• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Battleships

the great white north

Guest
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
60
Why is it that battleships are no longer apart of anyones fleets? They can still serve a purpose in a navy as seen in the gulf war. As I understand it its because of the new technology introduced that there guns arent very useful, but if there just modernized I think they can still be important. So should we bring them back or are they really done?
 
They where done after the battle of Midway in 1942.
 
the great white north said:
Why is it that battleships are no longer apart of anyones fleets?

They are hugely expensive to operate and provide very little that a modern fleet doesnt already have with smaller warships.
 
As far as NGS goes which was what they stayed around for mostly. A monitor would be better.
 
sledge said:
As far as NGS goes which was what they stayed around for mostly.

IMHO, the USN kept them around only as a cold war counter to the Russian Kirovs.
 
BUt a test against a anchored ship that is not firing back is not a real test. IMHO anyway. But I am with you in your assesment.

A counter to the Kirovs yes but  Uncle sams misguided children liked the guns for NGS.
 
Google earth to....

39"56'21.91"N by 75"07'59 W for nice shot of the USS New Jersey.

30"40'54.58N by 88"00'51.57 W for the USS Alabama.

41"42'24.51 N by 71"90'46.76 W for the USS Massachusetts.(edit to add)

34"14'11.46 N by 77"57'15.82 W for the USS North Carolina(edit to add)

29"45'22.72 N by 95"05'23.18 W for the USS Texas(edit to add)

21"21'43.20 N by 157'57'12.65 W For the USS Missouri south west is the sunken remains of the USS Arizona and the Memorial site to pearl harbour.


They may not be used but they are not forgotten.

Cheers.
 
They where replaced by aircraft carriers. So they where used for launching tomahawks in GW1. A Tike or AB can carry more as can a Ohio SSGN. They are too big use a huge crew and not effective anymore. Hence why no one uses them. The Brits got rid of their last one in 1960. Have you been to a library to read about the subject at all? Just curious, Their are many books around that will explain it all.
 
the great white north said:
Whats the reason you feel that they have been done for so long, when one was used in the gulf war?

They are huge expense in both money and manpower. maintaining that size of a platform for NGS is a waste of scarce resources. They are incredibly vulnerable so you have to task many other warships to escort it, consuming more resources.
 
the great white north said:
I see, so the aircraft carrier has replaced them. Makes sense.

Its not that the aircraft carrier "replaced" the battleship but that the aircraft carrier eclipsed the battleship as far as a tool of power projection.
 
Also IMHO a carrier is more versitle that a "battle wagon" it provides airpower (both fixed and rotary), marines, fair sized medical facilites, and like CDN AVIATOR said its a projection of power.

Battle wagons had really only one purpose to lauch 16 inch shells at land or sea targets.

My 2 cents, your mileage will vary.
 
If you think of how much battlespace a carrier group can domintae as oposed to a group centered around a battle ship, IMHO, the demise of the BB is obvious.

Putting a BB off the coast of a beligerent nation has, again IMHO, less political value than that of a CBG.

The battleship's glory days faded with the end of "gun-based" ship to ship combat.
 
From
A SHORT HISTORY OF WAR
The Evolution of Warfare and Weapons

Richard A. Gabriel and Karen S. Metz

Strategic Studies Institute
U.S. Army War College


The war at sea saw the demise of the battleship as it became increasingly vulnerable to air and undersea attack. The aircraft carrier became the major naval weapon. Carriers like the Essex and Midway class carried over 100 strike aircraft, were 820 feet long with beams of 147 feet, and could move at 32 knots. Carrier-based aircraft were remarkable machines. These aircraft carried 2,000 pounds of bombs, flew at 350 miles per hour, attacked with rockets, torpedoes, and machine guns, and ranged over 300 miles. Although submarines operated with new electrical motors to make them increasingly difficult to detect, antisubmarine technology improved markedly. Radar and radio sets allowed antisubmarine aircraft to detect submarines at night. New depth charges provided surface vessels with new means of submarine destruction. By 1944, the submarine was no longer a significant threat to surface combatants
 
Sitting a CVN off the coast and sending in sorties of fighter/bombers to hit targets risks the lives of those pilots.

Sitting a BB off the coast and sending in volleys of 16" shells risks no one's lives.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Lumber said:
Sitting a CVN off the coast and sending in sorties of fighter/bombers to hit targets risks the lives of those pilots.

Sitting a BB off the coast and sending in volleys of 16" shells risks no one's lives.

Just my 2 cents.

::)

Those shells can only go so far. Its what i was getting at with my "size of the battlespace" comment. A BB with 16 inch gus can dominate the coastline. A CVN can dominate an entire region.
 
Back
Top