Smart or Stupid

OddBall1st said:

That was not a case of obtainning freedom. It was beating up the bully. That is against our Constitution but the Bushes found a way to make it hasppen. Kinda like the Excutive Orders Obama is useing freely today.

Do you mind beating up the bully ? Does it bother you ?

Click to expand...

When it takes 13 years and 1,000,000+ casualties... Yes, it kind of bothers me.

BigNBushy said:

Yeah, you can put modern weapons systems on the BB, so what? Many navy ships carry them. The only need for a ship the size of an Iowa is to have big 16 inch guns. We have more effective means, and more accurate ways of sending ships to the sea floor than gun fire today. That massive platform, while so sexy, is obsolete. A couple of Burke class DDs could take out the entire USNavy from WW2.

The biggest advantage the BB has that isn't available today is a cheap way to rain down death on a beach, 16 inch HE rounds are so much cheaper than a tomahawk.

What other reasons would you have to start building a new class of BB?

Click to expand...

Here`s a Fact, in one hour, a Battleship can lay down fifty times the firepower of a Carrier on the beech and you can hide behind it on the way in because it will be right there with you. Which one do you want covering you on the way in ?

neosapien said:

When it takes 13 years and 1,000,000+ casualties... Yes, it kind of bothers me.

Click to expand...

You can address that with the Political Correct crowd. Patton would do it inside a week and wouldn`t stop till he reached Beijing. Know what I mean ?

neosapien said:

Is that usually how you debate? Resort to middle school name-calling?

To answer your question... Weapon contracts, construction contracts, cheap labor, oil, phosphorus. Probably some I'm missing.

Click to expand...

These are not the Royalties you claimed we went to "Steal From Them" You have re-tuned your guitar !i

neosapien said:

To answer your question... Weapon contracts, construction contracts, cheap labor, oil, phosphorus. Probably some I'm missing.

Click to expand...

i agree with you neo. I do not agree with the motives of those who call the shots....IT's why I never went in the first place.

I will not slam those brave men and women who did volunteer though. They made a choice....so I didn't have too.

gotta respect that

OddBall1st said:

Do post hypothetical situations with many variables, If my kid was on that bus against her will, I`d jump in front with my 30-30, shoot the driver and jump out the way. Would you die for your kid ?

Click to expand...

You would kill the driver of a moving bus and jump out of the way hoping your kid survives the crash??

Not very bright...

OddBall1st said:

Here`s a Fact, in one hour, a Battleship can lay down fifty times the firepower of a Carrier on the beech and you can hide behind it on the way in because it will be right there with you. Which one do you want covering you on the way in ?

Click to expand...

Who are we attacking??

NLXSK1 said:

Who are we attacking??

Click to expand...

Canadian seals.

NLXSK1 said:

You would kill the driver of a moving bus and jump out of the way hoping your kid survives the crash??

Not very bright...

Click to expand...

you present no better options

Battleships are obsolete. The 'shotgun' approach is no longer required because of accuracy increases from modern weapons like missiles.

Don't need to fire 50 rounds and hope to hit a bunker..... one missile will do the trick, the first time.

heckler73 said:

Canadian seals.

Click to expand...

Have Canadian seals gone thru the Canadian CG? I hear the CG is the shizzle!

Beefbisquit said:

Battleships are obsolete. The 'shotgun' approach is no longer required because of accuracy increases from modern weapons like missiles.

Don't need to fire 50 rounds and hope to hit a bunker..... one missile will do the trick, the first time.

Click to expand...

Or simply take out all of the bunkers with a tactical nuke It seems common sense to most people, but well, have you read his posts? He clearly isn't most people

tip top toker said:

Or simply take out all of the bunkers with a tactical nuke It seems common sense to most people, but well, have you read his posts? He clearly isn't most people

Click to expand...

The new Zumwalt class destroyers will pack more punch than any battleship ever thought of packing.

Missiles, and a possible railgun or free-electron laser weapon systems vs artillery pieces.... not really much of a choice. lol

OddBall1st said:

Straits and Choke points.

Do you remember the tanker wars between Iran and Iraq and the Saudies ? No-one could go through the gulf of Aden, Yemen Strait, and the trapped med Sea was deathtrap before the Canal.

When the Iowa Class showed up and sailed with relative impunity, the tanker shooting stopped. Word had it that the Iowa`s were looking for a fight in closed quarters. Those countries offered nothing in response. If that were a CVN group, they would have lost a lot of three inch hulls and prolly sank the flat-top.

Today`s navy relies on defensive action, if jumped, outcome is not good.

Burkes and Frigates and Nimitz Carriers are all subject to artillery in the Mid. East Gulfs, choke points and the Med sea. Panama is not to be excluded. Nothing in today`s navy except the Ford Class even approaches 5" armor hulls. That`s the decap armor on a BB. Then you gotta go into 24" security armor around the citidel. Barbetts, 18" thick. Turrets 16 front 10 sides 8 rear. Look what happened to Cole. You can hit these escorts with simple shit and down they go.Pirates don`t even fear the Navy. We have nothing that can go by a G-5 howitzer with a fifty mile range in any of the choke points or canals and gulfs.

Click to expand...

The CVN group would launch air strikes against all those targets, the DDs would launch missiles from well beyond the range. That was the late 80's I think. Our capability has increased infinitely since them with terms of fire and forget missiles and gps guidance.

