Should We Build More Battleships?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Should We Build More Battleships? (Page 1 of 7)

Posted: 6/9/2019 7:54:32 PM EDT

I know it's been beat to death, but I'm doing laundry and bored.

If you're President with both houses of Congress fully committed to your agenda, do you build a modern battleship? Maybe rail guns and shit. Maybe regular big ass cannons. Your call.

I say yes.

Under the Whiskers plan, we have 20 CVNS, 300 Seawolf 2s, and some new crazy battleship. I don't know maybe a couple hospital ships. But no Littoral crap and no Zumwalts. I say this as a guy who knows almost nothing about Naval warfare. BUT MY PLAN IS SOUND.

Edit: I'm now adding 100 Whittemore Class SSGNs

Posted: 6/9/2019 7:56:48 PM EDT

[#1]

50,000 ton gun warships are obsolete.

Posted: 6/9/2019 7:57:37 PM EDT

[#2]

What would they do?

Posted: 6/9/2019 7:58:57 PM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:
What would they do?

View Quote

Cost money and get sunk.

Posted: 6/9/2019 7:59:41 PM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:
What would they do?

View Quote

Kick alien ass when required?

Posted: 6/9/2019 7:59:59 PM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:

Cost money and get sunk.

View Quote

Mothball Queens

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:00:00 PM EDT

[#6]

SSGNs and stealthy Tomahawk successor.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:01:54 PM EDT

[#7]

Everything in this picture is scrapped except the New Jersey and she is a museum. BBs are antiquated.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:02:28 PM EDT

[#8]

The whole reason for a battleship is to move it's big guns.

We don't need the guns to blow shit up.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:03:43 PM EDT

[#9]

Battleships are cool but if we bring them back we might as well restart the transatlantic zeppelin service and rotary phones hooked to landlines with live operators to connect calls.

They're all gone because we have long ago figured out better ways to do their jobs.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:04:33 PM EDT

[#10]

Replace big guns with big rail guns, electricity provided for by nuclear reactor.

Sure why not. Then we could get drunk and shoot at the moon and shit

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:05:01 PM EDT

[#11]

I could go for medium-sized arsenal ships that have a deck full of MLRS vehicles. Some loaded with ATACMS. Maybe some Tomahawk GLCMs too.

But battleships, no.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:12:06 PM EDT

[#12]

Okay Fluffy it's good to hear that you are revising the Seawolf number.

But with current budget constraints you are going to have to settle for 100 of these. They are much cheaper.

How about a modern "heavy cruiser" concept?

Mounted railguns, missiles. Armored so it can take some close in damage. Nuclear powered, with capability to be used as a mobile power source for US bases and aid operations.

Say it's for anti piracy patrols.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:12:52 PM EDT

[#13]

Too big of a target, one wouldn't last 5 minutes in an engagement.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:14:44 PM EDT

[#14]

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:15:13 PM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
What would they do?

View Quote

Bad ass murica reasoning aside, I read a good article a few years ago that they were VERY helpful to Marine amphibious landings.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:16:11 PM EDT

[#16]

Fuck yes! Cut welfare and build all military might!

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:18:06 PM EDT

[#17]

GPS guided shit now. Dropped from high above or launched off smaller boats.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:18:48 PM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:
Okay Fluffy it's good to hear that you are revising the Seawolf number.

But with current budget constraints you are going to have to settle for 100 of these. They are much cheaper.

How about a modern "heavy cruiser" concept?

Mounted railguns, missiles. Armored so it can take some close in damage. Nuclear powered, with capability to be used as a mobile power source for US bases and aid operations.

Say it's for anti piracy patrols.

View Quote

We can do better than the Brits...

But yeah, exactly. A modern, armored battleship. Probably laser CIWS, heavily armored, definitely nuclear powered. I like rail guns so I think they should have rail guns. Ridiculous rail guns.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:19:52 PM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:
GPS guided shit now. Dropped from high above or launched off smaller boats.

