USS Iowa

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
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.

Wouldn't it still be useful as a VTOL carrier?

[Dis]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


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

you know, battleships are among the fastest ships the navy had. Or they used to be.

That would not be the case with lead. You'd have to put in larger boilers and turbines. Larger reduction gears. Then you'd need a larger ship. Then you need more shielding, requiring bigger engines. You know the rest.

And reduction gears are not cheap. They are designed to last the life of the ship. They are custom built in weather controlled environments.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Dis


you know, battleships are among the fastest ships the navy had. Or they used to be.

Neg. Iowa classes were fast, but they were the exception, not the rule.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
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.

26 miles.

[:) Smiley]

On a tangent...
---------------------------------------------

Strange isn't it, that in something as cutting-edge tech-obsessed as the military, there is plenty of hardware in operational use at an age far exceeding their commercial equivalents.

The battleships were mothballed after over half a century of services. Today, the Air Force still operates B-52 bombers built in the 60s (and plans to continue for the forseeable future) while the Navy has 1960s aircraft carriers in active service.

Commercial aircraft and ships on the other hand generally become obsolete and replaced in around 20 years.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Smiley
On a tangent...
---------------------------------------------

Strange isn't it, that in something as cutting-edge tech-obsessed as the military, there is plenty of hardware in operational use at an age far exceeding their commercial equivalents.

The battleships were mothballed after over half a century of services. Today, the Air Force still operates B-52 bombers built in the 60s (and plans to continue for the forseeable future) while the Navy has 1960s aircraft carriers in active service.

Commercial aircraft and ships on the other hand generally become obsolete and replaced in around 20 years.

The Enterprise was laid down 2-1958 and launch 9/24/1960. In serv11/25/1961. The last B-52 came off the line in 6/62. So the youngest B-52 is 43 years old.

[Dis]

good call. I served on the Enterprise. And I believe there are still 2 conventional carriers older than the Enterprise.

The Enterprise is scheduled for decomissioning in 2013. I came aboard in 1993, and they told us then the major overhaul and refuelling would last 20 years.

Here's an interesting little tidbit (or maybe only interesting to nuclear fanatics like myself). The original reactor cores of the Enterprise only lasted 5 years. But the last refuelling is expected to last 20 years. This shows the innovation and upgrades to nuclear reactor phsysics over the year. Take note that the reactors aren't bigger. The fuel rods are still placed in the same size reactor. It's just better distribution of uranium and boron and all that good stuff inside a reactor (which is probably classified- but I can't remember anyways )

[Provost Harrison]

And I thought the sheer bored rigidness of the MBT thread was impossible to repeat. How wrong I was

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


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

Where would the fun be in that?

All I'm saying is that you got enough big ships you can visit dotted all round your country without adding another one...

After visiting Pearl Harbour you wouldn't want to see any other battleship anyway and considering SF is only a few hours away there's hardly any point in putting it there.

Plus you have the Alabama in Mobile Bay for all those poor Southerners who can't afford to make the trip to Hawai'i so that part of the US is catered for.

Besides they both have submarines with them as added attractions - are you going to find a spare sub for Iowa too?

And if you're into Aircraft Carriers there's always the Intrepid museum in New York - which also has a sub...

If you're in need of something older why not go see the massively overhyped Constitution in Boston?

I'm sure there's more besides dotted around the country - so who needs another one? Not SF for a start as it has enough attractions without added some old rusting second rate battleship attraction to the mix. So good for them telling Iowa where to go.

Have you even been to any of these ships I've mentioned - cos if you haven't it is hardly worth crying about not finding a home for this ship and then not visiting it if they did find it a home...

[Mr. Harley]

Uh, Dis - we used it in Desert Storm. Effectively. The Red Sea is a critical choke point for oil tankers (can you say Basra?), and the New Jersey is a 45,000 ton gorilla. It sits anywhere it wants to. Oil pipelines are very fragile, so as long as we have the Iowa, it is ridiculously easy to interdict coastal areas with relative safety. Many modern ships are substantially more fragile, and are much more likely to be destroyed in that kind of constricted combat zone. A mine, while doing damage, is NOT going to sink an Iowa class ship, and it would still be perfectly operative, just a couple of knots slower. We've already discussed modern anti-shipping missles.

