Design a modern battleship
-
As many people said, the age of battleship is over. However, I find that it's because people are refering to older battleship design not suited for modern days instead of the idea of battleship.
So let's say you are in charge of the USN, and you are ordered to built a battleship, nevermind the cost. Firstly, the battleship need to have battleship level guns instead on focusing on missiles like modern navy ships.
Also, it need to be able to survive pounding from missile attacks, either by having a very strong CIWS( like the new battlestars from battlestar galactica) that it can provide a 'shield'.
Also, it need to be able to perform gun support for marines instead of missile support. Also, you need to find a way to ensure your battleship will be an easy target for fighters or bombers like in ww2.
You can built the battleship with modern or near-future(not from anime or science fiction) technology. Like rail-guns to laser based weapons which are in development.
So, are you able to built a MODERN battleship? -
1 battleship needs at least 2k men.. but with 20 men I can sink your 2k men
-
Although a battleship can scare people alot more than seeing a aircraft carrier...
In a middle of battle, if you saw a aircraft carrier in range of your site...you will be thinking the Aircraft carrier is going to be so screwed.
If you saw a battleship, you are going to be thinking ' I'm so screwed' -
doesnt make any sense to put those 16inchers back on any ship...missiles are much more accurate and they take up less space , since u said cost wont be an issue then having missiles instead of guns would be the correct choice
-
Hmm... it might still be worthwhile to put some good-old fashioned guns on a battleship.
They can then act as indirect fire support for beach landings.
But yeah, anti-ship missile launchers should be the main weapon for ship-to-ship combat. And on top of that, lots of anti-aircraft weaponry. -
is it like possible to put enough armor on a Battleship to make it impervious to missle attacks?
-
I doubt it. You'd need lots and lots of armour to defend against a Harpoon or a Gabriel, and that would weigh the ship down. And even then, that's no guarantee that the missile won't cause damage.Originally posted by beavan:is it like possible to put enough armor on a Battleship to make it impervious to missle attacks?
Active countermeasures (i.e. shooting down the incoming missile) would be more appropriate. -
Me agree that the old 16 inch guns might not be as functional in modern warfare, but they do have the "shock and awe" fear factor...Originally posted by fudgester:Hmm... it might still be worthwhile to put some good-old fashioned guns on a battleship.
They can then act as indirect fire support for beach landings.
But yeah, anti-ship missile launchers should be the main weapon for ship-to-ship combat. And on top of that, lots of anti-aircraft weaponry.
Tambah satu!
-
The advent of the submarine and the aircraft carrier has bereft the classic battleship of its original tactical and strategic purposes. The battle of Jutland in 1916 was the apogee and also the demise of battleship warfare. Before we can design a new battleship for the 21st century, we need to ask ourselves whether there is such a need, and if there is, what are the tactical and strategic purposes which such a vessel is intended to serve.
-
I'd go for railgun and solid state lasers, cooled by seawater.
The highest power rating for a functional military laser is 100kw today. -
Well...carriers and submarines can be said to be for indirect naval fighting. A battleship is meant to be engaging enemy ship head on. All it needs is a proper doctrine.Originally posted by dakkon_blackblade:The advent of the submarine and the aircraft carrier has bereft the classic battleship of its original tactical and strategic purposes. The battle of Jutland in 1916 was the apogee and also the demise of battleship warfare. Before we can design a new battleship for the 21st century, we need to ask ourselves whether there is such a need, and if there is, what are the tactical and strategic purposes which such a vessel is intended to serve.
Last time, calavary is said to be useless, with evolutions of machine guns, however they did return in the form of armored combat. If a battleship has newer equipments like rail-guns( yes, it is in development, and the range of fire is very large.) Once the battleship get in range of a carrier, the carrier is screwed.
A battleship can also function as a CIWS weapon platform, providing a large air protection for the surrounding fleet. -
i don't think we'll ever see any missle system or airplane being able to stop a kinetic weapon. especially if it's a rail gun mounted on a Battleship.
there might be some hope for the battleship still/ -
Missiles r ex so they r use only for particular targets & rails guns r restricted by their flat tajaory(dun know how 2 spell) but conventional guns & rockets can cover bigger area for longer time
-
But i think a battleship modern or not is not impossiable but is in-cost-effective
-
-
-
screw the guns and load it up with tons of rockets for indirect fire support.Put some bigger Metal storm guns for point defence and some cruise missles for long range leg work.Couple of torps for submarine work and a couple of planes on deck. Most likely having a deck layout like the Russian carrier cruise only alittle bigger.
-
Kirov u mean
-
that shld be the one yeaOriginally posted by spartan6:Kirov u mean -
Singapore does not have enough manpower to crew a battleship plus
cruise missiles or supersonic missles can be fast enough to dodge CIWS, especially if the missiles are fired in sufficeint quantity to overwhelm the CIWS
Most battles are now fought without the two sides getting visual contact on each other, therefore a battleship is irrelavant if it is equipped with cannons -
missiles will probably have to be vertical launched, to save space.
-
There are railguns currently in development and also GPS guided "smart" shells. If the Battleship is ever to see a resurgence, these will be the primary motivating factor.
Railguns require a significant powerplant and thus you need a big ship. Those GPS guided shells could potentially replace missiles as precision weapons and you can carry ALOT more shells than missiles. -
not mentioning that 1 shell would probably break the back of the ship straight away.
considering u can carry 100 missles compared to 1000 shells. which can be dual purpose, used for some naval bombardment. -
-
Firstly, I did not say building a battleship for singapore but USN ...so man power isn't a problem, also about CIWS...I did not say you can only use existing CIWS.Originally posted by Mithrandir:Singapore does not have enough manpower to crew a battleship plus
cruise missiles or supersonic missles can be fast enough to dodge CIWS, especially if the missiles are fired in sufficeint quantity to overwhelm the CIWS
Most battles are now fought without the two sides getting visual contact on each other, therefore a battleship is irrelavant if it is equipped with cannons
There's a laser based CIWS currently in developement. Also, modern CIWS did not have the large cover area like a battleship in late WW2.
If anyone of you have seen battlestar galactica, you know what kind of CIWS I was thinking to be enough to protect against missile or fighters.
THIS is the kind of CIWS I was talking about...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fu_Ciu2R52I
Anyway...about the fact the ships not getting visual contact...as other has point out, rail-guns can reach sub-orbit and slam all the way back into earth, hence allowing a main gun range to be much longer than before.