User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:23:09 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You want our battleships built by welfare rats? GTFO. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
And as a jobs program If you're getting Welfare you have to work a set number of hours on Battleship construction. This will be observed of course, like an apprenticeship or classroom depending on role and critical need of the components. people would learn a huge number of marketable skills, they'd get pride in being part of something awesome, and the US taxpayer would get something in return. We waste far more money on stuff far less awesome on the first day, they're welfare rats on the second day they're laborers, welders apprentices, electrician apprentices and so on. Also, they aren't Union. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:23:56 PM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:25:20 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Voots beard! Everyone knows small attack ships run circles around big cruisers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:26:39 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
I know it's been beat to death, but I'm doing laundry and bored. If you're President with both houses of Congress fully committed to your agenda, do you build a modern battleship? Maybe rail guns and shit. Maybe regular big ass cannons. Your call. I say yes. Under the Whiskers plan, we have 20 CVNS, 300 Seawolf 2s, and some new crazy battleship. I don't know maybe a couple hospital ships. But no Littoral crap and no Zumwalts. I say this as a guy who knows almost nothing about Naval warfare. BUT MY PLAN IS SOUND. https://thumbs.gfycat.com/MiniatureAngryHackee-size_restricted.gif Battleships did not become obsolete because they are hard to kill, but because they couldn’t kill anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:28:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How many of those have we done in the last two decades? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What would they do? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:29:46 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How many of those have we done in the last two decades? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What would they do? However, if we wish to do so, it'd be pretty tits right? I'm only half joking. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:30:28 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:30:31 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Under my plan the entire ocean is completely covered with Seawolf 2s, if that matters |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:30:53 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When was the last battleship fired in vain? Did we shell Iraq in Desert Storm with them? You could still see the old shell craters in 2003. Within 20 miles, nothing delivers the pain like a BB. Not even a carrier, because the carrier can’t cycle sorties fast enough to keep up with the ROF of a BB. The problem is, as absolutely tough as a BB is, it is dead before it gets into range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:33:38 PM EDT
[#10]
Building 10 more BB would be a better use of taxpayer dollars than a single year of welfare
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:35:49 PM EDT
[#11]
The four Iowa class BBs need to be reactivated, in addition to the USS 'Bama and USS North Carolina.
The world respects-and FEARS-16" NGF. NGLOs need something more than 5" guns to ply their trade. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:38:21 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, iirc a battalion or maybe even a division surrendered to a US battleship in Desert Storm. You could still see the old shell craters in 2003. Within 20 miles, nothing delivers the pain like a BB. Not even a carrier, because the carrier can’t cycle sorties fast enough to keep up with the ROF of a BB. The problem is, as absolutely tough as a BB is, it is dead before it gets into range. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
When was the last battleship fired in vain? Did we shell Iraq in Desert Storm with them? You could still see the old shell craters in 2003. Within 20 miles, nothing delivers the pain like a BB. Not even a carrier, because the carrier can’t cycle sorties fast enough to keep up with the ROF of a BB. The problem is, as absolutely tough as a BB is, it is dead before it gets into range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:41:46 PM EDT
[#13]
https://www.military.com/video/russian-supersonic-anti-ship-missile-live-firing
Yeah big ships are big targets... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:42:52 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
50,000 ton gun warships are obsolete. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:43:05 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Battleships did not become obsolete because they are hard to kill, but because they couldn’t kill anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:43:14 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cost money and get sunk. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What would they do? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:44:08 PM EDT
[#17]
We have way better delivery systems for high explosives and armor perpetrators than giant, unguided bullets.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:45:47 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:BUT MY PLAN IS SOUND. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:51:35 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Battleships are cool but if we bring them back we might as well restart the transatlantic zeppelin service and rotary phones hooked to landlines with live operators to connect calls. They're all gone because we have long ago figured out better ways to do their jobs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:53:25 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Last one that saw combat (Missouri) had a silkworm missile launched at her that was shot down by the HMS Gloucester. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:53:32 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So a man could walk from Greenland, to Iceland to Scotland without getting his feet wet? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Under my plan the entire ocean is completely covered with Seawolf 2s, if that matters Basically our biggest problem is subs running into our other ridiculous subs. They're sweeping the sea clean. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:54:07 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Building 10 more BB would be a better use of taxpayer dollars than a single year of welfare |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:54:14 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How many of those have we done in the last two decades? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What would they do? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:55:21 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Voots beard! Everyone knows small attack ships run circles around big cruisers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:56:35 PM EDT
[#25]
In a railgun heavy config, yes.
I would hazard a guess that eventually, rail guns may even make some missiles obsolete. Heavy railgun projectiles could even make anti missile missiles obsolete. If you'd hit a 16" shell with frag, would it notice? A direct hit may disrupt the trajectory, but I don't think it would make it detonate. Nuke powered, heavy enough armor to defeat anti ship missiles, and let that bitch roam the seas. Anything within range gets a dose of hypervelocity rounds. It will need sub support, just like everything else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:56:49 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah that's what this old school surface warrior was thinking. Sound as the dollar. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:BUT MY PLAN IS SOUND. I do see actual benefits, however. Mostly, just because America |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 9:59:22 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In a railgun heavy config, yes. I would hazard a guess that eventually, rail guns may even make some missiles obsolete. Heavy railgun projectiles could even make anti missile missiles obsolete. If you'd hit a 16" shell with frag, would it notice? A direct hit may disrupt the trajectory, but I don't think it would make it detonate. Nuke powered, heavy enough armor to defeat anti ship missiles, and let that bitch roam the seas. Anything within range gets a dose of hypervelocity rounds. It will need sub support, just like everything else. 
