Future Battleship/Capital Ship Discussion

[Officer of Engineers]

No but Putin is going to challenge every chance he gets. He challenged us in Syria. We are not going to see WWIII but that does not mean that he will not send forces to stop us if his interests are threatened. And it's not the first time that Moscow did it. The USS ENTERPRISE Incident in the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War. The Soviets sent a nuclear armed naval task force that surprised the hell out of the USN.

The Soviets could afford to do so because they knew that Nixon was not about to start WWIII over Pakistan. In effect, the Soviets neutralized Nixon's gunboat diplomacy.

Putin now holds the same options over wherever American interests lies.

[Tom24]

No but Putin is going to challenge every chance he gets. He challenged us in Syria. We are not going to see WWIII but that does not mean that he will not send forces to stop us if his interests are threatened. And it's not the first time that Moscow did it. The USS ENTERPRISE Incident in the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War. The Soviets sent a nuclear armed naval task force that surprised the hell out of the USN.

The Soviets could afford to do so because they knew that Nixon was not about to start WWIII over Pakistan. In effect, the Soviets neutralized Nixon's gunboat diplomacy.

Putin now holds the same options over wherever American interests lies.

Again, your comparing world events now to Cold War events. The Soviet Union is gone. The current Russian military is a fraction of it's size, strength, and capability compared to the Soviet era, especially their current navy. They challenged us in Syria diplomatically not militarily. All they sent was one 1980's era Slava class cruiser a frigate and an auxiliary. A fleet deployment for them these days involves 2-3 ships. They have no ability to project any serious power much beyond their home waters and airspace. They are a very real threat to neighboring countries but not much beyond that(excluding nukes). China on the other hand is threatening everyone in that region of the pacific and are in the midst of a massive ship building program. North Korea is a loose canon that actually fires weapons at South Korea and even sank one of their frigates a few years ago, very serious stuff. I'm more worried about the clown in North Korea setting off a major war than Putin's actions in Ukraine because he isn't going to invade a NATO member country.

[Officer of Engineers]

Again, your comparing world events now to Cold War events. The Soviet Union is gone. The current Russian military is a fraction of it's size, strength, and capability compared to the Soviet era, especially their current navy. They challenged us in Syria diplomatically not militarily. All they sent was one 1980's era Slava class cruiser a frigate and an auxiliary. A fleet deployment for them these days involves 2-3 ships. They have no ability to project any serious power much beyond their home waters and airspace. They are a very real threat to neighboring countries but not much beyond that(excluding nukes). China on the other hand is threatening everyone in that region of the pacific and are in the midst of a massive ship building program. North Korea is a loose canon that actually fires weapons at South Korea and even sank one of their frigates a few years ago, very serious stuff. I'm more worried about the clown in North Korea setting off a major war than Putin's actions in Ukraine because he isn't going to invade a NATO member country.

NATO is land. A battleship is at sea. He has over 100 BACKFIRES that he can send in a fraction of the time that we can send a naval task force. Maybe you're comfortable ignoring this threat. I am not.

[Tom24]

NATO is land. A battleship is at sea. He has over 100 BACKFIRES that he can send in a fraction of the time that we can send a naval task force. Maybe you're comfortable ignoring this threat. I am not.

Actually it's closer to around 80 backfires and it's very much in question as to how many of those are actually in good enough condition to fly long range real combat sorties, I bet only half that number. The Russian military is slowly coming back but it's still not in great shape, and still only a fraction of what it was in the Soviet era. For much of the last 20 years the Russian Air Force has been in a pretty sad state. Secondly I'm pretty sure a battleship would not be used in Russian coastal seas. Just where exactly would it operate, in the Black Sea, the Baltic Sea? In the event of a major war with Russia it would be the carriers that would engage the Russian fleet and land targets at long range. If a modernized or new build battleship was used against Russian targets it would also stand off at long range and use it's anti ship and cruise missiles not it's guns. And remember we also have a bomber force and air defense that's much more modern and capable than the Russians. This discussion is a merry go round to nowhere, I'll let others continue this if they'd like. The Iowa's are museums and impressive ones at that, and they will never be re-activated.

[Officer of Engineers]

You're not getting it. A single regiment of 12 BACKFIRES to say Iran just complicated the entire battle picture.

[Tom24]

You're not getting it. A single regiment of 12 BACKFIRES to say Iran just complicated the entire battle picture.

And we always have a carrier battle group in the Persian Gulf flying CAP as well as USAF assets in that region. If a battleship was present in the gulf the CVBG is also there. So the backfires would also threaten the carrier not just a battleship operating with it or in the vicinity. Merry go round. It's been fun, have a nice night.

[Doktor]

If it comes to that, of course the Tu-22 will threaten the carrier group. What else?

And which battleship would that be?

[BBSupporter]

In 1939 Einstein sent a letter to the President advising him to the importance of his support to the scientific community. This letter had questionable benefit, however, the action taken by Einstein and others made an impression on the administration, however small, that planted a seed that eventually became the Manhattan Project.

In my opinion, as I have said before, the idea of a new capital ship may be less fanciful than first thought. I can conceive of a letter authored by respected professionals that gets circulated in the proper circles. The letter would be similar to the Einstein letter but drafted more like the Declaration of all things. Again, as I have publicly stated, the Marine Corps is in dire straits and is being written out of doctrine and relegated to a near demobilized status. The support of the Marines must be secured if for nothing but to prevent their continued force degradation and future combat effectiveness. I believe that if an influential Marine were to support the building of a true successor to the Iowa class battleships, that the Navy and Congress could be coerced into the development of a more formidable ship(s) than currently exists.

[SteveDaPirate]

Again, as I have publicly stated, the Marine Corps is in dire straits and is being written out of doctrine and relegated to a near demobilized status. The support of the Marines must be secured if for nothing but to prevent their continued force degradation and future combat effectiveness.

I could be mistaken, but with the strategic pivot to Asia, I would think the role of the Marine Corps would be increasing in emphasis. Considering the number of new toys the Marines are in the process of acquiring, I don’t see the severe force degradation and demobilization you are referring to. The Marines have recently gotten or will soon acquire:
• New AH-1Z Viper attack helicopters
• New UH-1Y Venom medium utility helicopters
• New V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft
• New CH-53K heavy lift helicopters
• New F-35 multirole stealth fighters
• New America class amphibious assault ships
• New HIMARS rocket artillery
• New MRAPs
To me that looks like many billions of dollars invested into the future of the Marine Corps and their ability to influence events in the Pacific.

[TopHatter]

And that's the best way to close out this discussion.