Whats with the iowa?

[Seahawk14]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

Seahawk14! Still worth the hike up four levels at Ft. Point under the Golden Gate Bridge to watch USS IOWA going by though! Probably the last time a Iowa class 'Battleship' passes under the Golden Gate!...and a kaleun was there!!

Oh, no doubt! And cool photo, man. Wonder if the Pampanito had any parting words before she left.

[Jimbuna]

Welcome to SubSim Seahawk14

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Seahawk14

Oh, no doubt! And cool photo, man. Wonder if the Pampanito had any parting words before she left.

Actually no! I had just been aboard Pampanito and the Liberty, Jeremiah Obrien, just forward, along Fisherman's Wharf, when word of the Iowa's passing down the Bay toward her (present)new berth in Southern CA caused my dash to the Fort Point across town-no mean feat in 'Frisco. Throwing in joggers, tourists, lookie-loos, and considerable surf crowd... and the trot up the circular stairs to the parapet (at my age!)....I made it with two minutes to spare-literally! Someone had brought an old WWII naval scope, so viewing was a real treat. Of course it helps not to be breathing hard to steady the 34" optics a crash course in "don't run-you'll just die tired" if ever!

[Aktungbby]

The overall view: about one minute later, of the Fort, the Golden Gate and The USS Iowa and Me...somewhere up there under the flag Three famous warships in one day ...is a VERY good day! IMHO

[mapuc]

Iowa and her sisters are no good in todays way of warfare at sea or tomorrows warfare at sea. I guess it would cost to much to get them rebuild so they meet current and future needs.

Todays warship have almost the same firepower.

If USA or other countries would go back to things like battleship they have to be built from scratch like the person described in my link posted in my former post.

But what do I know...

Have one of her sister standing on a shefl "BB 62 USS New Jersey" scale 1:350
On my wish list The Mighty Mo

Markus

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Iowa and her sisters are no good in todays way of warfare at sea or tomorrows warfare at sea. I guess it would cost to much to get them rebuild so they meet current and future needs.

Todays warship have almost the same firepower.

If USA or other countries would go back to things like battleship they have to be built from scratch like the person described in my link posted in my former post.

But what do I know...

Have one of her sister standing on a shefl "BB 62 USS New Jersey" scale 1:350
On my wish list The Mighty Mo

Markus

What vessels today have a gun the equal of a 16" or armour protection even approaching that of an Iowa class?

[Ishmael]

I smoked a joint in the captain's chairs of both Iowa and Wisconsin when we were in drydock next to them in Philly in 77. Went aboard Missouri and New Jersey in SF during the first two Fleet Weeks there as well. So, I've been aboard all 4 Iowa class BBs.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

What vessels today have a gun the equal of a 16" or armour protection even approaching that of an Iowa class?

Sorry for this late answer.

Not guns, but missiles like the RGM-84 or the french Exocet.

They can of course be fooled, which a dumb shell can't. A missile have countermeasures which a shell haven't, a missile can travel up to 80-90 nm a shell can't a.s.o

Well even a shell can today be shot down by modern air defence(I know the Swedish Bofors 40 mm radarguidede gun can.)

In WWII a warship needed some shots to get "in range" of the target. Today a modern warship need only 2-4 shots to be "in range" of the target.

My thoughts what is easiest to engage for a warship?

A missile or a shell from a 16" or a 20" ?

Markus

[Jimbuna]

I'll put it another way and in a hypothetical scenario....modern guided missile warship v Iowa:

Modern warship fires missiles at approaching Iowa who in turn responds with Tomahawk (which more than likely have a far greater range than the missiles from the modern warship) and or Harpoon. CIWS engage both sets of missiles, any getting through to Iowa fail to penetrate thick armour protection but any getting through to modern warship are probably catastrophic therefore game over.

