Choose a warship conversion

Foo Fighter said:
Whether it is tank rounds in a tank or missiles in a ship, I fall back to the gunners rule. Some is good, more is better and LOADS is best. You never know when replenishment can happen and the threat CAN be more than planned for. That and better situational awareness...... Old school? Yep, all the way.
Click to expand...
That's all great until some sneaky bastard puts a missile or torpedo into your magazine and you go KABOOM.

The most Harpoons any ship seems to have carried is 16x, but that was only the Iowas. Everyone else carried 8x. Even submarines I would not expect to carry more than 7x for the Seawolves, 5x for the Japanese, and 3x for 688s or Virginias (1 less than the number of torpedo tubes, because you always keep one tube with a torpedo in it for a snapshot)
 
Scott Kenny said:
The most Harpoons any ship seems to have carried is 16x, but that was only the Iowas. Everyone else carried 8x. Even submarines I would not expect to carry more than 7x for the Seawolves, 5x for the Japanese, and 3x for 688s or Virginias (1 less than the number of torpedo tubes, because you always keep one tube with a torpedo in it for a snapshot)
Click to expand...
Excellent point. I also add, that Harpoons, while not very expensive per unit, were quite costly in large numbers. Just providing a full load for all USN units & one spare load required literally thousands of missiles. Which cost A LOT, and we aren't counting missiles for planes, export missiles, missiles spent on exercises... So the idea of "let's give OHP missile load several times over its normal capacity" would be problematic to justify financially.
 
Scott Kenny said:
That's all great until some sneaky bastard puts a missile or torpedo into your magazine and you go KABOOM.

The most Harpoons any ship seems to have carried is 16x, but that was only the Iowas. Everyone else carried 8x. Even submarines I would not expect to carry more than 7x for the Seawolves, 5x for the Japanese, and 3x for 688s or Virginias (1 less than the number of torpedo tubes, because you always keep one tube with a torpedo in it for a snapshot)
Click to expand...
I do understand, say's more about an old 'steam powered' gunner than 'owt else but, that's what I am. I guess a lot of changes will be in the wings or already running wild now. Plus ca change?
 
Missed this one, somehow:
Foo Fighter said:
The 16" guns crop up a lot, mainly due to the rapid migraine manoeuvre. I would have LIKED to see more up to date rounds with multiple independent breakaway elements top them to better support landings and generally spread the mayhem faster. A localised MIRV if you like.
Click to expand...
Navweaps says there were 16" cluster munitions developed. Between a VT fuze that popped the HC shells at 20ft above the ground, Mk144 antipersonnel cluster shell with 400x M43A1 grenades, Mk146 DPICM shell with 666 various grenades, a new 2240lb HC shell with longer range, a subcaliber cargo shell, and then the 11" sabot with a 100nmi range, I think the Iowas would be well served with variety and firepower.
 
Arjen said:
My favourite: HMS Furious. First wulhack at launching aircraft from a man-of-war. Second whack - and on - until a usable carrier resulted.
<edit> Oops. Eugene Ely flew off USS Birmingham in 1910.
Edwin Dunning was the first to land on a moving ship, though - 1917, on HMS Furious.
Click to expand...


How about the UK uses the Majestic class Battleships Victorious and Illustrious for its aircraft testing rather than the historic Africa, Hibernia and London and does it sooner then subsequantly converts both to flight deck carriers so getting the names into the Aircraft carrier business.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom