Bobby, you don't have to convince me, you have to convince your Secretary of the Navy United States Naval Gunfire Support debate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Selected quotes, my bolds: Why keep two expensive museum pieces afloat when you can't even afford the replacements? I'm sorry, but they're well past their sell by date. Ship bombarment was fine for Normandy and the Pacific but things simply don't work like that anymore. You should have read the rest of the page, it seems even the Modern Navy is not 100% sure that Battleships are obsolete: Although the Navy firmly believes in the capabilities of the DD(X) destroyer program, members of the United States Congress remain skeptical about the efficiency of the new destroyers when compared to the battleships.[14] Partially as a consequence, Congress passed Pub. L. 109-364, the National Defense Authorization Act 2007, requiring the battleships be kept and maintained in a state of readiness should they ever be needed again.[28] Congress has ordered that the following measures be implemented to ensure that, if need be, Iowa and Wisconsin can be returned to active duty: Iowa and Wisconsin must not be altered in any way that would impair their military utility; The battleships must be preserved in their present condition through the continued use of cathodic protection, dehumidification systems, and any other preservation methods as needed; Spare parts and unique equipment such as the 16-inch (410 mm) gun barrels and projectiles be preserved in adequate numbers to support Iowa and Wisconsin, if reactivated; The Navy must prepare plans for the rapid reactivation of Iowa and Wisconsin should they be returned to the Navy in the event of a national emergency.[28] These four conditions closely mirror the original three conditions that the Nation Defense Authorization Act of 1996 laid out for the maintenance of Iowa and Wisconsin while they were in the Mothball Fleet.[4][10]
You keep the aging B-52s around because they are the most cost effective platform that can keep an endless supply of laser and/or GPS guided conventional bombs in the air on immediate call. They are much cheaper kept in the air over Afghanistan than anything else, being based in Diego Garcia Island, in the Indian Ocean. The missiles idea is lousy coz you'd need some naval platform near the coast - Pakistan's, either surface or sub-surface; the missiles would take a longer flight time than the 52 hindering the troops; the SLCMs would be a lot more expensive than the bombs (and the supply is limited, by the way); AND the missiles themselves would be visible by every Abdullah below (Afghanistan is an inland country!) which would be very bad press everytime a missile was fired! So right now you have a few bomb trucks carrying a variety of munitions (more than one type) in large numbers loitering over Afgh, and when there is some patrol or convoy scheduled it will be in a 100km vicinity (no miles for the AF), with a UAV right on top. If trouble crops up, the UAV will spot the Injuns, pass the data to the BUFF, and a single bomb will be dropped from 40000ft up and 80km away, falling smack on the guys litterally out of the blue! Nobody ever saw the 52 nor the Predator! No sir, keep the 52s where they are, they're doing fine! That's the way you do it nowadays Ok, ok, we'll keep the B-52s if you insist....Come to think of it, they do give us that capability to "reach out and touch someone." And going by Jugs above mentioned statement, even our congress still wants to keep the USS Iowa and Wisconsin in a state of near-readiness, just in case. So there is some merit in keeping the battlewagons around and ready to go....
Ta, ta, ta, ta, ta... keeping them in near-readiness where? Museums, that's where! Shoot, during the Invasion Scare the Limeys were taking Napoleonic guns from museums for the Home Guard! Oh, 'members of the US congress'. This can mean several things, and one that occurs to me is swine meat. The shelling proved to be so devastating that when the latter battleship returned to resumed shelling the island the enemy troops surrendered to her Pioneer UAV launched to spot for the battleships' guns rather than face another round of heavy naval artillery support.[49][50] Right. Now how far inland did you say the guns reach? The NGFS provided by the Wisconsin at the battle of Fallujah was simply shining "When word of a crisis breaks out in Washington, it's no accident that the first question that comes to everyone's lips is: 'Where's the nearest carrier?'" President Bill Clinton March 12, 1993 aboard USS Theodore Roosevelt It's not "In which museum is the nearest battleship"! :icon-mrgreenbandit: Battle Group Tasks But yes, a battleship is an impresssive thing, it always provide some great photo opportunities. "I told you I don't like guns." In case one wonders about Za's sanity, these stills come from Steven Seagal's "great" film Under Siege (1992)
OF coursed Clinton would say that, he's the one that moth balled them in the first place. I will agree that Steven Seagull can not act.
This is a multifaceted question and there are no "Right" or "Wrong" answers: 1. Could they play a roll in a modern Navy? 1a. If so what role should they play? 2. What upgrades should be made to them? 2a. Cost to build new class v. cost to upgrade?(DDX Program) 3. Are they more versatile than a Destroyer / Frigate? Feel free to add any questions you see fit. The only thing I ask is that you cite your sources or elucidate your claim in absence of citable resources (i.e. saying Battleships are "Cool" is not enough). Well, all I have is your objections to my objections. What is your standpoint after all? By the way, wasn't there a thread in WW2F (here) that was discussing much the same matter before being closed? Perhaps we ought to read it first in order to avoid repeating the same déja-vus all over again
Well, all I have is your objections to my objections. What is your standpoint after all? By the way, wasn't there a thread in WW2F (here) that was discussing much the same matter before being closed? Perhaps we ought to read it first in order to avoid repeating the same déja-vus all over again That is true. My intent was not to rehash anything I am honestly interested in why everyone seems to think that Battleships should go the way of the coelacanth. It's easy to say: "They are obsolete and inefficient"; but, the question remains why are they obsolete and inefficient? One argument is the power plants. the Engines off the BB-66 USS Kentucky are currently powering the AOE's Camden and Sacramento. BB's are the only ships, besides aircraft carriers, capable of making 35 knots. I guess I just haven't been convinced that BB's are useless. Brad
The USS Sacramento AOE-1 was decommissioned in 2004 or 2005. I think it is being scrapped now. I think the USS Camden AOE-2 has shared a similar fate. My cousin was deployed on the Sacramento in 2003 as part of the helo detachment. He described the ship as a huge floating WalMart. He said the officer staterooms were atrociously hot and he could only imagine how bad the crew berths were.
The USS Sacramento AOE-1 was decommissioned in 2004 or 2005. I think it is being scrapped now. I think the USS Camden AOE-2 has shared a similar fate. My cousin was deployed on the Sacramento in 2003 as part of the helo detachment. He described the ship as a huge floating WalMart. He said the officer staterooms were atrociously hot and he could only imagine how bad the crew berths were. Killin' me
Well, all I have is your objections to my objections. What is your standpoint after all? I guess I just haven't been convinced that BB's are useless. Sorry Brad, but it was you who raised the matter. The onus is on you to convince the others, so it is you who has to prove that the Battleships are the top bananas.
Sorry Brad, but it was you who raised the matter. The onus is on you to convince the others, so it is you who has to prove that the Battleships are the top bananas. No need to apologize. I was actualy hoping, through intelligent dialogue, that I would be presented with an "Ah ha!" moment of clarity that would change my opinion. During GW1, while sitting off the coast of Kuwait, the Wisconsin gave us all a warm fuzzy feeling just knowing that it was near. It was like the BFH you keep in a tool box to use when everything else doesn't work. Brad
