Iowa Class vs Kirov Class

[ArmchairGeneral]

Does the 80's era shipwreck have a top-down attack mode?

IIRC, Shipwreck has a high altitude flight profile with a final diving attack, although it may be able to do sea skimming too.

[Blademaster]

De turrets be the baddest part of the ship. If it can't penetrate the armor belt, it certainly can't penetrate the turrets.

How thick are those gun barrels? All the Shipwreck needs to do is to foul up the turret as to disable it from firing any shells.

[SnowLeopard]

In the 80's, the general joke about Iowa's and Styx were:

missile hits, send the boatswain to repaint the damage .........
........
UNLESS it goes down the smoke stack......then kiss it good bye.

A tactical computer exercise produced this situation: at the beginning of the war, a Mod Kashin is 1 mile off the starboard bow of the New Jersey. In that exercise, the New Jersey responded with a broadside of all 16 inch guns and after a minute, no more Kashin.

When I relate that problem, the immediate response is how could he get so close? Well, it was a situation where "Five minutes ago, we weren't at war. Our diplomats were rushing for a solution. He could get that close."

So, point one: Are we saying Kirov and Iowa at point blank, five minutes into a war?

Well, if so, while it is nice to think that those two will just punch it out, there was another "problem" which pointed out that right before the war, the AGI will be in the vincity of the carrier to provide the mid course correction for a cruise missile attack.

In point two: A Soviet cruise missile attack was expected to be massive, overwhelming a ship's defenses. While it seems a little bit expensive to use a Kirov as the mid course correction ship for such an attack (ie, that ship, whatever it may be, would probably buy it) ........ I wouldn't put it past them.

Getting back to the Kashin in the New Jersey problem, it is a scenario I return to time and time again. What if you were the Captain of the Kashin at that moment, what would you do?

My answer generally comes down to turning and trying to ram the NJ, firing SAM's in surface to surface mode (there's that smoke stack problem again), raking with the guns, and either turning to head astern on him at the last moment, firing torpedos (Styx when the angle is there) at point blank OR

.....if in heavy seas, completing the ram, maybe being on the crest when he is in the trough. Extreme, of course ...... but when is looking down a broadside on 9 "volkswagens" ............

Might not sink the NJ (unless the Kashin straddles the NJ, maybe) ..... but might bend a prop shaft or two, take it seriously out of the battle.

Does the Kashin have any advantage? Maneuverability and acceleration. His gas turbines to the NJ's boilers.

But this isn't a Kashin, it's a Kirov. Nuclear boilers to oil boilers, so no advantage in acceleration there. The oil fire superheater might or might not give a movement response advantage.

It does have helicopters, something the NJ can handle but doesn't embark with.....and those can used for over the horizon targeting of missiles.

Of course, the Iowa's can tie helos down to the deck, but in salt spray, how long would they be operational? Of course, the Iowa's carried RPV's, but in a jamming environment, the guy with three manned helos might have the upper hand.

But all things being equal ............... I don't expect them to be equal. I would expect the Kirov to win. It had nuclear weapons to use against other ships; the Iowa's didn't. I know the US treaties took off the tactical nuclear wpns in the mid 80's; I don't know if the Soviets agreed to take theirs off as well, but either way, ..................

.....................if push came to shove, I would rather expect them to be carrying some while the US might not.

I don't think that one could decide on the ship to reprogram a nuclear land attack to take on a ship.

