LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats.cruising
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
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Typical Motorboater Wilbur Hubbard Cruising 6 June 13th 09 04:02 AM
Typical Democrats Joe ASA 6 May 26th 07 02:16 PM
Typical ASA post #2 Peter J Ross ASA 0 September 4th 03 03:21 PM
Typical ASA Post #1 Peter J Ross ASA 3 September 4th 03 10:46 AM
Typical Scout ASA 52 July 10th 03 06:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017