To evaluate a warship, we must first look at two hard indicators;
The first layer: four artillery combat indicators. Namely, horizontal protection, vertical protection, horizontal penetration and vertical penetration; If two ships are divided into two parts, vertical data takes precedence over horizontal data, because normal naval shells fall from top to bottom.
The second layer: design structure. Including protection layout, firepower layout and hull structure. After 1930s, the protection of battleships depends not only on the thickness of armor, but also on how its armor and other protective components are arranged. Firepower includes the layout of the main gun, but it mainly depends on the layout of the auxiliary gun and air defense firepower; Hull is also important. A scientific shape not only affects the stability, turning radius, seaworthiness, sinking resistance and other aspects closely related to artillery operations, but also has a great impact on protection.
The above two levels are hard indicators, and other parameters, such as air defense capability, search capability, fire control, lightning protection, speed, etc. , can only be regarded as a soft indicator. Firepower control may be regarded as a hard index in modern times, but under the technical conditions at that time, it is not decisive and can only be regarded as a soft index.
Only when hard indicators can't tell the difference between victory and defeat should we look at soft indicators. Battleships were born for artillery warfare. Any decision to make warships multifunctional is foolish. There are two living examples in reality. (1) At the beginning of World War II, Lei Deer, commander of the German navy, put forward the idea of "attacking scattered British troops and escort fleets with high-speed large surface ships", which was ultimately self-defeating; (2) Before World War I, the British-designed battle cruiser Betty was stunned by hippel at the beginning of Jutland naval battle, which proved that this was a stupid design. Later, Hood, known as Britain's largest warship, became the laughing stock of future generations. Fortunately, only Britain and Germany did a lot of war patrols, and other countries stopped them in time.
The Times Maritime News once commented that "the world's most horrible 13 offshore battery" was evaluated according to the above criteria. 13 is an unlucky number in the west, but many people in modern times deliberately use this number to express their terror.
13 Battleship is:
1
Second place, Iowa
Third place, vittorio Vinetot
Fourth place Li Sailiu.
Fifth place, South Dakota
No.6 Bismarck
No.7 Qianwei
Colorado ranked eighth.
No.9 Nelson
Nagato 10
North Carolina 1 1
George v 12
No. 13 hood
In the following description, several terms involved should be explained first.
New warships: warships designed after 1930s.
Warship: A warship of the 1920s or earlier.
Advanced battleships: the above-mentioned 13 ships, including four old battleships.
Second-class battleship: bounded by Hood and Bavaria, its performance is higher than Hood's and lower than Bavaria's. Secondary battleships are mostly old battleships. Of course, there are also new battleships with serious design problems like Dunkirk and scharnhorst.
The following information is my simple evaluation of 13 warship based on the information I have. Maybe the landlord didn't need it, but I wrote it down anyway.
1. yamato
Four artillery combat indicators, two protection ranks first in the world, and the power of Type 94 main gun can also rank first in the world with Mk7. In terms of protection, it is the best in the world both horizontally and vertically, and the armor of each part is thicker than that of Daqi.
Structurally, Yamato is the most reasonable structural layout among the battleships actually built, and there is no one. The wide hull and heavy side line provide a very stable shooting platform for the nine-door 94 main guns, and at the same time give them protection commensurate with their tonnage. Compact island buildings make their abnormal protection higher. Yamato is also the world's first battleship with trunk hull, which enables it to reach a speed of 27.5 knots when the full load displacement exceeds 70,000 tons, exceeding the minimum passing line of new battleships and most old battleships.
The biggest disadvantage of Yamato is that when 4 1 was just built, the two fighting angles were limited, and the triple-mounted 152 auxiliary gun turret wasted a lot of water displacement. This design was influenced by Britain and Germany before the 1920s, and only considered increasing firepower, without considering whether it could be maximized. However, influenced by the United States, Yamato completed the transformation in 45 years, removed the two turrets, and increased the original six twin towers from 127 to 12, which not only saved the water displacement, but also doubled the air defense firepower, making more effective use of the space. Firepower layout is as reasonable as American battleships. In the latter part of World War II, the Germans also planned to change scharnhorst to this American layout, but unfortunately the plan was not implemented in time.
