Posted on 09/18/2006 7:41:46 PM PDT by neverdem
On Dec. 4, 1983, 28 aircraft from the USS Independence Carrier Battle Group attacked Hezbollah and Syrian anti-aircraft positions in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley. Two U.S. Navy A-7s were lost on the mission and a third aircraft was damaged. One of the downed pilots died of wounds in captivity and the other, Lt. Robert Goodman, was taken prisoner and paraded before the cameras. Though Lt. Goodman was eventually released, the U.S. Navy had learned a hard lesson.
Ten days later, U.S. reconnaissance flights were fired on again -- but this time the response was different. Instead of launching air strikes, the battleship USS New Jersey opened fire -- and with just 11 2,700-pound, 16-inch rounds, silenced the anti-aircraft sites. This feat was repeated on Feb. 8, 1984, when Syrian artillery opened fire on Christian West Beirut -- inflicting heavy civilian casualties. Less than two hours of fire from the New Jersey's 16-inch guns eliminated the Syrian artillery threat. It wouldn't be the last time the World War II-era "battlewagons" would serve our national interests.
During the 1981-1988 Iran-Iraq War, the Ayatollahs running Tehran decided the best way to influence the outcome of the conflict was to attack Western oil tankers transiting the Persian Gulf -- through which passes 20 percent of the world's oil. The United States responded by beefing up the 5th Fleet -- and deploying the USS Iowa. The battleship's captain, Larry Sequist, described the effectiveness of the 45,000-ton armored behemoth: "When we would sail the Iowa down the Strait of Hormuz, all southern Iran would go quiet. Iran's Revolutionary Guards were steaming around in boats with rockets, shooting at ships. When we arrived, all of that stuff stopped."
When Saddam invaded Kuwait in August 1990, the battleship Wisconsin was among the first capital ships to arrive in the Persian Gulf. By the time Operation Desert Storm concluded on Feb. 28, 1991, the Wisconsin and her sister battleship, USS Missouri, had delivered more than 1 million pounds of ordnance on the enemy from their 16-inch guns, Tomahawk TLAM-C cruise missiles and 5-inch gun batteries. Fire from the battleships was so overwhelming that an Iraqi garrison actually surrendered to one of the USS Wisconsin's unmanned aerial vehicles.
Despite the effectiveness of the vessels in modern warfare -- and pleas from the U.S. Marine Corps to retain them for Naval Surface Gunfire Support -- two of the four battleships, the New Jersey and the Missouri, were decommissioned and turned into floating museums. Until now, however, Congress has insisted that the Wisconsin and Iowa be maintained in "a state of readiness" for "rapid reactivation" in the "event of a national emergency."
But all that may be about to change. A House-Senate Conference Committee is now considering lifting the requirement that the last two "heavy gun" ships in the allied arsenal be kept ready for action. Apparently the lessons of recent history have been lost on the administration -- and perhaps even in the corridors of Congress -- despite new threats from Iran to acquire nuclear weapons and interfere with shipping in the Persian Gulf.
Just three weeks ago, Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval craft attacked a Romanian oil rig, assaulted the offshore platform and briefly took the crew hostage before evicting them. And last week, as President Bush was preparing to remind the world of the threat posed by Tehran, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a cheering crowd of supporters that "Iran has the ability to control the flow of oil the world needs."
Given the Jihad being waged against the West in much of the Islamic littoral, Iranian "saber rattling" and the lack of any replacement for the well-protected firepower of the Wisconsin and Iowa, turning them into floating museums now seems foolhardy. Yet, according to the green-eyeshade procurement wizards at the Pentagon, the two remaining battleships are too old, too expensive to operate and too costly in crew size to be deployed.
Instead of keeping the heavily-armored battlewagons maintained and ready, the brass at the five-sided puzzle palace and big spenders on Capitol Hill want the Marines to bide their time until 2012, when the Navy says it will deploy seven new DDG-1000 class destroyers -- at $3.3 billion apiece. These slower, thin-skinned vessels are to be equipped with an unproven Advanced Gun System designed to fire rounds weighing only 63 pounds but costing nearly $100,000 each. Even if the new ships eventually perform as advertised by their promoters, that's scant solace to the soldier or Marine who needs naval gunfire support at any point during the next six years.
People in Washington who ought to know better -- like Sen. John Warner, R-Va., the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee -- have turned a deaf ear to the plight of the Marines. Thankfully, a handful of stalwarts led by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., have taken up the cause of preserving the Wisconsin and Iowa as mobilization assets. He believes that keeping the battlewagons ready to fight will save American lives. He's right.
>>> That said, I'd stand in line to stand an underway watch on one.
I have been on the IOWA, at sea. I would gladly join you to do it again.
Efficiency. As technology changes, so must the mix and means of employing it. Ask yourself why the F22 was developed. Is it another piece on the chess board, or does it replace one.
Because it's expensive to keep bases open that aren't needed, and expensive to maintain weapons systems that are obsolete or don't fit into the current or future anticipated force structure.
Every dollar spent keeping up old gear or keeping open a underutilized base is a dollar not spent killing naughty muslims.
Seriously, massive guns, lots of them, advanced air defenses, massive armor that could take hits.. and lots of them.
Call them sea-hulks for all their raging raw power (damn that just sounds cool).
and yes, it'd scare the crap out of anyone thinking about messing with us.
There is emotion attached to many weapons systems. But you must ask the Marines why they are still attached to these. I suspect it is simply because they are still useful. Planes have not so far replaced artillery, in part because the air force and navy want to use something other than troop support. Better a knife in the hand than a gun across the room.
As an architect/inventor, I've got a couple of ideas for much faster and smaller ships, ie, outside the box concepts in marine propulsion : familiar things seen in unfamiliar ways. Will only communicate them privately.
Iwoa class Battleships have been in 4 wars WW2, K, V, DS and never damaged by enemy fire. The Iwoa class battleship is probably the finest capital warship ever built. The destructive power of her 16" guns beats anything short of a nuke. Want to get someone's attention? Park an Iwoa class battleship off thier coast.
It's not a matter of men as much as it is material. There's no high tech in riveting and welding. The big problem is that the only mill in Pittsburgh that could and did roll armor was converted into a water slide park several years ago.
NAMSMAN sends.
I think the platform could be built, again. Why not start building the USS Montana BB-67 again? The Montana was slated to have 12 16 inch guns, before it was canceled. The Montana could be built with modern engineering and electonics.
Unfortunately (for discussion purposes) and fortunately (for national security purposes), all data relating to the design vulnerability and survivability testing of U.S. Navy ships is classified at the Secret level. Has been that way since the end of WWII.
We build them very strong but we are not about to tell the enemy just how strong.
awesome pic
"Seriously, massive guns, lots of them, "
What you really want are the new generation railguns that are kinetic energy devices you can maybe rapid fire if you have a big electrical plant.
If I recall the cost of a Battleship at sea for a year was less than what is spent on one Space Shuttle mission.
I would rather have one less space shuttle mission per year and keep a battleship
LOL! Thanks for the BOOM!
Why can't we get more combat vets into office so this isn't a re-occuring problem?
I was mostly leaning toward the proplusion system. That could be improved to save money. IOWA and her sisters would have to be almost split in half to do it. That's why I thought it might be better to start with the Montana class.
The reason I said to start with Montana is that USS Montana and USS Kentucky BB-68 were canceled. Kentucky was used for parts for other ships.
In the fifties, the bow on the Wisconsin was damaged when it rammed another ship. The ship-yard cut the bow off of the canceled Kentucky and welded it on to Wisconsin. Years later, the USS Detroit AOE-4 was built with the Kentucky's boilers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.