Battleship is not obsolete

Is the battleship obsolete?

  • Battleship is obsolete

    Votes: 33 50.8%

  • Battleship is not obsolete

    Votes: 28 43.1%

  • I don't know and I don't care

    Votes: 4 6.2%
  • Total voters
    65
I just love the looks of the old battle wagons, especially the types with huge (16") guns, and bristling with smaller AA weaponry, but it does not alter the fact that like many beautiful old things, their time is well and truly past and they are no more than an expensive and uneconomic use of manpower and materiel.
 
sully said:
The Russian Battle Cruiser posted above has never been a threat to the US because it has had so many problems with it's Propulsion systems it has spent most of its time alongside the pier.Also the Us Agies class Cruiser has it out-classed in every way possible as far as Fire Control.
Click to expand...

But it was a Cold War Boggey Man when it was launched, and it's operating and performance factors were not known, hence the US recommissioned ships of roughly the same size.
 
03USMC said:
But it was a Cold War Boggey Man when it was launched, and it's operating and performance factors were not known, hence the US recommissioned ships of roughly the same size.
Click to expand...
You are right about the Bogyman part it was a mean looking Ship like the Carrier Cruisers but I don't think that had anything to do with the Re-Commision of our Battle Wagons the Iwoa Class BB was super great as a Troop support you can ask any Jarhead or Dogface that was in Vietnam.:smile:
 
Don't take my word for it then.

Late in her life, Wisconsin was reconstructed and returned to service. By this time there were no enemy battleships left, but the Soviet Union was making a bid to challenge the U.S. Navy's supremacy at sea, and in 1980 they commissioned the first of a class of four 28,000t nuclear powered guided missile battlecruisers, good for 33kts. The only ships in the world big enough and fast enough to counter these were the four Iowa class battleships, waiting patiently in reserve. The reactivation of the class started in 1981, with the New Jersey. The Iowa, Missouri, and Wisconsin followed. Their 16in guns were regarded as valuable assets, and were retained. Four twin 5in/38 mounts were removed to make way for Tomahawk missile launchers, the other six were retained. All of the lighter AA guns were removed. New systems added included: 8 armored box launchers for Tomahawk long range SSM, 4 quadruple launchers for Harpoon ASM, 4 Phalanax 20mm CIWS, improved communications (to the standard of a modern cruiser), SLQ-32V ECM gear, SPS-49 air search radar, SPS-67 sea search radar, various decoy systems, improved fire control systems, a new lattice foremast, installation of a helipad on the fantail, an improved fire-fighting system, and conversion to distillate fuel.

From here:http://www.chuckhawks.com/post_treaty_battleships2.htm
 
Last edited:
battleshipfiring.jpg











Love em or hate em tell me that ain't freakin impressive.
 
Just curious Marine have you ever saw this Lady up close and Personal.The name Jarhead was not an insult it was meant as my feeling toward Crimson & Gold a Gunny once told me I earned it I was attached to Camp Kister 1967 I had some great friends in Bravo & H&S 3/1 Amtracs under LT Colonel Toner.http://www.amtrac.org/1atbn/Chronicles/TracsAtCuaViet.asp
 
Last edited:
sully said:
Just curious Marine have you ever saw this Lady up close and Personal.The name Jarhead was not an insult it was meant as my feeling toward Crimson & Gold a Gunny once told me I earned it I was attached to Camp Kister 1967 I had some great friends in Bravo & H&S 3/1 Amtracs under LT Colonel Toner.http://www.amtrac.org/1atbn/Chronicles/TracsAtCuaViet.asp
Click to expand...

I was aboard both Iowa and Missouri in the 80's at various times. I qualed the Missouri's Marine 5" 38 gun mount at Talisan Bay PI in 87 with called fire and beacon adjustment.
 
03USMC said:
I was aboard both Iowa and Missouri in the 80's at various times. I qualed the Missouri's Marine 5" 38 gun mount at Talisan Bay PI in 87 with called fire and beacon adjustment.
Click to expand...
I knew most of the FT and GM's on the Big Mo while she was in Long Beach CA her and the Jersey were both in LB just before Desert Storm and after.I did not ever think I would ever see such a Salty crew all together some of those FTMCS had over 40 years Service in total.
 
Last edited:
Did you know a GM2 on 63 skinny little f*ck with red hair from Southie that used to listen to the Dubliners all the damn time. Turret 2.
 
03USMC said:
Did you know a GM2 on 63 skinny little f*ck with red hair from Southie that used to listen to the Dubliners all the damn time. Turret 2.
Click to expand...
Not sure but if he drank Beer knowing a Salior's habits I knew him because the Ships crew usually hang together esp. Gun crews the Bar they hang out in was called the Barge Inn and it was always a Navy Bar even back in the 60's it was also owned by an old Retired Cruiser Salior and his Wife.The only name I remember is Johnson he was Chief of the Boat BMSMC and he was just about as Salty as they come kinda like looking at a old Salty Gunny with more Hash marks than room on his sleeve.:pirate:
 
I think battleships could be useful if fitted with railgun technology that would allow them to lob shells 200 miles. Either way I don't think anything beats those big guns when it comes to fire support.
 
