Could the Zumwalt's guns take on a battleship?

[FOG3]

Pitting a 15k ton ship vs a 45k-57k ton, and ignoring the 15k ton ship's antiship armament proves what now? If you're going to pit a battleship you should be bringing out the WW1 HMS Dreadnought or earlier. The Iowas aren't technically even Battleships as their actual guns and AP ammo combination will penetrate their armor belt, resulting in their proper classification being that of an armored cruiser.

To stack the deck with over 3 times the tonnage on the Iowa side, and the vast majority of the Zumwalt's armament disabled on the other effectively concedes that the Zumwalt wins in any realistic conflict.

If 688Is consider their torpedoes threats to 100k ton carriers, some particular reason a ASWless ship would not be in trouble against a Akula II or the common diesel boats?

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by FOG3

Pitting a 15k ton ship vs a 45k-57k ton, and ignoring the 15k ton ship's antiship armament proves what now? If you're going to pit a battleship you should be bringing out the WW1 HMS Dreadnought or earlier. The Iowas aren't technically even Battleships as their actual guns and AP ammo combination will penetrate their armor belt, resulting in their proper classification being that of an armored cruiser.

To stack the deck with over 3 times the tonnage on the Iowa side, and the vast majority of the Zumwalt's armament disabled on the other effectively concedes that the Zumwalt wins in any realistic conflict.

If 688Is consider their torpedoes threats to 100k ton carriers, some particular reason a ASWless ship would not be in trouble against a Akula II or the common diesel boats?

Not necessarily. As always we seem to try and compare ships that have no comparrison whatsoever and it always seems to include an Iowas. The Iowas have their place in time and a very good service record. Most of the ships compared to the Iowas on the WAB and other Boards have never even seen conflict once in their lives where as the Iowas have seen every major conflict and have (in 5 more years) lived TWICE their life expectancy of 35 years. They are a class all their own and so far to this day there is absolutely nothing truely comparable to them no matter how much we try. They served their country well.

Different ages different machines.

[FOG3]

If you say so.

The Battle of Tsushima was between pre-Dreadnoughts and had as much to do with the Russian's failings in discipline, skill, and otherwise as anything else. In the Naval campaigns after that Battleships were like movie stars a lot of glamour, a lot of invested resources, very little actual work. The WW1 naval action was dominated by the submarine, and if the Germans had just been a little better at it they would have strangled the British to death. As is they effectively tore Britain from her throne opening it for the US. WW2 Atlantic was subs, Pacific was Carriers and PT boats.

The Dreadnought concept was a bad idea from day one, and sucked valuable resources from other necessary things such as invested resources to create safe berthings for the Grand Fleet. They learned the wrong lessons from the Russo-Japanese war when they thought those things up.

[omon]

not to mention those super ships automaticly become target no 1, and usually sunk before they do major damage, just like bismark, and yamato.

[Gun Grape]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

every major conflict and have (in 5 more years) lived TWICE their life expectancy of 35 years. They are a class all their own and so far to this day there is absolutely nothing truely comparable to them no matter how much we try. They served their country well.

Different ages different machines.

They may have been afloat more than twice their "Life expectancy" but the longest serving Iowa only has a little over 21 1/2 yrs of service. (jersey)

There are many WW2 era ships that served our Navy, and the Navies of other countries longer.

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by FOG3

If you say so.

The Battle of Tsushima was between pre-Dreadnoughts and had as much to do with the Russian's failings in discipline, skill, and otherwise as anything else. In the Naval campaigns after that Battleships were like movie stars a lot of glamour, a lot of invested resources, very little actual work. The WW1 naval action was dominated by the submarine, and if the Germans had just been a little better at it they would have strangled the British to death. As is they effectively tore Britain from her throne opening it for the US. WW2 Atlantic was subs, Pacific was Carriers and PT boats.

The Dreadnought concept was a bad idea from day one, and sucked valuable resources from other necessary things such as invested resources to create safe berthings for the Grand Fleet. They learned the wrong lessons from the Russo-Japanese war when they thought those things up.

The Battleships circumnavigated the globe, Showed the flags of their respective countries, Invoked diplomacy,industry and trained thousands and thousands of would be sailors to become men. That tradition is much lost today. Yes they complain about the manning aspect but the tradition and training recieved onboard is irreplacable and cannot be found in today's modern navy nor those seamen ship skills ever found again without great diffaculty.

