USS Iowa

[BlackCat]

You don't need a modified targeting system - all you need is a system where you can enter current position and target position.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by BlackCat


Oh, and what did they do in WWII ? Do you really think that they only fired when the target was in sight and didn't move ? No, they where both able to move, concider the opponents movement and fire with these movevements included in shoot orders.

There are no complicated things in this, just a lot of calculations that computers make easy.

During WW2 they used mechanical calculators to compute the firing solution. Yes they were able to use forward observers, particularily when attacking land targets. The accuracy wasn't as good as can be had today for a number of reasons: the mechanical calculators weren't as precise as today's digital computers, the radio triangulation equipment wasn't as accurate, they didn't have sophisticated tools to measure wind currents along the path to the target, the consistency of the powder was a little more variable, and they had no way of adjusting for wear in the gun tube.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by PLATO
This is just simply wrong. Sorry, but the exocet is not designed to be an armour piercing weapon. It is designed to be a penetrating weapon, but that function totally fails when placed up against armour plating. The truth is that an exocet would leave nothing more than a black spot where it impacted on most areas of The Iowa class Battleships...

You must remember that these ships were designed to defeat hits from 2500 pound armour piercing shells. The exocet has nowhere near that destructive capability. Not to mention the fact that the Battleships were designed to trade these kinds of blows for hours while in close combat.

I already covered how its going to hit the deck armor, so its going to at a minimum go through the initial 1.5 inch steel plate on the battleship's initial deck level, there is a noticable space between this layer of armor and the main one. At the time this was originally, this was a sensisble move because it could sucessfully detonate gravity bombs before they could reach the main level of armor, avoiding their sucessful penetration. However, against modern anti-ship missiles the scheme is flawed because it means the missile will explode inside the initial layer of armor, trapping most of its fuel in the relatively confined space. Since neither shells nor bombs had very volitile jet fuel inside. As shown in the case of the Stark, the fuel fire started by the missile would reach about 1500 degrees in one minute.

http://www.dcfp.navy.mil/mc/museum/STARK/Stark3.htm

This fire can eventually go further up in temperature to 2200 degrees, which is hot enough to melt steel. This means the fire can potentially melt all the deck armor in the area above it, and even melt the main armor belt and splinter belt armor. Any equipment or electronics in the area could also end up destroyed by the heat, including any connecting wires going through the ship. In other words an anti-ship missile can definately do a substancial amount of damage.

Its also worth noting that the deck armor can only take a 1600 pound armor piercing round in its "immune zone" portion of the deck, there is a substancial portion of the deck where it lacks such capability.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Couldn't you radiation shield most of the ship?

no. And the nuke tests on the battleship probably didn't accound for the very high temps either. Sure the blast won't penetrate. But you still have superheated air going throughout the ship. I seriously doubt anyone could survive that. Yes general quarters would be set. Iirc Zircle zebra is used to shut down ventilation systems in GQ. But ventilation shafts and dampers aren't going to withstand a nuclear blast.

and to talk about the CBR mentioned above. I'll add that there's a difference between nuclear contamination and radiation. Something most people don't realize. Navy ships are equipped with washdown systems that can wash down hazardous things like biological/chemical/ and nuclear contamination. But when a nuclear missile detonates anywhere near the ship. You are going to get hit with massive amounts of neutron and gamma radiation (the alpha and beta will be shielded). the steel of the ship may shield some of the gamma out. But most of that neutron radiation will penetrate the ship except areas under the water line- though if the water is pushed away- even they will be affected. Water is the best neutron shield (actually other materials are used in primary/secondary shielding as well- but water is still used to shield neutrons).

I'm not exactly sure how much radiation is released in a nuclear blast. I don't claim to be an expert on bombs. I do know nuclear reactors can release around 500 Rem/hour while operating outside the primary shield (but within the secondary shield). This is why you can't go into reactor compartments when they are operating. I'd imagine a nuclear blast releases more than that. though it will be instantaneious (again, I'm not counting the fallout) and not a continuous radation release as with a nuclear reactor.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Dis


no. And the nuke tests on the battleship probably didn't accound for the very high temps either. Sure the blast won't penetrate. But you still have superheated air going throughout the ship. I seriously doubt anyone could survive that. Yes general quarters would be set. Iirc Zircle zebra is used to shut down ventilation systems in GQ. But ventilation shafts and dampers aren't going to withstand a nuclear blast.

and to talk about the CBR mentioned above. I'll add that there's a difference between nuclear contamination and radiation. Something most people don't realize. Navy ships are equipped with washdown systems that can wash down hazardous things like biological/chemical/ and nuclear contamination. But when a nuclear missile detonates anywhere near the ship. You are going to get hit with massive amounts of neutron and gamma radiation (the alpha and beta will be shielded). the steel of the ship may shield some of the gamma out. But most of that neutron radiation will penetrate the ship except areas under the water line- though if the water is pushed away- even they will be affected. Water is the best neutron shield (actually other materials are used in primary/secondary shielding as well- but water is still used to shield neutrons).

I'm not exactly sure how much radiation is released in a nuclear blast. I don't claim to be an expert on bombs. I do know nuclear reactors can release around 500 Rem/hour while operating outside the primary shield (but within the secondary shield). This is why you can't go into reactor compartments when they are operating. I'd imagine a nuclear blast releases more than that. though it will be instantaneious (again, I'm not counting the fallout) and not a continuous radation release as with a nuclear reactor.

So the superheated air kills the crew rather than the radiation. That makes sense.

[MOBIUS]

Big f*cking deal...

There's enough of these museums and stuff dotted all over the US - if you can get to SF quit whining and go and see the Missouri in Pearl Harbour...

[Patroklos]

Could you clarify your point here, because the one Exocut that hit the ship's hull, appears to have done so entirely sucessfully.

