Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Grape
If they are small shells. Big bullets, with big casualty zones don't do me any good if I am in an engaged fight. The standard for 16in back in the 1980s was that anything within 2000 meters was "Danger Close" So big bullets mean that I have to engage them way off. OK if you are in the desert. bad anywhere else..
|
Well, the Iowa would not have just "big bullets". If reactivated (and the 16" Extended range PJ's were included), She would have 16", 13&11" Sabot, as well as her 5". She would be able to engage more than just one type of target.
That is why it pays to have a mix of systems and include above comment.
Quote:
|
What do you think an Iowa, in their present configuration, brings to the Navy?
|
Even in her present configuration, she brings her reliability, redundancy, and firepower out to 24NM. Along with out dated ABL's, older PHALANX, out dated comms equipment and so on. However, I do not agree that if they were to come back, that is the way we should keep the battleships, more on that later.
Quote:
|
Most classes can fab parts for their own ships use and the bigger ships LHA/LHD/CVs all have machine shops that can support the rest of the Taskforce.
|
Well, the LHA's & LHD's machine shops (even the CVN's) have enough to worry about with the ship and the air wing. They were jambed up to where we couldn't get a shaft for our distillate pump among other things. So for a majority of the time with embarked Marines, your above statement is not true.
Quote:
|
Then don't waste the money of a 60yr old hull. Use it to build a new oiler
|
It wouldn't be a waste of money, the oiler wouldn't be able to come near the battleships capabilities. We wasted money when we decommed our 4 AOE's.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by by me
Her firepower. That is another plus for the fleet. It can and should be improved upon. VLS and improved 5" guns along with extended range 16" projectiles, Goalkeeper CIWS, among other things. Gun grape, help me out on this one, There is a radar, I can not remember the designation, but it is able to track multiple targets like AEGIS is able to, and would be able to be installed on the Iowa's. I heard of the MK 160 (improved fire control), but it is not the one that is on my mind.
|
Quote:
|
Why do you think that the BB reactivation or 16in ER projectiles would not be the same pork barrel nightmares that everything else is?
|
Well, that depends on who the contract is awarded to and how it is awarded. It should be an FPI ( Fixed price incentive) contract with a ceiling of maybe 10 to 20% at the most to account for any design changes if they should happen. Many a contractor are real happy with the way things are going now. They are getting paid with a majority of it being for just making CAD drawings, models, and air time on the discovery channel among other things.
Quote:
|
My biggest problem with people that want to reactivate the Battleships is that even they talk about how the ships need armament upgrades, radar upgrades and comm upgrades. If you are going to spend all that money build a new hull and design it to your specs and needs. Not work around a 60yr old hull where you have to make design compromise after compromise.
|
Just in case you didn't know, even our current ships receive modernization and upgrading. Whether it be improved generator controls, wind screen's for the outer casing, fuel compensating systems, improved comms equipment, SHIPALTS, MECHALTS, and the things mentioned above are all going on. They have to work around the already built hull. Don't forget about the design and money that was poured in to the SSGN project as well. The same would be the case for the Iowa's. Why would you not want to upgrade, as is being done currently to many ships? Even with newer ships, they have to make design compromises. Would it be cost effective just to build new ones instead of upgrading them as we are doing now? No. The Iowa's can adapt to changes, as they already have.
So, by using those hulls, we would be able to get those ships out there a lot quicker instead of starting from scratch. So from there you would be able to have better rotations that will not only benefit the ships, but the sailors as well. If go is the word, then we can begin working on a new design, and gain much valuable information about what should be carried over and what improvements should be made to the new design. Though old, there is much we can learn from the past.
One other thing Gun grape, can you help me out on that radar question I asked earlier? I can't remember which Mark it was.
Take it easy for now
Steamin Demon