When one weighed a countries industrial standing in the world they almost always looked at that countries navy and capital ships such as the battleships never once at submarines nor aircraft, tanks or any of the like. It was always the battleships pure and simple. That fact is reiterated by all of the leading minds of the time. Engineering marvels.

You state that WWII Atlantic was subs. What about all those subs that were hunted to extinction. I could very easily post the numbers of subs built/launched against those destroyed. The number alone will astound you.
Germany could in no way shape or form keep up with the shipping being produced in American yards for the majority of WWII and at the same time support a multi front war effort.

The prized electric boats being produced by the ending of WWII were absolute junk according to many analysts. They were produced in so many different factories that quality alone was an absolute joke as many components would not even come close to alignment. The snorkels on the Type VII''s as well according to most reports were also failures as well as a majority or their sonars and radars. Their flak guns (37mm) were under constant repair and jammed constantly under pressure. Their torpedos were also not of the best quality, many failures on both the electric and air propelled versions as well as the magnetic pistols. Many of the supposed improvements to the newer boats such as hydraulics for the dive planes,periscopes and torpedo doors were located outside the pressure hull putting them even at further risk from even the slightest depth charging or aerial attacks and not repairable without surfacing endangering the boat and its crew.And then ofcoarse the looping torpedoes that sank some of their own submarines for the allies. So unpredictable that it was standard practice to dive the boat immediately after launching or risk destruction by error.


Hitler called his Uboat force his first line of defense. Well after gaining valuable ASW training and equipment that first defense was smashed beyond repair,forcing them to evacuate occupied France bases for Norway and even then they were running out of places to go so it was back to Germany for safety. Not only Britain, but also America, Canada, Aussies and many more were involved in hunting them down and it became a science Yes, a science. And in the closing months/years of WWII not very many could escape the much improved ASW measures and those that did surrendered.

Many places such as the Med, Straights of Gibraltar, Bay of Biscay among others were well know to the best Uboat skippers as graveyards for Uboats. Many attempted, Many,many lost in those waters.



With being able to travel maybe 60 miles a day and taking three weeks in alot of cases to reach their patrol zones (which left only a week to patrol owing to fuel concerns and the return trip) the fact that the Allies were reading their cyphers on a daily basis and being there waiting with loaded guns when they surfaced for fueling,repairs,charging the batteries or replentishment. Germany also lost many boats to mines. For the amount of time they spent laying minefields they didnt sink many Allied ships at all.The amount of money used for submarine building/testing /repairing was about as comparable as building the capital ships or battleships.

Further, Donitz awarded RitterKruez's by the dozens to skippers that claimed to have sunken a record number of both warships and merchantmen for a vast amount of tonnage but when the number of sinkings and ships reports were examined at the end of WWII it showed that the Uboat campaign numbers wise was nowhere near what the Uboat skippers had reported. Basically Donitz was the candyman on Easter sunday with alot of hungary children. In short, half of the RitterKruez holders (even the ones bearing the crossed swords,oak leaves and or diamonds) were far from deserving them and many never even sank a ship but that didnt stop Donitz from awarding them to keep up moral in a failing Uboat campaign based on unconfirmed reports.

It was nothing more then a bandaid for a seriously bleeding victim. Germany was out of time, the very lifeblood of good decision making.

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Gun Grape

They may have been afloat more than twice their "Life expectancy" but the longest serving Iowa only has a little over 21 1/2 yrs of service. (jersey)

There are many WW2 era ships that served our Navy, and the Navies of other countries longer.

No doubt Grape, But we can also look at one of the oldest still in commision. Perhaps not persay a battleship but Constitution comes pretty dam close and is still in commision and manned by the USN.

[Gun Grape]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

The Battleships circumnavigated the globe, Showed the flags of their respective countries, Invoked diplomacy,industry and trained thousands and thousands of would be sailors to become men. That tradition is much lost today. Yes they complain about the manning aspect but the tradition and training recieved onboard is irreplacable and cannot be found in today's modern navy nor those seamen ship skills ever found again without great diffaculty.

I disagree with that. The sailors of today are made of the same cloth the as sailors that sailed 100 yrs ago.

Your using the same "Back when I went to boot camp...." and "They don't make them like they use to."

But when the chips are down Sailors from ships like the Cole and the Stark showed what kind of sailors the US Navy trains and saved their ships after catastrophic damage. What better example of seamanship skills?