2. Iowa
The biggest reason why she won the second place is that her Mk7 main gun is the best in the world, and its horizontal and vertical penetration depth is the same as Type 94, and its soft index is even better than Type 94, which definitely deserves to be the best in the world.
In terms of firepower layout, the multi-dock with fewer seats is more reasonable than the multi-dock with fewer seats in terms of operational efficiency and economic benefits, and this layout is conducive to reducing the captain and increasing the width of the ship, which has an indirect impact on the turning radius, design stability and protection. Americans were the first to realize this, so the old warships in the United States usually have three seats and four seats, while other powerful countries have five or six seats and two seats. So the triple main gun of the first two and the last one was the best choice at that time. Of course, if the gascoyne class is built and tested in actual combat, then its unique main gun layout may be stronger than the triple main gun. Thirty years later, most of the new battleships are basically three or four bags with less than three seats. In other respects, the auxiliary guns, air defense firepower and spatial layout of the US military have always been unparalleled.
Let's talk about the shortcomings. First, the ratio of protection to displacement is somewhat unbalanced. In reality, there are three kinds of warships with a displacement of 50,000: Iowa, Bismarck and Avant-garde. Because Americans are more experienced in space utilization than Germans, most of Iowa's armor is thicker than Bismarck's, but the overall protection is not much better than Bismarck's, mainly because of its unreasonable structure. Due to the consideration of Panama Canal in Iowa, the hull is too slender, which not only affects the horizontal protection, but also affects the seaworthiness and turning radius. Moreover, the island built before and after is not compact enough, which also has a great impact on the protection. In addition, some military whites said that the slender hull was the reason for the high speed of the Iowa. I want to remind these people that I dare not say that it has no impact at all, but the impact is certainly not as great as you think, and the idea of sacrificing protection for speed was proved wrong in World War I, and it is impossible for Americans who have always attached importance to rationality to adopt this idea.
However, to say that the structure of the Iowa is unreasonable, it only means that it is slightly inferior to a few battleships with reasonable layout, but it is definitely not bad. Although its protective ability is sorry for displacement, it is still excellent. Vertical protection can basically reach the third place, and horizontal protection can also enter the top five in the world. There are also trunk hulls like the Yamato, and the powerful power system makes Iowa the fastest in the world. The first ship in Iowa has a maximum speed of 3 1 knot, and the second ship in New Jersey even ran out of 33 knots. In addition, Iowa's soft index is the best in the world.
3 & amp4. vittorio Vinetot and Li Sailiu
Together, in terms of firepower, their 15 inch guns all use large charge chambers and strong charge technology, which is super powerful. Vinetot's M 1934 has a diameter of 50 times, the horizontal penetration is the fourth in the world and the vertical penetration is the third in the world, which is very close to Mk7. , the world's first. The diameter of M 1935 in Li Sailiu is 45 times, which is slightly weaker than M 1934, but it is also stronger and more stable, ranking fifth in horizontal boundary and fourth in vertical boundary.
In terms of protection, Vinetot's vertical protection is stronger, and Li Sailiu's level is stronger. Although it is said that the vertical protection is preferred to the horizontal protection, Li Sailiu is still dominant here, because Vinetot's vertical protection is above average in the 13 ship, while Li Sailiu's horizontal protection can be in the forefront, but Li Sailiu's vertical protection is indeed a bit dangerous, although it is not bad, but it is too mediocre in the new warship.
In terms of layout, both of them are reasonable, with only one outstanding shortcoming. Vinetot's island architecture is not compact enough, which, like Iowa, has a great impact on conservation. Among the new European warships, Vinetot is inferior to Li Sailiu in lateral protection and Bismarck in longitudinal protection. Island architecture has a great influence on this. Although Li Sailiu has only one outstanding problem, it is much more serious than Vinetot, that is, the main guns are in front. This idea is caused by the tactical influence of T-shaped penetration in some famous naval battles. The idea is to face the enemy head-on, which can reduce the missile surface and fire all-round. However, in actual combat, warships will minimize their speed in order to improve their hit rate, but they will never stay where they are, and warships will emerge in large-scale naval battles. There are a large number of small and flexible ships interspersed among them, and the auxiliary guns cannot suppress these targets with absolute superior firepower, so the blank of the main gun range 180 degrees is still considered unreasonable. The French also realized this problem, and moved a turret to the rear in the planned Li Sailiu No.4 gascoyne. In addition, the speed of Li Sailiu is second only to Iowa. The speed of the first ship, Li Sailiu, is 30 knots, and the speed of the second ship, Jean Bart, is 32 knots.
