How much of this is a meme? Could these upgrades also be applied to the cancelled Montana-class ships? I think I read probably somewhere on Zig Forums that a battleship launching scramjet missiles from GLGGs has a 600 naut. mile radius sphere of influence, is this at all accurate? Also armchair-admiral "how would YOU redesign the USN?" thread.
Iowa-class refit
Lucas Moore
Other urls found in this thread:
towerofjade.com
interestingprojects.com
twitter.com
Hunter Flores
Just realized I am a faggot and forgot to link to the article:
towerofjade.com
Connor Ramirez
Compared to designing and building a modern ship from the ground up? A complete meme.
Depends on the cannon and projectile. In theory it's possible to launch a satellite-killer from a conventional 16" gun, therefore range isn't really a problem with CLGGs firing ramjets. Finding and targeting the enemy is the challenge.
Also, don't forget that having a dozen ships all carrying a single big gun is better than having a single battleship with 12 guns.
Adam Ward
Install SPY-1 radar.
Lighten armor where possible, it's only needed against terrorists with RRs and suicide boats.
Replace engine with more efficient gas turbine combo.
Increase functionality from 3 to 6 helicopters by gutting fire rooms (gas turbine engine) and installing a lift.
Armament:
Double the number of CIWS, 4 per each side of ship.
Add one RIM-116 on fore and aft each.
Delete. Replace with 64 x VLS cells holding ESSM and SM-3 missiles.
A CLGG gun is safer - the storage tanks for methane won't blow like the propellant charges Iowa previously used - the gas tanks can be used to fuel the actual ships engine and the guns at the same time - they're far more compact so - the deflagration is gentler on barrel wear - and they double the range to 50 miles.
Scramjet shell have already been tested on the 16 incher, and they gave 200-400 mile ranges. Adding CLGG technology together with a scramjet sustainer could give ranges in excess of 400 miles, whereas the Harpoon missile can only go 80 miles…. it would also have 2-3 times the size of a tomahawk warhead. Picrelate ranges in middle east.
Ethan Wright
The only mandatory capabilities are offensive, and since its a battleship the main offensive weapon should be the cannon. Nix the amphibious nonsense, trash the mission module. CIWS and air defense are a requirement, but only because the air threat is so dangerous. Sub defense should be carried out by smaller ships that specialize in that.
Is a very small atom, it leaks through everything. The only way to keep it under pressure is to cryogenically cool it, this slows brownian motion and limits leakage. It's a huge danger if stored, because its explosive and even when burning it creates invisible (ultraviolet) fire. Also expensive as hell, might as well fuel the ship with gold.
Methane is superior, it's dirt cheap, molecule is large enough to be safely stored, and it can run the gas turbine powering the ship.
Where do you put them? What would they be used for???? 60% of that energy would be a waste, used only to heat the water around the ship. Not to mention the cost or expense.
Chase Gonzalez
James Robinson
This is the only Iowa refit we should be investing in.
Wyatt Martinez
If a navy wanted to go the dozen smaller ships route, they could do something like this:
This way they could spam one kind of ship to do nearly everything, and they'd have a retarded amount of firepower.
Wouldn't you have to use liquified gas for that to work?
Please tell me that model was built for April's fool.
Joshua James
Not for a shaft turbine. I know of a company that uses methane to fuel a turbine generator for exploration in the territories.
Aaron Hall
Fluorine canisters exist you know
Jackson Perez
Iowas cost as much as a Arleigh Burke-class destroyer cost to build once you factor in inflation.
Why destroy a historical ship, when the ships were morale black holes when they were reactivated?
We have better steel that's stronger and lighter than what Granpa's generation used.
Building New Seawolves make more sense than a Iowa's replacement.
Jayden Wright
>>>/reddit/
Hunter Perez
(checked)
Underrated post.
Blake Gutierrez
You know that USN ships would only reverse into cargo ships if you mounted a purpose built ram on the prow. If you added a ramming blade to the stern then they'd somehow manage to get the ship moving sideways when they collided with civilian vessels.
Brayden Young
wow how pleb can you get
Tyler Cooper
Ryan Jones
Link pls? i didn't hear about the scramjet projectile having already been tested, i thought it was a theory thing only. Did the tests mention any feasibility for anti-air usage, or does it just move too fast?
Another thought is to go the full meme and drop a nuclear reactor and railguns on it, but that kinda defeats the purpose of bringing back the Iowa.
Isaiah Peterson
MUH
Jordan Stewart
This needs to become a thing.
Nice dubs, that would at least slow them down ridiculously, which could make the collisions less damaging …
Thomas Jenkins
It would be better if more boring to simply make arsenal ships a thing and have small, stupid fast ships with target designation and a rack or two of their own missiles, asroc and a gun and CIWS.
Caleb Robinson
Wouldn't those fast attack ships be all but suicide missions for their crew?
Jace Smith
I didn't know we called small destroyers suicide boats.
Justin Hill
I mean…
Landon Allen
How expensive would missiles be such as a Tomahawk missile if the Government were to not allow the manufactures to rip the tax payers off?
Alexander Fisher
If the industry were nationalized it would run even less efficiently and costs would be even higher than they are now.
Jason Martinez
Arsenal Gear!?
Jack Robinson
I always see people focusing on making a system as efficient as possible, but it ends up being an unrealistic nightmare. Try as much as possible to work with off the shelf technology.
I'm guessing here, but this might be one source:
Modern ships are suicide boats regardless of size, have been since the invention of the anti ship missile. It was possible to evade or armor against a torpedo, but it's impossible to evade or armor against a missile. A modern day carrier would be simple to gut.
A guy built a cruise missile superior to the tomahawk in range, guidance and payload for under $5000.
interestingprojects.com
A 10-100km missile could cost less than $1000.
Camden Garcia
That doesn't mean that the .gov can't figure out how to not rip taxpayers off.
I'll use NASA's commercial cargo program went rather well, and congress/nasa, when it was passed, both thought that there wasn't enough money behind it to work, but nasa got 3 new resupply vehicles out of it, and far cheaper launch costs too.
Setting a competitive, goals-based contract system that promises cash not just with a finished product, but on completing research milestones(and giving said research to the military), is the proper way to go.
Jose Ward
If all boats are suicide boats, then small destroyer sized hydrofoil boats with two CIWS modules, gun and racks of vls missiles makes more sense than large boats with the exception of arsenal ships and aircraft carriers.
Jace Wilson
Yeah, which is proof that private corporations tend to work more efficiently than the state. Their way of figuring out "how to not rip taxpayers off" was to acknowledge they had no idea how to do this and let the private sector handle it.