Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask An Expert- Battleships

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rusty Battleship I tried to PM you but the system is down. So I thought I would ask the community as a whole.
    Does anyone have planes from Iowa's last refit? I am working with plans from the Wisconsin's last refit and there are some difference in how some of the space is fitted out.
    One of my projects for the Iowa is working with USC's Institute for Creative Technologies who would like to expand into the museum exhibit business and are interested in using the Iowa to test some of there products and ideas.
    I am trying to identify space on board for them and it would be much easier if I had accurate plan.

    Here is a link to a project that USC and the Navy are working on.
    http://ict.usc.edu/news/gizmodo-visi...of-the-future/

    Thanks Craig Johnson
    Craig Johnson

    Comment


    • Question about about belt armor construction how did they join the thicker sections was it riveted welded or some other method.?

      Comment


      • +1 bbvet!


        Originally posted by crankcasy View Post
        Question about about belt armor construction how did they join the thicker sections was it riveted welded or some other method.?
        IIRC they had key sections that held them in place but then maybe that was ones like the NCs or I'm just completely wrong about everything :).
        RIP Charles "Bob" Spence. 1936-2014.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Battleship IOWA View Post
          Rusty Battleship I tried to PM you but the system is down. So I thought I would ask the community as a whole.
          Does anyone have planes from Iowa's last refit? I am working with plans from the Wisconsin's last refit and there are some difference in how some of the space is fitted out.
          One of my projects for the Iowa is working with USC's Institute for Creative Technologies who would like to expand into the museum exhibit business and are interested in using the Iowa to test some of there products and ideas.
          I am trying to identify space on board for them and it would be much easier if I had accurate plan.

          Here is a link to a project that USC and the Navy are working on.
          http://ict.usc.edu/news/gizmodo-visi...of-the-future/

          Thanks Craig Johnson
          There are some differences, but not too much. The main thing is that ONLY the Wisconsin has Port and Starboard vestibules at 03 & 04 levels for out of the weather access. The other three did not get them installed though I personally measured them up and drew the plans. The main difference on Iowa, however, is that instead of the 65 degree ladder going up from 04 to 05 being parallel to centerline is actually a bit further aft and set transversely.

          Also not that only the Iowa and Wisconsin retained their 20mm gun tubs at the bow. Back aft, the 500 gallon jettison bladder carriage for the RPV's is in the Stbd tub whereas on New Jersey and Missouri we put it in the Port tub. I also had to redesign the carriage to make it more bullet proof and amazingly it came out about a hundred pounds lighter.

          Biggest difference is the framing around the secondary conn bullwark on 08 level. ONLY the Iowa has the framing on the outside of the plating. Don't ask me why. That's just the way Brooklyn built the ship.
          Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by crankcasy View Post
            Question about about belt armor construction how did they join the thicker sections was it riveted welded or some other method.?
            It was a combination of joint procedures. The 12.1-inch face hardened Class A armor is actually bolted to 1 1/2-inch thick Special Treated Steel plate. Large steel ferrules (looking like big cup cakes) are welded to the inboard side of the STS. They are threaded for Class C armor bolts. The edges of the Class A plates was left "soft" so machining of keyways and drilling of bolt holes could be done.

            The STS Panel that forms the mounting plate of torpedo bulkhead 1 is butted together and riveted with butt straps. The butt straps are 3/4" thick steel and the rivets are 5/8-inch diameter HTS (High Tensile Steel aka Carbon Manganese).

            I have some photos of the joints but too busy trying to figure out how to put them altogether for a DVD slide show I have been asked to give at my Model Train club meeting next month. I've never done a DVD slide show before so I'm really going "where no one has gone before" (at least in my mind).
            Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

            Comment


            • Hi guys. I've got a legal/legislative question about the Iowas. I'm not trying to re-stir the activation debate, but with the news of the Navy purging all Iowa-related materials from their inventory and cutting up spare gun barrels, how does that not run afoul of Congress' directives in 2006 when they were stricken that they be kept in a way to allow for reactivation, along with maintaining infrastructure and spare parts? What legal authority superseded that? Also I read in some articles Iowa has to be maintained in a minimal state of readiness until at least 2020. Why 2020? And what about the other museums? If the curators at the Missouri wanted to make an exhibit that would make a turret permanently disabled, would they be allowed to? What if the way the curators were taking care of the ships meant they could survive as museums, but their military utility would be completely, irreversibly compromised. Would the Navy step in?

