AK Rifles banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
Oh Yeah!! the Big Stick...letting off a volley OoooraH!

Uss_iowa_bb-61_pr.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,749 Posts
They are pretty bad ass, but compared to todays technolgy and weapons I wouldnt call them "brutal" unless it was ship on ship action which these bad boys never really got a chance to partake in (not with the 16" guns anyways).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I don't know man, but those 2800 pound shells must have been the suck to be on the other end of. Love your sig line by the way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,551 Posts
...........:thumbsup:
TRAAK's, I got to give you credit. The photo you posted shows how the guns push the ship sideways better than any I have ever seen. Most pictures are of them firing while underway and you cannot see it.

You REALLY learn to appreciate them when they are providing fire cover for YOU!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,384 Posts
I copied that picture for the very reason you said. Hard to find without the ship under way. Wikipedia gave this one up for us.
Full Size:


A bow view of the battleship USS IOWA (BB-61) firing its Mark 7 16-inch guns off the starboard side during a fire power demonstration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts
They are a beautiful ship. The Wisconsin is here and it's free to go on her.

They put a political stamp on things in their time, but the real reason they brought them back the last time was that we had worn out our heavy crusiers and never built any replacements. By the 70's we had worn out all our heavy crusiers and the cutbacks in the Carter administration prevented any replacements. So when Reagan was elected, hauling the Iowas out of mothballs was deemed the interm solution. It takes forever to actually build a new ship from scratch, like a decade or two of lead time in the real world. So recommisioning was the quick-fix. It was terribly expensive, given the manpower costs, and the attendent costs for a Surface Action Group centered around and supporting the Battleship. Cost aside, their political statement can't be ignored at all. President Reagan knew how to send a message.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
26,331 Posts
Real firepower of a bygone age.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,937 Posts
Real firepower of a bygone age.
Made obsolete by the aircraft.

The ships were still active while I was in but not for long. It was only a few months after my separation that the Iowa blew up. Operating costs, obsolescence, and budget cuts I believe were the death of the BB. They were an awe inspiring sight.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
26,331 Posts
Made obsolete by the aircraft.
Yep, and if I remember correctly, it was Mitchell himself that proved this point using a few aircraft vs a captured German Battleship. Most of the old school Generals and Admirals blew him off, and he was all but run out of the service until he was asked to return shortly after the beginning of WWII.

General Mitchell was decades ahead of his time with his staunch support for air power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,497 Posts
They are pretty bad ass, but compared to todays technolgy and weapons I wouldnt call them "brutal" unless it was ship on ship action which these bad boys never really got a chance to partake in (not with the 16" guns anyways).
I'm not so sure... few things today have equivalent firepower. A dozen MLRS? An Arc Light raid by B-52s (which is itself a 59 year old bird)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,749 Posts
I'm not so sure... few things today have equivalent firepower. A dozen MLRS? An Arc Light raid by B-52s (which is itself a 59 year old bird)?
I have seen F18s loaded with a couple thousand pound bombs launched from the flight deck of a carrier, get several of those in the sky could put some one in a serious hurt locker! As far as I know they make 2k pound and bigger bombs that can be dropped from aircraft.

Not saying the fire power of a BB is weak by any means but I would rather take my chances in a fortified bunker against it compared to the weapons they have now days. (Minus gps guided shells) even though modern technology made them even More accurate minus GPS guided shells. In reality they are just giant mobile mortars. Now put me on a ship I would be scared shitless to go up against a BB even in a modern day cruiser or aircraft carrier with superior technology and weapons!

By the time it was entered into the service it was being made obsolete by aircraft, I think they where only used a handful of times to soften Japanese island targets, and saw most service as AA and accidental torpedo shields for carriers but most of the time the big wigs tried to keep them "safe" per say. Then again in the first Persian gulf war.

*Also I think they only had two of the "modern" BBs under way during the whole war in the pacific. I don't think they ever sent any into the Atlantic to see service against the Germans. I think they were to scared to lose one to the German U boats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,497 Posts
I'm not a big naval history buff, but I think you are doing a disservice to the service of US Battleships in WWII. The USS Washington alone served in both the Atlantic and Pacific and sank a Japanese battleship with naval gunfire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,749 Posts
Iowa-class battleship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You are correct the Washington did sink a jap ship, but most Naval battles of the time were fought with much smaller guns on much smaller and totally different class of ships, the Washington was probably the only BB in history to sink an enemy ship with 16" guns. Also the Washington is a North Carolina Class BB not Iowa class.
North Carolina-class battleship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A couple of really good reads on ships and battles of the time are Neptunes Inferno The U. S. Navy at Guadalcanal and The Boys of the Battleship North Carolina.
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top