How much more of a fight could the Japanese have put up if they didn't build the Yamato battleship?

Question

if they hadnt used so much resource and put all their eggs into that crappy expensive basket, what else could they have used the time and money for? would it have made a difference? in retrospect what would have been their better strategy?

rohak1212 - i meant crappy as in the context of which it was used and useful, so if you consider that then your answer would agree, it was a crappy choice

Answer 1

Actually they did not put all their eggs into their battleship that is why they only had two of them, their money went into air craft carrier's more so, especially once the war started.

Before the war the mentality of the world was that the Battleship dominated the Oceans and it was a British Naval assault with a torpedo from a bi plane launched from a British carrier that sunk an Italian Battleship that inspired the assault technique used on Pearl Harbor.

So no, I think they made more tactical errors than equipment errors, sure some equipment certainly needed to be updated such as a better sub machine gun and full auto machine gun, their woodpecker gun was antiquated and many of their pistols were also under grade pistols. it was not because of the Battleships though, it was their mindset, the Japanese especially Tojo and his people were following the BUSHIDO way as they perceived it something i know a lot about being a Sensei for 25 years and in Martial art for more than 30 years.

So it was their mindset that the body was a more polished weapon than having good equipment. this proved wrong and why so many japanese men died senselessly on assaults with a Katana (Samuraii sword) in their hand against a machine gun!

Had they been better equiped then the battles may have gone differently for they were fanatically stubborn i am told from many that fought in WWII.

Hope that helps.

Answer 2

First off, it was not crappy, it was an excellent battleship for it's time. It just was horribly misused by the desperate and somewhat deluded leaders of the Japanese military. Also, the actually built two ships of this class, the Yamato, and the Musashi. If they had used those resources for other things, but probably could have built 3 or 4 large aircraft carriers. And that probably would have been of more use to Japan during the war. Although I'm sure they would still have found some way to squander them.

Answer 3

IJN Yamato and its sister ship Masashi were the largest Battleships during WW2 and the only battleships with 18.1" main armament ,however they never engaged any allied Battleships during their entire career,they both succumbed to carrier dive bombers and torpedo planes.Their design was beautiful with Pagoda style superstructure and raked funnel,due to shortage of fuel oil both ships were unable to realize their potential.One battle that Yamato was in against "Taffy 3" consisting of 6 "Baby Flattops or Jeeps carriers" 4 destroyers and 3 destroyer escorts,the Yamato was unable to strut her stuff,so to speak because her 2600 lb shells just passed all the way through the thin skinned American ships and never detonated,in the confusion of battle mixed and missed signals by the Japanese,they thought they were engaging superior forces and turned for home,if they had only known that "Taffy 3 "was all that was between them and the American landing force at Leyte gulf,their real target.I understand the Yamato is still revered in Japan today and they have made both cinema and animated movies about Yamato. "

Answer 4

Not much. Yamato didn't take that much resouce, unlike V-2 of Nazis. Probably they might have made two or three aircraft carriers, or smaller Battleships instead, but it didn't change the course in an any fundamental way.

What Japan lacked was not a weapon, but a superior war general, or strategist. Many historians (such as John Keegan) argue that they lost the crucial Midway battle (which Japan could have won with their weapon) due to an extremely obtuse strategy by old-fashioned guy like Admiral Chuichi Nagumo.

But in any case, there was no way for Japan to win the war, as GDP ratio between Japan and US was something like of 1:30.

Answer 5

Don't think it would have made a difference. Japan's Naval strategy was based on their national sport, Sumo. In that sport, there is an initial charge from the mat of both wrestlers who engage in the final battle. Most bouts are over in two minutes or less. The Japanese Navy used the "final battle" model as their strategy, beginning with the initial attack on our military installations in Hawaii. At every Naval engagement from then on they hurled every resource they had in this "final battle" scenario. More importantly than the loss of ships was the loss of key personnel. After the Battle of Midway, less than 50 of the over 300 Japanese Naval aviators who took part in the attack of December 7, 1941 were still alive. Aviators who could have have taught and trained the next generation of aviators. So, when the Battle of the Philippine Sea happened, it became known forever as the "Marianas Turkey Shoot" because their inexperienced aviators were shot down by ours in quick order.
I don't know if they could have had a better strategy. Much of their Naval air warfare doctrine was the creation of Minoru Genda. But, they were set in their ways through centuries of being obedient to a higher power than themselves. And most of the senior Naval officers grew up within 60 kilometers of each other in small villages set along the Shimonoseki Straits which separate Honshu from Kyushu Islands.
Despite their military losses however, they did eventually achieve the goal of establishing the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" laid out in the Tanaka Plan in 1924. They are the dominant economy in Asia and one cannot visit one single piece of real estate in East Asia or Oceania without seeing the economic influence of Japan.

Answer 6

dear crass, apparantly you didn't do ALL your homework. the japanese, with or without their battleships, armaments, etc., were willing to fight in the streets down to their last man, woman and child. no kidding. oh, however, the govt failed to tell the average japanese population of this quirky little detail but what the heck! the govt knew, just knew the citizen of japan would agree. in fact, didn't it take TWO a-bombs ? no accident there. in fact, america had three lined up - two were used and a third was waiting in the wings, so to speak. tokyo was the third target but lo and behold, the japanese finally quit. fine people, the japanese govt, using the population as human shields and targets so the govt could save face. know what? knowing this and more, i do believe they got what they deserved - too bad it wasn't sooner.

Answer 7

It was discovered in WWII that the 'battleship' was obsolete and not as efficient as the cruiser or aircraft carrier.

Just as the machine gun made the calvalry charge obsolete in WWI; heavy bombers and improved dive bombers were the death knell for the battle wagon in WWII.

The YAMATO or a small fleet of YAMATO's would not have turned the tide in favor of Japan in WWII, especially with the advent of the atomic bombs. 1 A-bomb = 1 destroyed city and 1 A-bomb = 1 destroyed fleet or army or island.

Answer 8

they were also low on planes and especially good pilots at the end of ww2.They used1900 planes and sank 27 ships during the Kamikaze period.Their success rate was much higher when they used good pilots but they soon ran out as they used them as Kamikaze's at the start and ended up having to use anyone who could basically steer a plane once it was in the air!

Answer 9

Not much at all...