Battleships: Old warhorses
-
Any WWII aficionados here?
These are some of the greatest BBs ever (or the most famous)
Germany: Bismarck,Tirpitz, Graf spee, gneisnua, Scarnhorst
Britain: King George V, Hood, Repulse, Prince Of Wales
USA: Iowa class, North carolina, Texas (too many to name).
Japan: Yamato, Musashi, Kongo, Hiel (much more)
Their presence dictated strategy.
The threat of their deployment caused ship captains to quake in their boots. (Recall the fate of a certain Convoy, ordered to scatter, just because Tirpitz might have been at sea)
The firepower mounted by one.... tremendous!
Discussion? -
When they come face to face with air power battleships are obsolete.
-
Well the upgraded Iowa's carried something like 200 SM-2's....plus the ageis system.Making it a walking fortress.Also the US is having a hard time filling in the big guns that the battler ships have.Even the smallest of the guns were 5inches....provided some good arty support of amphi assaults not to mention the huge amounts of tomahawk missiles it could carry.Which is why the US considered the arsenal ships.But i think those were cancelled.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:When they come face to face with air power battleships are obsolete.
Anyway it's hard to point to any single best battleship because they were simply made for different reasons.
The Bismark was built for speed and barely had any armour.It also had the best sighting system at that time.However the British ships had the best armour in the Alantic learnt from the fact that the ww1 ships were sunk too easily but deck hits.Also the best gunnery skills for the main guns were british.
The US had a combination of good armour and copied the german sighting system to make them pretty good at shooting though the Brits were the for shore arty support.Also you have to look at the conditions.The British had a huge supplus of dreadnaughts that they converted for ww1 and then they used many old ww1 battleships for ww2(e.g the hood)The Germans were limited in time and tonnage so they never had any big ships.US had the most up to date battleships since most were sunk in pearl harbour and the rebuilt that fleet.Japan well sorry but other then knowing the Yamato's had huge guns (25inches i think) and thick armour i hardly know anything about their ships sorry. -
Yes yes, air power makes BBs obsolete.Originally posted by |-|05|:Well the upgraded Iowa's carried something like 200 SM-2's....plus the ageis system.Making it a walking fortress..
But in their time and day, BBs were the be-all, end all for navies.
Iowa does not carry any SM-2's.
The upgraded Iowa's add Harpoons, Tomahawks, and Phalanx. No fancy stuff.
Hood wasn't a battleship, it was a battlecruiser.
Yamato and Musashi had 18.1 inch guns.....
The 3rd member, Shinano was converted into a carrier. And it was subsequently sunk by a sub.
-
No SM-2's meh? i thought the removed 1 of the stern turrets to fit those in?Or was it a plan that was never carried out?talking abt the Iowa class ofcause....have to do some digging up i'm alittle rusty on ww2 stuff heheOriginally posted by Johnston:Yes yes, air power makes BBs obsolete.
But in their time and day, BBs were the be-all, end all for navies.
Iowa does not carry any SM-2's.
The upgraded Iowa's add Harpoons, Tomahawks, and Phalanx. No fancy stuff.
Hood wasn't a battleship, it was a battlecruiser.
Yamato and Musashi had 18.1 inch guns.....
The 3rd member, Shinano was converted into a carrier. And it was subsequently sunk by a sub.
Well the Bismark wasnt a battleship either.It was also a battle cruiser....though they called it a pocket battle ships because of the guns.The problems they had with classifing ships then was because they did not know to classify it using tonnage or gun calibre.Read that somewhere.And the Yamato had the biggest guns....right? that much i know
it was sunk by planes during transit to Okinawa....that i know 
-
Apperently they did not go though with the plan to put VLS on the BB's and decom all the ships.But they have kept 2 on in mothball state just incase they needed firepower.And the Arsenal ships has been cancelled meaning the US lacks ships with a big OMPF!!Too bad they will just have to use their carriers more i guess.
-
Hmmm .. I think Repulse was a battlecruiser right? Then Prince of Wales was a battleship. I know these two ships in different classes.Originally posted by Johnston:Britain: King George V, Hood, Repulse, Prince Of Wales
What's the difference between a battleship and a battlecruiser? I think the latter sacrifice armour for speed? -
..... They did remove some of the secondary armament, but SM-2's were never part of the revised armament.Originally posted by |-|05|:No SM-2's meh? i thought the removed 1 of the stern turrets to fit those in?Or was it a plan that was never carried out?talking abt the Iowa class ofcause....have to do some digging up i'm alittle rusty on ww2 stuff hehe
Well the Bismark wasnt a battleship either.It was also a battle cruiser....though they called it a pocket battle ships because of the guns.The problems they had with classifing ships then was because they did not know to classify it using tonnage or gun calibre.Read that somewhere.And the Yamato had the biggest guns....right? that much i know it was sunk by planes during transit to Okinawa....that i know
Bismarck and Tirpitz were both referred to as Battleships, in every work i have come across. Pocket battleships, are those of the Scarnhorst class.
You really need to get some reading.... -
I know very little about BB, but after a little research, I realize you also need to get some reading.Originally posted by Johnston:Pocket battleships, are those of the Scarnhorst class. You really need to get some reading....
Pocket battleships, or Panzerschiff, were those of the Deutschland class, not Scharnhorst class.
