Germany to get new air defense system, battleships

dailymail.co.uk ^ | 9 June 2015 | Associated Press

[Berlin_Freeper]

BERLIN (AP) — Germany plans to acquire a new air defense system and four new battleships over the coming years for a total of nearly 8 billion euros ($8.9 billion).

[Army Air Corps]

I saw the movie a year or so ago and thought it wasn’t bad (I agree that the visuals were pretty nice). Not excellent, but not horrible, either. I’ll keep an eye out for the new versions of the series.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Your bookshelf is complete !

[tanknetter]

“Whats a design like that doing in outer space?”

It’s off to save the human race.

Dontcha know?

[Army Air Corps]

It was made from the wreck of the battleship Yamato.

[tanknetter]

Drop me a pm later tonight and I’ll after im home ill dig out the link and post it.

[Army Air Corps]

Now, the theme music is playing in my head (both the English and Japanese versions). By the way, have you ever heard the original Japanese version of the Speed Racer theme music? It’s pretty cool.

[GOPJ]

Have they woken up to the fact that Obama will NOT defend them? What was their first clue?

[SZonian]

USS Iowa at San Pedro.

I haven’t been on it yet, but I guess the plywood is down to protect that actual deck?

[tanknetter]

The “super dreadnoughts” were before the Fast BBs (which started with the North Carolinas). I can’t remember if they started, for the US with the Nevada or Arizona classes. Nevadas, I think, with the all-or-nothing armoring scheme.

Technically that means the last US dreadnoughts were the New Yorks (New York and Texas)

[Forward the Light Brigade]

Maybe with the new missle enhanced shells. A battleship might not be a bad thing—it can take a punch and give back a whole lot more. That or atleast a full gun crusier with 8 inch guns. Everything old is new again.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

Why does Germany need so many deep diver U-boats? They can dive so deep we can’t find them! lets hope we never find out.

[central_va]

Be nice to ships again with a hint of defensive armor.

[tanknetter]

You’re welcome ;-)

Not sure about the Speed Racer theme. I’ve seen episodes in the original Japanese (which I don’t understand), but I don’t recall the music being that much different.

Speed, Starblazers and Battle of the Planets were my weekday after-school entertainment growing up. Voltron (the lions one) was sort of my last-hurrah exit point ... never got into Macross/Robotech. Which, in retrospect, seems really cool as well.

[Redmen4ever]

Central, you're insisting on the precise definition. "Battleships" are the equivalent of the Ship-of-the-Line of the sailing era. They're designed to go up against their counterpart. Hence, big guns and lots of armor. During the battleship era, "destroyer" and "cruiser" were smaller, less armored, fast ships (battleship could be either fast or slow). Although often used as escorts, they are capable of independent action on the oceans of the world. During WWII, battleships were re-purposed as escorts and shore bombardment ships; under Reagan, they were revived as cruise missile launch pads. The re-purposing of battleships signified that they were no loner the equivalent of the Ship-of-the-line of the sailing era. Without battleships out there, there was no point to defining destroyers and cruisers by contrast to battleships. This is why a wide range of surface combat ships are today called a "destroyer." In this sense, a destroyer isn't so much a weight class, but a blue ocean capable surface combat ship. The recently-launched USN Zumwalt is a "destroyer," when it should be a "cruiser." And, the Japanese Hyūga-class light carrier is a "destroyer." Ditto the South Korean Dokdo-class light carrier. We're holding the line on our light carriers, calling them amphibious assault ships rather than "destroyers." I should comment on "corvette" and "frigate." In the sailing era, a corvette was a coastal ship, perhaps the original littoral combat ship. And, frigates were small, fast man-of-war, not really capable of standing up to a Ship-of-line, but capable of independent action. Push forward, and during WWII, "frigate" referred to a weight class of escort vessel bigger than a destroyer and smaller than a cruiser. Think, "light-weight," "middle weight," "light heavy weight" and "heavy weight." Well, today "corvette" and "frigate" are escort vessels smaller than "destroyer. Think "bantam weight," "feather weight" and "light weight." Notice however that "frigate" and "destroyer" have flip-flopped.

[central_va]

frigate has one screw a destroyer 2 screws.

[tanknetter]

The problem with the BBs is the cost associated with the manpower and specialized training necessary to operate them.

And in a world of GPS-guided standoff weapons they aren’t anywhere near cost effective at doing anything relative to other available options.

About the best option would be to keep one in very limited operation as a training ship, like the Coast Guard does with the Eagle. But even that would be ridiculously expensive.

[tanknetter]

“had” one screw.

The next classes of USN “Frigates” (upgraded LCSes) will have waterjet propulsion ;-)

[Sherman Logan]

Actually, I think what they really mean to say is a warship or a combat ship.

AFAIK, battleship has a pretty specific meaning.

It originally meant a ship powerful enough to “lie in the line of battle,” back in the days when fleets fought in these formations. In the later days of sail this meant a two or three decker. They carried so many and heavy guns a less powerful ship such as a sloop or frigate would be overwhelmed in short order.

Of course, a ship of the line couldn’t normally catch a frigate...

[alfa6]

Montana

Think Iowa class with 12 16” 50 caliber rifles

Regards

alfa6 ;>}

[al baby]

They have been replacing the teak slowly it aint cheap losts of the deck under the plywood is real bad lots of trip factors