Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
EvyL

the Mogami cruiser

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Super Tester
1,677 posts

Note that there are two Mogami named cruisers because glorious poetic soul of Japan naming it after a freakin' river (well, to be fair to the Japanese, they did name their capital ships with old classical names such as Fuso bearing the archaic name of her homeland and Yamato, despite being named after an old province, had her name facemelt with another name for Japan), this one is the newer cruiser as the old one, one of the Yodo class cruisers, was scrapped before 1930.

 

I think I burned my brain.

 

I PRESENT TO YOU THE MOGAMI.

 

1zbh2wx.jpg

 

I gotta say, Mogami is one mean looking cruiser. You expected all four shipgirls you know and love? Well NO.

 

Well its this class again and its one of the most wonky designs the Japanese ever built during their cruiser iterations that began with Myoko which was technically the 'proper' heavy cruiser they ever fielded for the design thought and rolled with it for their new heavy cruiser iterations: a mean battery of 203's grouped in five dual mount turrets in the ABC-XY configuration which had, by sheer turret numbers alone, a heavy broadside potential, impressive speed and reasonable armor. They wanted the newer iteration to be something more as despite the solid build of the Myokos and their successor Takaos, they still were a bit top heavy which was already ringing alarms on the displacement restrictions for newer heavy cruisers within the Washington Naval Treaty so they tried to practically cheat their way in building the next heavy cruiser by making a big-ass hull that's basically an enlarged light cruiser and cram a load of stuff there for in the case of any war, these ships can be simply upgraded to heavy cruiser spec, a cheat which failed big time so hard that they needed to reconstruct them to be sturdy enough to be seaworthy. There were four ships in the class: Mogami, Mikuma, Suzuya and Kumano. A slight note for Suzuya and Kumano as they are sometimes slotted as the subclass of the Mogami because of their very intensive retrofit that had them deviate from both Mogami and Mikuma which can be a fun notion to say the Suzuyas were "Mogami Lites". To be fair lets bunch them to each respective sister ship.

 

2nbyaug.jpg

Offensives and lots of em.

 

The Mogamis had about 5 inches of belt, 2.5 inches of deck, 5 inches of magazine, about an inch of turret whereas the Suzuyas had about 4 inches of belt, about 1.5 inches of deck, 5 inches of magazine and an inch of turret. Their offensive weaponry initially consisted of five triple mount turrets carrying DP 155's in the ABC-XY configuration, some 127mm guns, a couple of 40mm's and heavy MG's which were later reinforced with 25mm's for their AA suite as well as the torpedo tubes most Japanese cruisers had. The speed of which all four, final iterations and all, ran at 35 knots but for the first two cruisers, they initially could move at about 38 knots more or less. The lead ship was the only one of the class that was converted to an aviation cruiser to supplement the fleet's massive loss of the Midway Four carriers.

 

rwnq7q.jpg

 

2vnqry9.jpg

Behold, the cutouts.

 

In a strange aspect though, the Mogami class had issues on their ends because of the whole masking of them being light cruisers, the construction proved faults such as the welds buckling in to the force of a salvo which could mean that the heavy cruiser would literally kill herself slowly just by simply shooting at a target, the hull could not take intense punishment from very choppy seas which warped the steel and reinforcing so much that turrets A and B at the bow were practically jammed after being subjected to that much, and stuffing em with necessary stuff like munitions and the like made them very overloaded at best. And so a reconstruction was issued for all four of them and it was helping matters that the Japanese backed out of the Second London Naval Treaty so they had every right to retrofit the cruisers to more sound levels but was very resource eating at most: the hulls were strengthened and added bulges for ample torpedo protection, additional AA guns and secondaries and the most important bit of trading their 155's for the same 203's the Myokos and Takaos had on. A reason why for both Mogamis and Suzuyas with their turret B's guns elevated was due to the length of the 203's they were retrofitted with. The 155's they once had could be laid down by turret B but not in this case, however this posed no problem to the Myokos and Takaos because their forward layout had turret B the superfiring one albeit turret C facing backward apart from the additional weight this layout had whereas for the Mogami class only turret C is superfiring and all guns are pointing forward which, in a combat sense, can allow the cruisers to bring their guns to bear without going at a large angle that may leave them open to sustaining hits.

