Jump to content


Photo

Impressive Pic Of Ijn Musashi


  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

#1 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,460 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 04 December 2018 - 1741 PM

This was the cover photo of the September edition of Warship International. I don't recall ever seeing it or a similar view before. Taken during her sea trials, it illustrates the absolute massiveness of the design, very beamy with the swayback fore deck. The quality of the scanning suffered from the periodical production, maybe also the colorizing, but I thought it worthy of attention. 

 

The credit line was a Japanese blog: http://blog.livedoor.jp/irootoko_jr/archives/1433792.html  but all I found were German warship pics also colorized.

 

 

 

Y8JIUo.jpg

 

Found another copy here:   https://blogs.yahoo....5/69776679.html

 

OGPRnY.jpg

 

Compare to a similar view of an Iowa class BB [45,000 tons standard designed vs the Musashi's 65,000 equivalent displacement]

 

 

 

016132.jpg

 

or,

 

 

0164033.jpg

 

 

.


Edited by Ken Estes, 04 December 2018 - 2040 PM.

  • 0

#2 Calvinb1nav

Calvinb1nav

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 517 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lexington, SC
  • Interests:military and aviation history, wargaming, shooting, travel, geography

Posted 04 December 2018 - 1819 PM

Thanks for sharing!


  • 0

#3 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,760 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 December 2018 - 1839 PM

Awesome angle of view. Sleek and deadly.


  • 0

#4 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,521 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 04 December 2018 - 1848 PM

The Iowa pics didn't come through


  • 0

#5 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,070 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 04 December 2018 - 1912 PM

The Iowa pics didn't come through


Still classified? Someone file a FOI claim. ;)
  • 0

#6 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,466 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 04 December 2018 - 1915 PM

Some of that is positional/optical perspective. 

Some is also that the Iowas had a more cluttered beam area with the 5 per side 2x 5" DP turrets on the Iowa vs the 1 per side 1.5cm triple turrets.

Some is absolute size.

USS Iowa Beam - 108 ft 2 in (32.97 meters)
IJN Musashi  beam - 121 ft 1in (36.9 meters)

A difference of 13 feet 1"

The Iowa was also built as a Fast BB. The planned but unbuilt Montantas were to be 121 ft 2 in .



re the 'clutter' of the armament. The Iowa class has more superstructure extends out on the deck to elevate more of the secondary armament. 
Iowa_class__schematic_full.jpg​

1920px-Musashi1942.png


  • 0

#7 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,466 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 04 December 2018 - 1916 PM

Montanas vs Iowas....per one of the schemes for the Montanas. 

http://navsource.org.../062/016720.jpg

Edited by rmgill, 04 December 2018 - 2317 PM.

  • 0

#8 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,460 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 04 December 2018 - 2039 PM

The Iowa pics didn't come through

OK, I'll supply the URL as well.

 

 

Gill fails to grasp the esthetics, but in any case, one can note that Musashi on trials had very little AAA fitted, and the later IJN decks became quite full in 1944-45 with the inadequate 25mm guns.

 

 

bz1m4I.jpg


Edited by Ken Estes, 04 December 2018 - 2047 PM.

  • 0

#9 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,521 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 04 December 2018 - 2149 PM

Thanks, Ken.
I've stood at the forepeak of USS Alabama and the view aft is pretty impressive there, as well. :)

Edited by shep854, 04 December 2018 - 2149 PM.

  • 0

#10 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,680 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Tamarama Beach, Sydney, Aust
  • Interests:Degree in History and Politics. Interests are Military History, military models,

Posted 04 December 2018 - 2225 PM

Certainly demonstrates the difference in philosophy regarding secondary / AA armament, with the US going for a universal ten turret twenty gun battery, whilst the Japanese has the two different calibres of twelve 15.5cm guns, unsuitable for AA and another twelve 127mm guns for AA.

 

The use of the 25mm cannon was certainly inferior to anything that the US placed on ships after 1942 when the 1.1in gun was being replaced by 20mm and 40mm guns.

 

One last point about the Musashi main battery.  The blast from the nine 18" guns was sufficient to injure anyone on deck not protected behind blast proof shields, such as that covering the 127mm guns.

 

Which is also why the ships' aircraft and boats were stowed under armour at the stern.


Edited by DougRichards, 04 December 2018 - 2227 PM.

  • 0

#11 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,466 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 04 December 2018 - 2340 PM

The US AA fits increased over time as well. Compare the North Carolinas at the start of the war with the late war fit.

I'm quite aware of the Japanese sense of aesthetics having lived there for a period of time. But I also know about perspective and visual issue that can influence such a view. A clean unfitted out BB is also a very fancy thing but still incomplete. It's a weapon of war, NOT a sports car.

But the point about perspective still stands with the nature of the deck also shifting the perspective as well. The lack of fit during the trials also supports my point, the big empty space that demonstrates the substantially larger beam is there because it's not filled up as in the Iowas. Again, it's only a difference of 13 feet which given the size, is less than a 10% difference. Not dramatic. If you compared a completed Montana with 5"/54s out at the deck edge with the above Musashi that would ALSO make the Musashi look beamier than the Montana which given the difference of 1" would be an exaggeration of perspective alone.

Compare the images above of the Iowa and the Yamato classes. Which looks longer?


Regardless of the visual issues, yes, the Musashi was impressive. But, as nifty as the Yamato class ships were, they had insufficient AA fits. Better they died at the hands of our air power than our men and BBs dying at the hands of Japanese air at the end of the war.
  • 0

#12 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,460 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 05 December 2018 - 1337 PM

Very weird.


