Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BenLurkin
It would be a hell of a lot cheaper than what we're doing now. The main reason brass and contractors seem to hate the battleships is not enough money/pork in it.

Me, I'd keep two of the 16" turrets and put one of Gerald Bull's super guns on the third turret for shooting people I really, really, really didn't like. I'd probably keep two of the double 5" mounts on either side, updated, and make the rest of the 5" mounts into phalanx systems. All of that would leave plenty of room for Tomahawks and anything else appropriate.

50 posted on 02/01/2006 7:18:52 PM PST by ironwoodchuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: ironwoodchuck

I know the Wisconsin already had a verticle launch system installed instead of the outboard mounted tomahawks.


62 posted on 02/01/2006 10:12:24 PM PST by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: ironwoodchuck

Battleships have one big advantage the new ships lack – really good thick armor. If a small boat (or torpedo or cruise missile) did get through it would anger the sailors because they’d have to hang over the side and repaint the scorch mark.


80 posted on 02/02/2006 3:08:58 AM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson