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