Bid for WWII ship hits rough waters ( USS Iowa )

Sacramento Bee ^ | 9/5/10 | Jeff Mitchell

[SmithL]

VALLEJO

[null and void]

As to being able to hit something anywhere near that far away, it would depend on the nature of the "shell". If it was mostly second stage and guidance, (don't need anywhere near that much warhead to kill an ICBM RV) it might be able to achieve both the range/altitude and be able to hit the target.

There's probably enough of a knowledge base left over from the Copperhead program that would map over nicely.

[El Gato]

There's probably enough of a knowledge base left over from the Copperhead program that would map over nicely.

And far more recent programs as well.

[glorgau]

I’d like to see it in Chicago.

Fat chance I know, but I’d still think it would be cool if done with someone else’s money.

[BenLurkin]

Nuclear power plant. State of the art “Aegis” system. State of the art electronic counter measures, lasers and missiles. New ammo for the main batteries.

Sail her up and down the coast of Red China 24/7, 365/year.

[null and void]

Probably. Not needing a clear path for the shaped charge right through the middle of the electronics package probably helps a lot too.

A 50 lb cloud of BBs in the path of the re-entry vehicle would probably suffice!

[Jay W]

Long ago it was standard practice to send an old decommissioned ship to ship-breakers who would tear it apart so that the scrap steel could be re-used. In the process, valuable history was literally destroyed.

By the 1960s enlightened people were able to save a few of the remaining ships, mainly those from the WW2 era, making them into museums. I’ve toured the USS Alabama and the USS North Carolina, and there are few things more awesome than an old battleship.

Sad to say, not only is California broke, but it has long been unenlightened where AMERICAN history is concerned. A battleship is politically incorrect, especially to state legislators, excepting perhaps a few Republicans.

The USS IOWA would be rather difficult to transport to the State of Iowa, for obvious reasons, but there is no reason why it has to end up in California.

[null and void]

I’d like to see it in Chicago.

Co-located with the Barak Hussein Obama, Jr. Presidential Library?

[null and void]

The USS IOWA would be rather difficult to transport to the State of Iowa,

It would look great parked at Davenport.

[RachelFaith]

Your information is 20 years outdated. At least. In the 90’s before these ships were decommissioned again, tests were conducted using 115 mile range guided 11-inch sabot rounds. This was part of the first Gulf War missile intersection testing.

In these intervening years, the sabot rounds have incorporated GPS and are accurate to within 3 meters in space at 100 miles of range.

Using a “shotgun” burst shell, and firing 18 shots per minute using all guns, which are independently targetable, you can hit many missiles for a micro fraction of the cost of 1 missile to missile firing.

Cheaper. Faster. Longer ranged. This is a 21st century Battleship.

[RachelFaith]

Ping to 29. And google will give you hundreds of articles to review on the subject.

[mad_as_he$$]

The Iowas ARE the most beautiful ships ever built.

[driftdiver]

I was fortunate enough to have a tour of the Iowa shortly before the #1 turret blew up. They took us into the second turret and explained the process. A pretty amazing ship and I wish I had been allowed to take pictures.

[fso301]

Using a “shotgun” burst shell, and firing 18 shots per minute using all guns, which are independently targetable, you can hit many missiles for a micro fraction of the cost of 1 missile to missile firing.

Only problem is, the circle of protection is based on the ships location. As a CVN protection platform there might be a role but there are far more CVN's in service than BB's. Furthermore, such spaceguns could be mounted atop other less expensive vessels.

[Paleo Conservative]

I don't see any point in wasting perfectly good ammunition.

Wasting? There's nothing else that shoots 16" ammunition. It would be a waste to have it decommissioned unused.

[Political Junkie Too]

USS Iowa in Suisun Bay.

And to move the Iowa to Mare Island, the channels and approaches will have to be dredged, a time-consuming and costly impediment.

That alone will be used by environmentalists to kill the plan.

-PJ

[glorgau]

Co-located with the Barak Hussein Obama, Jr. Presidential Library?

