Posted on Jan 13, 2018
Iowa-Class Battleship: The Warship the Navy Wishes It Could Bring Back from the Dead
3.66K
79
34
16
16
0
Bring out ye dead!!! I'm the Battleships
Missouri, Wisconsin and Iowa and I am not dead yet and I'm feeling much better!!!!
Like they used to say on Candid Camera:"wouldn't it be funny" if we took all the $165 billion cost overrun on the F-35 and put it toward the three battleships, we would at least have three battleships that we know work. Sure, they could be torpedoed and possibly sunk, but they would still work unlike the F-35 A and B.
Missouri, Wisconsin and Iowa and I am not dead yet and I'm feeling much better!!!!
Like they used to say on Candid Camera:"wouldn't it be funny" if we took all the $165 billion cost overrun on the F-35 and put it toward the three battleships, we would at least have three battleships that we know work. Sure, they could be torpedoed and possibly sunk, but they would still work unlike the F-35 A and B.
Iowa-Class Battleship: The Warship the Navy Wishes It Could Bring Back from the Dead
Posted from nationalinterest.org
Museums
Defense
Future
Naval/Maritime History
Budget
Edited 6 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
8
8
0
I happen to be sitting in an office on the USS Iowa as I type this.
Bringing back the Battleships is unfortunately nothing more than a Fantasy.
The material condition of the ships is pretty good (I've been aboard all four Iowa class in the last few years) but the systems, including the critical 16" gun turrets would need a massive amount of work just to get operational again let alone implement automation technology to enable the ships to operate with a crew of less than 1000 sailors.
All these systems, in particular the engineering plant and the ships main and secondary armament were designed around huge crews. You'd need to rip out the entire engineering plant and replace it with a more modern system (Gas Turbine powered or Nuclear) if you wanted to make significant advances in terms of automation. As far as the 16" and 5" guns, I can't see anything being done there the confines inside the turrets is just too small. The main reason the ships crews were so much smaller in the 1980s than in WWII is because the navy removed all the anti aircraft guns from the ship and replaced them with 4 CIWS mounts.
Once you get past the reality that crew reduction is a pipe dream you need to look at what it would take to just reactivate them as is. You'd need at least a year in the shipyards (of which we don't have many of anymore) and enough money to build an entire Flight III Arleigh Burke class destroyer.
Bringing back the Battleships is unfortunately nothing more than a Fantasy.
The material condition of the ships is pretty good (I've been aboard all four Iowa class in the last few years) but the systems, including the critical 16" gun turrets would need a massive amount of work just to get operational again let alone implement automation technology to enable the ships to operate with a crew of less than 1000 sailors.
All these systems, in particular the engineering plant and the ships main and secondary armament were designed around huge crews. You'd need to rip out the entire engineering plant and replace it with a more modern system (Gas Turbine powered or Nuclear) if you wanted to make significant advances in terms of automation. As far as the 16" and 5" guns, I can't see anything being done there the confines inside the turrets is just too small. The main reason the ships crews were so much smaller in the 1980s than in WWII is because the navy removed all the anti aircraft guns from the ship and replaced them with 4 CIWS mounts.
Once you get past the reality that crew reduction is a pipe dream you need to look at what it would take to just reactivate them as is. You'd need at least a year in the shipyards (of which we don't have many of anymore) and enough money to build an entire Flight III Arleigh Burke class destroyer.
(8)
(0)
SGT Jim Arnold
PO2 Robert Aitchison - I don't care how thick it is. if it goes down I end up on somethings dinner menu
(1)
(0)
CPO Glenn Moss
LTC (Join to see) - This is, indeed, one method by which modern torpedo's may take out a surface ship. "Overpressure bubble" doesn't really describe the mechanics of how this works, though. Essentially, a torpedo detonating under a ship would create a "bubble" under the center of the keel. This would leave the ship literally supported by water at the fore and aft ends, which would cause the keel of the ship to flex down in the middle due to the weight of the ship. Then the water would rush back in as the bubble collapsed, causing the keel to flex up in the middle. The end result (ideally) is this flexing would crack the keel of the ship, causing flooding and/or the ship literally cracking in half.
How well this would fare against a battleship of the Iowa class is debatable. All ships flex to some extent, some more or less than others. But these battleships are insanely strong and this particular type of torpedo attack will likely require multiple torpedos to sink one, regardless of the method used in the torpedo attack.
The bottom line is that ALL ships can be sunk. The question is whether or not that will happen before or after that ship causes significant damage to the enemy in the process. Remember also...these ships are part of battle groups and task forces. They're not lone ships. It's much more difficult to sink a ship which is part of a task force or battle group.
How well this would fare against a battleship of the Iowa class is debatable. All ships flex to some extent, some more or less than others. But these battleships are insanely strong and this particular type of torpedo attack will likely require multiple torpedos to sink one, regardless of the method used in the torpedo attack.