 

wklkpi.jpg

 

The 1943 iteration is the last build the lead ship took down with her somewhere in the depths of Surigao Strait (I believe that someone went on an expedition down there and found Yamashiro).

 

All four participated during the Dutch East Indies campaign with Mogami and Mikuma present at the Sunda Strait brawl which some were actually brow raised in suspicion of being careless due to FIVE of their own ships went down by friendly fire, provided offshore bombardment for landings and skulked around for anything that would jeopardize the campaign in the water as well as going on raids, and in the later runs, the lead ship would have her runs of collisions which, reasonable as they are, had a hand in putting some of her colleagues down under as well as the other ships having their own taste of going under. Midway where mass carrier brawls were pretty much the norm and subs getting chance attacks had seen Mikuma go under with the US aircraft delivering the coup de grace after Mogami had accidentally collided while she was trying to dodge the sub that was lining up for a torpedo shot which forced her to lag behind, Suzuya getting herself mauled hard and eventually going under during the Battle off Samar, Kumano getting decked with bombs somewhere in Manila to the point Halsey had expressed his pity on the heavy cruiser as she got repeated attacks again and again until she went under, and Mogami, which got a severe whacking by the earlier T crossing during the Surigao Strait brawl and also collided with Nachi, was eventually scuttled as she was nearly totaled from the repeated attacks and from the wounds she suffered in the previous attacks.

 

Mogami_%26_Nichiei_Maru_after_Midway.jpg

 

Mogami's prow totaled after decking Mikuma. Up front is a tanker.

 

Seriously Mogami WHAT IN THE WORLD. Myoko accidentally colliding with Hatsukaze and nearly sinking her was one thing but to collide with your own sister, a tanker and one of your cruiser colleagues? Now I have seen everything.

 

In-game wise, Mogami is an interesting heavy cruiser, I will say that much, as she is the only ship in the current iteration that can dictate her playstyle by her guns, be them the fast firing 155's or the harder hitting 203's. Her range is a problem as it is a kilometer short than her counterparts and at that tier, Admiral Hipper has the furthest range of 17km, but that does not stop this cruiser to be a potent surprise as she can behave as a "strike" cruiser just by remaining invisible. If memory serves, she can be seen at 12km and adding the concealment module, commander concealment skill and paint, the range she can be seen will be somewhere at 9km which can be helpful if you want to have the element of surprise. She's also a surprising destroyer thug at her tier.

 

Derp.exe is over.

Edited by EvyL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

The painting though, same painting used in my 1/700 scale model and the weird part it was called as light cruiser. Anyway thanks for this article and knowledge given to us by this thread XD

 

Well to be fair, they WERE light cruisers by virtue of guns (155/6.1 inch) and the alleged displacement wasn't really funny... 9k tonnes during shakedown and 11k chucked up... oh Japan, you so funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
760 posts
6,922 battles

Basically the Brits termed the IJN heavy cruisers like the Mogami's, which tried to pretty much act as "supercruisers" doing every job possible acting as flagships, raiders, ships of the line, scouts, transports and torpedo runners as quote

 

"Trying to fit a pint in a quart"  and when hearing of the ships supposed stats the Brits also said "They (the Japanese) are either lying or have made their ships out of paper" which to some extent is true given the structural issues on this class of ships lol

 

Once again, good job Evyl! loving it!

Edited by Blitzkreig95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
40 posts

Pretty much all IJN heavy-cruisers at that time are powerful and superior than USN counterparts, they're all well-armed, top-heavy, well armored (especially Takao-class and Mogami-class) and the fastest cruisers (but the trade off is the giant citadels). Obviously Japanese are too good when they conceal their cruisers true characteristics (displacements), causing American believe these ships are under-weight and suffered from design flaws for being "top-heavy" or "overloaded with weapons".

 

...and that reflected in-game, IJN cruisers are flat-out better than USN cruisers (except pre-buff Furutaka and Aoba, they're horrible). Start from Myoko, Mogami, the down-grade Ibuki and Zao they're all superior ships. RIP USN cruisers :teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
760 posts
6,922 battles

Pretty much all IJN heavy-cruisers at that time are powerful and superior than USN counterparts, they're all well-armed, top-heavy, well armored (especially Takao-class and Mogami-class) and the fastest cruisers (but the trade off is the giant citadels). Obviously Japanese are too good when they conceal their cruisers true characteristics (displacements), causing American believe these ships are under-weight and suffered from design flaws for being "top-heavy" or "overloaded with weapons".

