Military Literature

[Podweed]

my mistake, the yakhont carries a 1,000 pound warhead, not kilogram. the tomahawk carries 700 pounds. the exocet that sank the sheffield (MM-38) had only 350 pounds while later exocets already carry 600 pounds.

 

the russian submarine-launched ss-19 (those in the ill-fated kursk) might be even more powerful than the yakhont.

 

but these are missiles with high explosives. they couldn't match the impact of a 2,000 pound armor-piercing shell traving at mach 3. that's how powerful one shot from the new jersey is. the yamato's gund are even more powerful. the bismark could fire more salvos on a sustained rate. and a well-armored battleship could take a couple of direct hits and still fight on.

 

here's one fallacy about battleships: they were rendered obsolete not because they were not powerful enough. they were obsolete partly because of their limited range but mostly due to cost of operation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Understood, but with a gun range of less than 50 miles and without any radar or sophisticated fire-control, that WW2-era warship can't even close undetected to within striking distance of a modern destroyer.

 

It's no contest.

[belisarius]

strickly for the new jersey:

 

not all moders destroyers and frigates can run > 35 knots because they have shallow drafts. that means the NJ can catch them in open sea. they may run to shallow water but they'll surely be within gun range.

 

now for those who can outrun NJ, the question now is, who wants to come near who? if the NJ's mission is to climb up the kola peninsula and bombard the russian airfields there, it will be the destroyers and crusiers that will have to approach (possibly to within 50 miles). they will have to hit it at least ten times with their strongest missiles to put it out of action, or at least twice using their sub-launched long range torpedoes (containing a 1-tone warhead, designed to knock out US nuclear powered carriers).

 

if you need to chase and destroy those fast ships, then the NJ is not your suitable weapon.

[Podweed]

strickly for the new jersey:

 

not all moders destroyers and frigates can run > 35 knots because they have shallow drafts. that means the NJ can catch them in open sea. they may run to shallow water but they'll surely be within gun range.

 

now for those who can outrun NJ, the question now is, who wants to come near who? if the NJ's mission is to climb up the kola peninsula and bombard the russian airfields there, it will be the destroyers and crusiers that will have to approach (possibly to within 50 miles). they will have to hit it at least ten times with their strongest missiles to put it out of action, or at least twice using their sub-launched long range torpedoes (containing a 1-tone warhead, designed to knock out US nuclear powered carriers).

 

if you need to chase and destroy those fast ships, then the NJ is not your suitable weapon.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Alright, alright, belisarius. C'mon, smokescreens here and there. My earlier question was simply: had that super-Kraut battleship been launched and was still in commission today (unmodified), would it survive an encounter with a modern destroyer?

[BlackWizard]

Walang tatalo sa Thundersub...

 

Peace :hypocritesmiley:

[belisarius]

Alright, alright, belisarius. C'mon, smokescreens here and there. My earlier question was simply: had that super-Kraut battleship been launched and was still in commission today (unmodified), would it survive an encounter with a modern destroyer?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

the answer will of course be yes.

[belisarius]

you wanna see how the bridge area of the new jersey looks like? that wall's 17 inches thick made of high carbon steel. no other type of warship today has that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.battleship.org/images/BN/armor2.jpg

[Dr_PepPeR]

Just curious. Are battleships a thing of the past? No new ones for a long long time.

[belisarius]

as we knew them, most probably. but a new generation of 'battleships" are being designed and some possibly in the works.

 

you could still call it "battleship" in that it still incorporates the three basic defining components: speed, armor protection and firepower.

 

land attack ships (for littoral warfare and ground support) are being seriously studied, as are weapons requirements. the basic findings:

 

1. current ships (corvette to destroyer size) lack armor protection for close-in action. direct armor plating is considered (similar to new jersey and yamato). indirect protection, basically building miniscule internal compartments, like in the bismark, is not likely.

 

2. the current guns, the 76mm and the 5"x54, lack power and range. currently studying to extend the 5" range to 70 miles and develope a new 8" long range gun.

 

land attack ships will still be using long-range cruise missiles as primary attack weapons but they will need guns. unlike missiles, it's so easy to saturate a target within range using gunfire. a spotter relays extent of damage and change in target locations, the gunner adjusts, and then pours it on again. nothing plasters a target better than large guns.

[Dr_PepPeR]

as we knew them, most probably. but a new generation of 'battleships" are being designed and some possibly in the works.

