Zephyr Net


Return to the Fighters Anthology Resource Center

Go to the VNFAWING.com Forums
It is currently Tue Apr 23, 2024 19:57 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 22:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 18:58 pm
Posts: 2041
Location: Charleston, USA
What do you think

_________________
Image

allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 00:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
depends on how many beaches we're gonna storm. I personally dont miss them.

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 00:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 18:58 pm
Posts: 2041
Location: Charleston, USA
I think it's just like how they retired the F-111- For no reason.

_________________
Image

allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 00:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
ships are expensive to operate and maitain, the BBs have no mission anymore.

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 00:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 18:58 pm
Posts: 2041
Location: Charleston, USA
They could still provide intense artillery barrages on enemy positions. They could carry cruise missiles too.

Who's to say it has no mission anymore? No one knows what the military might have to face tommorow.

_________________
Image

allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 01:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
anything can (and does nearly) carry cruise missles.

BB guns go about 20 miles, how close in are you going to drag the "big guns" to the shore? Anti-ship cruise missles wont sink a BB (wont sink our big CVs either) but they will sure ruin its day and most likely get a "mission kill" and for what? lotza noize and pretty pictures. If you wanna destroy someones harbor facilities they WILL do that, but we generally need those facilities a day or two after the fighting starts cause the baddies are on the run, the USMC is in effect and rolling inland and need logistic support. We can "provide intense artillery barrages on enemy positions" with a few smart weapons. We dont need to mess up stuff we're gonna need later. BBs are expensive and pointless.

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2003 16:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 18:58 pm
Posts: 2041
Location: Charleston, USA
FAS says that their big guns were able to reach 26 miles, about as long as the standard U.S. artillery.

And that kind of firepower would be very valuable if U.S. forces ever have to do an amphibious landing again. And it could also be valuable for shelling nearby enemy fleets.

_________________
Image

allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2003 19:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
lol

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2003 19:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 19:11 pm
Posts: 2148
Nothing I love more than a full broadside from the Missouri.

_________________
Centurian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2003 17:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 18:54 pm
Posts: 4402
Iowa suffered from a destroyed turret after the accidental explosion... New Jersey had a massive crack through her midships across her entire armor plate from the continual shock of firing the weapons, Missouri's boilers were worn out and need to be retubed... add to this that ALL of the 16inch propellent was well past its expiration date and was unstable (this is the reason Iowa's turret exploded)...

80% of the cannons were 'shot out' and need to be replaced...

The onboard electronics suffered shock damage whenever more then one 16 inch gun was fired at a time...

The number of crew needed to maintain them, coupled with the costs also killed them... The Navy dimply did not have the number of bodies needed any longer to man them...

Couple with this that the Navy now has precision guided munitions coming onboard for her standard cannons that have a range in excess of 100 miles ashore...

Plus the RCS of the battleships was simply to HUGE to hide... They are to big of a terget and still susceptible to submarine attack or even light craft torpedo strikes...

Either way they had out lived thier useful lives...

What never should of been done, was the massive $$ spent on their upgrade in the 1980s, money which could of been better spent on other ships and aircraft programs...

CAG out...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2003 17:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 18:58 pm
Posts: 2041
Location: Charleston, USA
The BB has always been a staple of Naval Power. Even back in the days when the Brits owned the seas. The battleship was always the most feared weapon on the seas.

And I don't think that it outlived its usefullness. It could still barrage enemy positions on beach areas (26 mile range on the gun), and it could carry cruise missiles.

The BB is/was a nice compliment to the Aircraft Carrier, it could protect it from enemy fleets or ships that get too close. Not to mention that it was armed with 20mm Phalanx CIWS, as well as 5-inch / 38 caliber guns. It offered protection from cruise missiles as well.

_________________
Image

allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 00:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 00:26 am
Posts: 1409
Location: Mid-Coast USA
umm... lol ... what would a BB protect a carrier from? Tico and others will do anything BB can do other than the gunfire(long rang antiship missles and air defence) what fleet would get within 26 miles of a BB and more importantly WHY WOULD WE LET THEM GET THAT CLOSE lol. Airstrikes would make that enemy fleet turn tail or wish it had in a very short time.

Quote:
The battleship was always the most feared weapon on the seas


WAS being the operative word in that sentance. If the BB is so great for today why aint nobody building them now?

_________________
Fighting for justice with brains of steel

Let your anger be like the monkey which hides inside the piniata.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 18:58 pm
Posts: 2041
Location: Charleston, USA
I seem to recall the Israelis attacking the USS Liberty at close range with PT boats. Small boats like that would probably be able to screen through and attack.

And it had the PHALANX cannon, it could provide cruise missile defense to the fleet.

_________________
Image

allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 18:54 pm
Posts: 4402
Big,

The BBs should of stayed retired after Vietnam. Their weapons were out dated and hazardous to the crew to even use. The money (Billions by the way) spent on their reactavitation could have provided us an additional Nimitz class carrier, which do you think would be more effective in todays modern environment?

And a BB could not protect a modern carrier, it cant even keep up...

It has no anti air weapons other then phallanz widh is a last ditch weapon that can only protect the ship it is mounted on and has never (that I know of)been proven to even work in a combat situation.

Add to the fact that the Tomahawk launchers were bolt on improvements and were easily removed... To be carried by more effective ships...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group