Yes! Edit: That's where Seawolf 2 Electric boogaloo comes into play |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:02:53 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Amen Certainly they are obsolete, but there are more considerations than the modern blue water battle space |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:05:42 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm admittedly not a naval warfare expert. I do see actual benefits, however. Mostly, just because America |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:10:27 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What would they do? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:11:17 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I suggest you read Alfred Thayer Mahan’s “The Influence of Sea Power on History.” Some Times the psychological affect of a platform outweighs its practical use. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm admittedly not a naval warfare expert. I do see actual benefits, however. Mostly, just because America Will continue to argue taxpayer monies go to awesomeness and not dependency. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:12:22 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I suggest you read Alfred Thayer Mahan’s “The Influence of Sea Power on History.” Some Times the psychological affect of a platform outweighs its practical use. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm admittedly not a naval warfare expert. I do see actual benefits, however. Mostly, just because America Just don't. Just don't even try, because America |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:16:02 PM EDT
[#33]
Yes.
Jobs, and we need to be ready for the vortex that will send the shop and crew back in time to sink fleets of foreign nuisances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:17:56 PM EDT
[#34]
What ranges can gunpowder naval rifles achieve?
What ranges are possible with electromagnetic launch? How can these ranges be improved by guided, rocket-assisted projectiles, and how much do those rounds cost? Ok, then. What are the ranges of Tomahawk, LRASM, and SM-3/6? What are the ranges of threat ASCM and ASBM? Firepower and big fuck-off guns are certainly part of the American military tradition, but I’d spend Navy money on a great deal of other things before spending it on battleships. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:19:38 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think in the not too distant future energy based point defense systems will largely render attack aircraft and missiles obsolete. What will we use to strike targets if/when that happens? Torpedoes can strike ships, but not land based targets. You can't shoot down a hyper velocity kinetic round... Battleship guns have extremely limited range vs aircraft (even if they employed working railguns) and the ships themselves would be giant sitting ducks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:19:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kinda like 5th gen fighters. Just don't. Just don't even try, because America BBs are obsolete against major open water competitors, but fucktards like Somali pirates? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:23:19 PM EDT
[#37]
I love battleships. Some of the most awesome vessels ever.
To answer the OP, no. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:25:25 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Like a carrier? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:26:32 PM EDT
[#39]
I vote for the Montanas!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:33:45 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:34:20 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It’d of been awesome if the Iowa or Missouri was parked of the coast of Somalia during Black Hawk Down! I don’t think we’d have lost any to enemy combat yet had we not retired them. We should have kept 1 operational just to show the flag. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What would they do? I don’t think we’d have lost any to enemy combat yet had we not retired them. We should have kept 1 operational just to show the flag. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:44:05 PM EDT
[#42]
Have we gotten all the normal illogical "bb's can't do X because they're susceptible to Y" despite every navy ship being susceptible to Y thing yet? How about people mistaking them for being constructed the same as much smaller ships? In just a brief scroll thorough I already saw a BUNCH of arguments against BB's based on really bad logic.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:44:11 PM EDT
[#43]
On a spectrum between build more battleships and all surface combatants are obsolete we are far closer to the latter than the former.
If/when we get into a conflict with a near-peer power our surface fleet is going to be held to stand off distances by cruise, ballistic, and hypersonic weapons that render it largely irrelevant. What we need is a Columbia class variant purpose built for carrying a few hundred cruise missiles to replace the out going Ohio class SSGNs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:44:39 PM EDT
[#44]
Battlestars
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:45:00 PM EDT
[#45]
No. Time to join this century.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:49:53 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Battleships did not become obsolete because they are hard to kill, but because they couldn't kill anything. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I know it's been beat to death, but I'm doing laundry and bored. If you're President with both houses of Congress fully committed to your agenda, do you build a modern battleship? Maybe rail guns and shit. Maybe regular big ass cannons. Your call. I say yes. Under the Whiskers plan, we have 20 CVNS, 300 Seawolf 2s, and some new crazy battleship. I don't know maybe a couple hospital ships. But no Littoral crap and no Zumwalts. I say this as a guy who knows almost nothing about Naval warfare. BUT MY PLAN IS SOUND. https://thumbs.gfycat.com/MiniatureAngryHackee-size_restricted.gif Battleships did not become obsolete because they are hard to kill, but because they couldn't kill anything. So far the closest our BB's have come to not killing anything, is what replaced them, the Zumwalt's lack of capability. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:51:45 PM EDT
[#47]
After watching a documentation series on TV, I think we need to build more USS Nathan James.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:52:03 PM EDT
[#48]
Of course.
They would be one of the only US Navy warships able to perform an actual necessary job. Frigates and Destroyers and Cruisers are nothing more than jobs programs for Naval Officers and ship builders. They do nothing in this modern world other than costing us money. The same could probably be said for submarines as well. But Battleships? They very much have a job: they can obliterate anything within twenty or thirty miles of a coastline, and if designed correctly do it with almost perfect safety from anything south of a nuclear weapon. You could park one in Shanghai harbor and they still wouldn't be able to hurt the thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:54:05 PM EDT
[#49]
TBH BB's do pretty well against nukes as well.
Testing post war showed them to be pretty resilient. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2019 10:54:07 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Battleships are cool but if we bring them back we might as well restart the transatlantic zeppelin service and rotary phones hooked to landlines with live operators to connect calls. They're all gone because we have long ago figured out better ways to do their jobs. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File