I hate Omaha!

Discussions on all aspects of the United States of America during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Carl Schwamberger.
Post Reply
Tiornu
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 20 Aug 2003, 21:16
Location: NAmerica

I hate Omaha!

#1

Post by Tiornu » 24 Sep 2003, 23:01

Thanks for letting me vent. And no, I don't mean the city, I mean the ugly deathtrap of a cruiser design.

User avatar
fdewaele
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 30 Jul 2003, 15:27
Location: Belgium

#2

Post by fdewaele » 25 Sep 2003, 11:10

Don't forget these are old cruisers dating from just after WWI. They have a shape which was not unusual for that time. The Japanese Naka, Nagara, Kuma and Tenryu classes are quite similar....


Tiornu
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 20 Aug 2003, 21:16
Location: NAmerica

cruisers

#3

Post by Tiornu » 25 Sep 2003, 11:25

The IJN 5500-tonners were significantly smaller than Omaha but nearly as capable. Omaha has enclosed mounts but little else to recommend her.
I get nervous when I think of a 7000-ton ship with absolutely no magazine protection.

varjag
Member
Posts: 4431
Joined: 01 May 2002, 02:44
Location: Australia

Re: I hate Omaha!

#4

Post by varjag » 27 Sep 2003, 13:29

Tiornu wrote:Thanks for letting me vent. And no, I don't mean the city, I mean the ugly deathtrap of a cruiser design.
And what cruiser design isn't a death trap - ones whatever enemy starts scoring hits? USS Juneau?

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#5

Post by Andy H » 27 Sep 2003, 16:01

None of the class were lost to enemy action were they, and specifically due to magazine explosions?

Andy H

Tiornu
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 20 Aug 2003, 21:16
Location: NAmerica

Re: I hate Omaha!

#6

Post by Tiornu » 27 Sep 2003, 20:40

There were numerous cruisers that proved their toughness by resisting multiple hits during the war. The Atlanta class is a good example. Juneau and Atlanta were the only war losses, both victims of First Guadalcanal. Juneau had survived a 24in torpedo and was caught by surprise after the gun fight was over, struck by a submarine torpedo in nearly the exact spot of the previous hit. Atlanta also suffered a 24in hit and furthermore was beaten to a pulp by shells, including some of the most accurate short-range gunnery of the war--four consecutive salvos inflicting nineteen hits. Dozens of other hits followed, yet Atlanta sank only late the following day. This was pretty good for ships usually regarded as seriously vulnerable.
As far as I can tell, only two Omahas were ever shot at during WWII. Maybe three, if Richmond was targeted at all at the Komandorskis. Raleigh was torpedoed once at Pearl Harbor; she survived because there happened to be a few barges handy to lash alongside the ship and keep it from flipping over. A better gauge of the design's ruggedness came from Marblehead. According to Friedman, a 100kg bomb near-missed her bow. The mining effects nearly sank the ship, since there was nothing substantial to stop the splinters dancing through her hull. As bad as this sounds, the truth is probably worse. Friedman was wrong about the bomb; the Japanese didn't have a 100kg bomb. I'm guessing this is his way of referring to a small bomb, and the Japanese did have a small bomb, one weighing 60kg. If you're looking for ships actually sunk by 60kg bombs, look no further than little Ning Hai and Ping Hai. Only by a remarkable crew effort did Marblehead avoid joining that company.
The Omahas spent pretty much the entire war in zones of minimal threat, chasing down blockade runners and scooting about in the Aleutians. They were never committed to a major operation.

Post Reply

Return to “USA 1919-1945”