  • 0

#13 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,460 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 05 December 2018 - 1358 PM

Certainly demonstrates the difference in philosophy regarding secondary / AA armament, with the US going for a universal ten turret twenty gun battery, whilst the Japanese has the two different calibres of twelve 15.5cm guns, unsuitable for AA and another twelve 127mm guns for AA.

 

The use of the 25mm cannon was certainly inferior to anything that the US placed on ships after 1942 when the 1.1in gun was being replaced by 20mm and 40mm guns.

 

One last point about the Musashi main battery.  The blast from the nine 18" guns was sufficient to injure anyone on deck not protected behind blast proof shields, such as that covering the 127mm guns.

 

Which is also why the ships' aircraft and boats were stowed under armour at the stern.

Most true, Doug, and the French, German, Russian and Italian post-London BBs also clung to the separate secondary caliber, single purpose, sometimes mounted in cruiser type turrets. It's somewhat explained by the lack of appreciation for carrier aviation as a threat, but also the fixation on Jutland-like battleline engagements where the battleships would have to deal with some cruisers accompanying destroyers in torpedo attacks, without distracting from main battery targets.

 

Almost every film of IJN triple 25mm mounts in action shows one or more gun not firing; it was apparently a hassle for the loaders to get find enough room to serve the weapons.

 

I thought the clean sea trial condition of Musashi offered an unusual opportunity to appreciate her design and mass. I also thought the almost humorous small boats added in davits strapped on deck must indicate what a pain it was to unship the ships boats from their after stowage area. Probably a safety measure in the event of a man overboard.

 

In all a very placid scene for the ship and crew compared to the ships' horrific end.


Edited by Ken Estes, 05 December 2018 - 1409 PM.

  • 0

#14 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,207 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 05 December 2018 - 1534 PM

When I saw the thread title, I was expecting underwater pix of the sunk Musashi ahehe....

Impressive, and the pic shows just how massive it was. Iowa's OTOH look slim.
  • 0

#15 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,684 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 05 December 2018 - 1554 PM

 

Certainly demonstrates the difference in philosophy regarding secondary / AA armament, with the US going for a universal ten turret twenty gun battery, whilst the Japanese has the two different calibres of twelve 15.5cm guns, unsuitable for AA and another twelve 127mm guns for AA.

 

The use of the 25mm cannon was certainly inferior to anything that the US placed on ships after 1942 when the 1.1in gun was being replaced by 20mm and 40mm guns.

 

One last point about the Musashi main battery.  The blast from the nine 18" guns was sufficient to injure anyone on deck not protected behind blast proof shields, such as that covering the 127mm guns.

 

Which is also why the ships' aircraft and boats were stowed under armour at the stern.

Most true, Doug, and the French, German, Russian and Italian post-London BBs also clung to the separate secondary caliber, single purpose, sometimes mounted in cruiser type turrets. It's somewhat explained by the lack of appreciation for carrier aviation as a threat, but also the fixation on Jutland-like battleline engagements where the battleships would have to deal with some cruisers accompanying destroyers in torpedo attacks, without distracting from main battery targets.[/quote]

 

which nobody really had an appreciation of until battle experiences were made. Can be seen in the ever increasing number of AAA on all warships that could carry more.

 

[quote]

Almost every film of IJN triple 25mm mounts in action shows one or more gun not firing; it was apparently a hassle for the loaders to get find enough room to serve the weapons.

 

I thought the clean sea trial condition of Musashi offered an unusual opportunity to appreciate her design and mass. I also thought the almost humorous small boats added in davits strapped on deck must indicate what a pain it was to unship the ships boats from their after stowage area. Probably a safety measure in the event of a man overboard.[/quote]

 

Also life boats in case something goes terribly wrong during the trials.

 

[quote]

In all a very placid scene for the ship and crew compared to the ships' horrific end.

 

 

The silence before the storm.

 

 

 

When I saw the thread title, I was expecting underwater pix of the sunk Musashi ahehe....

Impressive, and the pic shows just how massive it was. Iowa's OTOH look slim.

 

 

Me too. I expected underwater photography, too. And I agree, because of its proportions the Musashi make it look mightier than the Iowa. The Iowa class always looked slim to me.


  • 0

#16 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,460 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 05 December 2018 - 1619 PM

Paul Allen;s discovery of Musashi's remains is presented here:

 

https://www.paulalle...sashi-wreckage/

 

 

We are going to miss his contributions to historical research and preservation RIP


  • 0

#17 MiloMorai

MiloMorai

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,241 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 05 December 2018 - 1905 PM

Kure museum has a very large model of the Yamato.

​

https://tokyobling.w...-yamato-museum/

​

The Anatomy of the Ship series has several books on WW1 and WW2 ships besides those of sail power.


  • 0

#18 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,701 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 05 December 2018 - 2135 PM

The reosurces if spent on a few more carriers and cruisers.......


  • 0

#19 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 48,730 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 06 December 2018 - 0332 AM

I always liked the look of these ships, I always thought they looked incredibly modern. Particularly the bow, which wouldnt look out of place on a modern container ship.

 

Ive got the anatomy of a ship book on Yamato, and its a fine book. Very useful building the Tamiya model,.


  • 0

#20 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,680 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Tamarama Beach, Sydney, Aust
  • Interests:Degree in History and Politics. Interests are Military History, military models,

Posted 06 December 2018 - 0343 AM

The reosurces if spent on a few more carriers and cruisers.......

 

You mean like the Shinano?

 

https://en.wikipedia...carrier_Shinano

 

 

She remains the largest warship ever sunk by a submarine.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users