Yet another reactivation plan...

[mbear]

I know, you're all sick of seeing them. Let me first say that I know nothing will come of this, but I needed something to do and this seemed like a decent solution.

My own personal take on how to refit the Iowa and her sisters can be found at Iowa Refit < Big Ideas < Tower of Jade

Just so you know, the last time I printed the webpage it was 55 pages long. That was before I added all the references, so it's even bigger now. If your system slows down, that's the reason why.

I really want to say thanks to all of you for hashing through so many issues and problems. It helped clear up quite a bit of confusion.

[shadow01]

I think it would be cheaper to build from scratch some of what you propose.

But what a grand idea!

[bigross86]

But what's the point? Bigger is not necessarily better, not with the advent in anti-shipping missiles. When you were talking WWII and BB vs BB naval battles, then yes, bigger was better, but now? What can a BB do that a CG or DDG can't do, aside from use it's 16" guns? What use is there for the 16" guns today, and what can the guns do that can't be done with a missile or bombs?

[Dreadnought]

Not that I subscribe to this idea in any way since I walk upon one frequently and have for several years but in order to answer BR's concerns there are several things those ships bring to the table that a CG or DDG cannot bring to the table. However, that being said we are talking two clearly different animals comparing these ships to the modern generation of Naval ships with two very different mission directives.

One thing that I can honestly say from not only examining these ships very closely over several years but also learning much from those that sailed, designed, modified and returned them to service is that many "ideas" that are brought forth in modernization proposals in todays age would not work in a logical funding sense.

The problem is that everyone that proposes these modernizations only focus upon the ships as they see it which is fine, but given the big picture they would soon find out that it would be an economically unsound undertaking for a few years as they have always pursued when returning them to service.

A long list of companies to employ as subcontrators would be needed.

If your going to spend that kind of money in supporting them for at a minimum of say 10 years at sea in service then design and build a new one.

Could it be done (as in upgrade the existing)? Yes, it could be done but probably at the expense of building from the ground up a brand new CVN in which the USN will not go for unless ordered too. It is after all their operating budget being spent. That would equate to a few billion dollars and probably not include the support systems needed for these ships to operate for the amount of time their updates would carry them through their new found service which would need to be justified first and foremost. Today, that would be hard to justify.

It is best to leave the Iowas the way they are and stick to their core values if ever needed again ergo heavy NGFS. After that, put them away again. It is not like they are not there in hull life and machinery sense. They are all still in good shape with Iowa herself awaiting drydocking and inspection soon I imagine. Missouri had her hull done not long ago, Wiskey is in good shape and New Jersey has resided in fresh water (unlike the others) since her last drydocking and transit to Camden NJ.

One a funnier note, go mention the term "Battleship" in a such politically correct forum such as Congress, Senate etc and see how far you get these days. History shows that Congress did appreciate the ships of the Iowa class however was very very particular over how much funding they would recieve for "austere" upgrades. It was always long enough to do the job at hand and then back to mothballs they go.

Further, if the jobs were not going to be performed in their (Senators, Congressmens) home state, they would not support the project unless brow beaten into submission by the higher ups. There is no reason to believe that this behavior will have changed any at all since the last modernization in the early 1980's.

However, if a lightning bolt were to strike and they were considered for reactivation hopefully you would not hear some of the stupid arguments of the 1980's over justification. It clearly showed many who were against them had never done their homework based upon material facts nor their characteristics.