Avatar feed
Responses: 7
SSgt Ryan Sylvester
4
4
0
Honestly... they really are superfluous at this point. The age of trading broadsides has long since ended. Their long guns do a quarter or less of the distance that anti-ship missiles travel, with the only real benefit that the projectile cannot be effectively intercepted (though I'm sure they'd love to let CIWS give it a go to disprove that). Meanwhile, the boats are still susceptible below the waterline. The only real benefit is the amount of firepower they can carry and deliver down range from one platform, but it's still massively underpowered compared to our carrier groups, and afforded very little of the same protection... unless you're talking about reinstituting the Battle Groups of old. Which doesn't really offer that much of a benefit over sending out a strike group sans the BB.

I think they probably are best serving where they are: as monuments to the final sunset of the nautical era of thundering cannons and plundering. And, as a great man pointed out once, "the cannons don't thunder, there's nothing to plunder, I'm an over-40 victim of fate."
(4)
Comment
(0)
SSgt Ryan Sylvester
SSgt Ryan Sylvester
>1 y
SSgt (Join to see) - Well, technically, the money's already spent, we're just giving it value, heh. But yeah, and that's been done before, calling up those old ships to pound the hell out of a location before the boots hit the dirt.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSgt Geospatial Intelligence
SSgt (Join to see)
>1 y
SSgt Ryan Sylvester - damn right! Use what we have at our disposal. That way we don't get into another 20+ year quagmire like the F-35 trying to develop the next big thing.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SSgt Ryan Sylvester
SSgt Ryan Sylvester
>1 y
SSgt (Join to see) - Christ, don't remind me. At least we've finally got an operational flight of those costly foxtrotters.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSgt Geospatial Intelligence
SSgt (Join to see)
>1 y
SSgt Ryan Sylvester - took them damned long enough to figure out how to get them to be able to fire their guns while in flight. At least they've dropped that non-sense about it replacing the A-10. Its now only currently slated to replace the F-16, which is the frame it should've been slated to replace all along. If they had, the thing probably would've been operational 10 years ago.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SN Greg Wright
3
3
0
Never happen. As I've said before, DDG's can deliver more chemical and kinetic energy downrange, at a fraction of the manpower and money cost, than the BB's ever could. And I say this as someone that's sailed in a fleet with them, has seen them alongside frequently. Love, love love them. But, their day is done.
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO3 Business Advisement
3
3
0
I really believe that missiles are great but an EMP no matter how it was deployed drops airborne missiles and wrecks non-launched missiles. Good old 18 inch shells can not be stopped once shot.
(3)
Comment
(0)
LTC Self Employed
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
On that note, I'm going to see the USS Iowa next Wednesday after I land in California for my four days of army training period I'm taking the wife this time so we will check it out. She was previously on the North Carolina and I previously had visited the USS New Jersey in Pearl Harbor back in 2011.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_Museum
(1)
Reply
(0)
PO3 Business Advisement
PO3 (Join to see)
>1 y
LTC (Join to see) - Outstanding !! Some great ships there. Be safe out there.
(2)
Reply
(0)
LTC Self Employed
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
Cdba11e7
PO3 (Join to see) - I go to California monthly. The freeways are crazy. I won't be in San Pedro at night. I have situation awareness. It will be fun! One of the majors in our unit works for the LA County Fire Department in the LA Harbor and he took this picture and gave it to me.
(1)
Reply
(0)
PO3 Business Advisement
PO3 (Join to see)
>1 y
LTC (Join to see) - That is a beauty.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close