May I ask who is stronger between the USS Hood and the Colorado class battleships?

Updated on military 2024-02-08
9 answers
  1. Anonymous users2024-02-05

    A battle cruiser and a cruiser are completely two different concepts, and he basically belongs to a special kind of battleship, that is, by sacrificing armor protection and increasing power to increase the speed of the route, which is used to chase and hunt cruisers, and at the same time can also be used to raid battleships, so to speak, a kind of fast battleship. So the battlecruiser was no smaller than the battleships of the same era.

    The Hood has a displacement of 490,000 tons and a speed of 30 knots, which was one of the largest and fastest warships at the time, and when World War II broke out, this tonnage and speed were also very prominent, and it was the main battleship of the British Empire, and the Colorado-class battleships had a displacement of 370,000 tons and a speed of 21 knots.

    The Hood is far more powerful than the Colorado class, and the Colorado class is just an old-fashioned battleship that fought in World War II, occasionally making a cameo appearance in an amphibious landing battle as a mobile battery, and the Hood has always been the most active warship on the battlefield, if it weren't for the encounter with the most powerful Bismarck-class, it is estimated that it would be very chic in World War II.

  2. Anonymous users2024-02-04

    The Hood was a battle cruiser.

    The USS South Dakota was a Colorado-class battleship.

    The tonnage of the two, the disproportionate ......... in firepower

    The firepower of the battleship is larger, and there is basically no suspense ......

  3. Anonymous users2024-02-03

    The Hood was beaten by a single shot from Bismarck, and it was embarrassing to compare, besides, did the United States and Britain have a reason to use battleships to bombard?

  4. Anonymous users2024-02-02

    HMS Hood battlecruiser.

    Construction of the shipyard: John Brown Shipyard (Clydebank) Commencement date: After the stoppage, the work is restarted.

    Launch Date: Completion Date:

    This is the last battlecruiser built in the United Kingdom, and it is the fourth in the history of the British Royal Navy to be named after the "hood", which belongs to the admiral-class battle cruiser. The ship was ordered to be built in 1916 under the Emergency War Programme. Although the British made extensive changes to the design after the lessons of the Battle of Jutland, the British knew that the limitations caused by the type of ship could not be changed by modifying the design.

    For this reason, the Hood's sister ship was halted and subsequently cancelled in 1917, which resulted in the Hood being the last battlecruiser to be built for the British Royal Navy. Her name was given by the 18th-century British Admiral Samuel Hood.

  5. Anonymous users2024-02-01

    The Hood was a battle cruiser, but it was a great improvement over a regular battle cruiser

    After the Revenge-class battleships, the British Navy** should build fast battleships like the Queen Elizabeth-class battleships, or stronger battlecruisers. It was rumored that Germany would start building Mackensen-class battlecruisers, which would overwhelm all British battlecruisers, and Britain would build stronger battlecruisers, the Hood-class.

    The Hood was built after the Battle of Jutland, so having learned the lesson of the battlecruiser's fragile defenses that led to heavy losses, the design was changed, and improving the broadside protection became the most important part, in fact, the broadside protection of the Hood had reached the level of a battleship.

    However, as the range of the battleship's main guns increased, so did the battleship's range of firefights, and the shells fell almost vertically at the end of the range, so that the requirements for the horizontal defense of the battleship were higher than the requirements for the defense of the broadside.

    Since the Hood's design dates back to the Battle of Jutland, hasty design changes have not corrected most of the structural and overall problems, and the assessment of the lessons learned from the Battle of Jutland is incomplete, the Hood still has some major flaws, especially the issue of horizontal defense.

    The Hood had the opportunity to address these shortcomings, but the Hood did not have enough time to modernize as a majestic sailor of the British Empire and the Royal Navy. At the outbreak of World War II, the Hood went into battle with a flawed body, only to be terminated by a shell piercing through the weak horizontal armor.

    Compared with ordinary battle cruisers, the Hood has reached the level of battleships in terms of broadside protection, and if the horizontal defense can also be revised as planned, it should barely meet the requirements of fast battleships.

  6. Anonymous users2024-01-31

    Strictly speaking, the Hood was classified as a battle cruiser before the London Naval Agreement, but after the signing of the London Naval Agreement between the five countries, each country removed the term modernized battle cruiser and classified it as a high-speed battleship. Casually, after the signing of the London Naval Agreement, it counted as a battleship.

    The Hood was built during World War I, and the design at that time was a battle cruiser, but after the Battle of Jutland, the British designers learned the lesson of the insufficient protection of the battle cruiser and suffered heavy losses, and increased the armor protection of the Hood.

    In a sense, the Hood's armor protection surpassed that of some of the older battleships, but he was still oneBattlecruisers

    After World War I, when the economies of various countries were in great recession and they could not afford to carry out a shipbuilding race, the naval powers signed arms limitation agreements in London.

    On this agreement, it was agreed that no new battleships would be built for a certain period of time, and the old ones could be refitted.

    Everyone moved the doctrine of battlecruisers and changed them to high-speed battleships.

    The Japanese Kongo class is also typical.

  7. Anonymous users2024-01-30

    The establishment of NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

  8. Anonymous users2024-01-29

    It was a battlecruiser that combined the firepower of a battleship with the speed of a cruiser.

    But the armor was chopped to pieces.

    The enemy hit our ammunition rack!

  9. Anonymous users2024-01-28

    Colorado-class battleships, which were built by the United States before World War II. The class was modernized in the 1930s with enhanced anti-aircraft fire and 5-inch anti-aircraft guns. When the Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the Colorado escaped by repairing in San Diego on the west coast.

    The USS Maryland was pierced by two bombs on the upper deck, and the hull was tilted longitudinally. The West Virginia was hit by multiple torpedoes on the port side due to its mooring on the outside of Ford Island, but it was seriously damaged and sank into the water because of its good watertightness and timely opening of the right water injection valve for reverse water injection, but the hull was seriously damaged and sank into the water.

    The basic design of the Colorado-class battleships inherited from the Tennessee-class battleships, and followed the standard style of American battleships at the time: the flying scissor bow; cage mainmast; The secondary guns are mounted on the bow deck; A powertrain with electric propulsion. The main thing is to improve firepower and protection.

    After receiving information about the Japanese Navy's Nagato-class battleships, the United States changed its design and replaced it with four twin 406-mm guns of a larger caliber. As the firepower increased, the defenses were correspondingly strengthened to defend against enemy shells of the same caliber. The rest of the situation is similar to the Tennessee class.

    The power aspect is still not paid attention to by the military, and the maximum speed is only 21 knots. -- Military knowledge.

Related questions
12 answers2024-02-08

How can it be about the same, when Sanda punches straight, turn the hips, twist the waist, and punch in a straight line. When punching the fist, the back foot kicks, the body forms a whole forward, the foot lands just when the fist is knocked out, forming a joint strength, when the two hands are wrong, the hand should be slightly hooked downward, so it is not a complete straight line, and when fighting, you can't turn the hip, you have to turn the waist. I have been studying Xingyi for two years, this is just a little personal opinion of mine, I hope it will be useful to you.