Moving on...Iowa gets within 16" main armament range (21nm)and fires a broadside of nine shells...game over.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

I'll put it another way and in a hypothetical scenario....modern guided missile warship v Iowa:

Modern warship fires missiles at approaching Iowa who in turn responds with Tomahawk (which more than likely have a far greater range than the missiles from the modern warship) and or Harpoon. CIWS engage both sets of missiles, any getting through to Iowa fail to penetrate thick armour protection but any getting through to modern warship are probably catastrophic therefore game over.

Moving on...Iowa gets within 16" main armament range (21nm)and fires a broadside of nine shells...game over.

How could I forget TASM who has a range of 250 nm which is far longer than RGM-84E and why not armed Iowa with the new ASM LRASM which has a range of ca 500 nm.

And if all their LRASM, TASM and RGM-84 have been used and no hit they have to use their guns and here Iowa is the big winner-I guess she would be.

Markus

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

I'll put it another way and in a hypothetical scenario....modern guided missile warship v Iowa:

I don't think it's a question of a "modern guided missile warship v Iowa", but rather several modern ships v Iowa. A group of ships would likely have more survivability than Iowa. I question whether the armor would be worth much against modern missile hits. I suspect a few hits would leave a BB operationally 'dead in the water'.

This reminds me of Benjamin Franklin's advocating the use of pikes and bows in the Revolutionary War, supposing them to have worthwhile advantages. Of course, the Continental Army never adopted this suggestion; probably because they had more sense.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by TorpX

this reminds me of Benjamin Franklin's advocating the use of pikes and bows in the Revolutionary War, supposing them to have worthwhile advantages. Of course, the Continental Army never adopted this suggestion; probably because they had more sense.

Jimbuna: What vessels today have a gun the equal of a 16" or armour protection even approaching that of an Iowa class?

The Druze militia didn't appreciate this 'ol' pike' off Beruit which killed one of their generals; half the job of a BB is to be a "threat in being" such as Bismark and Tirpitz; tying up much of the enemy's attention and resources. As Von C. says: "whenever possible increase firepower"...these still fill the bill and inspire 'shock and awe'... ever a favorite American tactic! PHOTO: USS New Jersey off Lebanon 1984...Personally I'd like to resurrect The Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri and New Jersey, paint them Teddy Roosevelt white and send 'em to the South China Sea just to see which Chinese frigate captains are feelin' 'bully' on Sino expansionism; suitably cruise-missile equipped and a carrier group or two just over the horizon for an ambush as needed. A little old-school OOOMPH in the RIMPAC exercise IMHO Nothing Lord Nelson couldn't tackle! 4

[TorpX]

I kind of regret the reference to Franklin's quote. I know the Iowa class is more viable than pikes and bows, but I assume the DOD had their reasons for taking them out of commission.

If they were to be upgraded, and possibly have improved armor, so as to be missile resistant, they could perhaps be formidable ships again. (Less clear to me is how valuable the guns would be. Also, wonder if it might end up being torpedo bait.)

BUT, in the present era, with our Great Leader Obama, and a Nitwit Congress, can we even afford such projects?

[Buddahaid]

Given what the people en masse deem to be news. The US is a country of nitwits just wanting enough lolly to be entertained one more night.

AS much as I love the big ships I can't see one ever being viable again unless we need a big target to float around.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

half the job of a BB is to be a "threat in being" such as Bismark and Tirpitz; tying up much of the enemy's attention and resources. ; suitably cruise-missile equipped and a carrier group or two just over the horizon for an ambush as needed. A little old-school OOOMPH in the RIMPAC exercise IMHO Nothing Lord Nelson couldn't tackle!

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

AS much as I love the big ships I can't see one ever being viable again unless we need a big target to float around.

Precisely! Luring the Persian fleet into at Salamis, to the old lure and bait cruiser tactics of Hipper vs. Beatty in WWI leading to Jutland; and the pre-Pearl Harbor picket island Pacific plans of Yamamoto and Kimmel culminating in Midway...nothing new really, just the biggest bang platforms ever invented with air cover to wipe out whatever ventures forth to assert its ambitions ...probably resulting in the battle of Taiwan...