 

...and that reflected in-game, IJN cruisers are flat-out better than USN cruisers (except pre-buff Furutaka and Aoba, they're horrible). Start from Myoko, Mogami, the down-grade Ibuki and Zao they're all superior ships. RIP USN cruisers :teethhappy:

 

USN Cruisers and their super AA have pretty much become obsolete since they nerfed carriers and killed the CV population, I recall times in beta when I shot down upwards of 40 planes defending my carrier from carrier sniping by 2 tier 8 carriers in my New Orleans
Edited by Blitzkreig95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

And to add for historical bit, the US cruisers were great at responding to everything whereas the Japanese cruisers were great at making you literally bleed from every orifice should you encounter them with an equal or lesser force, and you are absolutely going to bleed some more when you're fighting them in the night when you come back out from the gauntlet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
40 posts

Unfortunately, USN cruisers aren't that "good" respond against everything especially when it come combat and versatile capability, IJN cruisers have more advantage because firepower and powerful torpedoes make them more suitable against surface battles, meanwhile USN cruisers are focusing on improving AA guns, the policy force them to switch their "high-velocity" guns into "low-velocity" using for shore bombardments primarily, because the low velocity will increasing barrel wear and less dispersion. Which is correct, by the time Pacific War has showed that carriers becoming the most powerful weapons, their presences causing surface engagement less important, ultimately warships were assigned to their secondary roles as shore-bombardments.

 

What make USN designing and built Alaska-class and Iowa-class as "cruiser-killers"? Because IJN cruisers they founded out it more powerful than they expected, meaing their own cruisers hardly stand a chance when fight against them.


The game proved so far that IJN cruisers much better than USN cruisers in terms of surface fighting and killing ships, USN cruisers ultimately just a support cruisers and strong AA guns becoming useless because the rarity of CVs (except low-tiers).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
760 posts
6,922 battles

Unfortunately, USN cruisers aren't that "good" respond against everything especially when it come combat and versatile capability, IJN cruisers have more advantage because firepower and powerful torpedoes make them more suitable against surface battles, meanwhile USN cruisers are focusing on improving AA guns, the policy force them to switch their "high-velocity" guns into "low-velocity" using for shore bombardments primarily, because the low velocity will increasing barrel wear and less dispersion. Which is correct, by the time Pacific War has showed that carriers becoming the most powerful weapons, their presences causing surface engagement less important, ultimately warships were assigned to their secondary roles as shore-bombardments.

 

What make USN designing and built Alaska-class and Iowa-class as "cruiser-killers"? Because IJN cruisers they founded out it more powerful than they expected, meaing their own cruisers hardly stand a chance when fight against them.

 

The game proved so far that IJN cruisers much better than USN cruisers in terms of surface fighting and killing ships, USN cruisers ultimately just a support cruisers and strong AA guns becoming useless because the rarity of CVs (except low-tiers).

 

Actually, no torpedoes were both a blessing and a curse - early on in WW2 the IJN and their type 93 oxygen torpedoes were very good at taking out the unprepared enemy ships. But later on the volatile oxygen torpedoes had a tendency to explode if hit by even a stray piece of shrapnel as with the case of the cruiser chokai - hit by a single 5" gun from an escort carrier and exploding to a useless hulk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Ch%C5%8Dkai#Subsequent_Action

 

Also Alaska Class battlecruisers were designed to counter the panzerschieffs aka Dueschland class ships and the Scharnhorst class before the IJN cruisers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

Reason why the Alaskas got jumped into the Pacific instead of the Atlantic was to reinforce the bulwark of ships there, not for additional firepower as the Deutschlands they were intended to face were already taken care of. Even their most latest cruiser that was probably the most solid built of all of them, the Baltimore, did not unload at enemy warships but they were still bunching up with carrier task forces as part of the screen the 8"/55 all the heavy cruisers lugged around had a lot of iterations with some reaching further, and the normally, high velocity guns eat away the life of the barrel faster than the lower velocity ones as each of the US 203's had about 175 rounds before being relined. Its kinda biased if you say the Japanese were the most powerful cruisers ever when they had their strengths and weaknesses all the same alongside their American and international counterparts like the volatility of the Type 93 torpedoes which were ideal for night runs and against ships that would not highly expect a torpedo strike at best.