              Comment


              • Had a response and my phone deleted it ugh. RustyBattleship will be able to answer this for you though.
                RIP Charles "Bob" Spence. 1936-2014.

                Comment


                • It's only the Iowa and I think the Wisconsin that must be kept if fighting shape until 2020.
                  The Navy will never reactivate any of the Iowa's and will never fire a mark 7 bag gun again, for safety reasons.
                  The future is high velocity kinetic energy, directed energy weapons and missile systems with room to sling some lead around.
                  Craig Johnson

                  Comment


                  • Why 2020? And what legal authority allows the Navy to skirt the '06 requirement that spares and infrastructure be maintained?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Battleship IOWA View Post
                      It's only the Iowa and I think the Wisconsin that must be kept if fighting shape until 2020.
                      The Navy will never reactivate any of the Iowa's and will never fire a mark 7 bag gun again, for safety reasons.
                      The future is high velocity kinetic energy, directed energy weapons and missile systems with room to sling some lead around.
                      I highly doubt that's the reason. It always comes down to money and the Iowa's are too expensive to operate it's as simple as that. AFAIK in US Navy history there have been 3 major incidents involving big guns (Newport News, Mississippi (?) and of course the Iowa) and while I can't remember the other BB incident Newport News was a flash ignition from excess heat in the barrel that blew up a bad round and the Iowa was, reportedly, over ramming of the powder bags. If done properly they are safe but when accidents happen it's huge (unlike smaller guns).

                      Until they work out the Rail gun system the Iowa and Wisconsin will stay ready for reactivation though that's unlikely although a SHTF scenario with China looks imminent.

                      AP88: Not sure on the barrels/liners but there hasn't been "Battleship" infrastructure since the 50s. The other spares you mention are still in storage somewhere as is the shells/powder.
                      Last edited by 85 gt kid; 29 Aug 15,, 23:27.
                      RIP Charles "Bob" Spence. 1936-2014.

                      Comment


                      • Why 2020? And what legal authority allows the Navy to skirt the '06 requirement that spares and infrastructure be maintained?

                        Who will man them? Do you realize that there are essentially no engineering ratings left to operate that obsolete tea kettle? I could be her chief engineer, but I'll be 60 in May. Not bloody likely. That's why neither Congress nor the Navy really care at this point.

                        Comment


                        • Something I thought of (well not really) is if the guns were needed that bad they could restore the SSGs and tow her around and take out targets that way (that was an idea for the New Jersey for Vietnam).

                          Or you could become a teacher desert :) :D
                          RIP Charles "Bob" Spence. 1936-2014.

                          Comment


                          • Can you elaborate more on this plan to tow around the New Jersey in 'Nam? What's an SSG? Do you mean they just would restore the turrets and nothing else?

                            But none of this answers my original question. If Congress said in 2006 that the infrastructure and parts for the Iowa and Wisconsin had to be maintained, under what authority is the Navy able to scrap things like gun barrels?

                            Comment


                            • I'm on my phone which is a pain to type but basically they had the idea that to save money in reactivation they were going to reactivate just the main turrets and then just tow her around with tugs (very demeaning). For power they would use the Ship Service Generators which don't require as many people as the main stream turbines. They obviously decided against it and she was fully reactivated.

                              You prob won't get a good answer as no-one but the Navy knows (Rusty?). But the current barrels should have enough life to last one more commissioning.
                              RIP Charles "Bob" Spence. 1936-2014.

                              Comment


                              • In a word . . . bovine excrement. Also, it's "Ship's Service Turbo-Generators," and because you would be steaming "Modified Main" because you need the main engine condensers as heat sinks to make the basic steam cycle work, you would need exactly the same number of people. Furthermore, a turbine is a turbine is a turbine. They are not the issue. It's that 600psi superheated genie in the bottle; eight of them that are just waiting for some newb to let them out into the space. I saw the aftermath of USS Iwo Jima. Ever seen a burnt weenie sandwich? I have.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X