World Affairs Board - View Single Post - Future Battleship/Capital Ship Discussion

RustyBattleship · 12-10-2007, 20:33 PM

[quote=Rick DeBay;436294]Do any of them not need to be there? Is there anything missing? Does any point need an explanation as to why it's there?

I did leave off the wave-motion gun, [quote]

Wave motion: I think you mean gun stabilization. This was introduced into all the 16" guns of the three fast class Battleships in WW II. The Salem class Cruisers also had it. It just took a bunch more years to work the mechanics down small enough to work on a moving tank. But the principals are the same.

So you can go ahead and use that gee-whiz 155mm shell with a rocket motor, satellite guidance, etc. to knock out a target that is only worth 1/10 of what the round costs. Maybe only 1/50 if you include the cost of the gun and barrel wear.

Oh well. It's only money.

12-10-2007, 20:33 PM	#108 (permalink)
RustyBattleship *Defense Professional* Join Date: 01-12-06 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 2,951	[quote=Rick DeBay;436294]Do any of them not need to be there? Is there anything missing? Does any point need an explanation as to why it's there? I did leave off the wave-motion gun, [quote] Wave motion: I think you mean gun stabilization. This was introduced into all the 16" guns of the three fast class Battleships in WW II. The Salem class Cruisers also had it. It just took a bunch more years to work the mechanics down small enough to work on a moving tank. But the principals are the same. So you can go ahead and use that gee-whiz 155mm shell with a rocket motor, satellite guidance, etc. to knock out a target that is only worth 1/10 of what the round costs. Maybe only 1/50 if you include the cost of the gun and barrel wear. Oh well. It's only money. __________________ Able to leap tall tales in a single groan. Last edited by RustyBattleship : 12-10-2007 at 20:36 PM.