On the whole, they are all good ships, and Vinetot ranks ahead of Li Sailiu because its firepower is comparable to that of Iowa.
5. South Dakota
The best treaty battleship has the most reasonable fire protection and maneuver distribution within the specified displacement. Mk6 main gun adopts overweight 16 inch caliber AP, ranking third in the horizontal world and fifth in the vertical world. The horizontal protection is similar to Iowa, and the vertical protection is slightly weaker, but it can basically compete with European battleships.
The greatest advantage of this ship is its structure. South Dakota was designed on the basis of North Carolina. The hull has become shorter and wider, and the island has become more compact. Although the speed dropped to 27.5 knots, the protection ability was greatly improved. In terms of structural layout, it can be said that it is the second in the world after Yamato.
6 & amp7. Bismarck and Avantgarde
Say these two together. First of all, they have several common characteristics, such as strong protection, weak firepower, strong seaworthiness and similar displacement. Bismarck has strong vertical protection ability, and the average armor thickness of each part is no less than that of the seventh grade. Avant-garde armor is also very thick, and the layout is more reasonable, and the overall protection ability is even stronger than that of Iowa.
Firepower is the soft spot, and the firepower of the two ships is the fourth from the bottom in 13 and 1 respectively. Bismarck's SKC34 main gun has an old-fashioned design idea, which does not use large medicine room, strong charge and heavy ammunition. The muzzle kinetic energy of the German army is obviously lower than that of the guns with the same caliber in the United States, Britain and France since the industrial revolution. For example, the muzzle kinetic energy of Bavaria's 15 inch is only the same as that of Iron Duke's 13.5 inch, and Bismarck's SKC34 has made great progress, at least better than George V's 14 inch, but it is still far better than M 1934 and M 1935 with the same caliber. Avant-garde firepower is worse than Bismarck. At first, the Royal Navy realized that warships were no longer the main force in naval battles. Vanguard was designed as a battleship with fire support and coastal shelling as its main tasks, so no new main gun was designed for it. The eight main guns come from six different old battleships, and the layout of the main guns is also the old-fashioned four-seat double-mounted form. Because it is an old model, it is not as good as George V's 14 inch.
Structurally speaking, Bismarck's hull is not excellent, but it is not bad. After the 1930s, it was defined as a reasonable idea that large ships carrying small guns, and other countries sought a balance point, but the Germans finally took a shortcut, that is to say, under the condition that the number and caliber of main guns were similar, German ships had larger displacement and stronger deterrence than other countries, and as mentioned above, the German space utilization rate was not as good as that of the United States, so they simply relied on increasing displacement to obtain protection. For Germany, where battleships have been blank for 20 years, these two shortcuts are very clever. Bismarck is the best of the 13 ships in both shooting stability and seaworthiness.
However, it is precisely because of the blank period that Bismarck's design structure also has many defects. First, in the era when armored boxes were popular, dome armor design was still used, which caused Bismarck to have super comprehensive protection, but the protection ability for key parts was seriously insufficient. People who know history should know why Bismarck finally rushed into the encirclement of the British army. Second, Bismarck's dome armor integrates vertical protection and horizontal protection. We should know that the kinetic energy of artillery small-angle projectiles is much stronger than that of large-angle projectiles, so this idea of defense integration is actually a very one-sided design and completely unrealistic. Results Bismarck's longitudinal protection is super strong, but its lateral protection is not as good as that of most new battleships. Moreover, this idea also has a drawback, that is, it makes the protection of key parts that are already weak worse, and the tendency of armor equalization is serious. In addition, in order to catch up with the war, many parts of the No.1 ship still use non-hardened homogeneous armor. There are also problems in Bismarck's firepower layout, mainly reflected in the fact that the auxiliary guns 105 and 150 are alternately arranged on the side, which affects both the air and the sea surface density.