 

you could still call it "battleship" in that it still incorporates the three basic defining components: speed, armor protection and firepower.

 

land attack ships (for littoral warfare and ground support) are being seriously studied, as are weapons requirements. the basic findings:

 

1. current ships (corvette to destroyer size) lack armor protection for close-in action. direct armor plating is considered (similar to new jersey and yamato). indirect protection, basically building miniscule internal compartments, like in the bismark, is not likely.

 

2. the current guns, the 76mm and the 5"x54, lack power and range. currently studying to extend the 5" range to 70 miles and develope a new 8" long range gun.

 

land attack ships will still be using long-range cruise missiles as primary attack weapons but they will need guns. unlike missiles, it's so easy to saturate a target within range using gunfire. a spotter relays extent of damage and change in target locations, the gunner adjusts, and then pours it on again. nothing plasters a target better than large guns.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Good points. I was thinking of how the Navy would support a large scale amphibious invasion, similar to those staged in WWII. AFAIR the Navy used battleships, cruisers and destroyers as floating artillery to reduce beachhead strongpoints. As you said, land attack ships would really need guns, as there is still no substitute for artillery to saturate targets. So this means there are no dedicated ships that can serve as floating artillery in the same manner that battleships used to do in the Pacific in WWII?

[belisarius]

well, land attack ship design follows a logical course. right now, the ships given this duty are the large destroyers that mount both harpoon and tomahawk missiles. but they are designed to rush in fast, fire their liong range missles to hit precision targets inland and scoot out fast. littoral warfare really harks back to old ship concepts because things could easily turn into a slugfest that can be decided by guns and short range missiles.

 

what i'm trying to research is how guns could possibly return to primary status in open sea warfare. every armchair strategist i ask doesn't believe that guns will ever take the place of missiles in that aspect. the longest ranging naval gun right now can go 50 miles. plans are afoot to extend this to 70 miles. magnetic rail guns in the future could reach more than 200 miles.

 

my idea is to match a 50-70 mile range gun to a sturdy and stealthy ship. you know, those slanting catamarans like the one in the james bond movie "tomorrow never dies". an alternative is a big surface effect ship that could go faster than 60 knots. if either one of those ships could slip in within 50 miles of a carrier task force, or even just a convoy protected by destroyers and cruisers, then maybe surface naval warfare could again be settled by gunfire.

[Yuex]

I have this book by readers digest. Its all about WW II. It gives you an account on critical things that happened before the pre -war time to the victories of the Allies. It gives details on on how the war started, characters who performed critical roles in the war, and deciding battles that shifts the tides of victory and what blunders and miracles prolonged the war. A great book i would say. :thumbsupsmiley:

[willow_boy]

I have this book by readers digest. Its all about WW II. It gives you an account on critical things that happened before the pre -war time to the victories of the Allies. It gives details on on how the war started, characters who performed critical roles in the war, and deciding battles that shifts the tides of victory and what blunders and miracles prolonged the war. A great book i would say.  :thumbsupsmiley:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hi Yuex,

 

Were you referring to Readers' Digest's "Illustrated History of World War II"? If so, maganda nga iyang librong iyan. I badly wanted one when I was a kid pero medyo mahal. Aside from Readers' Digest, Time-Life also has great books and photo collections on the war. Regards.

[Dr_PepPeR]

I have this book by readers digest. Its all about WW II. It gives you an account on critical things that happened before the pre -war time to the victories of the Allies. It gives details on on how the war started, characters who performed critical roles in the war, and deciding battles that shifts the tides of victory and what blunders and miracles prolonged the war. A great book i would say.  :thumbsupsmiley:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Where did you get it?

[cocoy0]

May vintage na nahukay akong book from the Marcos era. It was published in celebration of the anniversary of the AFP. The book featured the strengths of the AFP. Syempre, pagmamayabang yan. Propaganda, pampataas ng morale. But what caught me reading it still was the "handbook" at the appendix teaching soldiers jungle survival. The recipes were funny, including cooking adobong palaka for 50 people (imagine the effort!), and including nutribun in the recipes.

[UNDergroundX]

Anyone who has a book or war stories regarding the battleship Musashi in Japan during world war 2?

I heard that its the biggest battle cruiser or ship in its time with the biggest cannon seen in this side of the world. Is this true? or is this just a myth?