The Yamato-Class Battleships and ROI

One of the things I like about Quora is that there are times when one question offers an opportunity to put into words something which has been on my mind. In this case, I venture forth, once again, into looking at history in economic terms. I have been toying with discussions and considerations of the relationships between the costs of warfare and how it influences tactical and strategic planning. Perhaps I am close to making my point… perhaps it has already been made by someone much more educated on economics… it still gives me something to write about… 

---

“What naval warship had the most embarrassing career?”

I’m actually a bit surprised that no one has brought up the Yamato­-class battleships yet.

The Yamato and her sister ships – the Musashi and Shinano – were to be the first three of five shining stars for the Imperial Japanese Navy. Of these three, only the Yamato really saw any solid action:

19-23 Jun 1944 – the Battle of the Philippine Sea (where she fired on friendly fighters)…

24 Oct 1944 – the Battle of the Sibuyan Sea (engaged American attack aircraft and received several hits)…

25 Oct 1944 – the Battle off Samar (sunk the American escort carrier Gambier Bay and severely damaged several other destroyers/destroyer escorts)…

…Before finally being sunk during the ill-fated Operation Ten-Go on 7 Apr 1945 (though it took 11-13 torpedoes and at least six bombs from the swarming American attack aircraft).

The Musashi, while present at several of the same battles as the Yamato, was damaged sufficiently enough on 25 Oct 1944 (19 torpedoes and 17 bombs), that no damage control efforts could prevent her eventual sinking.

Finally, the Shinano…

Hers would definitely qualify as an embarrassing career:

Keel laid 4 May 1940…

…construction paused and resumed as a carrier Dec 1941-Jun 1942…

…launched 8 Oct 1944…

…commissioned 19 Nov 1944…

…sunk ten days later by the USS Archerfish.

Now, I must be clear– this is not meant to disparage the crews lost on these three ships; an estimated 3,055 sailors were lost on the Yamato, 1,023 lost on the Musashi, and 1,435 perished on the Shinano. However, since the question centered on the service and not the morality, the two battleships serve as effective examples of the dangers of vaunted and expensive warships in a near-peer naval war.

A bit of perspective:the estimated cost of these ships in 1940 was around 250 million yen; this comes up to about 721.1 million in 2015 USD…which is still considerably less than the $1 billion for a Ticonderoga–class guided missile cruiser and far less than the $4-7.5 billion per unit cost of the Zumwalt-class destroyer. Interestingly, the closest value for modern warships would be the Spanish Álvarode Bazán-class frigate at $600 million.

The reason for this digression is the concept of “embarrassment” when it comes to the production of warships for a long-term strategic and tactical naval presence: return on investment. The Yamato and Musashi proved to be very costly warships for a cash and resource-strapped Japan, and this proved to be part of the decisions which had them effectively sidelined rather than fighting:

The reasons advanced for her taking no part in the Solomons campaign are shortages of fuel and bombardment ammunition, restricted, shallow and uncharted waters near Guadalcanal, her slower getaway speed than KONGOs and Admiral Yamamoto’s reluctance to commit her to battle. YAMATO, the world’s mightiest battleship, remains at Truk as a “hotel” from 29 August 1942 until 8 May 1943. 

For me, this class of ship proved to be a total embarrassment for the Imperial Japanese Navy. Yes,they were impressive warships, and I will also admit that we have the benefit of perfect 20/20 hindsight… but to invest the time, money, and resources – only to be reluctant to place them at risk?

This was a case of poorly sunk costs (pun intended).