Iowa Form 123: Fill & Download for Free

I’ll answer this based on the armor on an Iowa class against modern anti-ship missiles, torpedoes, and naval air bombardment.Someone called “Blackadam” did a fair amount of work on this problem, and here are his results…. No an anti-ship missile modern day can beat Iowa Battleship-class ?Note his conclusion, just based on the tonnage of explosives needed to sink an Iowa, would be the equivalent of 100+ cruise missile hits.The Japanese Yamato was struck by some ten torpedoes, mainly on the port side, and several bombs before she sank. Musashi and her consorts were attacked by hundreds of U.S. Navy carrier aircraft. This battlewagon was hit by some nineteen torpedoes and seventeen bombs. Though her heavy protection withstood this massive damage to a degree probably unsurpassed by any other contemporary warship, Musashi capsized and sank about four hours after she received her last hit.Just to give an idea of how much punishment BBs can take.Standard USN air droppable torpedos weighed 1005kg/2216 lbs and had warheads with 262kg Torpex. Typical aircraft armaments in these cases consisted of 454kg/1000lbs and 227kg/500lbs. Respectively, these contained about 241kg and 119kg of HE explosive.Name Type Bomb-Weight HE-WeightAN-M30 GP 100 lb 54 lbAN-M57 GP 250 lb 123 lbAN-M64 GP 500 lb 262 lbAN-M65 GP 1,000 lb 530 lbAN-M66 GP 2,000 lb 1,051 lbAN-M56 Light Case 4,000 lb 3,245 lbAN-Mk1 Armor-Piercing 1,600 lb 215 lbBy comparisonP-800 OniksWarhead 250 kg (551 lb)P-700 GranitWarhead weight 750 kg (1,653 lb) HE (unknown composition, probably RDX or similar) or 500 kt fission-fusion thermonuclear weaponAssuming Mk13 torpedos and 500lb bombs were used, it took at least some 3 tons of explosive to sink Yamato (and 7 tons to sink Musashi). That's the same weight of explosive as in 4 (9) SS-N-19 or in 12 (28) SS-N-26. Between 11 to 15 torpedo's and at least 7 direct AP bomb hits to sink the Yamato. Let's Remember ! The anti-ship missile operates mainly sea-skimmingAnd armor of Iowa better than Yamato/Musashi, it plated by nickel-steelUnlike modern warships, which operate on the concept of eliminating an incoming threat (anti-ship missiles or enemy aircraft) before the given threat strikes a ship and thus carry lighter armor, the Iowa-class was designed and built in an age when ships were expected to withstand an onslaught of naval shells from enemy ships, emplaced coastal defenses from fortified enemy positions near the coast, and the increasing threat of gunfire and armour piercing/ incendiary bombs dropped by enemy fighter and bomber aircraft. Like most World War II era battleships, the Iowa-class was equipped with class B armor plate designed to a post Jutland design (the "all or nothing" armor scheme), but unlike earlier WWII-era battleship, the Iowas benefitted from advances in steel technology that allowed mills to forge the steel at higher temperatures and heat treatment, which produced a much higher-quality, stronger and more elastic armor. The metal was a nickel-steel compound, classified as a stainless steel, that can bend easily and resists corrosion. Most of the armor was manufactured at Bethlehem Steel’s main mill in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, and Luken Steel’s Coatsville mill just outside Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The exception was the turret plating, which was forged at a plant built especially for the Iowas: the Charleston Ordnance Works in Charleston, West Virginia.Subsonic missiles would be less devastating degree, due to the speed and low weight of their warheads, so they need more than 100 missiles to destroy targets such as IowaI think Iowa is still a threat if it still works and upgrades