Nah, Navy Pier. Or maybe by Shedd Aquarium.

[tanknetter]

Source please? (Not that I doubt you, but I'd sure like to be able to cite it!)

Back in the 1970s there was a project called "HAARP" (I think, High Altitude something something Projectile. Maybe) that was using two Iowa-class 16" rifles welded together end-to-end to pop shells up to the edge (and maybe into?) space.

Obviously that won't work for an actual Iowa, because they could never have the structure necessary to handle the kind of rig used in HAARP. Nor could their turrets be elevated high enough.

The Iowas saw all kinds of experimental or small-batch shells over the years. One of them was apparently on the way to Korea with the nuke shells when that war ended (Ike let that little fact be known as an incentive to the NKs to take the peace tals seriously). There was also a 13" subcaliber sabot shell designed to put submunitions onto a target at a range of about 40 miles. Iowa's turret 2 was supposed to be the test crew/turret for this, prior to the explosion ... and during the events leading to the explosion they were playing around with popping off 16" shells using reduced numbers of propellant bags (the load was supposed to be six bags, but they were using 5 during the shoot that resulted in the explosion).

The most interesting was the 11" subcaliber sabot shell that DARPA had designed. It was supposed to be GPS-guided and have a range of about 100 miles. Unfortunately, this was a "paper panzer" and didn't get off the drawing boards prior to the class being put back into mothballs.

There's actually a really decent solution to this situation with the Iowa. They could follow the model used with the Wisconsin and dock her at an existing naval museum, allow visitors onto her open decks but otherwise keep her sealed up. Basically a no-cost option other than the tow (and maybe a good repainting prior to going on display - although her teak decks are likely a real mess at this point and will be tres expensive to replace). Good candidates would be next to the Midway at San Diego (as mentioned) or Hornet at Oakland.

[Eye of Unk]

I think it should be kept in total sea shape, what people don’t know is that our enemies will use mass versus our technical prowess, they will use quantity versus our quality, and our ships are pretty darn advanced but it can also be a weakness with sabotaged computer programs and EMP.

The ships of this era had the most basic of computers for getting the shells on target, at the time an outstanding achievement of engineering, but we should keep the ship, add as many close in weapon systems like the gatling guns, it would survive almost any attempt at its lower level from a suicide boat bomber belt as the ships were massively armored below the waterline. I don’t think any of our current fleet of naval vessels have the thickness of armor that the Missouri Class of battleships had.

And then there is a new concept, installing a railgun on a naval ship that can truly indeed strike a mach 7 projectile.

[Eye of Unk]

I meant Iowa class of battleships. I always think of the Missouri when I first see a battleship.

[tanknetter]

The ships of this era had the most basic of computers for getting the shells on target, at the time an outstanding achievement of engineering, but we should keep the ship, add as many close in weapon systems like the gatling guns, it would survive almost any attempt at its lower level from a suicide boat bomber belt as the ships were massively armored below the waterline. I don’t think any of our current fleet of naval vessels have the thickness of armor that the Missouri Class of battleships had.

The son of next door neighbors growing up was assigned to the Missouri in the late 1980s, right after her reactivation. He said that, next to the 16" rifles and the plaque on her Surrender Deck, the thing that interested visitors the most was the small dent in her side where a kamikaze had hit, and disintegrated, in 1945.

Now, understand this about the Iowa-class BBs: they had an internal armor arrangement. That means that their main armor belt was located inside the hull of the ship, rather than bolted onto the outside (as was the case with some of the other battleship classes). So what the kamikaze had really hit, and disintegrated against leaving a small dent, was her outer hull plating, NOT her armor belt.

The only ships in the USN that have protection (I'm not using the word "armor" here for a reason. Read on ...) equivalent to if not better than an Iowa are the carriers. While they do carry some armor (steel on the flight and hangar decks, the later Nimitz class have kevlar armor various places), their main source of protection is compartmentalization that will absorb and contain a hit, rather than multiple inches of steel that will deflect one.