Big Mo BB63 Firing her main battery:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj-15O-BTDw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj-15O-BTDw[/ame]

Two Iowa Class, I think this is Missouri and Wisconsin during the Gulf War:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7H3cfZXoZE"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7H3cfZXoZE[/ame]

Wisconsin BB64:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5ATYPrZnSQ&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5ATYPrZnSQ&feature=related[/ame]


Iowa:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsNlmiLJGIw&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsNlmiLJGIw&feature=related[/ame]

Tell me that isn't impressive8-)
 
Battleships could be effective when using modern sensors and weapons. If not railguns then big electrothermal-chemical guns could work in a similar fashion, albeit with normal types of shells.
 
Problem is, even with the Missouri class in service during the first Gulf War, they were boilers on fuel, not only so but they had a huge crew compliment.

Another problem is that in smaller brush wars with a litoral nation, the so called brown water navy is key here.

Battleships could be useful once agian with the proper utilization.

But in an era where the world's larger navy's are looking to cut back on spending and cost.

Buying a hugely expensive piece of equiptment that has not been updated or even had tactics redeveloped for it deployment in decades, is just not cost effective.

Put it this way, horse calvary charges where once devastating and had a large fear factor on the battlefields of old, and I guess you could bring back scale use of horse calvary in the modern age, by for say developing laser beams to attach to their heads and kevlar armor plating....

But when the times comes to explain your thought in front of the defense spending committee, your laser beam armed kevlar space horse calvary of the future impressive and cool as it is, financially it just doesn't make sense....:horsie:
 
Last edited:
Yossarian said:
Problem is, even with the Missouri class in service during the first Gulf War, they were boilers on fuel, not only so but they had a huge crew compliment.

Another problem is that in smaller brush wars with a litoral nation, the so called brown water navy is key here.

Battleships could be useful once agian with the proper utilization.

But in an era where the world's larger navy's are looking to cut back on spending and cost.

Buying a hugely expensive piece of equiptment that has not been updated or even had tactics redeveloped for it deployment in decades, is just not cost effective.

Put it this way, horse calvary charges where once devastating and had a large fear factor on the battlefields of old, and I guess you could bring back scale use of horse calvary in the modern age, by for say developing laser beams to attach to their heads and kevlar armor plating....

But when the times comes to explain your thought in front of the defense spending committee, your laser beam armed kevlar space horse calvary of the future impressive and cool as it is, financially it just doesn't make sense....:horsie:
Click to expand...
Probably not usefull for fighting as Cavalry, but in some places, like Vietnam, Mounted Infantry might have been usefull.
 
On a second note, horses navigate very rough terrain much better than motorized vehicles, and even in Afghanistan, coaliton special operations groups sometimes used horses, as they are more quiet and can navigate many types of terrain easier than atv's.


But as for bringing back an new version of an extremely expensive naval vessel, you would like any other piece of equiptment, get a concept, pay to have it developed, and the thing about a ship is unlike a plane, for a large vessel such as this there may very well be no "prototype" this does not give the nation in question's legistrative spending committee or body the ability to examine such prototype tests and decide if they want to continue to pay for the development the program, or if they wish to have a competing design take the contract instead.

(Like the death of the YF 23 for example)

And another bad thing you would have to overcome is cutting down as much as possible on the crew compliment, the most expensive componet often is personal, so the designers maybe I guess to solve that problem they would turn more to automation of any potentional battleship, thus running up the cost in the process.

Like I said, yes, maybe you could modernize the battleship, but the hardest part is overcoming that cost, unless you just ask for a private investor, then convincing your country's spending body to buy off on it, in today's economy is the only thing seperating you from your bad@$$ battlewagon is paying for it.

Unless you get get a bunch of corporate sponsors lol

Just couldn't image the Missouri sponsored by Coke, or State Farm lol
 
Last edited:
Horses in jungles just seem like a very bad idea to me. Been in a few jungles... not exactly a horse-friendly environment.
 
That's what I thought for moment, but then I thought of Mexican cowboys ranching on the edges of rainforest.
 
As I think I already said earlier, the US can't make barrels bigger than 8", and the spare 16" barrels were slated for destrucion. If no Country can make barrels of 12" or bigger, then Battleships are a moot point(exactly why they were planning on destroying the spare barrels). The Russians seem to save everything, wonder if they had & saved the capacity, assuming they didn't buy the barrels for the few post WW 1 BBs they tried to make.
 
Why not just get a special interest group or private contractor to piggy back a program to remake 16 inch guns again through Congress.

I know it would not make sense, but that's almost a prerequisite to get a law passed in this country nowa days.

If the USN got funding and wanted big guns, long and behold, destroyed or not, they will forge new ones and get big guns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top