Should the remaining iowa class battleships be reactivated?

Question

I have now checked into this idea for a Year now and i fouind out that.

1. An Iowa class battleship has way to much armor to be pierced by Cruise missle or harpoon.

2. The modern guns of the Battleship can rip a modern destroyer/cruiser in half, and a CV would be dead in the water after one hit.

3.True battleships can be targeted by Subs but that is why you usually have battleships screened by a destroyer or with subs, just like with any carrier fleet today.

4. Modern advances in the battleships could be made today at the cost little since ramjet projectiles have already been successfully tested and fired at 100nm.

5. Arguing the Battleships reactivation cost is useless since reactivation and modernization together costs as much as a mdoern missle frigate.

6. Manpower is a joke since it takes 5000+ men to run a CV when a Iowa class Battleship takes 1,921 men at maxmium capacity (minimum is 800+)

7. A battleship can make decisions easier when invading on a beach easier than a destroyer using tomahawk missles.

8. Battleships have All weather status and are not affected by any kind of weather including hurricanes.

9. a Battleships will only take 1-2 million a year to maintain. at the same time a aircraft carrier cost's several Millions to replace missles and aircraft.

10. Reactivation and Modernization will only take 1-2 years.

11. Reactivation costs are $500 million and modernization is $2 billion.

12. To further Technology of the Battleships would cost an additional million if not less for the projectiles to be but into production.

13. True no such personell know or are trained to operate a battleship main gun but can easily be taught.

14. some reportes have indicated a battleship's main guns could be used as anti aircraft if the time detonation fuzes could be computer operated with it's target and shoot 10mm sabot shells plus shrapnel when shell explodes.

15. Some 5" guns on the battleships could be removed to put more Phalanx CIWS on the ship to inprove it's anti-aircraft/ anti missile capabilies.

16. No ship or missile in the world is designed to take out the battleship with one shot or with many massed attacks.

17. Battleship Survivability since they use STS (special treated steel) of belt armor reinforced by large Bulk heads and Barbettes.

True The Turrent on the USS Iowa did explode but it only did so little damage to the ship that it can easily be repaired and which was considered in the Gao Reports i read so that turrent has already been included into the math.

19. True Air Supeiority is nessicary but when it comes down to shore bombardment, Planes can be intercepted, sometimes ineffective economically and phyisically, and usually avoided by the enemy until the marines come on up to the shore to attack.

Currently building new battleships would be.....truely expensive depending upon thier armaments and capabilities.

21. Surface ships were built for Naval presence, if we did not want Naval presence we would have built the arsenal ship back then but it can down to the fact that the arsenal ship could be easily struck by one harpoon missile and probably blow up the whole ship because of it's weak armor and heavy armament beyond it's own defensive capabilities to protect exposed weapons whereas the battleship can protect it's magazine and it's missiles with several anti-air/missile weapons and thick enough armor to make sure they don't explode by the bullet.

22.Iowa class battleships today cannot be compared with the ships of yesterday due to the fact that technology back then againest aircraft was completely ineffective in most cases whereas today trying to hit a destroyer with a single harpoon is almost impossible but massed attacks would sink a destroyer after 1-3 hits of harpoons.

Answer 1

We no longer need to control the seas as we did during the battleships heyday. Now it is important to control the skies...and if you can control the skies, you control the sea also.

You mention that battleships can fire on targets within a 100 nautical mile radius...which is a quarter of the radius that an aircraft carrier can strike.

It's sad to see a generation go but with the effectiveness of the carrier fleet, we need to let the dinosaurs die out.

Answer 2

The most important thing to control the seas is to control the skys above, not just the surface. The battleship may have less crew but their is a problem with your theory. WHERE in the world is the navy going to get men for the ship, a good chunk of the surface fleet has been sent to the mothball fleet because the navy dose not have the manpower to support them, how in the world are we going to supply a good crew and giving the ship their minimal number needed is not a number the navy will not accept at all. Then the time it will take to upgrade the ship. The most advance ships of the class is 1991 and that means a overhaul of the ship and more money to pay for the replacing outdated things and upgrading others. Next the US public will not like another oil-drinker in the US armed forces. That thing still runs on the its original engines and takes a lot of oil to run, more money in the defense budget going to gas. the nuclear engine is cheaper because the engine dose not need a fill up until 25 years later, cheap in the long run. Next, were are you going to store the ships around the world. Their are so little number of big enough docks that would accept them at all. Then the PR of seeing one of the Iowa class sink the worst is the USS Missouri (The battleship the Japanese surrendered on). The best thing is to let them sit in their place and allow them to rest as silent reminder of the days gone past. Their will be a better carrier that will be coming out and are a whole lot better then the Iowa class and are older carriers known as CVN-21, look it up. It needs even less manpower thanks to automation, a large area of aircraft that can launch off the deck without causeing the damage that the steam catapult that makes the more work hours for the naval planes over the land-based aircraft. The days of the Battleships of the Iowa Class are over, but maybe a new battleship class can be made for the 21st century

