Post

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
Click again on or Share Via icon
Click on Copy Link to Tweet
Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
More info at Twitter Help

Navy General Board

Jul 14, 2022 • 9 tweets • 5 min read • Read on X

The battleship Mustu at anchor. Her extensive bulges, the result of her 1930s modernization, are prominent.

A lot of people are surprised by just how large the Nagato class grew to be over their careers.

At the start of their careers, the Nagato class were 215m (708') long with a beam of 29m (95'3"). At a draught of 9m (29'), this gave them a displacement of 32,200 tons (38,498 tons at full load).

In 1927, Mutsu had a modified bow fitted that increased their length by 1.6 meters (about 5' 3") to make the forward deck more dry. Nagato received a similar modification in 1930.

Their size was further enlarged during their comprehensive 1930s modernizations.

The Nagato class had their Hulls extended at the stern, increasing their length by another 7.55m (24' 8").

Beam was also increased through the fitting of large anti-torpedo bulges. This increased the beam by 2.4m (about 8').

The fitting of new weapons and equipment caused the draft to increase as well. At their heaviest, the Nagato class had a new draft of 9.49m (31' 2").

This led to an impressive increase in draft (almost 7,000 tons).

The Nagato class battleships were now 225m long (738') with a beam of 34.6m (113' 6").

Their new displacement was 39,050 tons standard, swelling to 46,000 tons at full load.

This actually placed them within the upper echelon of dreadnoughts in terms of size. At their heaviest, they rivaled designs such as the more modern North Carolina (46,700 tons) and King George V (45,400 tons) classes.

The Yamato class might get all the glory, but the Japanese Navy had some other hefty girls in service too!

#Japan #History #WW2 #inflation #ThursdayThoughts #thursdayvibes

@threadreaderapp

@threadreaderapp unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @thegeneralboard

Navy General Board

@thegeneralboard

Sep 6

Standards and Speed

While most Navies made the pursuit of greater speeds in their dreadnoughts a priority during the First World War, the United States remained happy with maintaining a speed of 21 knots throughout their series of superdreadnoughts.

Much has been written about the great leap in capability that was brought about by faster battleships such as the Queen Elizabeth class. This premium on speed has led the casual reader to discount the US Navy's Standard-Type battleships or even the entire battleline.

However, the reasoning for the emphasis for a 21 knot speed was not an inability to produce faster ships. Rather, it was a calculated decision to have all of their battleships standardized to the same speed throughout the entire navy.

Read 15 tweets

Navy General Board

@thegeneralboard

Sep 5

The United States "Standard-Type" Battleships are something of an oddity so far as naval history is concerned.

They are typically overlooked by the casual observer and are seen as smaller, slower, or perhaps less visually impressive compared to their European contemporaries.

However, there was a good reason for the Standards and why they were designed the way they were.

They were, along with the strategic thinking of the US Navy, heavily influenced by Alfred Thayer Mahan.

Mahan's 1890 book, "The Influence of Sea Power upon History", had an effect of navies around the World.

The US Navy on the hand, began designing its entire navy around Mahan's theories.

One of the biggest being the concept of a decisive battle between capital ships.

Read 10 tweets

Navy General Board

@thegeneralboard

Jul 30

Battlecruisers in the US Navy: Part 4

We talked about the Lexington class battlecruisers, what they might have looked like had they been built, and how they might have been upgraded.

Now let's see how they might have operated in the US Navy.

I imagine they would have spent the interwar years split between the Atlantic and Pacific Fleet, generally following the distribution of the battleships. Most of them likely would have been sent to the Pacific along with the Battleline by the late 1930s to contain Japan.

Any battlecruisers left in the Atlantic would have likely supplemented or even replaced the three battleships covering the Neutrality patrols at the outbreak of the Second World War.

The higher speed and great range likely would have been invaluable in covering more territory.

Read 9 tweets

Navy General Board

@thegeneralboard

Jul 24

Battlecruisers in the US Navy: Part 2

So let's assume that the US Navy did produce it's Lexington class battlecruisers in their original configuration.

How might they have influenced the US Navy during the interwar years and into World War 2?

There likely would have been no Alaska class cruisers for one.

With six large capital ships to patrol the sea lanes, there would be less impetus for the development of the large cruiser proposals in the 1930s.

As a side note, this might have even caused Germany to hesitate on the Deutschland class.

The Renown class/HMS Hood were known to be the major threats to the class due to their speed and power. Having the threat of the Lexington class in the Atlantic would be added to this.

Read 10 tweets

Navy General Board

@thegeneralboard

Apr 17

On the post about the Yamato class and torpedoes, someone had pointed out that they always seemed to take on roughly 3,000 tons of flooding after they were initially torpedoed by aircraft or submarines.

Perfect because I wanted to talk about a design flaw in the Yamato design.

Japanese designers went above and beyond in the design of the Yamato class, stretching their capabilities to the limit to produce a very advanced warship.

Notably, the Yamato class used plenty of full scale testing in its design. This was especially true for the armor design.

Gunnery tests against Tosa showed that large calibre shells retained enough momentum to travel for some distance underwater, allowing them to bypass the main armor belt entirely by going under it.

Read 13 tweets

Navy General Board

@thegeneralboard

Apr 12

I don't know who needs to hear this, but Bismarck was sunk by the Royal Navy, not scuttled.

I wanted to do a post on the torpedo protection of the Yamato class, but recent events required a change of plans.

There seems to be this weird, persistent belief that the Royal Navy could not sink it and the Germans scuttled it.

Some of the more extreme takes seem to suggest that Bismarck was in great shape prior to her being scuttled.

The facts of the matter is that the Royal Navy quickly "mission-killed" Bismarck, negating her use as a fighting vessel.

This allowed them to close the distance and begin pummeling her at close range.

Read 10 tweets

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Navy General Board

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @thegeneralboard

Navy General Board

Navy General Board

Navy General Board

Navy General Board

Navy General Board

Navy General Board

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!