[hchutch]

While the JDAM has lessened the acuteness of the need for battleships, I have yet to see an aircraft that can remain on station for a long period of time, and take the abuse a battleship can - and then still accomplish its mission.

As Sergei Gorshkov put it: "You Americans do not realize what formidable warships you have in these four battleships. We have concluded after careful analysis that these magnificent ships are in fact the most to be feared in your entire naval arsenal. When engaged in combat we could throw everything we have at those ships and all our firepower would bounce off or be of little effect. Then when we are exhausted, we will detect you coming over the horizon and then you will sink us."

[Poohbah]

As Sergei Gorshkov put it: "You Americans do not realize what formidable warships you have in these four battleships. We have concluded after careful analysis that these magnificent ships are in fact the most to be feared in your entire naval arsenal. When engaged in combat we could throw everything we have at those ships and all our firepower would bounce off or be of little effect. Then when we are exhausted, we will detect you coming over the horizon and then you will sink us."

First, I sincerely doubt Gorshkov ever said that. The capital ship of the Soviet Navy was the submarine, and (a) submarines are not vulnerable to being sunk by a battleship, and (b) the Soviet Navy could very well sink a battleship without unduly straining themselves. 4 Type 65 wake-homing torpedoes would be enough to mission-kill a battleship--one nuclear torpedo would be enough to sink it outright.

Second, the battleship is simply not logistically supportable in this day and age, and reconstituting the logisitic support infrastructure would probably cost less than providing same for a new-build fire support vessel with the latest technology.