Given that, given that armor is no match of a nuclear blast, one on one, given what each ship has, what each ship might do, I would expect the Kirov to win.
------------------------------------------------------
("You are considered a great hero if you negotiate an arms limitation treaty with your opponents ....... but you're a FOOL if you think your enemy will hold to its side of the bargain."--(wtte), a MAD satire on this and that)

[Dreadnought]

IMO The Kirov dont have one fraction of the armor needed to withstand even a RGM-84 Harpoon missle fired from the Iowa. One thing most tend to omit is that the Kirov are loaded with missles and almost (very little) no armor to protect those missles. Where as the Iowa's could fire the Harpoons or the BGM-109Toms. They are carried in three versions aboard for the Toms and with 1500 mile pinpoint striking capability for the Toms it opens the range greatly. If we used the old armored box version even they are protected inside the box with minimum armor, but what of the Kirov. The Iowas were also built with great damage in mind so they are compartmented quite well. The other weapons to rely upon would be the jammers (splq) these are the much older form of jammers (but since someone mentioned upgrades before hand) for the missle lock upon both vessels Phalanx and SRBOC. Thats where it comes down to whose electronics are better then whos and whos armor will withstand the blast ableing them to reply in full. You will notice I negated the guns altogether. No need for them when facing a rather well armed opponent with a penchant for missle technology. But while were here as far as the guns go.. If we lay one salvo on the Kirov and it will penetrate those decks without doubt then we will see just how well schooled the Soviets are at abondon ship drills and sever damage control measures.

The Soviets feared the Iowas because they feared they could not sink one before she could get off a full and well balanced reply aka.. forsurely endangering the missle platform of the Kirovs in which no crew member would survive to tell (unless ofcoarse they left early). The rest is a testment at who builds a better ship and whose damage control technique has the better grade. IMO The Iowa's and since I have had the pleasure of meeting someone of the opposing side who favored the very same I rest my case and this is my reasoning.

[omon]

do any of the ships have torpedos?

[Dreadnought]

Now heres a scenario.... Both ships battle damaged,many injured/dead fires going and taking on water/listing, whose damage control measures will pass the grade when the moments count. Also do the Soviets have the necessary means to rescue a sinking Kirov in the open seas with a depleated Navy. We know the USN has those resources in various forms and we will negate the "time" factor somewhat to benefit both parties involved. You decide the ending.

Will it be ship for ship or a victor and the vanquished?

[Firral]

I know, there is an opportunity to use 3M-45 "Granit" ("Shipwreck") in various modes of attack in structure of group (including top-down), and also against the closed coastal artillery.
What protection Iowa? Whether it is possible, what one 750 kg (geksogen?) a head part for the speed from 1,5M up to 2,5M will not bring serious damage Iowa?

[Dreadnought]

An Iowa is not perfect and is suseptable to attack from many different missle systems but she has the armor (deck,belt,conning,turret) to withstand alot of damage. The question is can a Kirov with virtually little armor repel the very same missle attack and survive without the ship exploding or poisoning the crew if the nuclear power plant is struck. 76MM thick armor around the plant dont seem very reassuring.

Some points to consider..... (no favorites mind you)

An Iowa has four shafts. The Kirov class has two. Any hit close can disable the Kirov or an Iowa. But, one shaft is not enough to run away with if it needs to happen. Two or more would be most effective.

The Kirov has steam powered backup propulsion. The Iowa dont. She has eight massive Babcox boilers (Iowa may have a different manuf. mind you.) They must secure the reactor before the steam plant engauges. An Iowa was reported to cruise at 28kt on four boilers alone and that if half of her systems are taken out.

If Kirov is forced to secure the power plant and run on steam she is easily outranged by the Iowas steam plant range statistics (fuel mileage) this is quitisential especially in heavy seas.

At 26000 tons displaced against 57,000 tons displaced the Iowas easily out manuver the Kirovs in heavy seas.

Ramming is in serious doubt. The Kirov comes to even within range and the 5"/38 mounts open up with 11-22 rounds per minute x 3 double mounts. With a 10 mile range they will surely sink Kirov long before she can ram the Iowa. Also a better question is could the Kirovs bow hold up to the Iowas side plating/belt. (very doubtfull)

Protection. Most often points of target are batteries,bridge and powerplant. On the Iowas they are afforded maximum protection of up to 17.3" thick STS on the bridge & turret face. Pending which particular Iowa is sent will depend the interior bulkhead protection. and the belt 12.1 inch Grade A & Grade B armor. The Kirov lacks in this area.

