2030's US Defiant Battleship vs WWII Bismarck & Tirpitz | Sea Power

Comments · 552

• ZI

  @ziggelito · 1 month ago · pinned

  But could a single aircraft carrier travel back in time and fight off the invasion of pearl harbour?

  195

• SU

  @supertracker9823 · 1 month ago

  There is a big difference between a rifle round hitting a car and hypersonic projectile hitting a ship. For reference I believe a more accurate analogy is an 120mm APFSDS round hitting your car through the engine bay with so much energy it vaporizes small amounts of material at the first point of impact, then super-heating spall and fragments from the engine bay sending them through your entire car with every little fragment now moving faster than the speed of sound. <br><br>Not an expert but the general idea is a HGV is a lot heavier and faster and ships have a lot more things to turn into shrapnel.

  160

• TI

  @TigerJaeger131 · 1 month ago

  The bombs that destroyed the Tirpitz were not ordinary bombs; those were Tallboy earthquake bombs. Those Tallboys weighed about 12,000 lbs, with a 5,200 lb warhead (7,300 to 7,800 lbs of TNT). <br>29 Tallboys were dropped; 3 possibly hit the Tirpitz, and 1 of them caused an internal fire that detonated the &quot;Caesar&quot; turret magazine.

  121

• TH

  @The_Anti-Mormon · 1 month ago

  When the hypersonic glide vehicle pushes <b>air</b> out of the way, it turns into <i>plasma.</i><br>When the hypersonic glide vehicle pushes <i><b>a ship&apos;s hull</b></i><b></b> out of the way...

  89

• WO

  @Wolfe351 · 1 month ago

  a 600kw laser would only clean the paint off the armour

  2

• MA

  @maxfan1591 · 1 month ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2P34EGMsKU&amp;t=550">9:10</a> &quot;too much value in one asset&quot;<br><br>This is the reason the 18th century Royal Navy favoured building 3 74 gun ships of the line as opposed to 2 100 gun ships of the line. More ships of the line meant more strategic flexibility.

  29

• VB

  @vbcsalinasapologetics1242 · 1 month ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2P34EGMsKU&amp;t=1636">27:16</a> at these &quot;hypersonic&quot; speeds, you&apos;re going to have compression as the projectile hits the hull. Air won&apos;t be able to get out of the way fast enough, making a small amount of &quot;plasma&quot; (like a welding arc) that softens the metal and carries heat into the ship. It doesn&apos;t need an explosive, as the ship&apos;s skin becomes the explosive.

  6

• BL

  @Blaze-r5f · 1 month ago

  Bismarck and Tirpitz never sailed together as Tirpitz had barely commissioned in time for Bismarck&apos;s final voyage.<br>Had they sailed together, Denmark Strait would likely have gone worse for the Royal Navy. However, historically the force was spotted by the British before breaking into the North Atlantic. Had both Bismarck and Tirpitz been there, the Royal Navy would likely have sent more ships to intercept.

  9

• NL

  @nla27 · 1 month ago

  Many WWII anti tank guns disabled tanks without penetration. The kinetic energy imparted on the hardened armor plate would break off a slug of the inner armor plate that would ricochet around the inside of the tank. The energy transfer leaves the slug red hot. You don&apos;t need to penetrate hardened armor to cause damage. The hardening process does this. This is why spall liners, splinter protection, and composite armor exist.

  3

• KI

  @KibuFox · 1 month ago (edited)

  Part of the issue with simulations like this, is how Sea Power models ship armor. &nbsp;Specifically, as ships like Bismarck and Tirpitz here are modeled, they don&apos;t have &quot;good&quot; damage models. &nbsp;Yamato also suffered from this, but it&apos;s a known problem with mod ships. &nbsp;Specifically, the game has a tendency to take the armor plate and extend that over the entire ship&apos;s superstructure (much like how modern ships are built). &nbsp;As opposed to accurately modeling the armor scheme or damage models. &nbsp;So, you get situations like this, where warships can take a beating far above what they would be expected to. &nbsp;A good comparison, would be to run this simulation with the in game stock Iowa class, and compare. &nbsp;You&apos;ll see there just how bad the damage model for these ships is.<br><br>So, this means your &quot;scientific approach&quot; was flawed from the start, as you&apos;re using a broken model to try to extrapolate data from. &nbsp;That&apos;s like looking at a mathematical error, and basing a conclusion off it.

  41

• CA

  @Canada_Goose · 1 month ago

  Fun Fact - The HGV would roughly be equal to a 3800 pound warhead(if you&apos;re using TNT). This is due to the formula for Kinetic Energy, ½mv², which is half of the mass times the square of the velocity. The HGV has a mass of 5400 kg and moves at mach 5, which means it has roughly 7.8 gigajoules. This is roughly equal to 1.9 Tons of of TNT, or 3800 pounds. If it was the Mach 8 land variant however, it would be equal to 9700 pounds because the velocity is squared.

  14

• SE

  @seamon9732 · 1 month ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2P34EGMsKU&amp;t=1620">27:00</a><br>The rock that annihilated the dinosaurs was just kinetic mass energy too, it still made a big boom.<br>Above a certain threshold, kinetic energy can become as powerful as nukes...<br>So yeah, enough mass accelerated fast enough will make big booms.

  2