phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
An invasion force of 2,000 Marines with Artillery, Armor, and Air to back them up.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
CVN Gary Hart
- Thread starter raptor10
- Start date
I visited the Washington Navy Yard museum this past weekend, and out in front there are slabs of Japanese 23" armor that the placard said was taken from Yokosuka shipyard after VJday and was intended for the next Yamato BB. They took it to Dahlgren and fired 16" shells at it from 10,000 yards for ballistics analysis. Holeeee shit..... I wish I had taken pics. I had no idea what a 2700lb 16" shell could do to armor that thick. Penetrated all the way through, and what was left was totally molten, jagged piece of metal.
A tomahawk can't go look and then decide not to blow up the place...
And the Psychological factor of 90,000 tons of diplomacy as well.
TACTOM can.
Though obviously you can't reuse it the way you can with an F-18. And they're also sorta limited to big bang or no bang.
No SDBs, 20mm, or whatever to limit collateral damage.
But then there's the possibility of having LCS type craft trolling around with a load of Tomahawks ready to go all over the world. Of course, they'd have to keep LCS costs down to make that possible.
Power projection. While sea control is important, the majority of operations these days take place inland and away from friendly bases. Only Naval air power can really address the requirements of the COCOMs in this type of warfare.
Brett
^ God, that's a beautiful picture -- should warm the heart of every Navy man. And woman, too ...
Was about to say the same thing...isn't that shock wave on the water great?
And how many tomahawks do we have? Maybe a swo can answer that... but my SWO friend was telling me about how his DDG never leaves with a full loadout.
Why do we need planes? That's an honest question. Yesterday I can answer for. Today is what I'm asking about. Tomorrow will be informed by Today.
In the same vein, with the shift to more focus on littoral warfare, as well as the need to combat piracy, such as that around the horn of Africa, would it not make sense to bring back the battleship? What would be the obstacles standing in the way for that to happen, because I can think of all kinds of things that it would help bring to the fight?
Obstacles? Money, manpower, and that they don't make the parts anymore and the guys that know how to run it are getting real old.
16" guns on a pirate are a bit overkill, no?
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
From "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates"
Rule 37. There is no "overkill". There is only "open fire" and "I need to reload."
Rule 37. There is no "overkill". There is only "open fire" and "I need to reload."
Speaking of awesome pictures how's about the shutter speed on this one?
I think we (the Navy) are fooling ourselves into beliveing that there's one ship/plane/helo that can do it all. Most of the time these days, it's making lemonade from lemons because a procurement program got driven into the ground and so we have to make do with what's left. If we could just overhaul the procurement system and get a diversity of weapons back into the military, we might get to stop agonizing over jack-of-all-trades platforms. But there's no way it's going to happen.
- The services keep changing requirements late in the game.
- There's more money to be made for the contractors in prolonging the problem than producing a product.
- Every congressman who's district isn't getting a piece of the program is determined to kill it (to show he's Tough on Government Waste, unless it's a pork project for his district) or help "his" companies litigate the living crap out of the contractor.
- The services keep changing requirements late in the game.
- There's more money to be made for the contractors in prolonging the problem than producing a product.
- Every congressman who's district isn't getting a piece of the program is determined to kill it (to show he's Tough on Government Waste, unless it's a pork project for his district) or help "his" companies litigate the living crap out of the contractor.
It's not a matter of fooling ourselves about anything. We have what we have because that's what we can afford. The current (and forseeable) requirements can not justify the cost of specialization. We are so far ahead of our most likely opponents in so many areas that it really doesn't make sense to specialize any more than we do. While I agree with your assessment of the procurement process, I think it's a symptom of our current reality - not the cause.
Brett
I think you misunderstand. I meant to reintroduce battleships, i.e. redesign and build new ones. The last battleship design(Iowa-class) introduced was in the 1940s. Methinks something better and more effective/capable could be thought up with the wonders of modern engineering. And you can always make new parts.
There's an idea for a new CGN being bruted about. I say, to hell with it, let's call 'em Battlecruisers. Muy macho. "The President of the United States has just sent a nuclear-powered guided missile battlecruiser to the shores of your pissant banana republic, so shape the eff up."