In closing, The Iowas were designed to meet and defeat one of their own kind (57000-61000 tons displaced battleship.) The Kirovs were designed to repel any USN CV attack and support their submarines. Different tools for different jobs gentlemen.

Just my thoughts.

[ArmchairGeneral]

How thick are those gun barrels? All the Shipwreck needs to do is to foul up the turret as to disable it from firing any shells.

The gun barrels are designed to withstand extraordinary pressures, from the inside. Nothing but a direct hit is going to hurt the barrels. As for fouling up the turret, I suppose it is plausible that a hit on the deck nearby could smash things up enough to make the turret stick. But I'd want Rusty's opinion on that, for sure. Even if that happens, elevation would not be disabled, so the guns might still be usable. You'd just have to aim the ship in the right direction. Which could be difficult.

[JA Boomer]

They are carried in three versions aboard for the Toms and with 1500 mile pinpoint striking capability for the Toms it opens the range greatly.

What are the three versions of the Tomahawk? I thought there was only the TLAM and TASM?

[omon]

if us navy ever faces russia navy, it will be one hell of a war, i wouldn,t be surprised if nukes are used, at least on water, if that happens, no armor and missles will help either side, one or two nuke torpedo under ships formation(?), and that is it.
subs would be more usefull,
and also do these ships(kirov, iowa) ever oppearte alone? wouldn,t either side do all they can to keep them away, from each other?
looks to me like iowa vs kirov, one on one, can only happen in holywood, and wab.

[zraver]

But all things being equal ............... I don't expect them to be equal. I would expect the Kirov to win. It had nuclear weapons to use against other ships; the Iowa's didn't. I know the US treaties took off the tactical nuclear wpns in the mid 80's; I don't know if the Soviets agreed to take theirs off as well, but either way, ..................

Ever seen what the most powerful US H-bomb 1 mile away did to a WW2 era German heavy cruiser or US carrier let alone a battleship? Not much, if the ship didn't capsize the unexposed crew could be back in action in a matter of minutes, they might die in the long run from poisoning but that doesn't stop thier revenge. Even a direct hit probably wont breach the hull. Rather the blast will drop the ship into the vacume below it onto the sea floor.

[gunnut]

Then the Kirov would win just because of her superior long range weapons. If I was the captain of Kirov, I would never let the Iowa class battleships get in the firing envelope of my ship. I would send out corvettes or frigates out as screens and pinpoint the battleship and launch the Shipwrecks. The Shipwrecks doesn't have to breach the armour belt to do her job. She just need to take out the turrets. Once the turrets are disabled, the Iowa class battleship is basically a sitting duck if she runs out of Tomahawks.

Don't forget the Iowa class carries 16 Harpoons and 32 Tomahawks with significant range on them. Those missiles are probably useless against a battleship but plenty enough to make big holes in a Kirov.

[gunnut]

I know, there is an opportunity to use 3M-45 "Granit" ("Shipwreck") in various modes of attack in structure of group (including top-down), and also against the closed coastal artillery.
What protection Iowa? Whether it is possible, what one 750 kg (geksogen?) a head part for the speed from 1,5M up to 2,5M will not bring serious damage Iowa?

You have to remember those battleships were built to withstand AP shells fired from their own guns. That was the benchmark for a true battleship.

Iowas were built to withstand 16" AP shells. Each of those weigh the same as a Shipwreck. Their terminal velocity is probably around mach 1.5 to mach 2.

The scenario is still a ship with a lot of armor but little long range firepower against a ship with virtually no armor but a lot of long range firepower.

Point blank, no contest. Iowa's 16" guns would destroy Kirov.

[TopHatter]

What are the three versions of the Tomahawk? I thought there was only the TLAM and TASM?

During the 80's there was technically 4 versions of the Tomahawk:

1. TLAM-A - Nuclear-tipped

2. TASM - Anti-ship role.

3. TLAM-C Land Attack (Single warhead)

4. TLAM-D Land Attack (Bomblet dispensing)