The bottom line is that ALL ships can be sunk. The question is whether or not that will happen before or after that ship causes significant damage to the enemy in the process. Remember also...these ships are part of battle groups and task forces. They're not lone ships. It's much more difficult to sink a ship which is part of a task force or battle group.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
LTC (Join to see) thanks for the share/read my friend. The Wisconsin is in Norfolk, VA. I will go and see it this summer.
(7)
(0)
PO2 Robert Aitchison
LTC (Join to see) - We actually have a couple dozen inert 16" shells we got from the Navy a couple years ago that we have on display in various places.
Likewise we have a handful (less than 1 dozen probably) "training" powder bags that are filled with non-explosive stuffing.
Nothing that goes boom though, also no fuel and no lube oil.
Oh yeah and every piece of major machinery has been partially disassembled to allow for dehumidification while the ship was in the reserve fleet.
And I can't forget to mention how every sea chest (opening in the hull where sea water enters or anything discharges) has been welded shut and you'd need to drydock the ship (or at least get a bunch of underwater welders) to undo all that.
Likewise we have a handful (less than 1 dozen probably) "training" powder bags that are filled with non-explosive stuffing.
Nothing that goes boom though, also no fuel and no lube oil.
Oh yeah and every piece of major machinery has been partially disassembled to allow for dehumidification while the ship was in the reserve fleet.
And I can't forget to mention how every sea chest (opening in the hull where sea water enters or anything discharges) has been welded shut and you'd need to drydock the ship (or at least get a bunch of underwater welders) to undo all that.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
PO2 Robert Aitchison - I thought so. I wonder if the Long Beach Naval weapons Station still has any 16 " HE shells left or powder? Does gunpowder go unstable after 75 years?
(0)
(0)
PO2 Robert Aitchison
LTC (Join to see) - You mean Seal Beach? I don't know, I do know when we got our inert shells from the Navy they came from somewhere in the Midwest via train.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Yes, Seal Beach! I don't know why I thought of Long Beach but yes it is Seal Beach. I actually was there 2 years ago for weapons qualification. They have about a three-story High sandbagged area where you can qualify for a 25m for the 9mm range. Thank you for correcting me that was a brain fart. LOL
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
LTC (Join to see) Wasn't Cost Effective at the End of WWII wasn't in Korea, wasn't in Vietnam, Wasn't in Beirut, Wasn't in Desert Storm. Yes I Love them Passionately, Yes I'm a Romantic, Yes they are Intimidating. Saw the Missouri, New Jersey every day I went to Work for 5 Years in Bremerton where they spent most of their Illustrious Careers in the White Fleet, The Ghost Fleet, Retired/Inactivated Fleet. I can think of Plenty of Things Better to Spend a Million Dollars a Day On and Better Use of Time for a Crew of a 1K Sailors. Same Reason My Beloved Nuclear Cruisers were Retired, Cost Per Day to Operate and a Crew of 600. Smaller, Faster, Cheaper. Nature of the Game.
(5)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
LTC (Join to see) - Speaking of Iran, They have Done an Excellent Job of Maintaining Several Ships and 2 P-3s We Left there with the Shah's Government. Having Spied on them for My Last Two Big Hurahs, I Learned a Healthy Respect for them as the Kings of Bubble Gum and Paper Clip Repairs.
(2)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
LTC (Join to see) - As Far as COMSEC and OPSEC the Iranians always Sucked and I Could Take them Out the Minute they had an Evil Thought, Let Alone Try and Carry It Out.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
I remember the Arab and Persian engineering students were one crazy group of guys at Cal State Fullerton. If they can reengineering the F4 Phantom and keep the F-14 flying, they can do an excellent job keeping their existing Hardware working. I was only 60 miles east of the
Iran border when I was Afghanistan and I'm sure the forward operating base was probably flown over by our reconnaissance F4 Phantom. Just think of all the hand-me-down planes they received from the Saddam Hussein era Iraqi Air Force in 1991.
https://warisboring.com/this-is-how-iran-maintains-its-bizarre-air-force/
Iran border when I was Afghanistan and I'm sure the forward operating base was probably flown over by our reconnaissance F4 Phantom. Just think of all the hand-me-down planes they received from the Saddam Hussein era Iraqi Air Force in 1991.
https://warisboring.com/this-is-how-iran-maintains-its-bizarre-air-force/
This Is How Iran Maintains Its Bizarre Air Force
Iran is an air power, relying on large numbers of heavily-armed warplanes to deter hostile neighbors and try to keep at bay the ships, stealth fighters and spy planes of the United States. But Iran is also an isolated and embargoed state, barred from legally acquiring new airframes, parts and...
(1)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
LTC (Join to see) - Always Beware the Kings of Mix and Match, Iran and India always Deserve a Degree of Respect.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google