Battle Report, Volume I ~ Pearl Harbor to Coral Sea, originally published by Farrar & Rinehart (dedicated 9 September 1944, published 9 September 1949). 2nd printing and the next 5 volumes published by Rinehart.

Battle Report, Volume II ~ The Atlantic War.

Battle Report, Volume III ~ Pacific War-Middle Phase.

Battle Report, Volume IV ~ The End of an Empire.

Battle Report, Volume V ~ Victory in the Pacific.

Battle Report, Volume VI ~ The Korean War.

All 6 volumes were purchased new, Volume I by my dad, 2nd printing of Volume I (has additional pics) and all the rest by myself.

I have over 3,000 books on naval and maritime history in this menagerie and have read them all, many more than once.

All these books will be donated to the USS Iowa.

 

Ill have to check online, I like collecting first edition books and any books that has orignal documentation presented within.

 

I'm keeping the first edition of Volume I, as it's too beat up to donate, because...dumb kid, before I knew better, drew pics of cars and battleships in it.

Dumb kid was born 9 September 1944, another reason I'm keeping it. Dumb kid has matured (somewhat) and is a volunteer on the USS Iowa.

btw: Did'ja know that Yamato and Musashi weren't the first BB's to have 18" guns? Battleship HMS Furious, one of Admiral Fishers "large light cruisers" had 2 18" guns (2X1).

Furious converted to an aircraft carrier as were HMS Glorious (Spurious) and HMS Courageous (Outrageous).

 

Couple of specifications:

USS Texas 14"/45 caliber mount:

1) Was never modernized as was Nevada and Pennsylvania Classes. Elevation limited to 15 degrees.
2) Range of 23,000 yards
3) Shell weight of 1500 lbs.
4) Top speed 21 knots

Iowa Class 16"/50 caliber mount:

1) Range of 42,345 yards
2) Shell weight of 2700 lbs. AP Mk 8 Mod 6 1944 equal to Yamato 18.1" gun at 2/3rd's less weight.
3) Top speed 33 knots

 

Texas & New York: Top speed of 21 knots when built. By 1945, top speed had been reduced to 19 knots, because both were outfitted with myriad anti-aircraft guns for service in the PTO.

Texas was also bulged in 1925/26, which reduced her top speed.

When the USS Tennessee was rebuilt after the Pearl Harbor Attack (it wasn't hit by any torpedoes, as it was inboard of the USS West Virginia), bulges were added.

Bulges wouldn't allow it to fit thru the Panama Canal, so after WWII ended, Tennessee had to steam SSW, then around the horn.

 

All this talk about armor and gun weights, the golden age of the battleship, and ironically it's sunset too.

Also ironic, today's "lightweight" warships like the Arleigh Burke class destroyer, could send these behemoths to the bottom in short order without coming anywhere near their weapons range.

 

I found a lot of those Battle report books. Ranging as cheap as $3 per book to as much as $250 per book.

With so many different listings for each volume its hard to pick out all books being of equal condition for a set considering their all being sold by different sellers so condition could be slightly different than another seller would describe it.

The elevation was limited to 15* but at 15* at max range for Texas she could with her 14" guns punch through 12 1/2" thick hull armor. The deck armor was reduced cause the shells wouldnt be plunging as much straight down so the deflection rate is high so 4" is about all that the shell could go through at max range. Anything thicker and the shell will just bounce off due to the high impact angle.

On the Iowa class, I still havent found a 16inch/50cal penetration chart like I did for the 14inch/45cal, so I cant exactly comment without speculation on what kind of armor penetration she could get both deck and hull at different ranges.

 

I saw this from the Battleships forum at the World Affairs board.
I also am a dealership vendor that fixes water leaks, wind noise and sunroofs for about 15 dealerships in this area, (Raleigh, NC Research Triangle) and most of what I work on is Ford, so maybe I can be of some help if someone runs across a leak.

However, what brought me here was the Iowa vs. Texas deal. First, let me say that it's really not a good comparison, there is no imaginable scenario in which Texas could beat or even seriously challenge Iowa. As Rusty Battleship (renowned expert) stated on the other board, even if Iowa was simply a target, Texas probably doesn't carry enough ammo to sink her. And Iowa firing back will end badly for Texas, every time, with very little damage to Iowa.

Texas' range is maybe 20k yds or so. So chances are, Iowa just stays out of range and pummels her. Texas never even fires a shot.