If you look at Iran, (as another area of conflict) it has an extensive coastal area, and it is almost totally dependent on the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean for it's commerce. The ability to shell with relative impunity 26 miles up and down the coastline of Iran is not something to be sneered at. Designing an extended range munition for a 16" shell would be easy, and I'll bet that you could put 1000 pounds (times 9 per salvo) within 50 miles of the coast, if the Navy was so inclined.

Now when it comes to Afghanistan, or any of the other -stans in Central Asia, those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

Kuci, you could put in VSTOL capability on the Iowa. They actually added some ASW helicopters on the largish read deck behind the last turret. However, it will still be very manpower intensive. In addition, unlike a carrier, the battleship does not have fire-proofed and specially armored (against shape-charged munitions) fuel and ordinance bunkers and delivery systems to get them from the protected areas to the aircraft. While you might convert the magazines and then one of the lift/barbette systems (that delivered the shells to the rear gun turret, for the sake of argument) you are talking a HUGE amount of expense. Add in the fact the fueling system, and the safety/damage-control aspects of that system, will have to be added in as a kludge.

The Naval Ship Design Bureau spends extensive time, effort, and expense designing that into American ships from the start. That is one of the reason US Ships could take more damage than any other Navy except possibly the Germans. You cannot design an "aftermarket" safety system into a ship, it is built into it from the keel up. So while you could put Harriers on the Iowa, the Navy would never do it.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Uh, Dis - we used it in Desert Storm. Effectively. The Red Sea is a critical choke point for oil tankers (can you say Basra?), and the New Jersey is a 45,000 ton gorilla. It sits anywhere it wants to. Oil pipelines are very fragile, so as long as we have the Iowa, it is ridiculously easy to interdict coastal areas with relative safety.

Uh, shawn - the Iowa was decommissioned in 1990.

Perhaps you were referring to the Missouri which, if it weren't for a British ship would have been hit by an Iraq Silkworm, and we'd have been able to have seen just how unsinkable it was - IIRC the US anti-missile defences were too busy shooting up the Missouri to take it out and that is why you had to rely on us...

Which is another reason why the Missouri is a museum ship and the Iowa will be sold for scrap metal...

[Patroklos]

Perhaps you were referring to the Missouri which, if it weren't for a British ship would have been hit by an Iraq Silkworm, and we'd have been able to have seen just how unsinkable it was

Like most allied navies, you proved yourselves to be effective missile sponges.

Of course I would challenge you you produce any proof or a silkworn attack on the BB.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Like most allied navies, you proved yourselves to be effective missile sponges.

None of our ships were hit during the Gulf Wars that I know of...

And if it weren't for the British ship shooting down the silkworm, the Missouri would have been hit - because as I said before the US ships were too busy engaging in friendly fire to shoot it down.

That must have been real embarrassing - the most powerful navy in the world screwing up and needing to be rescued by its allies.

No wonder you haven't heard about it...

Of course I would challenge you you produce any proof or a silkworn attack on the BB.

I'm not inclined to lie when I make an easily verifiable statement - so either believe me or look it up yourself.

Clearly you're in need of urgent education, so I would suggest the latter course of action...

[Mr. Harley]

I tend to think of them as a class - New Jersey, Missouri, Iowa, and the fourth which I'm too lazy to google right now.

I highly doubt the Silkworm was being fired with any fancy terminal maneuvers. This is Iraqis using Chinese weapons. However - and the thing has a huge warhead, I'd have to get my Jane's down but isn't it around a ton? - it is a slow missile and the Phalanx has an excellent chance of hitting it. Still, from a technical standpoint it would have been interesting, though I have no complaints about Brits helping us out. You fought in the Falklands and found out how to deal with a modern second tier anti-shipping environment (the Argentinians are not first tier, but they still had some decent hardware).

[PLATO]

Wisconsin is the fourth BB in the Iowa class.

Both The Wisconsin and Missouri saw action in GWI