Distraction can be deadly

Every hear of the AEGIS AN/SPY-1 system? Heavy tech aboard guided missile cruisers, only reason why I asked.

Yep that's why the tin cans hang out with battleship or carrier our only mission on the frigate I was on was to protect the center of the battle group i.e. carrier, battleship, marine carrier kind of like a castle though the moat over or through the wall, well in all reality I was on a ship that was where the moat is......LOL but true.
 
Yep that's why the tin cans hang out with battleship or carrier our only mission on the frigate I was on was to protect the center of the battle group i.e. carrier, battleship, marine carrier kind of like a castle though the moat over or through the wall, well in all reality I was on a ship that was where the moat is......LOL but true.

Thanks for your service!!!

images[3].jpg

images[3].jpg
 
Yep, no need to update a 16" gun. It'll update whatever it hits.......or is near it.

There are some vulnerabilities to an Iowa Class BB. One, they have no Basic Point Defense Missile System. Their CIWS is good for a target up to 1486m away. Yet if that were an Exocet, Silkworm or worse a SSN-19 the 1486m would be useless. True we have Aegis Cruisers but as has always been the case something always gets through. Even with all our fighters, destroyers and anti-aircraft cruisers a couple of Kamikazes made it through.

In the Battle of Guadalcanal the South Dakota took 26 hits from 5" and 8" AP shells and one 14" AP hit. All these shells hit her superstructure and early on her fire control and internal communications were knocked out. When she left the battle she had only one operating radar, suffered serious top side damage and needed to be dry docked for repairs. An SSN-19, with 1000kg of explosives, would devastate a superstructure. The only armored places topside are the turrets and the conning tower. Needless to say you don't want to be near a shore where those kind of weapons reside.

Another weakness is her torpedo protection. Protection at her waterline is 1.5" of armor. Inboard she has 12" of Class B armor inclined at 19 degrees top to her triple bottom. Class B armor was found to not have enough flex to disperse the explosive gases of a torpedo hit. The armor would suffer cracks which could lead to water entering her main body. This armor is several feet inside the main hull leaving a lot of space to flood. I have seen that space aboard the Iowa when the lead planner for her modernization in the 80's showed me in 2011. Impressive but he also knows of that 1939 study on the Class B armor. It was said that the Class needed 6 more feet in beam and more compartment subdivisions back after she was built. Too impratical then and more so now.

Today's torpedo is a different breed from the Japanese Long Lance of WWII. There are enough videos out there showing what happens to a warship when hit with a US torpedo during a SinkEx. Now suppose the torpedo had a shaped charge. Such a charge could be deadly to her magazines especially the one for Turret A which is very near the hull. Think USS Arizona. A shaped charge would cut right through that 12" inclined armor. We know that the SSN-19 can carry a 1000kg shaped charge. Don't even want to think about what that could do especially given that most of the ship's crew is in the lightly protected superstructure.

Below the 12" armor bulkhead and how it is attached along with a side shot showing the angle. The ship is 108' wide on the outside but she is only 80' wide on the inside. Why was she not wider? One speed and two the Panama Canal.

Iowa_223.jpg


Iowa_224.jpg
 
Battery 9 rounds of 16" guns......that's like shooting 9 Volkswagon's through the air at the same time. The battleship pushes back 1,000 feet when it shoots a Battery 9. Now this is BADASS!!!!
That description always intrigued me. I guess they mean weight (2240 lbs.) as the round is only 16" in diameter and slightly less tall then my 73". We have a storage hold down on deck 4, on the Hornet, with 16" shells we picked up.
 
That description always intrigued me. I guess they mean weight (2240 lbs.) as the round is only 16" in diameter and slightly less tall then my 73". We have a storage hold down on deck 4, on the Hornet, with 16" shells we picked up.

Thanks for sharing.

Those 16" rounds are massive compared to the 8" rounds we shoot on land. However....we have 2 different nuke rounds we can fire. When President Reagan told Gorbachev that the U.S. would use tactical battlefield nukes in Europe he was specifically talking about our 8" Howitzers.

