SUBMARINEMUSEUMS.ORG Forum

General Boards => Submarine Related Chatter => Submarine Trivia => Topic started by: JTheotonio on May 14, 2009, 02:16:25 PM

Title: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: JTheotonio on May 14, 2009, 02:16:25 PM
There are several parts to this question so let's see if anyone can get all the parts correct.  Mark I hope this is OK to post!

What is the name of the largest Japanese ship to be sunk during WWII?
  a. What US submarine sunk this ship?
  b. How many ( :smitten: ) torpedoes were fired?
  c. What was the depth set on these torpedoes?
  d. What is the name of the Captain of this US submarine?
  e. What is the date of the sinking?

Have it boys! Let's see some answers flying around.  There is a lot more to this Japanese ship than these few questions ask.
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: MWALLEN on May 14, 2009, 04:03:52 PM
Answer: Shinano, Japanese carrier at 72,000 tons

(a) USS Archerfish (or Archer-fish) SS-311

(b) all 6 bow tubes

(c) 10 feet - all of them

(d) Joseph Enright

(e) 11-29-44

And for what it's worth, since the Batfish has the 311's bow tubes...then the Archerfish may have had the Batfish's tubes...so does Batfish get 1/2 credit?   :o :D
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: JTheotonio on May 14, 2009, 07:04:32 PM
Too fast Mark but well done - I figured this would be easy.

So what was so special about the Shiano?
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: Dave595 on May 16, 2009, 12:07:07 PM
The Shinano was originally a sister ship to the Yamato, the largest warship ever built.  Before the Shinano was completed the Japanese decided to convert her to an aircraft carrier, the world's largest.
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: JTheotonio on May 17, 2009, 06:55:50 PM
Bingo - she was a Battleship by design.  Because of this she had certain design flaws as a carrier. 
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: JohnG on May 18, 2009, 11:17:36 AM
What were the design flaws?
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: JTheotonio on May 18, 2009, 01:09:21 PM
When Shinano sailed only 4 of her 12 boilers were functional due to shortage of parts.  This reduced her sped making it difficult to lunch her planes.  Her sped was cut from 27 to 21 knots – too slow to launch without headwind.

Badly damaged, the carrier continued underway, but soon progressive flooding over the next few hours cause the carrier to list to starboard.  Because of this the captain ordered 3 boiler rooms counter-flooded to compensate the listing.  Then the carrier’s boiler feedwater system failed. All efforts to control flooding now failed in part because most of the crew was not well trained in damage control.  (Remember our school of the boat)

By 0745 the carrier had lost all power and ceased forward motion.  Two of her escorts tried to tow the carrier in an attempt to beach her – but failed.  At 1018 the captain gave orders to abandon ship and was listing 30 degrees.  At 1057 on 29 Nov. she capsized and sank taking 1,400 sailors and some civilian workers with her.  The captain and navigator were among the dead.

Postwar analysis by the US Naval Technical Mission to Japan concluded that Shinano had serious design flaws. Specifically, the joint between the antiprojectile armor on the hull and the anti-torpedo bulge on the underwater body was poorly designed; Archer-Fish's torpedoes all exploded along this joint. Also, the force of the torpedo explosions dislodged an H-beam in one of the boiler rooms. The dislodged beam turned into a giant battering ram that punched a hole between two of the boiler rooms. In addition, the failure to test for watertightness played a role.   Survivors claimed that they were unable to control the flooding because the water poured in too fast; some claimed to have seen rivets between seams burst and allow water to surge through. The executive officer reported hearing large amounts of water entering the ship only minutes after the last torpedo hit, and blamed this on the failure to air-test the compartments. Additionally, the ship's list to starboard caused the pumping valves to rise above sea level, which would have made it impossible to counter-flood and right the ship even if they'd worked properly
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: SOB on May 29, 2009, 02:21:37 AM
(d) Joseph Enright

I had the distinct privilege of working for Joe Enright in NavShips in the late 60s and he pinned some fruit salad on my chest that finally caught up with me from my SUBFLOT SEVEN and Viet-F-ing-Nam days. The ceremony came as a total surprise to me - I was told the day before to wear my uniform (most military did NOT wear uniforms to work in D.C.) because I was scheduled to meet with Admiral Enright for a program review.

Imagine my surprise when I walked in his office, only to find my wife and kids and several friends from Admiral Fluckey's staff - including the red-headed gentleman himself! He then gave me 15 days basket leave.

///SOB
Title: Re: Since not much is going on - here's a question for U to answer
Post by: JTheotonio on May 29, 2009, 08:48:49 AM
Congratulations - pretty cool!