Tl;dr: Survival in a non-survivable accident like JAL 123’s is purely random. Nothing you can do will change your likelihood of climbing or being dragged out of the wreckage alive.The Japan Transport Safety Board (https://www.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/english.html) (formerly the “Aircraft Accident Investigation Commission” under the Ministry of Transport) is world-class and did an excellent investigation of this heartbreaking tragedy. Their accident report (thoughtfully offered in English in a big PDF file at http://www.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/eng-air_report/JA8119.pdf) makes the following observation:“Four persons survived this accident, but they were all seriously injured. All of them were seated in the aft portion of the aft fuselage and are considered to have been subjected to tens of G, but they were able to escape death miraculously. The conceivable reason would be that their seating attitude, way to fasten the belt, status of damage to the seat, status of substances surrounding their body, etc., at the time of collision chanced to help buffer the impact, and that they were less subjected to collision with dispersed internal substances of the fuselage.” (Page 128)Captain Masami Takahama and his crew carried out an unbelievable feat of airmanship — on a par with that of Captain Al Haynes and his crew on United Airlines Flight 232 - Wikipedia — in keeping an essentially unflyable aircraft in the air for an agonizing amount of time. The only difference between the two really was the Japan Air Lines’ lack of options and inability to get out of the mountains they ultimately struck.JAL 123:UA 232 (mash-up of NTSB illustration and Topocreator (Create and print your own color shaded-relief topographic maps) map of Iowa):Both crews were confronted with grievously compromised flight control systems, and both used what little they control they had better than should have been humanly possible. UA 232 was coaxed to what amounted to a semi-controlled crash in an open area — the runway environment at Sioux City, IA — with dozens of first responders on hand, at a lower airspeed than JAL 123 could attain as its crew fought to survive over forbiddingly rugged terrain.Aircraft structures, seats, and interior furnishings all are designed to absorb impact forces, steer them away from occupants, spread out impact forces and delay the start or spread of post-crash fires. The crews will do what they can to manage a truly catastrophic situation, and most aircraft will take themselves apart trying to give the people inside them a chance.Captain Haynes and crew had enough room to bring down their DC-10 to what could have been a completely non-survivable impact and wound up saving more than half of the people aboard. Captain Takahama and crew couldn’t get their crippled Boeing 747 to more forgiving terrain to even make such an attempt before time ran out for them.However, like I said up front: when it comes to survival from a truly disastrous emergency, once the crash sequence has started, it’s purely random.

This question suffers from a common logical flaw. It posits an engagement that would have violated every tactical and operational doctrine of the time. By the time the Iowa-class was fielded, battleships no longer were arrayed against battleships. The only occasions for such and engagement, once it was in commission, were the destruction of KMS Scharnhorst by HMS Duke of York in December 1943 and the Battle of Surigao Strait in October 1944. The former was an uneven match that involved teh successful ambush of a capital ship operating as a commerce raider and the latter involved American battleships that were no longer considered part of the battle line and which had been relegated to shore bombardment duties.Fast battleships had become the bodyguards of the aircraft carriers. Yamato, Bismarck, and Tirpitz, should that near impossible task group be formed, would never have gotten within range of the Allied battleships. Waves of carrier aircraft would have disabled and, eventually sunk, these ships.Assuming all the planets aligned and this engagement came to pass, a wonderful July 1983 article in the U.S. Naval Institute journal Proceedings by Thomas Hone and Norman Friedman, both noted naval historians, is instructive. It suggests that a gunnery duel between the Iowa and the Yamato would have been won by the Iowa, subject to the influence of luck. A subsequent letter to the journal commented on the article and was penned by retired Vice Admiral Lloyd Mustin, an expert on the matter who had been the staff gunnery and radar officer for the U.S. battleships in 3rd/5th Fleet late in the war. Taken together, these articles suggest that the advantage in long range gunnery enjoyed by the Iowa would have been decisive.[1] Similar advantages enjoyed by the King George V-class later in the war would have provided a similar advantage for the British ships, although Prince of Wales, sunk on December 8, 1941, would never see these improvements.[1] Thomas Hone and Norman Friedman, “Iowa vs. Yamato: The Ultimate Gunnery Duel,” Proceedings 109, No. 7/965 (July 1983): 122–123; Lloyd M. Mustin, “Iowa vs. Yamato: The Ultimate Gunnery Duel, Comment and Discussion, Proceedings 111, No. 11/969 (November 1983): 98–99; both articles are reprinted in Thomas J. Cutler, ed., The Battle of Leyte Gulf at 75: A Retrospective (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2019).