As for the avant-garde, the design structure is much better, especially the seaworthiness is better than Bismarck, and it can catch up with the level of South Dakota, and there is basically no big problem.
Incidentally, both of them are in the forefront of the world, with Bismarck's maximum speed of 30. 1 knot, Tilpitz's 30.8 knots and avant-garde 3 1 knot.
On the whole, Bismarck won the sixth place with its strong overall protection and good and stable hull, while Vanguard ranked seventh because of its weak protection and firepower.
There are still three points to vomit:
First, in reality, many military fans think that the avant-garde main gun can't enter the top ten because it is old, but this is a prejudice, just like the SA80 rifle, because one shortcoming is prominent, many advantages are ignored. Many advantages of avant-garde have been mentioned above, especially the modern structure and the world's first airworthiness, which can't be completely denied just because the gun is not good.
Second, the diameter of SKC34 main gun is 52 times on paper, but in fact, Germans and other countries have different standards for counting the diameter, and this 52 times includes the medicine room, while other countries usually calculate the diameter without counting the medicine room, so the actual diameter of SKC34 main gun should be between 47 and 48 times.
Thirdly, I once argued with an ignorant soldier in Youku. According to his ridiculous logic, Bismarck's side armor is thicker than Iowa's, so its protective performance is better than Iowa's, and other parts of the hull structure and armor are ignored. I guess he may think that artillery shells are as direct as tank shells in naval battles ... I tell you responsibly that the probability of that kind of trajectory in naval battles in the 20th century will not exceed 1%. The horizontal penetration depth mentioned above refers to small-angle projectiles within 10 km, and the vertical penetration depth refers to large-angle projectiles outside 10 km. Either way, the lateral waterline is not the main missile face-to-face, but only a part of the overall protection. Of course, being shot in the side is usually fatal, so it is not wrong for someone here to make it thick at all, but the thickness of the side alone can neither determine the horizontal protection nor the vertical protection of a ship.
If I have said so much, there are still some Germans who think Bismarck's side is thicker than Iowa's, then I suggest him to see how thick the side of the British battleship is so that he can jump into the river.
I wonder if the landlord is Hadrian. If so, please be a rational German fan, not a mindless German stick. If not, please distinguish between Chu's powder and Germany's stick. Defen is a real military fan like us and should be discussed together. The Germans, I don't admit that they are military fans, just a group of fanatics, who think that the Allies won because of XXX and the Germans won NB; It is believed that the atrocities of the Allies are real, while the atrocities of the Germans are fabricated; They don't like reading books and paper materials, but only get some fur knowledge or YY knowledge from the internet; And on the basis of only one or two weapons, I think Germany is the best in the world, and I can't wait to go up and taste Nazi SI.
The German stick I mentioned above is a little knowledgeable, and even more enthusiastic that Bismarck's protection ratio is large and strong, which is based on the quality of Degang. I can explain this to the landlord. First of all, the steel quality of the big countries in World War II was worse than that of the Soviet Union in 1942-43 and Japan in 1945. Except for these two periods, the steel quality gap between big countries is not big, at least not big enough to determine the protected areas. And even if there is a gap in steel quality, the impact on protection is limited. In Germany, due to 44 years of long-term bombing, the quality of steel has obviously decreased, but no one has ever felt that the protection of leopard in 45 years is worse than that in 43 years. At most, it is prone to cracking, aging and unstable structure. When the Soviet Union invaded Budapest, a JS3 turret exploded and fell to the ground, indicating that the steel quality of the Soviet Union was not very good, but no one ever thought that JS3 was poorly protected, which means that the role of steel quality during World War II was limited to these insignificant aspects. In other words, Mr. Degong mentioned above is purely YY. I guess he knows the caliber of SKC34, and he doesn't even know its model and diameter multiple.
It's just a moment of excitement and digression. To save time, let's keep it simple.