My pleasure

In other words it easily penetrated the ship's armor and expended the rest its force in the interior of the ship.

Oliver Hazard Perry class ships don't have armor. No modern US warships do with the excetion of carrier flight decks. What the missile penetrated was 1/4" in hull plating, which you could also do with a .50cal.

The missile that only penetrated 3/4 of the ship's normal hull plating absolutely did not work as designed. It simply failed to detonate. The other missile easily penetrated well into the ship's hull and did a large amount of damage.

No. The missle that actually detonated penetrated 1/4" inch of hull plating, and then I gave you another 1/2" to acount for whatever interior bulkheads it would have had to get through to go into the crew berthing (which is none, as the crew berthing is against the hull, but I am trying to give your the benefit of the doubt.). So in grand total BOTH missiles penetrated less than an inch of normal steel, not armor, one simply didn't detonate.

Now back to the battleshop. which has armor 500% more substanial at its weakest point.

This really isn't a matter of debate, it is simply how it is.

[Dr Strangelove]

Steel armor doesn't stop radiation as well as lead shielding, plus a nuke is going to be detonated in the air, so the radiation will strike the ship from an angle not protected by armor anyway.

[Patroklos]

I already covered how its going to hit the deck armor

I already told you that it wouldn't. The popup manuever is not, repeat NOT, so that it will hit the deck. It is to give it enough altitude to allow the terminal spiral manuever that plays havoc with point defense cannons.

Why would anyone design a missle that would hit the deck when no modern warships have armor? And the only exception to the rule, carriers, has its only armor on the deck! The missile is designed to skim the surface and hit the ship as close to the waterline as possible.

What do you think the missile does, aproach the ship at altitude as a perfect target for defensive missiles and point defense cannons and then drop vertically on the target? I wish they did that, as we would never have to worry about such a weapon being a threat.

[Mr. Harley]

Patroklos is absolutely correct, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to substantially automate the Iowa. It is also largely proof against all modern anti-shipping missiles. During the 1960’s and 1970’s there was considerable examination of this factor, and the Navy determined that under modern warfare conditions, anything short of a direct nuclear hit would leave the ship operational. Actually they were worried about a nuclear tipped Soviet torpedo, that’s about the only sure way to kill one. None of the modern anti-shipping missiles are designed to deal with a target like the Iowa. That’s the Navy’s estimation.

Also, there is a problem with cascade radiation in the armor. Steel is LOUSY radiation shielding, as instead of simply absorbing the radiation, the iron nuclei release there own lethal radiation under the right circumstance. The estimation is that the crew would die several days after an airburst. At that time they were not talking about super-heated air, I suspect that the armor belt would stop enough direct radiation to prevent that. It will definitely protect against the initial blast damage. You coujld survive to operate the ship for a couple of days before dying.

However, Mordoch is also correct. They determined that the best strategy for the Soviets would be to airburst one of their larger missiles (at the time the Styx was mentioned, we are talking the 1960’s you know), roughly equivalent to the Chinese Silkworm missiles – which are VERY improved versions of the Styx. That would shred all the comm and radar gear, turning the ship into essentially a gun platform. It would hardly be harmless, but it’s lethality would be decreased by a degree of magnitude. Hence the Phalanx, to protect all that soft gear.

As a gun platform the Iowa class is unmatched. The problem when engaging in fire support is accuracy, destructive capability, and ammunition supply. While the modern ships and their guns will exceed the Iowa in accuracy, they cannot match it in the other two categories. I’ll never forget when someone mentioned that the Soviets 30mm gatling system (Phalanx equivalent, though inferior) might develop the ability to actually hit an incoming 16” shell. At which point the reply was “So what.” It would still land and detonate.

The Iowa can fire nine 2500 pound shells per salvo, at a rate of two or three rounds per minute per tube (I’m doing this from memory). They cannot be intercepted, and can destroy an area the size of a football field. They made concrete penetrating rounds that will let them destroy almost any modern exposed defensive construction. They also made a round with 600 bomblets (the so-called cluster bomb which is standard anti-personnel – why make a big hole when you can instead saturate an even larger area with lots of little pieces of shrapnel). That means a minimum of 10,800 bomblets a minute – and the rounds are much cheaper than the Army’s MLRS missles.

The simple problem is expense, and doctrine. They are extremely expensive to operate, and remember, they are fuel oil guzzlers, too. The Marines love the behemoths, and they were devastatingly effective in supporting the Marine push through the fortified areas along the Kuwait-Saudi border along the Red Sea (Desert Storm). If the modern US military is deploying soldiers in armored Humvees and Stykers, both of which are inferior vehicles, do you think they are going to keep a battleship in service just to keep the Marines happy?

[Dis]

the shells are very powerful indeed. They are still badass, even today. but they also have limited range. When most of our targets are far inland, it doesn't make sense.

[Mr. Harley]

Twenty miles or so, if memory serves me. While alot of conflicts do occur far inland, find me a decade in the twentieth century where the US has not had a conflict where the ability to bombard within 20 miles of the coast with de facto immunity from counterattack did not have value. Admittedly, in some of the interwar periods you didn't NEED a battleship to do the shelling, but you still have had a conflict every decade in the twentieth century where there were coastal zones involved.

[Dis]

but what about the 21st century .

Iraq, afghanistan. Battleships would be useless.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Big f*cking deal...

There's enough of these museums and stuff dotted all over the US - if you can get to SF quit whining and go and see the Missouri in Pearl Harbour...

If you're going to be an ass, why not just avoid the thread in the first place?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Steel armor doesn't stop radiation as well as lead shielding, plus a nuke is going to be detonated in the air, so the radiation will strike the ship from an angle not protected by armor anyway.

I was suggesting lining the interior of the armor with lead.