View Quote

Completely feasible. Easily doable. Excalibur of the seas

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:20:06 PM EDT

[#20]

I’m fully on board with OPs plan. Not from any real strategically sound standpoint mind you, but mostly cause I toured the USS Alabama today.

I’m in a BB afterglow.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:22:08 PM EDT

[#21]

Yes

not because it's practical or needed

but because they're awesome

And as a jobs program

If you're getting Welfare you have to work a set number of hours on Battleship construction. This will be observed of course, like an apprenticeship or classroom depending on role and critical need of the components.

people would learn a huge number of marketable skills, they'd get pride in being part of something awesome, and the US taxpayer would get something in return.

We waste far more money on stuff far less awesome

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:22:41 PM EDT

[#22]

The view from the bridge yesterday.

Hell No.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:23:11 PM EDT

[#23]

bring back the USS dport

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:26:37 PM EDT

[#24]

USS Battleship Trump

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:27:14 PM EDT

[#25]

Would't more Arleigh Burke Destroyers be more practical?

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:28:38 PM EDT

[#26]

Once laser or energy point defense is capable of knocking out missles or aircraft the Battleships will return.
Hyper velocity tunsten or DU wont care about lasers.

Subs will remain effective regardless.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:28:59 PM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:
And as a jobs program

If you're getting Welfare you have to work a set number of hours on Battleship construction. This will be observed of course, like an apprenticeship or classroom depending on role and critical need of the components.

people would learn a huge number of marketable skills, they'd get pride in being part of something awesome, and the US taxpayer would get something in return.

We waste far more money on stuff far less awesome

View Quote

You want our battleships built by welfare rats? GTFO.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:29:17 PM EDT

[#28]

I miss Dport.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:29:28 PM EDT

[#29]

Quote History

Quoted:
50,000 ton gun warships are obsolete.

View Quote

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:30:33 PM EDT

[#30]

Nope.

Cruisers... based on the San Antonio class hull... with updated 8" turrets based off of the Mk71 MCLWG.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:34:13 PM EDT

[#31]

Quote History

Quoted:
USS Battleship Trump

View Quote

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:36:34 PM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:
What would they do?

View Quote

It’d of been awesome if the Iowa or Missouri was parked of the coast of Somalia during Black Hawk Down!

I don’t think we’d have lost any to enemy combat yet had we not retired them. We should have kept 1 operational just to show the flag.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:37:21 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/139707/EDFAD1F8-076C-425F-A038-2D825BF41E4D-974637.jpg

I’m fully on board with OPs plan. Not from any real strategically sound standpoint mind you, but mostly cause I toured the USS Alabama today.

I’m in a BB afterglow.

View Quote

Quoted:
Yes

not because it's practical or needed

but because they're awesome

And as a jobs program

If you're getting Welfare you have to work a set number of hours on Battleship construction. This will be observed of course, like an apprenticeship or classroom depending on role and critical need of the components.

people would learn a huge number of marketable skills, they'd get pride in being part of something awesome, and the US taxpayer would get something in return.

We waste far more money on stuff far less awesome

View Quote

Quoted:
Would't more Arleigh Burke Destroyers be more practical?

View Quote

Maybe.

I guess I'll have to alot some Burke destroyers under the Whiskers plan. They are pretty awesome.

All I know is:

More carriers
More Seawolf 2 Electric Boogaloo
More Battleships

I'll hire people to figure out the rest

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:38:52 PM EDT

[#34]

Quote History

Quoted:
Okay Fluffy it's good to hear that you are revising the Seawolf number.

But with current budget constraints you are going to have to settle for 100 of these. They are much cheaper.

How about a modern "heavy cruiser" concept?

Mounted railguns, missiles. Armored so it can take some close in damage. Nuclear powered, with capability to be used as a mobile power source for US bases and aid operations.

Say it's for anti piracy patrols.

