[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Bishie2

Just wondering what are your guys opinions. Should the United States reactivate the battleships that are museum ships such as the BB 61 Iowa, BB 63 Missouri, and BB 64 Wisconsin. -Bishie2

Absolutely! "If ya got it flaunt it!"... but lets go visual on the concept! (This was the only occasion that all four Iowa Class BB's were steaming in formation(1954). Arguably; two years later...the most powerful surface armada the world ever saw: Mk 23 Atomic shells)....and upgrade the ammo slightly; talk about 'Katie! bar the door!' here! http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2419375&postcount=39

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I love battleships. In the day when they represented a government's power and influence they were indeed important, both as weapons and as symbols. Very expensive symbols. The problem was they were like Greek Heroes. Very impressive, and when one died the whole nation mourned.

The smaller ships were more like soldiers. Lots of them, and they carried the brunt of the battles. Battleships were mainly good for fighting each other, and not much else.

Shore bombardment was their final use. Which is more useful for that purpose, one battleship or a dozen destroyers, or a hundred airplanes?

I love battleships, but I don't see much use for them anymore.

Precisely, and it's still all about showtime; actual shooting usually turns out quite dismally....for both sides as at Jutland for example. As per my post title: the Kaiser won the shooting match tactically but lost the battle and the war at sea strategically...as did Yamamoto at Pearl Harbor.

Originally Posted by vienna

In modern naval warfare, no ship is immune to an air attack whether it is by a manned aircraft, a missile, or a drone, and the larger the vessel, the greater a target it would be; agility and low profile are the new norms. Consider what the reaction in the US would be if NK, Iran, or even terrorists were to lob a few well-aimed missiles or drones at a US carrier and sink it...

For an example, look back at the Falklands War and what happened to the ARA General Belgrano...<O>

Actually that was very old torpedo against a very old American cruiser but your point actually says it all: everything is vulnerable; thus the very fast Iowa class BB's (33 knots!!!) may and should be reactivated with sufficient escorts and at least one outta-sight carrier group ready to pounce as we practice "innocent passage' right through the South China Sea the the way the Chinks like to skirt Alaska in the Bearing Strait.

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

The only advantage with Battleships would be shore bombardment, but BBs are a blunt instrument, much like the WW2 Heavy Bombers.

Now with Precision Guided Munitions, both Laser and GPS guided, one Bomb or shell can take out a target that in WW2 would have required massive area bombing in the hope that one would actually hit the target.

So yes, BBs are obsolete.

Even though no longer part of the fleet, the USS Iowa and USS Wisconsin are still in reserve and could potentially be brought back in service, if required.



Here are some of the issues if they were re-activated:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...support_debate

The navy estimates costs in excess of $500 million,[26][27] but this does not include an additional $110 million needed to replenish the gunpowder for the 16-inch (406 mm) guns because a survey found the powder to be unsafe.

Precisely why it should not be done with the 16 inch guns beyond a few 'Show' rounds'; and USS Iowa's turret two is still inoperable, I believe, after the infamous fatal explosion anyway.

For example, a full charge for the 16"/50 (40.64 cm) Mark 7 during the World War II period consisted of six propellant bags whose total propellant weight was 660.0 lbs. (299.4 kg) of SPD and 4.463 lbs. (2.1 kg) of gunpowder. Some references show this charge weight as 660.0 lbs. (299.4 kg) while others show it as 664.463 lbs. (301.4 kg). With the post-war adoption of the cooler burning propellant, the six bag full charge weight for this gun changed to 655.0 lbs. (297.108 kg) and 4.463 lbs. (2.1 kg) of gunpowder. Again, some references show this charge weight as 655.0 lbs. (297.108 kg) while others show it as 659.463 lbs. (299.2 kg).

With the atomic shellsMk. 23 nuclear naval shells with an estimated yield of 15 to 20 kilotons.... widely advertised to our 'potential threats'....Fatboy of N. Korea in particular, together with tomahawk missiles, aegis weapons and the escorts, the mission is no longer prolonged shore-bombardment ala Lebanon but massive shows of force. The platform is still good but the gunnery and mission has changed. And if we paint the Iowa's white, Teddy R. would think it was 'just Bully"! 'Cause 'nuthin good goes outta style'...BBY
1907: the Great White Fleet circumnavigates the globe.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_White_Fleet