 

And to be fair, the Japanese also designed the B-65 large cruiser when they heard the Alaska was there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
266 posts
3,486 battles

powerful and superior

 

and here am I... still wondering how powerful and superior they are after the Suzuya was sunk by aircraft

 

armed with bombs for ground targets

 

and explodes without even taking any direct hit at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
17 posts
1,167 battles

Pretty much all IJN heavy-cruisers at that time are powerful and superior than USN counterparts, they're all well-armed, top-heavy, well armored (especially Takao-class and Mogami-class) and the fastest cruisers (but the trade off is the giant citadels). Obviously Japanese are too good when they conceal their cruisers true characteristics (displacements), causing American believe these ships are under-weight and suffered from design flaws for being "top-heavy" or "overloaded with weapons".

 

...and that reflected in-game, IJN cruisers are flat-out better than USN cruisers (except pre-buff Furutaka and Aoba, they're horrible). Start from Myoko, Mogami, the down-grade Ibuki and Zao they're all superior ships. RIP USN cruisers :teethhappy:

 My keks man, never knew that being prone to capsize in storms is an advantage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
22 posts
417 battles

 

and here am I... still wondering how powerful and superior they are after the Suzuya was sunk by aircraft

 

armed with bombs for ground targets

 

and explodes without even taking any direct hit at all

 

A general-purpose bomb is still a bomb, and bombs are very good at destroying things. What are you talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,779 posts
328 battles

 

A general-purpose bomb is still a bomb, and bombs are very good at destroying things. What are you talking about?

 

the bombs didn't hit Suzuya, her Torpedoes detonated from dodging the bombs dropped (all near misses at her)

 

basically Suzuya sank without getting hit by a single bomb but was destroyed by her own torpedoes.. 

 

just sayin~ :hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
22 posts
417 battles

 

the bombs didn't hit Suzuya, her Torpedoes detonated from dodging the bombs dropped (all near misses at her)

 

basically Suzuya sank without getting hit by a single bomb but was destroyed by her own torpedoes.. 

 

Shell or bomb, a near-miss can damage the hull and the deck. What are you talking about? Ships have been crippled or sunk by near-misses. I'd say that a near-miss counts as a hit.
Edited by SillyGoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

Well, to be fair, if you look at the pilot's perspective, a near-miss isn't a confirmed hit on the ship itself per se, but its still a hit as the blast shockwave in the water may rock and damage the ship.

 

Strange things 500 lb general purpose bombs do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
266 posts
3,486 battles

 

A general-purpose bomb is still a bomb, and bombs are very good at destroying things. What are you talking about?

 

 

Shell or bomb, a near-miss can damage the hull and the deck. What are you talking about? Ships have been crippled or sunk by near-misses. I'd say that a near-miss counts as a hit.

 

 

near miss

noun

a bomb that misses its target but still causes damage

 

no need to freaking define what a "miss" is. the point still stand that it's not a direct hit

also, given that you are merely destroyed by that, that sounds pretty lame to begin with compared to those taking actual hits not just from bombs but also torpedoes.

 

Ah yes. Bombs can destroy things if their target is the one they are intended to deal with. If not, it would be something that wont cause serious problem with the fighting capability of a ship, unless their design sucks.

 

Now im really wondering what I'm talking about. Am I influenced by those Hollywood movies where peestol can destroy tonks? Or is it the games where i end up thinking that anything will work to destroy stuff and is k. Enlighten me.

 

_(:3」∠)_

 

Edited by Kotono_Amaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
22 posts
417 battles

Ah yes. Bombs can destroy things if their target is the one they are intended to deal with. If not, it would be something that wont cause serious problem with the fighting capability of a ship, unless their design sucks.

 

Now im really wondering what I'm talking about. Am I influenced by those Hollywood movies where peestol can destroy tonks? Or is it the games where i end up thinking that anything will work to destroy stuff and is k. Enlighten me.

