HUGE, FAST VESSELS PROJECTED BY NAVY (1/9/39)

Microfiche-New York Times Archives | 1/9/39 | No byline

[Homer_J_Simpson]

If you would like to be added to or deleted from the Realtime +/- 70 Years ping list drop me a freepmail. Articles going back to 1/27/08 can be found by searching by keyword "realtime."

[Homer_J_Simpson]

Let's see how a battleship thread fares compared to a tank thread.

This article got me wondering about the relative cost of producing a BB vs. a CV. On the one hand, a carrier is just a floating hanger with a landing strip on the roof. But you have to include the aircraft in the cost since that is the main armament. Even though the aircraft are not fixtures on the ship. I would think the materials and engineering going into a battleship would be tremendous, especially for the maing guns and fire control system.

I am confident that I will soon learn more on this topic than I ever new there was to learn about it.

[quikdrw]

bump for later

[JDoutrider]

bttt

[DouglasKC]

Ramping up for war.

And whatever happened to the New York boy who was going to ride his bike to Mexico? Did they find him?

[Camel Joe]

Are these two the North Carolina Class or the newer Iowa Class?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Had to be the Iowas...

[Homer_J_Simpson]

And whatever happened to the New York boy who was going to ride his bike to Mexico? Did they find him?

I did not see any follow ups to that story. Since it was a filler and not a front page item it is not likely I would see a follow up except by accident. My next trip to the archives will take up at 2/21/39. I imagine the kid on the bike had achieved his destiny by then so we will probably never know.

[KarlInOhio]

Iowa class. The North Carolina is mentioned elsewhere in the article.

[DouglasKC]

I did not see any follow ups to that story. Since it was a filler and not a front page item it is not likely I would see a follow up except by accident. My next trip to the archives will take up at 2/21/39. I imagine the kid on the bike had achieved his destiny by then so we will probably never know.

I did a quick google search on full name. He would be 83 or so today if he were still alive. I didn't see anything definitive though in my very cursory search. :-(

[Camel Joe]

Thanks, just found it myself, the USS NC is too wide of beam to pass through the Panama Canal isn’t it?

[Moose4]

I *think* they’re the first two of the Iowa class. The North Carolina and her sister ships are mentioned in the article as already under construction. But I can’t remember if there was another intermediate class of BB in between those or not.

}:-)4

[Moose4]

Nope. From the USS North Carolina Battleship Memorial website:

Hull Number: BB 55
Keel Laid: October 27, 1937
Launched: June 13, 1940
Commissioned: April 9, 1941
Decommissioned: June 27, 1947
Length: 728 feet 5/8 inches long
Extreme Beam: 108 feet 3 7/8 inches wide
Mean Draught: 31 feet 7 inches normal, 35 feet 6 inches maximum
Displacement: 36,600 tons standard, 44,800 tons full load
Complement: 2,339 (144 officers and 2,195 enlisted)
Speed: 28 knots
Armament: 9 16-inch/45 caliber guns
20 5-inch/38 caliber guns
60 40mm/56 caliber guns
48 20mm/70 caliber guns

So with the article saying the Canal was 110 feet wide, she’d fit. Barely.

}:-)4

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

The article states that 6 ships of the North Carolina Class were under construction, that these two new ships would be nearly 30 percent larger, unless it was decided to make them North Carolina Class size. If they were larger they would have been the first two members of the Iowa class.

[Camel Joe]

I can tell you it was a great tour for a 14 year old kid back in the 70’s! There was mention in the article of the new ships being designed for canal transit and the NC is considerably wider. If my tech wasn’t so pathetic I could post pictures...

[KarlInOhio]

The 6 other ships mentioned are the two previous classes: North Carolina and South Dakota.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battleships_of_the_United_States_Navy#North_Carolina_class

[pabianice]

More than coincidence? You decide.

[Eye of Unk]

Japanese battleship Musashi Displacement: 68,200 tons 72,800(max) tons Length: 263 m (863 ft) overall 256 m (840 ft) waterline Beam: 38.9 m (127.8 ft) Draft: 11 m (36 ft) at full load Propulsion: 12 Kanpon boilers, driving 4 steam turbines 150,000 shp (110 MW) four 3-bladed 6.0 m propellers Speed: 27.46 knots (50.86 km/h) Range: 7,200 nmi. at 16 kt (13,000 km at 30 km/h) Complement: 2,399 Armament August 1942 (as built): 9 × 460 mm (18.1 in) (3×3) 12 × 155 mm (6.1 in) (4×3) 12 × 127 mm (5 in) (6×2) 24 × 25 mm AA (8×3) 4 × 13 mm (2×2) Armament October 1944 (as sunk): 9 × 460 mm (18.1 in) (3×3) 6 × 155 mm (6.1 in) (2×3) 12 × 127 mm (5 in) (6×2) 130 × 25 mm AA (32×3, 34×1) 4 × 13 mm (2×2) Armor: 650 mm on front of turrets 410 mm (16.1 in) side armor 200 mm (8 in) central deck armor 226.5 mm (9.06 in) outer deck armor Aircraft carried: 7, 2 catapults

[Eye of Unk]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Musashi

[rednesss]

6 years is all they got out of it??? Not much of a useful lifespan.