Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

The Admiral Belgrano was a pre-World War II Brooklyn class light
cruiser,
that admittedly was armored on a scale with contemporary heavy cruisers,
but
substantially less well armored than the war-built Baltimore class heavy
cruisers.
----- Original Message -----
From: <adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca>
To: <gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: Tin Cans versus Dreadnoughts

> Hi Folks,
>
> just a couple of brief thoughts re the battleship thread...
>
> <snip lots>
>
> >  The ability of one modern CV (or CVN) to take out multiple Kirov or
> Missouris
> >is a matter of conjecture.  They may be able to mission kill (ie
render
> >inpotent) the ship due to topside distruction of radar, optics and
comm.
> >However the ability to completely punch through 12 to 16 inchs of
specially
> >designed armor is a matter of great concern.  If the warheads were
shaped
> >charges then maybe but general explosives, I doubt it.  Unless the
> torpedoes are
> >designed to explode under the hull the BB are a real tough customer.
>
> <snip lots more - interesting stuff...>
>
>
> While modern missiles (harpoon, etc) and long-range naval guns might
not
> take out one of those battleships with their heavy armour, modern
torpedoes
> might very well.  The Janes website
>
>
http://www.janes.com/defence/naval_forces/news/juws/juws010202_01_n.shtm
l
>
> has an interesting set of pictures of the Australian navy testing one
of
> their current torpedoes (the US Mk 48 ADCAP) on an older ship, from an
> "over the horizon" shot.  The torpedo explodes under the center of the
> hull, and the ship was cut in half.  Certainly this isn't a
battleship,
but
> still...  A modern torpedo packs a whallop.
>
> Also, there are a lot of air- and sea- launched weapons other than
Harpoon
> type and size...  Imagine being hit by a Kelt?  Chances are you'd be
able
> to shoot the thing down, but the Soviet Kelt missiles were *huge*. 
Make a
> big mess if one hit a modern ship.  And then, of course, the warhead
could
> be a baby nuke, at which point things are academic.
>
> What about the sinking of the Admiral Belgrano during the Falklands? 
That
> was a late WWII-era heavy, wasn't it?  How many shots did it take from
the
> British submarine that attacked it?  Certainly wasn't as many as were
> needed to sink the Yamato. I thought only one or two.
>
> And with laser guided armour piercing 2000 pound bombs and stealthy
> aircraft (manned or unmanned) guiding them - a battleship would be a
> sitting duck, I'd think.  Same old problem - I build heavy armour, you
> build a bigger gun, I build heavier armour, you build an even bigger
gun.
> But now, as they say, modern conventional weapons can defeat any
practical
> thickness of armour.
>
> My 0.02.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ********************************************
>
> Adrian Johnson
> adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca
>