Bring Back The Iowa Class Discussion And Debate

P

Praxus

New member
Joined
Aug 26, 2003
Messages
3,169
I think we should bring back our Battleships.

Back in the 1960's they made an 11" discarding sabot round with a range over 50nm, in the 1980's DARPA made one with a range of 200nm!

It cost two billion to bring both of them back, which is cheaper then the low rate production cost of a single B2 Bomber.

So what you have is a ship that can deliver up to 1500 shells to a range of 200nm and hit them acuratly. Not only this but you could put in 120 cell VLS and ESSM

New Barrel linings last for thousands of rounds.

Also do you think it is possible to put AEGIS on it, because I heard that it can't withstand the Guns firing?

The USMC NSFS Requirment is 96nm for Gun Fire and the AGS is unlikely to have this range with a deadly payload. Where as an 11" DARPA round could go out to that range and cause some serioues damage to the target. Hell if you felt like it you could knock out ships:-)
 
AEGIS was concept proven for use on BB's in the 80's.

It was to be installed on one by 1992, but they were taken out of service before it could be fitted.

There is also a new 5" round that has a range of 90 nautical miles(Not ERGM), and a flight velocity of Mach 4+.

I agree....the BB's should come back.
 
Something tells me that Snipe and Praxus are going to get along REALLY well...

I still say nuclear new-build Montanas... :N :G big grin :G :N
 
AEGIS was concept proven for use on BB's in the 80's.

It was to be installed on one by 1992, but they were taken out of service before it could be fitted.

There is also a new 5" round that has a range of 90 nautical miles(Not ERGM), and a flight velocity of Mach 4+.

I agree....the BB's should come back.
Click to expand...

There is nothing else besides a Battleship that can provide effective NSFS.
 
Man, you sound like me.

The BB's in modernized form would be the most powerful non carrier warships in history(One Iowa would have about 10x the firepower of a Ticonderoga CG)....and yet we let them sit in cat B reserve.

The USN is run by idiots.
 
Its a byproduct of the American all or nothing attitude... the Carrier Admirals felt they won the day in WWII.... no more BB.
 
Well, back then there were hundreds of light and heavy carriers (anywhere from 25-over 75 ships), and some of the carriers also had guns on them, so it was the best of both worlds...
 
Just think about this, you can run a ship for 75 million a year(about half as much as Carrier, not including aircraft maintance, aircrew cost, and refueling of U235) that can deliver 1500 Shells on target before it has to reload and it can deliver an additional 12,000 5" shells on target.

It can deliver well over twice as much firepower on a target within it's range as all the fighters on the Aircraft Carrier can in one sorty(they only did one sorty in the second Gulf War the second one was when they landed on an Airforce base to refeul and rearm)

No modern Anti-Shipping missile can sink her because she has armor over 15 inches thick, and on top of this you would have active protection such as ESSM and SM-2 Missiles.
 
I didn't mean to infer I was against bringing the BB's back. Trust me the only one I know who wants 'em back more than me is probly Snipe here. I just know how the bastards that are in charge think... If it isn't high tech very new and expensive as hell they don't want it.
 
I think the best possible sollution to the lack of NSFS would be a new platform, but this couldn't be available for at least another 20 years. So we have to

But this is what it should be like in my opinion...

Evolved Aegis Radar(whatever the newest kind will be in 20 years)
420 PVLS Cells around the ship
12 Advanced Gun System loaded with LRLAPS
6, 16 inch 62 caliber guns and automatic loader(each gun about 3-4 rounds per minute)

Atleast a 1200 round magizine for the 16 inch guns and a 8,000 round magizine for the AGS's. Each system should be able to be reloaded at sea for long deployments.

There should also be a couple helicopter pads that can hold ASW aircraft.

It should also have a few UAV's to spot targets over the horizen.

This would be the most deadly ship to ever be put to Sea.
 
BB reactivation

BB reactivation

Ive been reading, listening and debating about this subject this subject since 1990. After nearly 14 years I don t know if I have much to add but here are a coupla thoughts.

The people issue We have four old AOEs(600 crew apiece)(the four newest( 3 are now) will be MSC by summer 2004) that should be decom or transferred to MSC. We have 4 Command ships and 2 tenders that(AFAIK) are stationary most of the time that could be temporarily downgraded to Reduced Operating Status in certain areas. Not to mention skilled ENG rates off the recently retired USS Constellation and the 2 Anchorage class LSDs and one next year. Thats alot of ENG personnel, Bosun Mates, Admin & support rates, not to mention sources of young Seaman and Fireman from all those sources. GMs may be a problem but the NRF and retired ranks will have to provide many of these especially for the 16' guns anyway. Also I would reduce the OHPs by 8-18 again providing a great source of personnel including many GMs among other ratings and officers.

A non-issue if you ask me.

The money issue Well if you look above alot of money will be saved there and the Navy and Congress between them should be able to come up with the rest. Again for me a non-issue.

Escort issue With the finally operational ESGs(btw envisioned in some form for over 20 years at least). Look at the "Conceptual U.S. Navy Surface Combatant Formations" from the House, Committee on Armed Services Hearings of March 1982 to get a sense of why this too is a non-issue.

The BBs utility of course will remain a question for many. If their 16" guns can only fire some 20 miles inland then that of course is a good question. As compared to the reach of Aviation and Missles. People will also question how they fit into OMFTS and the RMA. Those are questions that should be debated. Also the fact that 3 are virtual museums and the fourth, well Im not convinced that it is in the best of shape although I hope Im wrong. Everything else is excuses IMHO.
 
With Scramjet projectiles the range of the 16" rifles can be increased to 4-600 miles.

While we are waiting for the technology for those to mature, the 11" DARPA rounds from the 1980's will strike up to 100 miles inland.

With simple laser guidance and onboard RPV's, the BB so equipped would be a potent ASuW and STRIKE asset, without equal in that 100 mile exclusion zone.
 
The USNFSA headed by Willian Stearman is actively pursuing reactivation.

They have a BBG concept that is just flat awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top