Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests
Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Dilandu » Thu Mar 07, 2019 8:07 am | |
Dilandu
Posts: 2536
|
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... hips-46277
...There seems to be no end of this "lets get some battleships" story. Some sociology professor from Sidney think battleships are imposing and cool, so he want the USN to build a few. They should scare China because they are so imposing, and they could cut underwater cables (I wonder, why you need battleship for that), and couldn't be disabled by being rammed by cargo ship (actually, they could be), and their armor would allow them to survive in high1threat areas (spoiler: it wouldn't) "Every groundhog view himself as agronomist" (c) ------------------------------
Oh well, if shortening the front is what the Germans crave, Let's shorten it to very end - the length of Fuhrer's grave. (Red Army lyrics from 1945) |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Michael Everett » Thu Mar 07, 2019 1:54 pm | |
Michael Everett
Posts: 2612
|
Sounds to me like the professor in question may be a fan of Kantai Collection, where WWII naval ships are reincarnated as girls to help fight monstrous versions known as Abyssals.
Not kidding. And as you may expect, there are several fanworks based on the original game, including several stories, one of which crosses over with Harry Potter and at least two with Wildbow's Worm. It's quite sad that with Carriers and missiles dominating the battlewaves*, Battleships are little more than floating targets these days, being slowly consigned to history along with the Galleon and the Junk. *Battlefields sounds too land-based. ~~~~~~
I can't write anywhere near as well as Weber But I try nonetheless, And even do my own artwork. (Now on Twitter)and mentioned by RFC! ACNH Dreams at DA-6594-0940-7995 |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Dilandu » Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:41 pm | |
Dilandu
Posts: 2536
|
The missiles are just too smart - always were too smart - to defend against them by just primitive armor. Even 1940s missiles already could hit the decks or underwater parts, avoiding entirely mighty armored sides. ------------------------------
Oh well, if shortening the front is what the Germans crave, Let's shorten it to very end - the length of Fuhrer's grave. (Red Army lyrics from 1945) |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by The E » Thu Mar 07, 2019 3:07 pm | |
The E
Posts: 2683
|
The debate around big-gun battleships will never end. Someone will always find arguments to support the notion that the concept isn't dead yet. One argument I heard recently (via the Drachinifel youtube channel; if you don't know him, Drach is a naval historian. His channel is specialized to telling the stories of individual ships or ship classes, or telling the stories of notable battles) is that the fight of missiles vs countermeasures is getting harder and harder for the missiles to win. If laser-based CIWS can be made to work, and work better than the current gen of projectile-based installations, then a big-gun ship can penetrate a defensive fire screen much more readily (and much more cheaply!) than a missile salvo can. |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Annachie » Thu Mar 07, 2019 5:27 pm | |
Annachie
Posts: 3099
|
Dale Brown's Silver Tower has an interesting take on Battleship use.
Two actually. Not exactly realistic, but interesting none the less. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ still not dead. |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Lord Skimper » Thu Mar 07, 2019 9:18 pm | |
Lord Skimper
Posts: 1736
|
Pocket battleships with 5" smoothbore guns would be great. Shells, Armour piercing sabots and songster type missiles. Small fast powerful.
________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars. |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Daryl » Sun Mar 10, 2019 8:38 pm | |
Daryl
Posts: 3503
|
Aeronautical engineers design weapons systems, naval engineers design targets.
|
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Castenea » Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:59 pm | |
Castenea
Posts: 671
|
NO. Modern armored cruiser optimized with for shore support. Two or four triple turrets with the 155mm Smooth-bore from the M1 Abrams. Enough armor to protect the vitals and crew battle stations from counter battery fire up to MLRS batteries. 30+ Knot top speed, room for good AAA suite and Land attack cruise missiles. A battleship does not give enough improvement until you can equip it with energy hogs like Electromagnetic rail guns, 6-10 PDLCs instead of CIWS and then the fact it has room for a very large sensor suite is simply gravy. The big downside to the battle wagons was the size of the crews and how much it cost to pay and feed them. Until there is a clear advantage to having a bigger ship as opposed to similar numbers of crew on smaller ships they will not be built. |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by TFLYTSNBN » Sun Mar 17, 2019 7:30 pm | |
TFLYTSNBN
|
The guy is obviously no expert on naval warfare. The US already has an excellent platform for attacking undersea communications. It is a submarine. There is a cogent argument for an intermediate size ship (25,000 tons) with a hybrid nuclear/gas turbine integrated electric power system for propulsion and electronics. I seem to recall the Soviet Union building something similar, the Kirov. |
Top |
Re: Social policy professor want battleships | |
---|---|
by Dilandu » Tue Mar 19, 2019 5:25 am | |
Dilandu
Posts: 2536
|
It wasn't exactly what Navy wanted. The initial idea was to have two nuclear-powered ships on the same (roughly 7000 ton) hull: the large anti-submarine ship with helicopters and long-range ASuW missiles, and missile cruiser with long-range SAM and heavy ASM's. The missile cruiser were supposed to protect a pair of anti-submarine ships, working as hunting group in Atlantic and Pacific (hense nuclear power) But problem was, that it was Party Central Committe who decided what wepon should be produced, not military. And essentially someone decided that it would be better to have "universal" ship, that could do both. So, the nuclear anti-submarine ship project was abandoned, and instead ASuW weapon was placed on cruiser. Then there were concerns about the reliability of next-generation reactors, so the Party ordered a new cruiser to have a backup boilers & oil supply. Essentially, all this changes and some new weapon development resulted in oversized ship, powerful and impressive, but too costly for mass production. ------------------------------
Oh well, if shortening the front is what the Germans crave, Let's shorten it to very end - the length of Fuhrer's grave. (Red Army lyrics from 1945) |
Top |