If only this 2 ships begins to fight each other, I would make my bet to the Bismarck.

It was
smaller faster ship, which made her harder to hit. The germans used full armor on the warships
instead of British style all or nothing armoring. The armor made 40%-os the total mass of the
Bismarck, and this armor made of the best armor, Germany could provide (brinel 650-700,
meanwhile best British counterpart was only brinell 600). This hardening was expensive method,
for example the Japanese do not use it, the armor hardness was only the regular steels (Brinell
250). The main weaponry were 8 SK C/34 38 cm gun, 36,5 km range and 304 mm armor hitting
power at 24 km. (detailed info : bismarck)
The Yamato class (like Mushashi) was bigger slower heavier, with lesser quality armor. the
armoring was British style all or nothing, which means the bow and stern were unarmored. The
guns were 457 mm 40cm/45 Type 94 guns, maximum range 42 km, hitting power 310 mm at 30
km.
But you must know, that at 40 km, the ballistic throw reached 500m!
And the aiming systems were not the best at that time. at 40 km Iowa class battleships had 2-3 %
chance of hitting the target within 500 m!
The bismarck was a smaller faster, stronger armored ship, with smaller, but high quality guns,
the Yamato class was bigger, slower ship, with bigger guns. But you must know, the Scharnhorst
firing from 24 km, hit the Glorious with the 3rd volley.
The survival ability of german battleships were exceptional, meanwhile the unarmored bow and
stern made the Japanese counterpart more fragile. And at effective range both ship could shot
throug the armors of each other. In this case, the faster, full aromer Bismarck would have higher
chanche to win, that the bigger Yamato. The cause of sinking of Mushashi was a hit on the bow,
which greatly slowed it down.
Ship data:
Bismarck: bismarck
Yamato class (Mushashi): Musashi
Edit: add battle testins of two armor philosophy:
I think most people follow the assumption that all or nothing is superior to full armor. This is the
result of 1 406 mm hit to an "all or nothing" armored battleships bow and stern

Against airborne attack all or nothing also unusable, the Roma and Littorio were sunk by 1-1
fritz-X, 4 times smaller than the bombs destroyed the Tirpitz.
The Bismark has 44% armormass, more than any other ships at that era, and had higher quality
than other ships. Range was not problem, since over 20 km there was no real chance to hit
something only by fortune. The big gun battle happened at 15-20 km distance.
Battle tests of the 2 philosophy:
British: Only the Price of Wales was tested: Sunk. Catastrophic torpedo defense, the first
japanese torp hit her out of battle, 4-5 other were enough for sank. (to mention, Scharnhorst after
5 torpedo and more heavy shell hit was still able to fight and run around 20 knot.) And one more
thin, at the fight against the Bismarck one grenade of the Prinz Eugen went through the armor
into the shell-lift. If it was not a foul shell, the ship would have seriously damaged or sunk. That
part was one of the most armored section, but the german shell was able to break through.
USA: South Dakota: Got 27 hit from other ships, only one arrived from Kirishima (356 mm), but
this hit through the C turret. The other shells were 127-203 mm cruiser and destroyer shell, and 8
of them fouled. To compare: The Bismarck got 20-25 356-406 mm hit, and many more smaller,
(total estimation 300-400 hit).
They used to say, that the all or nothing defend the important parts of the ship, but this was true
for the Bismarck! Engines operated till the end, the main armor belt only 4 point broke through
and there was no internal shell explosion. Statically the ship was not damaged heavily. Of course
the turrets and upper buildings damaged heavy, but lower, not too much was able to destroy.
44.5K views

View Upvoters

View Sharers

You upvoted this

72

91

91 comments from Ákos Németh and more

Sponsored by Blissy