While it is very improbable in 1944 a Kongo class battleship vs. an Alaska class large cruiser, who would win? This is an encounter the Alaska was designed for.
Kongo vs. Alaska
- Thread starter Musketeer513
- Start date
Alaska is bigger, faster, more heavily armored, has more guns, has better guns, and of course, has excellent American gunfire control systems. There is some debate as to whether the 12"/50 caliber Mark 7 guns are better or worse than the 14" guns on the Standard battleships, but they were certainly very close in terms of penetration curves. The Alaskas have a disadvantage in terms of shell weight (1,140 vs 1,500 lbs) and burster (17.4 lbs vs 22.9 lbs). However, firing cycle was about 10 seconds faster so weight of fire per minute was heavier.
Both ships were designed to be armored against 8 inch shells, but Alaska had some extra vertical protection in exchange for a tapered belt. Neither ship is protected against the others gunfire, so getting the first hit on target is going to be very important. Haruna and Kongo probably landed straddles on the American escort carriers at Leyte Gulf at ranges of nearly 30,000 yards, so I would not discount their optical gunnery.
Both ships were designed to be armored against 8 inch shells, but Alaska had some extra vertical protection in exchange for a tapered belt. Neither ship is protected against the others gunfire, so getting the first hit on target is going to be very important. Haruna and Kongo probably landed straddles on the American escort carriers at Leyte Gulf at ranges of nearly 30,000 yards, so I would not discount their optical gunnery.
I thought it was going to be about some interaction between the two places.
I misread the title and thought it was an independent Alaska vs either Kongo
Back onto topic, Kongou bongo get sunk
Agreed with all of this. I hate to say it, being as critical of Alaskas as our resident ursine moderator, but I think Alaska generally has the edge in any such engagement. Alaska's 12-inch/50-caliber Mark 8 actually had the same range (about 35km) as the Kongo's 14" guns even after their modernization, so . . . I think fire control is the biggest difference maker on who gets the first hit in, and the Alaskas simply had much better radar (and a crew better trained to use it).* Hell, if it's a night engagement, the Kongo might not even know what hit it.
One could imagine circumstances where a Kongo could nullify these advantages, but on most rolls of the dice, they are going to come up on the short end of things.
__
* Technically, the Kongo's Type 22 surface radar wasn't even designed for fire control, though the Japanese tried to use it that way, with limited results. Not really a match at all for the Alaska's Mark 13.
Last edited:
I think Alaskas are superior to all but the 15/16 inch pre Thirties capital ships.
That's pushing it. Alaska would certainly be superior, but I'm not convinced she's sufficiently superior to cope with an unengaged opponent coming at her, especially given that the advantage is entirely in speed and fire control in a fight between glass cannons.
It’s a game of rocket tag and that favors Alaska’s better fire control. That’s not to say a Kongo can’t win such an engagement, but it’s probably a 6 or 7/10 in favor of Alaska.
It would depend on who is in charge of the units and when in the war they fight. Alaska just after commissioning vs Kongo with experienced crew slight edge to Kongo in day, could be a draw at night if the Alaska isn't quite good on the fire control. Later on with an experienced crew Alaska both day and night. You might want to check with Ursus Arctos Californicus and get his opinion.
In 1944 the Alaska was accompanying the Franklin back after receiving heavy damage. The Haruna , a Kongo class battleship was still active. Setting the scenario for the encounter.
The Kongo class are fantastic Battleships with excellent fire control and run very aggresively by the Japanese Commanders as is typical for a Battlecruiser/Ship. The 12 inch 50 on the Alaska was superior to the 14 inch on the standards in every way. The Alaska's themselves are fairly well armoured but less than a Kongo the problem for the Kongo is that the Alaska has exact range, course, speed etc. The only variables are caused by air and sea currents. So Kongo is up to 5 salvo's for a straddle and Alaska is 2 or 3 at most, and this disregards range. THe Alaska is faster and so long as ability to turn is not taken into acount they are a very good ship, just an elephant etc.
The attack on Franklin was actually March 19, 1945 - ironically, the very same day of the big US air strike on Kure that damaged Haruna. Alaska and Franklin were only detached for the three days it took to go down to Ulithi for emergency repairs to Franklin.
The problem with Alaska in this scenario is that she didn't reach WestPac until February 1945; Guam only arrived in March. By that point, it becomes harder to find an opportunity for a Haruna-Alaska matchup, because the IJN hardly has the fuel to send Haruna out on any sort of mission. It is possible, I think, to get Alaska out there a bit sooner, but not by much - rush her out too fast, and you are omitting a lot of necessary training and working up of the ship.
Honestly, for a hypothetical like this, I almost think you need a more radical point of departure - something that delays the entire US offensive across the Central Pacific, for example.
Last edited:
Driftless
Donor
Or a reverse PoD. Have a "not Alaska" get built in the North Carolina or South Dakota late 30s timeframe. We've knocked that thought around on the US Battlecruiser thread. It's theoretically possible, but maybe not plausible
Would it really be the same Alaska, though?
If it's available a couple years earlier, you have to adjust its radar and AA suites accordingly.
Or are we assuming our "Not Alaska" is so close in to Alaska's final 1940 design as to be worth having the discussion?
Well . . .
Let's say Alaska (with same basic specs as the OTL Alaska) is down at Guadalcanal in November 1942 instead of Washington. If she has the same Mk3 and Mk 4 fire control radars, the same SG search radar as Washington, I think we could say she would enjoy . . . not dissimilar success to Washington vis-a-vis Kirishima, especially if Willis Lee is on the bridge.Even 1942 radars, properly worked up and trained up, give a big advantage at night over a Kongo that doesn't have radar. It took a perfect storm for South Dakota to take the short end of the stick, showing up at point blank range, total power loss, backlit by her burning escorts . . .
It would be a riskier affair for Halsey to send her in, of course, because unlike Washington and South Dakota, Alaska can't take the pounding of close in combat of the sort she's likely to face. It would a desperation move, betting all the chips on Alaska being able to get a first hit in, and use her greater speed to avoid getting hit back. But then, in OTL, Halsey *was* pretty desperate in November 1942, so . . .
A daytime engagement would be a closer affair, and then all the little things start coming into play.
Last edited: