US Battleships in T2K

[pmulcahy11b]

The last use of a US Navy Battleship was (IIRC) was the USS Missouri during the Gulf War in 1991. If we posit (as many here seem to do) that Desert Storm and Shield did occur in the T2K v2 and 2.2 timelines, the US Navy may have one or more of these vessels on active duty during the Twilight War (whether they were sunk is fodder for another post). It's what I imagine, anyway.

For that matter, do any other countries in the Twilight War have such ships (or their version thereof) in service (again, whether they got sunk or not during the War)

[Matt Wiser]

Paul, did you check Grimace's fanzine The naval stuff I did earlier is there, and it does include the battleships and the two Des Moines-class gun cruisers.

[Adm.Lee]

The last use of a US Navy Battleship was (IIRC) was the USS Missouri during the Gulf War in 1991. If we posit (as many here seem to do) that Desert Storm and Shield did occur in the T2K v2 and 2.2 timelines, the US Navy may have one or more of these vessels on active duty during the Twilight War (whether they were sunk is fodder for another post). It's what I imagine, anyway.

For that matter, do any other countries in the Twilight War have such ships (or their version thereof) in service (again, whether they got sunk or not during the War)

I always figured that at least one, and probably 2-3 of the Iowa class were recommissioned during the Twilight War. The other one or two would have been kept for spare parts to keep the others running. I really don't think the tourist BBs (North Carolina, Alabama, Massachusetts) would be considered worth the effort, except as more parts storage or training. The Texas, certainly not! Post 1999, if these are still afloat and given power and fuel sometime, they would make great accommodation hulks for a thousand or so souls.

Ditto for the heavy cruisers of the Des Moines class. Three were active in Vietnam, Newport News was scrapped in 1993, but the other two were still in mothballs. I think I saw them in Philadelphia Navy Yard in 1994


No, I don't think there were any other battleships existing in the 1990s.
{Scan of wikipedia}
Soviets: scrapped all of theirs between 1947 and 1956, it seems. They did keep 13 of the Sverdlov-class cruisers with 6" guns through the late '80s, but all were gone by 1991 IRL. It's believed that they were kept around in the faint hope that once the American carriers and subs had been defeated, there could still be a role for an all-gun ship. Maybe if the USSR is still breathing in 1992, these would have been saved Exception: the Kutuzov, now a museum ship in Novorossysk. There's a candidate for a late-war revival in the Black Sea Fleet
Germany, Japan: all their BBs were gone by 1946. About half of Italy's made it into the 1950s.
France scrapped their last two in 1966 and 1970.
The Royal Navy cut up the Vanguard in 1960.
The Turkish Yavuz Sultan Selim, more famous as the SMS Goeben, made it to 1973.
Argentina, Brazil and Chile each had a very few BBs, all were gone by 1960.
Spain lost its last two in its civil war.

There are some other museum ships around, but I'd think those aren't worth the trouble, since I'd bet nearly all of them were decommissioned in the '50s, and most of them might be even older than WW2. Example: HMS Belfast, turned into a museum in 1978.

I think that's everyone

I love battleships, can you tell

Allow me to quote from the novel Ghostrider one, by Gerry Carroll (1993). "The battleships have all been mothballed again now and it doesn't seem the same anymore. When one sees a battleship steaming along, one is seeing Navy and all that that has meant through the centuries. There is no weapon on earth that will make a little tinpot dictator sit up and take notice like a battleship slowly cruising off his coast well out of pistola range with her guns trained on his presidential palace. It sort of gives him a little peek at his relative importance in the grand scheme of things. If that peek stops one firefight, however small, or saves one life, or ensures the fairness of one election, then the battleship has earned her keep."

Well-spoken for a brown-shoe, don't you think

[Grimace]

That is a very good, very pertinant, and altogether saddening quote from that book. I miss the old battlewagons.

[Raellus]

Going by the v1.0 timeline, even if the first war against Iraq didn't happen, the Iowas might still have been around by the time the Twilight War began in '96. Since in the v1.0 timeline, the Cold War never ended, the USN had reason to keep the Iowas around. Perhaps they were no longer on active duty c.'96, but I would fathom that they would still have been on the books and could have been returned to service relatively quickly. They may not have been the most practical vessels in the modern world, but they had their uses and a certain prestige value as well. All my old Cold War naval warfare books from the '80s like to compare the Iowas and the Kirovs. It's apples to oranges, of course, but I think the USN liked to dispute the claim to having the largest, most powerful surface warfare vessels afloat. In my T2KU, all of the Iowas were in active service at some point during the Twilight War.

[Legbreaker]

If we posit (as many here seem to do) that Desert Storm and Shield did occur in the T2K v2 and 2.2 timelines...

It absolutely did in 2.2.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.phpt=3109&highlight=timeline

Requiring a crew of approximately 1800 men, would they be all that useful in most theatres Take Europe for example, how much of the fighting took place within the 40km range of the 16 inch guns Sure, the Iowa class carried Tomahawks, but at half a million a pop, they're a bit too expensive to fire off in bulk.
We also know Battleships where already obsolete as a concept by WWII, so they'd be of limited use in naval actions - smaller and cheaper destroyers, both in currency and manpower, offer a greater flexibility on the whole.

However, their usefulness in amphibious operations can't be denied. If they were recommissioned, it's extremely likely they'd be attached to support the Marine units in the Middle East and Korea (the North Sea and the Baltic might be a little "hot" for them especially after the 1997 battles destroyed pretty much all the available escorts). The Middle East and Korea were basically second class fronts with second class enemy units compared to Europe so I see their survival and usefulness as at least vaguely plausible.

[dragoon500ly]

Iowa would most likely have served as a training ship/spare parts hulk, her number two 16-inch turret was never operational again after the breech explosion.

The USN planned to use the battleships to support amphibious operations or as part of a Surface Action Group targeting Soviet warships. New Jersey (and Iowa) were assigned to the Atlantic Fleet and Wisconsin and Missouri were assigned to the Pacific Fleet. It would be possible to see New Jersey and/or Wisconsion in the Middle East with Missouri off Korea.

[Raellus]

I can see an Iowa class supporting amphibious/ground operations in Scandinavia. I can also see it getting caught up in one or two of the fleet battles in the Norwegian/North Sea. I'll bet that an Iowa could take quite a bit of damage before sinking. Perhaps after taking a couple of SSMs, her captain ran her aground to keep her from sinking. A partially submerged/exposed Iowa-class battleship with at least one functioning turret would be an interesting setting for an encounter or PC FOB.

[HorseSoldier]

Going by the v1.0 timeline, even if the first war against Iraq didn't happen, the Iowas might still have been around by the time the Twilight War began in '96. Since in the v1.0 timeline, the Cold War never ended, the USN had reason to keep the Iowas around.

+1. The BBs got recommissioned as part of the Reagan-era build up, so even without the '91 Gulf War they'd have been on the books and in the ver 1.0 alternate history the unrest in the Middle East before the Sino-Soviet war kicked off would have provided ample employment opportunities for them.

I can see an Iowa class supporting amphibious/ground operations in Scandinavia. I can also see it getting caught up in one or two of the fleet battles in the Norwegian/North Sea.

The Norwegian front is probably the best venue in the European theater for a battleship to make a contribution as a fire support asset, at least until the fighting moves into Finland. Given the road network in Norway any Soviet attempt to move south would provide lots of serious targets for 16" naval gunfire as long as the NATO side of the naval fight could maintain enough superiority to keep ships in close to the land front.

[Raellus]

The Norwegian front is probably the best venue in the European theater for a battleship to make a contribution as a fire support asset, at least until the fighting moves into Finland. Given the road network in Norway any Soviet attempt to move south would provide lots of serious targets for 16" naval gunfire as long as the NATO side of the naval fight could maintain enough superiority to keep ships in close to the land front.

I can conceive of a naval engagement brought about by the success of an Iowa's 16"ers against Soviet ground columns in Norway- it's such a hinderence to the road-bound Red Army that the Soviet navy is called on to sally forth in an attempt to eliminate or drive off the battleship task force, leading to a major surface action. I'd love to wargame some naval battles in the Norwegian/North Sea. I almost got the latest iteration of the venerable Harpoon series for my PC but I just don't have the time to play with it- and if I create the scenario, playing it out wouldn't be as satisfying.

