Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Where a modern battleship would fit in a CVBG?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Where a modern battleship would fit in a CVBG?

    As a general battleship history buff, and a firm believer that a modern battleship class would have a place in modern naval warfare: I must ask the question: If battleships were to be built once again, where would they fit in the modern Carrier Battlegroup that has supplanted Line Ahead as the main combat formation of modern navies? What mission would they fulfill? What would they bring to a CVBG? (Or CSG as the United States Navy as taken to calling them).

    Well, right off the bat, with a significant missile and gun capacity, I can see prodigious ASuW capabilities. As a platform for CIWS of both missile and gun varieties, it could also provide area air defense for the rest of the battlegroup. An electronic warfare suite would also add ECM capabilities, and a helicopter hangar would add ASW.

    It's obvious that the battleship could fulfill many missions for a navy. But the problem lies in cost. Any theoretical battleship design i've read, both here and on other locations across the Net, has cost near to as much as a supercarrier, occasionally more. That's a significant investment in capital for what would be counted amongst the carrier's escorts. Manpower, too, is usually rather high. And a battleship has always been a high profile target for enemy forces, given it's cost and the battleship's symbolism as a image of power and industrial capacity.

    So, there are pros and there are cons. What do you all think? Where would the battleship fit, if in fact it would fit at all?

  • #2
    What would a modern battleship look like? I imagine some kind of hybrid Aegis/Big gun platform. If that is the case, then the newly designed Battleship might be better suited to accompany an ARG than a CVBG. ARG's generally have limited defensive capabilities and depend heavily on the support of a nearby CVBG if defense becomes necessary. Add a modern battleship with enhanced AAW and gunfire support capabilites and it alleviates some (but not all) of the need to have the Carrier nearby.

    Comment


    • #3
      In a modern word, what they would come up with and call a "battleship" (not that the media dont already call every other ship besides a carrier a "battleship") UGLY! It will never have the fine flowing lines of yesterday that not only made them feared but georgous as well.;)
      Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

      Comment


      • #4
        Like this perhaps, but with some guns.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Johnny W View Post
          Like this perhaps, but with some guns.

          Why Johnny that is a sexy picture you got there You know where is it from?

          Comment


          • #6
            I guess its an artistic concept of an arsenal ship. an idea (that I think died some time ago) that is based on a ship that works a huge plattform for a lot of missles instead of conventional weapons.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Super Dude View Post
              Why Johnny that is a sexy picture you got there You know where is it from?
              Its posted on fas.org. Tarek is right though, its just a concept image, and its a few years old at that.
              Last edited by Johnny W; 28 Feb 09,, 00:48.

              Comment


              • #8
                That thing nearly looks like a submarine, it's so smooth (that's what she said)
                "If a man does his best, what else is there?"
                -General George Patton Jr.

                Comment


                • #9
                  A little too sleek for me. Still better looking than the Zumwalt though, which in my opinion looks like the bastard child of a pre-dreadnought and a U-boat.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by HoratioNelson View Post
                    A little too sleek for me. Still better looking than the Zumwalt though, which in my opinion looks like the bastard child of a pre-dreadnought and a U-boat.
                    You made my day. "Bastard child":))

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The zumwalt is a bastard child. I don'f like the ship at all and also its a waste of 4 billion dollars. Going stealthy with a ship is pointless. Yes, it may be a good idea, but a pointless one. For every stealth desing for planes and ships, there will always be a counter stealth system out there. Why go stealthy, when we can use a weapon system that can engage an enemy loong before the can see them on radar. Ok moving on.

                      A modern Battleship should be in its own group. I have a good reason whym but i gotta go so i will post it later on today.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Where a modern battleship would fit in a CVBG?


                        Simply put, it doesn't.

                        A modern BB, or BBG, would be part of the Gator Navy and would likely be assigned to an ESG or an ARG.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Modern Battle Wagon



                          The Kirov is heavily armed enough to fit the bill but its no battleship. This is because of the fact that it is quite a thin skinned vessel (a little armor around the reactor and some splinter protection is all it has). But the concept is sound. If the US Navy were to build such heavy warships it might do well to incorporate a few of the Kirov's capabilities and add some new ones.
                          I butchered an image of the Kirov to see what such a ship might be like.
                          Concepts:
                          •Must be able to absorb and contain the damage from several large cruise missile hits such as the P-700 Granit (750kg warhead)
                          •Must have a dense array of Close in defense gun weapons systems (that can also engage surface targets Phalanx)
                          •Must have a dense array of Close in Missile weapons systems ( RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile?)
                          •Must have the FEL laser defense system
                          •Must have the ability to launch from VL mounts the full array of Standard arm missiles (RIM-161 Standard Missile 3, RIM-174 Standard Missile etc...)
                          •Must have significant protection via traditional steel, Laminate, and Electric reactive armor.
                          •Must have ASW capability
                          •Must have significant gun firepower (8"?) that can deliver smart and conventional munitions)
                          •Must have long range Land attack missiles (Tomahawk)
                          •Must have Long range supersonic Anti Ship missiles and medium Range wave riding Harpoon missiles.
                          •Must have the AEGIS system

                          Well that's about 4-5 billion and change. The question is would it be better to just build a bunch of beefed up Arleigh Burke class destroyers?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            IMO, 45,000 tons wont get it for that shopping list above. The Kirovs were built as "stand off" ships not battleships, relied upon a totally different idealism of what war between ships actually was and IMO are nowehere even near the design parameters of the BB's. Especially the hulls and superstructure for carrying the above mentioned weapons.

                            There are far too many reasons why the concept alone will not work in material sense not to mention the political sense and given todays economies it would end up as an unwanted toy such as the Kirov's spent the majority of the late 1980-90's and 00's rusting away at anchor.
                            Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Xbow View Post


                              The Kirov is heavily armed enough to fit the bill but its no battleship. This is because of the fact that it is quite a thin skinned vessel (a little armor around the reactor and some splinter protection is all it has). But the concept is sound. If the US Navy were to build such heavy warships it might do well to incorporate a few of the Kirov's capabilities and add some new ones.
                              I butchered an image of the Kirov to see what such a ship might be like.
                              Concepts:
                              •Must be able to absorb and contain the damage from several large cruise missile hits such as the P-700 Granit (750kg warhead)
                              •Must have a dense array of Close in defense gun weapons systems (that can also engage surface targets Phalanx)
                              •Must have a dense array of Close in Missile weapons systems ( RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile?)
                              •Must have the FEL laser defense system
                              •Must have the ability to launch from VL mounts the full array of Standard arm missiles (RIM-161 Standard Missile 3, RIM-174 Standard Missile etc...)
                              •Must have significant protection via traditional steel, Laminate, and Electric reactive armor.
                              •Must have ASW capability
                              •Must have significant gun firepower (8"?) that can deliver smart and conventional munitions)
                              •Must have long range Land attack missiles (Tomahawk)
                              •Must have Long range supersonic Anti Ship missiles and medium Range wave riding Harpoon missiles.
                              •Must have the AEGIS system

                              Well that's about 4-5 billion and change. The question is would it be better to just build a bunch of beefed up Arleigh Burke class destroyers?
                              I'm sorry to say it wouldn't be - the same amount spent on AB flight 6 or 7 (hypothetical versions) would probably be a better investment
                              sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                              If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X