Answer 3

Iowa Class Battleship Specs

Answer 4

As much as I love battleships (my favorite ship type) I don't see bringing back the Iowas into service. But as new technologies become available I do see a reinvention of the battleship come out.

The key to this is rail-guns. RGs have the ability to have large ranges making such weapons much cheaper than missiles or aircraft and such ships can stay on site much longer.

Example, designing a new battleship with improved armor, stealth features and arming it several (maybe six to eight) RGs, a few missiles, and AA and ASW capabilities would make a very effective fighting ship. New technologies would also reduce crew possibly making the ship have a crew about the size of a cruiser or destroyer, or even less.

Answer 5

The simple fact of the matter is that every one of these missions can be performed for less money using our current destroyers and cruisers.

There are a number of other issues you have to consider:

1) The powerplants on the existing battleships are worn out and new ones would have to be designed and built from scratch.

2) The turret on the USS Wisconsin was damaged in an explosion - and we would have to re-invent the technology of building Battleship turrets in order to repair it.

3) Modern missiles have ranges in excess of 100nm. And using a 'pop up' style terminal attack the missile will strike from above - bypassing the armor belt.

Answer 6

yes right now and all the other battleships we have including uss texas adding modern cws and new 5inch secondary whee the existing 5 inchers are tune up the engines and electronics leave all the main 14inch and 16inc guns intact with analog fire control system incase emp weapons are used and we have the most powerfull ships afloat again i believe the battleships definatly have a 21st century role i cant stand all the stupid comentors that immediatlhy come onto this subject and skepticize and spread false negative info about the battleships being obsolete they like to sound like they know what they are talking about and they dont its always the same dumbasses that chime in dont even bother to read their scoffer remarks just look at their avatars and you will see their mentality is next nothing just punks should go back into the closet where they came out of if you get my drift

Answer 7

Back in the '80s when I was in high-school, then President Reagan touted the Iowa class re-activation as a necessity to counter the Soviet Kirov class Battle cruisers. One of the articles I saw was for a proposed phase-2 variant that removed the rear turret and replaced the rear deck with a VSTOL flight deck holding about 20 combat and support aircraft. Adding LAMPS helo's would solve a lot of the anti-submarine problems. The hybrid battle carrier would make an excellent Spec-Ops platform, and when they extract the spec-ops team, who would want to chase them?! The big problem is targetability, it's not so impossible to sink them. (Remember Pearl Harbor and the German Battleship Bismark, the Bis was considered to be unsinkable in her day)
Where the Battleship stands out is as a weapons platform, it's a big, tough hull, and you can mount anything on it. As we invent new weapons systems, carriers and battleships are easier to base them off of. I though it was grandstanding to bring them back in the first place. It was just plain stupid to de-activate them again. Bring them back and keep them back in service. There's alot they can still do, even in this modern, electronic world.

Answer 8

1. The BBs are all oil burners and not one of them has a gas turbine engine. Compared to smaller surface ships they are lumbering war ships.
2. No major beach landings are planned now or in the immediate future, so their role as major gunfire support ships for such operations is moot.
3. There are no nations with major fleets that could bring about a naval battle on the order of what you envision. Most of the vaunted "Red Banner" fleet of the former Soviet Union is rusting at the piers.

Answer 9

Sorry but this argument was over in June of 1942 at the battle of Midway. Carriers decisively proved that Naval Air Power was far better at power projection that the battle wagons of old

Only in off shore bombardment does the battleship still reign supreme. While it costs more to build, equip and man a carrier, it is far more useful and can complete numerous missions that the Battleships cannot.

Answer 10

As much money as the government spends on weapons and technology and then gives it away, i dont see why we cant take a battleship modernize it and use it as we are the only country that still has them, as for people to man them whats the issue? Theres still BB sailors from 92 that know there stuff probably be happy to show younger generation.