8— 10. Daqi
The Colorado, Nelson and Changmen are the pinnacles of the old warships. Their armor thickness is stronger than most new battleships, and their firepower is terrible. But they are older, so they are backward. Although they were modernized in 1930s, the basic framework is still very old.
Horizontal permeability: Colorado > Nelson > Nagato.
Vertical permeability: Colorado > Nagato > Nelson.
Lateral protection: Nelson > Colorado > Nagato.
Vertical protection: Colorado > Nelson > Nagato.
On the whole, Colorado > Nelson > Nagato.
Structurally, Colorado is the most reasonable. As for an American who uses multiple bags with few seats, why did four bags suddenly appear? The reason is that Colorado is not redesigned, but expanded on the basis of Tennessee.
Nelson's most serious problem is that nine main guns are in front, so I won't go into details about the shortcomings mentioned above. In addition, Nelson adopted a vertical bow. During World War I, many old battleships in Britain and Germany were vertical bows, and I don't know what it means because of my limited knowledge. Perhaps it is because these two countries are relatively rigid and old-fashioned, but judging from the fact that the new battleships in both countries have been changed into flying shears, the comprehensive ability of flying shears is better.
The structure of Nagato is at the bottom of the three, with a slender hull and an island that is not compact enough. Although the armor is better than most battleships, it is not as good as the first two. You know, armor thickness is very important for old battleships. Nagato's protection ability is indeed a bit backward at the level of the post-20s, and its speed has reached 26 knots, which was rare at that time. But it's foolish for battleships to sacrifice protection for speed, as I said above.
I found an interesting place where three old-fashioned advanced battleships of the United States, Britain and Japan can just correspond to three new-style advanced battleships of Germany, France and Italy:
Vinetot and Colorado correspond: their main guns are the strongest of the three, and their structures are not too big.
Li Sailiu and Nelson correspond: The main problem is that they are too inclined to lateral protection. The island building is the most compact of the three ships, all of which have the problem of the former main gun.
Bismarck and Nagato correspond: both designs are biased, Bismarck is stronger than Nagato, and there are many problems in structural design.
1 1。 12. North Carolina and George V.
In addition, the design is biased towards the last pair mentioned above, which is more biased than Bismarck and Nagato. NC has the same Mk6 main gun as SD, which is faster, but its structure has major problems, and its protective performance is almost at the bottom of new warships.
KGV is completely trapped by the second round of naval treaties. Britain started the construction of KGV very early, and strictly followed the restrictions of the second round of treaties. When it was built, it was discovered that almost no one complied with the treaty. She became a new advanced battleship with the smallest displacement and the smallest main gun caliber. Because the British have the most experience in designing battleships, although the displacement is small, the armor is not thin, and the structure is reasonable, and the protection ability is only slightly weaker than that of the avant-garde. The problem is that her Mk7 main gun (not Iowa Mk7! ), 14 inch is obviously the smallest of 13 ships. Originally, it was planned that three turrets with four seats still had the advantage of fire strength, but in order to control the displacement, one of them was changed to a double installation, and this advantage also declined.
To be exact, SD, NC and KGV were all harmed by two rounds of naval treaties. Without the naval treaty, these three ships would be better battleships. Of course, the naval treaty is still good. If there were no treaties, the powers would do a lot of things that wasted people and money.
The last ship was the Hood, originally a combat cruiser built in the 1920s. 4 1 year, converted into a battleship. In fact, it was sunk before its modification was completed.
The problem is that the target is big, but the armor is thin, which is a typical target. However, it is not unreasonable to put Hood in an advanced warship. Hood was the largest warship in the world before the war. Although its armor is relatively thin, its protection ability is better than that of most old battleships. The firepower ratio is at the bottom of 13 ship, but as an old gun, its power is close to the new guns on George V and Bismarck, and it ranks among the best among the old battleships, and its maneuverability is not as good as that of the old cruiser.
If we compare Hood with Bavaria, Hood is completely superior to Bavaria in firepower and armor thickness, but slightly weaker than Hood in protection layout. The hull structure is slightly dominated by the hood, so the hood is stronger. It is also reasonable to regard Hood and Bavaria as the dividing line between high-level and low-level battleships.