Not that the battle buggy can't get the job done, but they are vulnerable to mines and torpedoes.

Sending a BB into a situation like that is still risking the loss of a capital ship, which would be a massive propaganda win for them, and a humiliating pr loss for us. When the Bismark was sank, it was crippled by ww1 vintage torpedo bombers, the Rodney et al finished the job (although I think his captain ordered the Bismark scuttled). Then the royal navy sank the entire itallian BB fleet at toranto.

They are more of a liability than an asset now. By the wars end, the Bismarks brother shop, Terpinz, spent the war hiding.

I would like to see a new class of BBs, but it is purely for nostalgia and erection reasons, it isn't, in my mind, a logical thing to do. I realize you know more about this than I do, but I am echoing the opinions of war planners who know more about it than both of us do.

I think though, if and when we perfect the rail gun, we will need a big platform for it, might as well armor her up, put on a few 16 inch or maybe super erection 20 inch guns, and some t hawks.

Her day may come again, but it isn't today.

Beefbisquit said:

The new Zumwalt class destroyers will pack more punch than any battleship ever thought of packing.

Missiles, and a possible railgun or free-electron laser weapon systems vs artillery pieces.... not really much of a choice. lol

Click to expand...

It's like seeing an armored vehicle and wondering whether it makes more sense to pick up your lazer guided missile or call for mortar fire

tip top toker said:

It's like seeing an armored vehicle and wondering whether it makes more sense to pick up your lazer guided missile or call for mortar fire

Click to expand...

Yep.

Doesn't make sense at all. Javelin missile FTW. lol

Not true, Beefy. Iowa fire control can hit anything in range.....first try in the fog, snow, rain, or dead of night. Faster and "Right now" not, "in a few"

OddBall1st said:

Not true, Beefy. Iowa fire control can hit anything in range.....first try in the fog, snow, rain, or dead of night. Faster and "Right now" not, "in a few"

Click to expand...

Not from 1700km away with a 1000lbs HE payload.

EDIT: and the best guns accuracy, e.g. gyroscopically stabilized ones, still don't have the accuracy of a missile.

BigNBushy said:

The CVN group would launch air strikes against all those targets, the DDs would launch missiles from well beyond the range. That was the late 80's I think. Our capability has increased infinitely since them with terms of fire and forget missiles and gps guidance.

Not that the battle buggy can't get the job done, but they are vulnerable to mines and torpedoes.

Sending a BB into a situation like that is still risking the loss of a capital ship, which would be a massive propaganda win for them, and a humiliating pr loss for us. When the Bismark was sank, it was crippled by ww1 vintage torpedo bombers, the Rodney et al finished the job (although I think his captain ordered the Bismark scuttled). Then the royal navy sank the entire itallian BB fleet at toranto.

They are more of a liability than an asset now. By the wars end, the Bismarks brother shop, Terpinz, spent the war hiding.

I would like to see a new class of BBs, but it is purely for nostalgia and erection reasons, it isn't, in my mind, a logical thing to do. I realize you know more about this than I do, but I am echoing the opinions of war planners who know more about it than both of us do.

I think though, if and when we perfect the rail gun, we will need a big platform for it, might as well armor her up, put on a few 16 inch or maybe super erection 20 inch guns, and some t hawks.

Her day may come again, but it isn't today.

Click to expand...

GPS guidance is useless against a target that is moving or decoy.You can`t say...wait, that`s not it and take it back. You can however go to it and see it with your eyes first. Ya might get the right one more often that way.

Mines are somewhat a risk, she can hear and outrun torpedo`s. She drags cable antenna behind her.

BB`s reserve the same protection as a CVN, so how long will a Carrier last vs. a BB if the shit hit`s the fan ?

An Iowa today has the same electronic warfare and protection as any other ship, it can approach over the horizon and clean house rather quickly. They are the second fastest ship in the fleet and you just can`t kill it easily.

Of course after 2006, they have been laughing at the Navy boats today, all tied up and greased. A ball point pen took them out, cuz no-one else could.

There are at any given time a hundred ships in the sea waiting to go through a strait or canal, how do you approach and board the bad guys pulling howitzers out from covers and shooting up the horizon, with missiles and Carriers that don`t even know who is who ? The money needed for research and development is the only reason Congress canceled the BB program. They themselves hold stocks in these companies. The Navy is today regretting that mistake and cutting costs and crews to make up for it. Congress is laughing all the way to the bank.

It was a bad move anyway you look at it.

Laser guided only works when the weather is clear. Do we only fight then ? What about smoke screens that the beam does not go through ? Laser guided is nice, but limited. You need more than one option.

Again, with today`s warfare and escorts, a BB will thrive. It can carry anything but aircraft and drag a carrier home if it had to.

Bismarck and Yammato and South Dakota, are nothing compared to a modern Iowa class. The problem is and has been the ease of upkeep and survivability that you don`t need to spend much on, that`s not good for ship building industry.

Beefbisquit said:

Not from 1700km away with a 1000lbs HE payload.

EDIT: and the best guns accuracy, e.g. gyroscopically stabilized ones, still don't have the accuracy of a missile.

Click to expand...

You also overlook the Tomahawk (1,700 mile range, multiple warhead) and sea sparrow (AAA) missiles on board a modern Iowa. Not many know of the canister depth charges on board too.

Take a good close look at one someday.