 

_(:3」∠)_

 

 

The Avengers flew with 500lb general-purpose bombs. GP bombs were standard-issue for anti-ship activities in the US Navy; the Americans did not have a dedicated anti-ship bomb - something which you seem to believe. What I don't like is that people here are discrediting the Suzuya's design because it was destroyed by such a bomb, because these were powerful weapons that would punch a hole into any ship's hull that's less than a Battlecruiser in strength, whether near-miss or direct hit. Ships, for all their size, are pretty damn fragile against the weapons of their day.
Edited by SillyGoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
266 posts
3,486 battles

 

The Avengers flew with 500lb general-purpose bombs. GP bombs were standard-issue for anti-ship activities in the US Navy; the Americans did not have a dedicated anti-ship bomb - something which you seem to believe.

 

 

The US also have AP Bombs which were mostly on 1000lb but not on the Avengers since they can only carry  500lb or 100lb. They have GP bombs solely for ground or unarmored surface targets. Its true anti-ship weaponry is the torpedo. Hell it can even fly with HVAR but not as anti-shipping weaponry.

 

 

What I don't like is that people here are discrediting the Suzuya's design because it was destroyed by such a bomb, because these were powerful weapons that would punch a hole into any ship's hull that's less than a Battlecruiser in strength, whether near-miss or direct hit. Ships, for all their size, are pretty damn fragile against the weapons of their day.

 

and again, GP bombs aint stronk enough like AP Bombs to kill an armored ship. But to see a ship sunk without even taking so much beating like the rest. I get impressed with a chance of cringe at the same time.

 

as a commander? I'd like that ship...

 

on the other side so I can simply send CVEs just to take them down. And have them armed with GP bombs and Depth Charges :trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
22 posts
417 battles

 

The US also have AP Bombs which were mostly on 1000lb but not on the Avengers since they can only carry  500lb or 100lb. They have GP bombs solely for ground or unarmored surface targets. Its true anti-ship weaponry is the torpedo. Hell it can even fly with HVAR but not as anti-shipping weaponry.

 

 

and again, GP bombs aint stronk enough like AP Bombs to kill an armored ship. But to see a ship sunk without even taking so much beating like the rest. I get impressed with a chance of cringe at the same time.

 

as a commander? I'd like that ship...

 

on the other side so I can simply send CVEs just to take them down. And have them armed with GP bombs and Depth Charges :trollface:

 

GP bombs were loaded on SBD Dauntlesses, which exacted a heavy toll on Japanese ships. The bombs you are talking about were rare - a carrier never carried more than 20 1000lb AP bombs in its magazine. I have also read the memoirs of Cmdr. Harold J. Buell, an American dive bomber pilot who flew the SBD and the SB2C Helldiver and participated in every major CV-vs-CV engagement in the Pacific War, and he never took thousand-pounder AP's on an anti-ship mission - it was always 1x 500lb GP, and 2x 250lb GP, and boy did he sink quite a few ships! In the Battle of Leyte Gulf, he even scored direct hits on the Zuikaku. But I digress.

 

The main ship-killing tool for the USN was the dive-bomber and its bomb, and the GP bomb proved more than adequate in this role because of terrible American torpedo performance till 1944. It is not shameful for the Suzuya to have been sunk by this bomb, because the weapon was very powerful and the ship suffered bad luck. Cmdr. Tameichi Hara's DD Amatsukaze suffered extensive shell hits in August, 1942 at Guadalcanal that took out her hydraulics and even damaged a torpedo mount, and yet the Type 93's did not explode.

Edited by SillyGoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
40 posts

 

Well, i mean that their cruisers is overloaded with weapons too (forgot to add that) and yes being top-heavy thanks to those bulky superstructure make them excessive rolling on heavy-seas and storms, once the "fleet accident" showed the flaws, Japanese sacked one of their commander Fujimoto Kikuo (he's the one who like: "let stacked a lot of firepowers on our ships until it capsized"). :teethhappy:

 

When i say "superior" and "powerful" the IJN heavy-cruisers quite sounded on paper, but in practice they're capable forces (well armed and heavy torpedoes armaments). USN cruisers were focusing on escorts and AA screens to protecting their task forces while IJN can't because the poor AA guns, so USN cruisers and their doctrine design philosophy are well balanced is just not the best, just "average".

 

The game balance does as well, IJN cruisers are great at versatile and better combat capability than USN cruisers. While USN cruisers tend to be more "teamwork-heavy", escorts, AA screens, protecting teammates and can help pushing cap effectively. (even am not sure someone willing to "teamwork" :sceptic:)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×