But if Iowa decides to close, her armor is not only at the limit of what Texas can penetrate, it's better armor too, so I'm not sure the armor penetration comparison is accurate...what they were shooting at when the 14" guns were made was not as strong as what Iowa was designed to shoot at.

I did see a request for the Mark 7's penetration tables, and here it is from NavWeaps. There's pretty much no immune zone at all for Texas.
(just scroll down for the tables)



Iowa is the ultimate Battleship. The only ship that could out-gun her (by a little), the Yamato, can't outrun her. She could run down, or run out of fuel, any BB ever built, and be superior to most when the fighting started, and on fairly equal terms at worst.

 

It seems to me though that the Iowa could sit outside the range of the Texas and pound her to death and have the speed to be able to stay out of range itself. Wasn't it the Hood that was sunk because they weren't really in range but the Bismark? was able to fire on it?

 

Bismark's 15in Krupp high velocity main guns were far superior to Hood's main guns, her fate was sealed as soon as the engagement began.

 

Battle of the Denmark Strait = See post 7 and here's some more info.

Range wasn't a factor. In fact, the British opened fire first, but initially at Prinz Eugen that was the leading ship, had a similar silouette as Bismarck.

When Admiral Holland realized his mistake, the Prince of Wales & Hood's salvos were soon straddling Bismarck.

Bismarck's captain turned to Admiral Lutjens and said: "I do not want my *** shot off, give the order to open fire!"

Holland made another mistake, only the Hood's forward turrets could fire, while the Germans were crossing the British T .. all guns bearing.

Holland ordered a 20 degree turn to starboard to bring Hood's after turrets to bear. WHAM! a 15" shell blew the Hood to smitherines, sank in less than a minute. There were only 3 survivors, 1,415 perished.

For many years afterwards, there was conjecture if Holland gave this order...or not. Order confirmed in 2001, when the Hood was located.

Krupp steel had nothing to do with it. The Hood was commissioned in 1920, and while a symbol of British pride between the wars, never had one refit. Hood did not belong there. HMS Rodney would have been a better choice.

When Bismarck was caught, Rodney & KGV pounded the Bismarck into scrap, with Rodney's nine 16" guns (3X3-all located forward of the superstructure), doing most of the damage.

 

Wasn't the guns that did it. It was Hood's armor. Hood was a Battle Cruiser, not a Battleship. She had no business at all facing another Capital ship. The Brits lost several Battle Cruisers the same way in WWI, including the HMS Invincible....blown in two and sunk with Hood's namesake, Admiral Hood, aboard. You'd think they would have learned.

 

What's the next discussion in this thread gonna involve, the Battle of Jutland? Bring it on, I'm prepared.

British capital ship losses in WWII

10/14/1939: HMS Royal Oak torpedoed by U-39 while lying at anchor in Scapa Flow.

5/4/1941: Battle Cruiser HMS Hood sunk by Bismarck.

11/25/1941: HMS Barham torpedoed by a U-Boat off Cape Matapan.

12/10/1941: HMS Prince of Wales & Battle Cruiser HMS Repulse sunk by aerial bombs and torpedoes in the S China Sea off the Malaysian Coast.

How many of y'all have seen the famous footage of a battleship heeling over on her port side while steaming ahead...then blowing up in a massive explosion? ~ HMS Barham.

 

Same in this comparison between Texas and Iowa. The Captain of the Texas doesn't want to be anywhere within the range of the Iowa's guns or her speed as his fate would be sealed.

Oh, one comment to Rusty_S as I originally missed this but another Rusty didn't. Iowa's design had nothing to do with the Panama Canal at all. She was laid down when the London Naval Treaty was in effect and a limit of 45,000 tons for a battleship. Of course there were a couple of countries that didn't exactly adhere to the Treaty. To see what the U.S. would have built outside the treaty limitations look at the Montana Class.

 

Not the table I'm looking for. I'm looking for navy documents. Not something typed out.

But based off what's typed out the guns Iowa had wouldn't penetrate Texas 12" thick class A armor. So Iowa would have to move closer to do damage.

This would put the Iowa in range to be fired upon in return. Then there's accuracy issues, at these ranges a ship the size of bismarck has a 10.5% broadside hit chance at 20,000 yards. I'm sure the hit chance would drop to 9% for a ship the size of Texas.

In the end the Iowa with a broadside hit would have to penetrate the 12" belt armor the further penetrate the 12" energy absorbing backing of the belt armor.