recomissioning Iowa class BB's

[Officer of Engineers]

I suggest Private Messaging if you want to share with all concerned.

[RustyBattleship]

I suggest Private Messaging if you want to share with all concerned.

I agree. But I was just kicking myself in the posterior for wanting to be a "Land Grabber". Well, that's one way you can translate my last name from German.

[DCSculler]

I'm assuming that's sarcasm . . .

Overall, the Yamato and the Musashi ... didn't have very good fire control

According to Lundgren in "The World Wonder'd: What Really Happened Off Samar" the Yamato shot quite well at Samar.

[Pacfanweb]

According to Lundgren in "The World Wonder'd: What Really Happened Off Samar" the Yamato shot quite well at Samar.

Yep, I've seen that. Guy did some very in-depth analysis.

Regardless....I would NOT want to be on the ship that a Yamato was shooting at, even an Iowa. Nothing ever put to sea could stand up to those guns, so if you're on an Iowa you better pray that your FC really is 'that much better' and you get some critical early hits, because if Yamato is the one that gets an early hit and slows Iowa enough to close....it's all over.

[maximusslade]

Based on what little bit I've read, Iowa's 2700lb AP shells were found to out perform the Japanese 18" shells. Iowas were supposedly designed to withstand their own ordinance.

As always, take it with a grain of salt.

[Michigan_Guy]

I wish they'd recommission one or two of them just to get this conversation over with.

[Burnet]

I wish they'd recommission one or two of them just to get this conversation over with.

I don't think it would matter. The conversation would just change to the Battleships aren't getting the [fill in the blank] they need. It's a conspiracy by the carrier admirals.

[SlaterDoc]

I have always believed and I wish they would come around to my way of thinking!
But, they should create another tier of ship commission. Maybe place custody of the ship(s)
under the History and Heritage Command. Then any ship that is to be held in an inactive
(so called "ready" reserve) like the Iowa would retain it's name and status even as a museum.
I does not make sense to decom a ship, transfer ownership and still restrict use of so much of it!
So, instead of "in commission" or "out", you would have another tier called "in commission, inactive"
Then, with so few ships that have been "struck" being left, NAVSEA would have an extended purpose.
That is one of the things that many of these museum ships have lacked, someone keeping an eye
on their condition and status. Yes, I know the "can of worms" that might be opened with them involved.
But, all that could be avoided with responsibilities being clearly defined and understood.
Also, situations like what happened with Olympia could be avoided! I know that is not the only museum
ship that has suffered from mismanagement, neglect and what appears to be outright financial pilferage!

[Battleship IOWA]

That is one of the things that many of these museum ships have lacked, someone keeping an eye
on their condition and status. Yes, I know the "can of worms" that might be opened with them involved.
But, all that could be avoided with responsibilities being clearly defined and understood.
Also, situations like what happened with Olympia could be avoided! I know that is not the only museum
ship that has suffered from mismanagement, neglect and what appears to be outright financial pilferage!

I can't speak for other Naval ship Museums but I can speak for the Battleship Iowa Museum and can tell you that the "condition and Status" of the USS Iowa is closely monitored with many eyes on the issue.
Not only does the Navy do yearly inspections of the ship but we also do twice a year underwater inspections using divers with ultrasonic paint thickness measuring equipment. We also have a cathodic protection system for the entire hull of the Iowa.
We are currently drawing up plans to build a coffer dam type system to repaint small sections of the hull at the waterline in the hope we can get another 20 years before needing a haul out.

[tbm3fan]

Hornet has a yearly inspection by Navy divers. We also have a cathodic protection system around the hull.

[SlaterDoc]

Yes, you are definitely one of the most closely monitored! Although, I am going to guess Missouri probably has even more due to location! Plus Midway, also because of her location!

All the more reason for her to retain some sort of commission status and her name not being available.

Funny thing is that our little DE that the Navy has no involvement with anymore seems to get a lot of "non-official" inspections! Though that has more to do with curiosity brought on by the Command staff of the two area Naval facilities. Like the happen-stance visit from the Admiral in charge of the Aircraft Carrier projects in VA last Summer.


Actually, I think they are just jealous!

I can't speak for other Naval ship Museums but I can speak for the Battleship Iowa Museum and can tell you that the "condition and Status" of the USS Iowa is closely monitored with many eyes on the issue.
Not only does the Navy do yearly inspections of the ship but we also do twice a year underwater inspections using divers with ultrasonic paint thickness measuring equipment. We also have a cathodic protection system for the entire hull of the Iowa.
We are currently drawing up plans to build a coffer dam type system to repaint small sections of the hull at the waterline in the hope we can get another 20 years before needing a haul out.

[SW4U]

ok, if you look at the forward ABL's on the Iowas.. the platform they are on is approx. 87 x 28 ft a single 64 cell Mk 56 VLS is approx. 30 x 24 ft.. you could reasonably easy remove the 4 ABL's and in their place install two Mk 56 VLS launchers, giving an Iowa an upgrade from 32 Tomahawks to 128 Tomahawks, remove the rear ABL's and install two Harpoon launchers in each location giving her 48 Harpoons.. that's one HELL of a load out, especially since you'd have the 9 16" guns and 12 5" guns.. (also, the Iowa's can shoot 11" sabots to a range of approx. 100 miles..

1) Mk-56 VLS can't shoot TacToms.

2) The 11" sabot projectile with a range of 100 NM was PPT vaporware.

[SW4U]

US Navy ship building budget is 21 billion dollars a year.. To convert the SSBN's into SSGN's it cost 1 billion dollars each.. for that SAME amount, they could have recomissioned the 4 Iowa's and given them almost the same amount of TLAM's 128 vs 154.. plus everything I posted in the post above..

William Stearman and his associates of the USNFSA now reckon that reactivating & modernizing one Iowa-class BB would cost $1 billion. See here.

[SW4U]

If the planned FRAM updates had taken place early to mid 90's they all would have had VLS installed, more tubes total than the Ticos

I've seen some plans (by JJMA IIRC) and the *FRAM* upgrade actually featured 96 Mk-41 VLS cells in total (2 x 32 cells aft and 2 x 16 cells amidships). The amidships VLS was a source of concern due to the proximity of the expansion joint.

As a result, I believe the amidships VLS were dropped and the *FRAM* upgrade only retained the aft VLS (i.e. 64 Mk-41 VLS cells in total)

[Gun Grape]

William Stearman and his associates of the USNFSA now reckon that reactivating & modernizing one Iowa-class BB would cost $1 billion. See here.

Wow, I didn't think you could pack so much bullshit in such a short article.