M110-203mm.jpg

M110-203mm.jpg
 
We had to offload, I don't know how many, shells underway passing them via helicopter to another ship staying in the area. Had a working party to carry them from the for'castle to the helo deck, those were about 75# maybe 30" long 5" rounds on a rocking and rolling deck and up a set of stairs. If you saw the movie battleship them heaving that shell is a joke. I remember seeing those 16" ers on the peir in the Philippines at the ordinance depot when we were doing something with our puny 5" rounds LOL. BTW Bob Thank You for your service while I was on a 5 yr cruise you guys were doing the dirty work pun intended
 
We had to offload, I don't know how many, shells underway passing them via helicopter to another ship staying in the area. Had a working party to carry them from the for'castle to the helo deck, those were about 75# maybe 30" long 5" rounds on a rocking and rolling deck and up a set of stairs. If you saw the movie battleship them heaving that shell is a joke. I remember seeing those 16" ers on the peir in the Philippines at the ordinance depot when we were doing something with our puny 5" rounds LOL. BTW Bob Thank You for your service while I was on a 5 yr cruise you guys were doing the dirty work pun intended

Thanks!

smiley-face-soldier[1].gif

smiley-face-soldier[1].gif
 
I too have noticed in the last few years how the majority of people...especially in the dense urban cities...are always "plugged in". That is they are either on the phone, talking, texting, or have ear buds in listen to lord knows what. People can't be alone with there own thoughts anymore....what would you do if it was quiet and you had nothing to distract yourself.....Umm I don't know..maybe look at the world around you, stop and listen to the beauty of silence, and maybe THINK!

I like the saying, "Only reason people get lost in thought, is because it's unfamiliar territory."
 
. People can't be alone with there own thoughts anymore....what would you do if it was quiet and you had nothing to distract yourself.....Umm I don't know..maybe look at the world around you, stop and listen to the beauty of silence, and maybe THINK!
."

That's right to the point what I'm thinking and I just don't get it. I just spent about 4 hours polishing a car from front to back, just alone with my thoughts and I didn't even need music for dispersal.
 
Thanks for sharing.

Those 16" rounds are massive compared to the 8" rounds we shoot on land. However....we have 2 different nuke rounds we can fire. When President Reagan told Gorbachev that the U.S. would use tactical battlefield nukes in Europe he was specifically talking about our 8" Howitzers.

View attachment 18639
Forgive my ignorance, but how do friendlies get out of the way of a tactical nuke?? In my mind "tactical" means eye ball to eye ball right? So if someone lights off a nuke in the same area your troops occupy......well, explain please. Run like hell??
 
Forgive my ignorance, but how do friendlies get out of the way of a tactical nuke?? In my mind "tactical" means eye ball to eye ball right? So if someone lights off a nuke in the same area your troops occupy......well, explain please. Run like hell??

It would be a "Lone Gun Mission". No other friendlies would be in AO. I doubt the crew could get away without fallout contamination.

This is a 1953 test fire of an 8" inch Howitzer predecessor...

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Operation_Upshot_test.ogg

This is the nuke we would of shot.....it would of made Hiroshima/Nagasaki look like a firecracker. 40 kiloton yield.

Mk33.jpg


482px-Operation_Plumbbob_-_Priscilla_2.jpg


Declassified stuff if you want to read about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plumbob


We also had a "Neutron Bomb" in 1981. It was considered a clean bomb that would of been used for surgical strikes. The nuke yield was a lot less.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W79

All of these rounds had to be assembled on the battlefield just prior to firing. Disassembled...they couldn't be detonated. The end of the road for these rounds came in 1992...shortly after the Cold War ended. I'm sure the Government still has all the pieces somewhere for future........

BTW, we (U.S. Army) never fired one of these rounds on the battlefield.
 
BTW, there was never a shortage of Artillerymen to volunteer to crew the gun on the "Lone Gun Mission" if the mission ever got the call from HQ!!!
 
How/what made you get into the Military Bob, if you don't mind telling?

I was real close to getting drafted at the very end of Vietnam.......I decided to enlist in 1976 and get my military service (3 years) in before we were involved in another war. All of my friends were in Vietnam with the Army or Marine's and I wanted to experience the military too. My Dad (Korea) and Grandpa (WWI) were in the Army. My plan was to serve 3 years and get out. I liked the first 3 years and decided to re-up with the intent of doing 20 years and retiring. My wife didn't care one way or another as long as I was getting paid. My Ma wasn't overjoyed about it but my Dad and Grandpa were fine with me staying in and making a career out of it. My Dad and both Uncle's later said that they all wished that they stayed in for 20 years and retire from the Army.
 
Back
Top