When one weighed a countries industrial standing in the world they almost always looked at that countries navy and capital ships such as the battleships never once at submarines nor aircraft, tanks or any of the like. It was always the battleships pure and simple. That fact is reiterated by all of the leading minds of the time. Engineering marvels.

And they got it wrong. They also judged Armies by their calvary units until the machine gun showed them different.

You state that WWII Atlantic was subs. What about all those subs that were hunted to extinction. I could very easily post the numbers of subs built/launched against those destroyed. The number alone will astound you.
Germany could in no way shape or form keep up with the shipping being produced in American yards for the majority of WWII and at the same time support a multi front war effort.

And the battleships contributed nothing to that effort. The CVEs and DDs won the Battle of the Atlantic. The CVs won the Battle of the Pacific

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Gun Grape

I disagree with that. The sailors of today are made of the same cloth the as sailors that sailed 100 yrs ago.

Your using the same "Back when I went to boot camp...." and "They don't make them like they use to."

But when the chips are down Sailors from ships like the Cole and the Stark showed what kind of sailors the US Navy trains and saved their ships after catastrophic damage. What better example of seamanship skills?


And they got it wrong. They also judged Armies by their calvary units until the machine gun showed them different.


And the battleships contributed nothing to that effort. The CVEs and DDs won the Battle of the Atlantic. The CVs won the Battle of the Pacific

Grape, What is being implied training wise is that there is one fraction of the human interaction into training as compared to computer simulation and the like in this age. It is in all cases not like it used to be. That takes absolutely zero of my own confidence away from todays sailors and I am proud of them including the cadets that will be the future some day as well as the sailors we have now. Perhaps its just the road the future takes much different from the past.

Im not claiming that they got it right but what I am stating is the way it was viewed back in Teddy Roosevelt's days. We cant change history nor what brought about the industrial age. It was heavy industry, science and engineering that brought it about beyond doubt.

Grape, I have stated zero to the effect that the battleships contributed anything to the war in the atlantic. In the Pacific though they sure as hell helped our boys take all those islands along with airwings,groundtroops and others. They also put on one hell of a show in some of the major battles.

The CVE (jeep carriers), DD's, DDE's, Sloops,Frigates and smaller craft as well as a plethora of different aircraft from various Allies ALL contributed to bringing the Uboat navy to heel and did so coming into the game late. But we also cant rule out Intelligence,Cypher breaking, Ship yards and associated industry. Being a merchant marine or Armed Gaurd was no different then being a Uboat sailor or any other as far as credit goes.

What was meant by my post was an answer to FOG post about being wasteful spending and I showed the wastefull spending of the Uboats.

[Shipwreck]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

The Battleships circumnavigated the globe, Showed the flags of their respective countries, Invoked diplomacy,industry and trained thousands and thousands of would be sailors to become men. That tradition is much lost today.

Utter nonsense.

You're joking, right ?

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

Utter nonsense.

You're joking, right ?

Utter nonsense?
When speaking about the Battleships no Im not.
There are zero on the register and none in service in this day and time.
Thats what the post focused on. No other class of ships just the Battleships. Its quite common knowledge that many USN ship make foreign port visits quite often but none are Battleships. Many people use the term loosely.

So what "utter nonsense" is that I might ask?

[Shipwreck]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

So what "utter nonsense" is that I might ask?

That the tradition of *circumnavigating the globe* to *show the flag*, *invoke diplomacy, industry* and *train thousands and thousands of would be sailors to become men* is *much lost today*.

Only the battleships are gone.

And it's much better like this.

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

That the tradition of *circumnavigating the globe* to *show the flag*, *invoke diplomacy, industry* and *train thousands and thousands of would be sailors to become men* is *much lost today*.

Only the Battleships are gone.

And it's much better like this.

In their day and age they did that job very well. Much like the CV's and other ships classes that do it today. They follow a long path in classes of ships that did it long before the CV,DDG,FFG or any other outside the Second Class Battleships and sail powered ships before them.

You are merely taking words out of text. What you quoted was in regard to the post that FOG posted nothing more then a comparrison between a countries money spent on subs and one spent on capital ships. Nothing to do berating any other class of USN or other ships.

"Only the Battleships are gone.

And it's much better like this"

Your opinion. Not mine nor others.

[Shipwreck]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

"Only the Battleships are gone.

And it's much better like this"

Your opinion.

US Navy and Marine Corps think the same.

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

US Navy and Marine Corps think the same.

Well I'm glad you can speak for them. Some seem to think other.