View Single Post
  #29   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
Vic Smith Vic Smith is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,312
Default Military Ships (was Your Typical Beneteau!)

On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 22:25:22 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:



Hi Joe,

It is true that armor would keep bullets out, but an Exocette with go
through that like so much cardboard.

The ships taken out by Exocets weren't battleships. Destroyers are
unarmored and often have aluminum superstructures.
But I agree that *all* surface ships are vulnerable during all out war
with a major power in this air/electronics age.
I think Billy Mitchell proved air supremacy in the 1920's
Battleships were and are excellent bombardment delivery systems.
I seem to recall each 16" shell is about 2000 pounds - I looked at
Wiki and they say 1900-2700 pounds.
Big problem is the manpower required to deliver the explosives.
This gives some perspective,
"When firing two broadsides per minute, a single Iowa-class battleship
can put 36,000 pounds (16,000 kg) of ordnance on a designated target
every minute, a figure that can only be matched by a single B-52
Stratofortress of the United States Air Force.[47] A B-52 can carry up
to 60,000 pounds (27,000 kg) of bombs, missiles, and mines, or any
combination thereof."
Putting aside all the other delivery issues like shell capacity before
re-arming and how many B-52's that can equal, the 3 turrets require
300 men total to operate. That's just the gun crews.
A B-52 has a 5 man crew.
A battleship is hugely expensive to build and operate for what you
get.
Anyway, there's all kinds of ways of looking at it. I kind of see it
as 3-D aircraft and subs versus 2-D ships.
The 3rd dimension element is a big advantage.
Bottom line is the BB's are all gone.
Even in WWII their role was limited to mostly Pacific island
bombardment. Though their presence affected strategies of fleet
movement, the carrier task groups were where the real action was.
They were magnificent machines of destruction though. Not just the
guns, but the other engineering that went into them.
BTW, sci.military.naval used to have some pretty good discussions on
this kind of thing.
But as has happened in many other groups, the political bull****ters
have made it a chore to read.

--Vic