View Quote

Sounds good. With railguns and nuclear power a heavy cruiser should be able to fulfill the role of the the old Iowa class BBs while also incorporating missiles, anti-missile defense, etc. Hell maybe outfit them with some of the new, soon to be released laser technology too.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:39:01 PM EDT

[#35]

Under my plan the entire ocean is completely covered with Seawolf 2s, if that matters

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:39:37 PM EDT

[#36]

nope. even with rail guns, idea being the range extends to 100 miles, trying to hit an area with a rail gun on a battleship from 100 miles would probably be less accurate than a traditional gun fired 20 miles. i would assume the rail system would have to be greater than 5 times more accurate than its counterpart to be significantly beneficial, or else it probably makes more sense to just launch guided munitions from a frigate from much further away, much more accurately. now, if this battleship was a space battleship, i would be all in.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:45:26 PM EDT

[#37]

Yes, and anyone who disagrees is just a communist in disguise.

Nothing dispenses anger and freedom like a set of big fuck off guns.

'Murica.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:46:04 PM EDT

[#38]

Bring back Iowa class ships.
Make bottom three decks a brig.
Fill with illegal aliens.
Sail off the coast closest to their home country.
Cram into 16” guns.
Fire them in the general direction of their home.
Everyone profits.

8654

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:50:51 PM EDT

[#39]

Montana class to start.

Eventually a circular nuclear powered battle island, capable of 60+ kts.

36 turrets, located at 10° intervals. Depth charges, SM-3's, rail guns, torpedoes, laser death rays, atomic depth charges, everything.

Name the first one the USS Cheerful.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:52:27 PM EDT

[#40]

Uss New Jersey 16 inch shell splashes!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhto0ud4MgA

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:55:17 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Yes, and anyone who disagrees is just a communist in disguise.

Nothing dispenses anger and freedom like a set of big fuck off guns.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/MPQl-ndEjMo/maxresdefault.jpg

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71wvB%2Bkue1L._SL1000_.jpg

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Qg5_VZws--/c_scale,f_auto,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/1276763157872328774.jpg

'Murica.

View Quote

Can't say I disagree sir.

Quoted:
Montana class to start.

Eventually a circular nuclear powered battle island, capable of 60+ kts.

36 turrets, located at 10° intervals. Depth charges, SM-3's, rail guns, torpedoes, laser death rays, atomic depth charges, everything.

Name the first one the USS Cheerful.

View Quote

I prefer USS Lexington.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:56:42 PM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:
Once laser or energy point defense is capable of knocking out missles or aircraft the Battleships will return.
Hyper velocity tunsten or DU wont care about lasers.

Subs will remain effective regardless.

View Quote

You have to wonder what the next measure will be if anti missile defenses suddenly become virtually impenetrable. A laser ain't going to do shit against a 2000 lb hunk of hypersonic tungsten/steel slug. Neither is a big auto shot gun or phalanx. It's kind of interesting that the navy is so interested in rail guns.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:56:59 PM EDT

[#43]

Quote History

Quoted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhto0ud4MgA

View Quote

Under my plan we use 32s

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:58:01 PM EDT

[#44]

Quote History

Quoted:
Under my plan the entire ocean is completely covered with Seawolf 2s, if that matters

View Quote

Yeah it matters, to fufill demands for deployment we had to lower recruiting standards. This boats crew is a little on the autistic side.

Last ship: Nathan james encounters sub

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wyW7uDeXlA

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:58:59 PM EDT

[#45]

Last one that saw combat (Missouri) had a silkworm missile launched at her that was shot down by the HMS Gloucester.

Posted: 6/9/2019 8:59:22 PM EDT

[#46]

We should definitely build some more battle ships. They need to be Knock Nevis-sized.

5 turrets with 3 16 inch guns. It also needs a flight deck for a 40 plane air wing.

And it needs at least 320 VLS cells. Along with docking bays for LCSs to run

interference for it. Oh, and a 3 ring circus.