The three indisputable Pocket battleships:
Deutschland/ Lützow
Admiral Graf Spee
Admiral Scheer -
Scarnhorst class were Schlachtkreuzers or battle cruisersOriginally posted by Johnston:..... They did remove some of the secondary armament, but SM-2's were never part of the revised armament.
Bismarck and Tirpitz were both referred to as Battleships, in every work i have come across. Pocket battleships, are those of the Scarnhorst class.
You really need to get some reading....
the Deutschland class is a pre-dreadnaught class though some said they are pocket battleships.
mm and yea the bismark is battleship sorry it's a full 20,000tons more then the Scarnhorst.But still the bismark was under armoured.Infact it had slightly less armour then the Scranhorst i from what i see -
They ARE the pocket battleships.Originally posted by |-|05|:the Deutschland class is a pre-dreadnaught class though some said they are pocket battleships.
-
ah..but with the decommisioning of all the battleships there were no ships capable of conducting naval gunfire support..so the US are designing a future DD-X, which is some destroyer that is meant to give NGFS like a battleship..anyone know anything abt the DDX programme?
-
Ya it got spilt off from the Arsenal ships project.And it's called DD-21 fire support ship.And like i said the battleships are decom but 2 of them are still being held in reserve just incase the USN needs them.I think they are the Iowa(BB-61) and the Wisconsin(BB-64).They are still on the navy's list of ships while the New jersy and Missori have been removed effectively retiring them.Originally posted by sgFish:ah..but with the decommisioning of all the battleships there were no ships capable of conducting naval gunfire support..so the US are designing a future DD-X, which is some destroyer that is meant to give NGFS like a battleship..anyone know anything abt the DDX programme? -
*nods*Originally posted by Icemoon:I know very little about BB, but after a little research, I realize you also need to get some reading.
Pocket battleships, or Panzerschiff, were those of the Deutschland class, not Scharnhorst class.
The three indisputable Pocket battleships:
Deutschland/ Lützow
Admiral Graf Spee
Admiral Scheer
Now get over to this page.
http://warships1.com/US/BB61stats/index.htm -
Roger on Iowa and Wisconsin.Originally posted by |-|05|:Ya it got spilt off from the Arsenal ships project.And it's called DD-21 fire support ship.And like i said the battleships are decom but 2 of them are still being held in reserve just incase the USN needs them.I think they are the Iowa(BB-61) and the Wisconsin(BB-64).They are still on the navy's list of ships while the New jersy and Missori have been removed effectively retiring them.
But DD-21 has been canceled, hasn't it? The same for the arsenal ship. Too much projects, too little $$ -
I'll have you know that the majority of surface warships still carry 5 inch guns.Originally posted by sgFish:ah..but with the decommisioning of all the battleships there were no ships capable of conducting naval gunfire support..so the US are designing a future DD-X, which is some destroyer that is meant to give NGFS like a battleship..anyone know anything abt the DDX programme?
Ticonderoga, Arleigh Burke, Oliver Hazard Perry.... -
can 5 inch guns give adequate naval gunfire support? i mean like they have quite short range..Originally posted by Johnston:I'll have you know that the majority of surface warships still carry 5 inch guns.
Ticonderoga, Arleigh Burke, Oliver Hazard Perry.... -
Our FH2000 155mm/52 cal howitzers can deliver ordnance out to 50 klicks.
That's far enough, thanks.
USA is researching on extended-range munitions, just for shore bombardment... -
No lah, the "Oliver Hazard Perry" class frigates are armed a 76mm gun not a 5" gun..Originally posted by Johnston:I'll have you know that the majority of surface warships still carry 5 inch guns.
Ticonderoga, Arleigh Burke, Oliver Hazard Perry.... -
Still.......what is the 1 5inch on the Aleigh Bruke and 2 5inches on the Ticonderoga going compared to the 9 16inches and 12 5inches??Though i have to admit the guns on the Iowa's are small in calibre.being 38 for the 5inch and 50 for the 16 inches but still it is more then those on present day ships which is why the navy still has 2 on the standby and 2 more that can be made ready in under 1 year.Originally posted by Johnston:Our FH2000 155mm/52 cal howitzers can deliver ordnance out to 50 klicks.
That's far enough, thanks.
USA is researching on extended-range munitions, just for shore bombardment... -
Some range info here that i found.
the new Mk45's on the modern day ships have a range of 14.9 miles(23.84km).
The old MK38 on the Iowa's had a range of 10miles(16km) The 16's on the Iowa's have a range of 21miles(33.6km).
They ofcause are coming up with new ammo and a 62 calibre MK45 to fire up till 65miles.Imagine if that was fitted to the Iowa's.... -
You need alot of people to run a battleship. Not to mention a very high running cost, although i think it should be comparable to a CV. I think the main constraint is on manpower.
About the guns, it is not just the size of the shell, but how many are fired at one point. That sort of naval firesupport can flatten the enemy easily. -
The Main 16 inches can fire starboard and port while there are 12 guns aside for the 5inches.(in turrets of 6)Originally posted by koxinga:You need alot of people to run a battleship. Not to mention a very high running cost, although i think it should be comparable to a CV. I think the main constraint is on manpower.
About the guns, it is not just the size of the shell, but how many are fired at one point. That sort of naval firesupport can flatten the enemy easily.
As for manpower cost?
1,515 ship's company
65 officers
1,450 enlisted
58 Marines