Need for a modern battleship

[DiabloTX]

No, the Salem did.  The other 2 got scrapped.

[GtoRA2]

Originally posted by DiabloTX
No, the Salem did.  The other 2 got scrapped.

Oh I know, but I was using global security as a reference, and they listed the DeS moines as a possible museum. It seems they didn't update their site lol.

[DiabloTX]

Let's just build Montana's from scratch.

[FiLtH]

It gets ya thinkin of how airpower and the CV put the BB in mothballs. Now with missiles and awesome defense capabilities, I wonder if the day will ever arrive where the BB is king again.

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by Maverick
Nilesen,

I was thinking about the same idea except I figured the top weight of the operation would be prohibitive putting a battery of tubes up there. It might work out better especially for accuracy by using the MRLS systme mounted on deck.

Yup. Isnt it the germans who are experimenting with putting MLRS launchers on ships? I know this was a topic in the oclub not long ago, but im not 100% sure it was the germans.

-edit- yes it is the germans. They are putting navalized MLRS on thier F125 frigattes and have been experimenting with putting the turret of a pz2000 howitzer on the same ship under the MONARC programme.

[Nilsen]

The US had a project that i belive is scrapped called the Arsenal Ship. That was a missile-only ship that was supposed to be purpouse buildt for that project so the cost would prolly become gigantic compared to what i was suggesting.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/arsenal_ship.htm

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by republic
Which begs the question....why has there been no replacement for 'shipborne artillery'?  Should the need ever arise that we must storm the beachhead...what would we do?
 

Just who's left we'll need to storm beaches against?  
Modern warfare has the forces typically against western military forces taking the fight into the cities.  Bosnia.  Iraq.  If you can't take on Abrams tanks and F-15 Eagles head on, you take away their advantages:  the tight confines of urban environments with lots of civilians around.  
Not the kind of environment where you'll see "the good guys" lobbing in 16 inch shells.

There are even efforts on the part of many countries to negate the western air superiority.  Cheap ground to air missiles in large quantities.  Air defense systems technologies.  

Then there are the anti-ship missiles to worry about when trying to defend 1 big slow target that has to come in closer than a carrier to make use of it's artillery weapons.

Battleships?  Nope.  A huge investment and ongoing expense that can be negated by the other side several ways.

[rpm]

1 F/A-18 can do more damage than a BB for far less money. GPS and laser guided weapons are pinpoint on fixed and moving targets. If you need a shore cleared you drop cluster bombs.

Maybe we should go back to sails. They would never hear us coming.

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by rpm


Maybe we should go back to sails. They would never hear us coming.

There you have the plot for the next james bond movie! stealthy sailship owned by an internet tycoon who is ready to take over the world by selling faulty operating systems

[DiabloTX]

This would have been interesting had the Soviets ever completed them.



Sovetsky Soyuz class battleship

[Chairboy]

This article has a great video of a test, with setup:

http://fredericksburg.com/News/Web/2007/012007/0130railgun

[VooWho]

Beside who are we going to invade from the sea that we can't already handle with what we have? China???? [/B][/QUOTE]

You forgot Iran and North Korea. There are also many hostile countries that the U.S.A. could invade in the future.

[Hornet33]

Yeah but what are we going to invade them with?? If you took EVERY amphibious assult ship in the US Navy inventory and loaded them up with Marines you might have enough sealift to put a reinforced brigade ashore. That's it.

There isn't enough sealift capability left in the Navy to mount a large scale amphibious assult. We only have 2 Marine divisions and we can't move them both at the same time.

The days of large scale amphibious assults are over. We just do not have the capability to do it anymore. Even if you took into federal service EVERY US flagged cargo ship on the planet, it doesn't come close to equaling the amount of tonnage required to move both Marine divisions we currently have, let alone put them ashore under combat conditions.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Hornet33
Yeah but what are we going to invade them with?? If you took EVERY amphibious assult ship in the US Navy inventory and loaded them up with Marines you might have enough sealift to put a reinforced brigade ashore. That's it.

There isn't enough sealift capability left in the Navy to mount a large scale amphibious assult. We only have 2 Marine divisions and we can't move them both at the same time.

The days of large scale amphibious assults are over. We just do not have the capability to do it anymore. Even if you took into federal service EVERY US flagged cargo ship on the planet, it doesn't come close to equaling the amount of tonnage required to move both Marine divisions we currently have, let alone put them ashore under combat conditions.

you couldn't be more wrong.  We have 4 Marine Divisions
1st Mar div Camp Pendleton Ca
2nd Mar Div Camp Lejune, NC
3rd Mar Div Okinawa
4th Mar Div New Orleans (reserve)


You are also missing the point of an amphibious assault.  No longer do we have to take islands and countrys like we did at normandy/tarawa/iwo ect.

The Marines now have over the horizon capability and employ what's called a MAGTF, Marine Air to Ground Task Force concept.  Simply put it is a full spectrum of engangment from both air and sea designed to envelop the target area.

OR

You can use the Marines as a decoy as in the first gulf war.  Sadam moved a hell of alot of troops to meet the Marines on the beaches of Kuwait only to be attacked from behind.  Brilliant planning IMHO.

EDIT:

In addition there is allways 2 MEU (Marine Expeditionary Units) and a couple of MEB (brigade sized) afloat supported by MPS (maritime prepositioning ships) that are capable of puting 10,000 combat ready toops ashore with enough supplies to fight un replenished for 30 days.

[indy007]

Part of FCS is a relatively small box of guided, NLOS missiles. 15 mile range. They exist right now & work pretty well from what I understand. It looks like you can put 2 boxes of them in the back of a pickup. Completely self-contained, disposable system.

Velcro a bunch of them into the back of some LCACs. Problem solved.

No need for thousand+ crews. Far less eggs in 1 basket. Much less expensive. Doesn't require leaps of technology still under development. You can drive the LCAC onto the beach and extend your reach 15 miles inland without the need for far more expensive Tomahawks from the fleet. Marines could take it with them during the breakout & push. Flight times for the artillery are shorter with better accuracy.

Neat stuff.