[Adm.Lee]

I can conceive of a naval engagement brought about by the success of an Iowa's 16"ers against Soviet ground columns in Norway-

That reminds me of something I read in one of the Horatio Hornblower novels. He was commanding (IIRC) a 74-gun ship of the line off the Spanish coast when they spotted a French cavalry brigade moving along a coastal road, with bluffs behind them that prevented their escape. It was target practice, essentially.

USS New Jersey in the Norwegian Sea might play hide & seek among the fjords, like the Germans did with Tirpitz in WW2. Sure, a big missile could sink her, but it would be a bear to get a clear line of attack to her. If she survived to 1998, she'd be pretty dominant until she ran out of fuel.

[Legbreaker]

The Norwegian front is probably the best venue in the European theater for a battleship to make a contribution as a fire support asset, at least until the fighting moves into Finland.

In my mind it's the only place they could have been used to any real effect. The supporting ships were basically all gone by June 1997 so it would be suicide for them (if any survived that long) to sortie into the Baltic, or even just cruise around in the North Sea within useful bombardment range of the coastline. Given the likely heavy use of sea mines by the Pact, going into the shallows without minesweepers, etc would be pure idiocy!

In my mind, if any survived beyond June 97, they'd have quickly been reassigned to the other "secondary" fronts where the threat to them would have been greatly diminished. From memory, we can find one in the Gulf as per the RDF book

[Targan]

I've held off from commenting on this discussion but I feel compelled to point out, they use sooooo much fuel. Even if a couple of the Iowa class survived, that's a massive commitment of scarce, oh-so-precious diesel. I know it's tempting and attractive to have these gods of war still roaming the high seas at MilGov's behest late in the Twilight War but the logical part of my brain suggests to me that their fuel requirements would render the Iowa class battleships all but unusuable in a mobile role from '98 onwards.

[Legbreaker]

Very good point that. Between fuel requirements, 1,800 crew, limited ammo (how many 16 inch shells are going to be available after 97 anyway compared to smaller guns), and battle damage/wear and tear, any hulls still floating aren't going to be of much use.

Just the crew alone could be better used to (for example) create two new infantry battalions, or the supporting elements of an entire pre-war brigade, perhaps even division. And what about food Men on the ground can grow their own given time and a suitable patch of dirt - it's a bit hard for ship borne crew to do that...

However, in late 1996, early 1997, provided the manpower can be found, it's my opinion all four battleships might see at least limited action somewhere. As the war drags on, it's likely they will be stripped of crew and equipment rather than be repaired, with those resources sent to smaller ships, the marines, or even logistical units behind the lines.

[Panther Al]

Very good points on Manpower and Fuel issues, but there is a couple of countervailing points:

The steam plants in those ships used bunker oil - not diesel. Bunker oil is also considered garbage production in modern refining compared to the higher grade fuels: in essence, its the leftovers after making good fuel as far as I can tell by reading up on it. So fuel will be scarce yes, but it won't be anywhere near as bad to source it as it would be the high test. Even better; the engines that burn it - particularly the ones built in the first half of the 20th Century, such as those in the Iowa's, are sufficiently crude that in a pinch it could use the raw stuff at the cost of decreased efficiencies, more maintenance, and much more pollution (IE: Very a dark exhaust plume).

As far as maintenance on the plants go, as long as they can get raw materials, a majority of its power plant (That is, the small(er) parts that typically break now and then) can be supported by the on board machine shops.

Compared to the other ships in the Navy, the Iowa's was maintenance nightmares yes: but thats because of old simpler equipment. Once the nukes fly however, the high tech supply line that the newer ships require more than air will dry up - but the simpler, older equipment (less the upgraded electronics such as the radars and such) on the Iowa's can still be made with relative ease in small to medium sized machine shops either afloat in depot ships or the smaller ports that didn't get nuked.

And while yes, that manpower can be used elsewhere, but will it be worth it

In 2000, in a perverse way, the Iowa's might become the most seaworthy and available ships in the fleet because of its maintenance intensive but simple nature.

Of course, that leaves ammo.

This is actually the larger problem, but not for the reasons you think.

Producing the shells is easy: all you need is a casting shop, of which there is thousands in the US, to cast the shells. It's the boomenstuff that is the problem. But not as large or insurmountable as it sounds. If the US industry can supply small arms with the newer fancier powders for rifles and machine guns, as well as the courser stuff for mortars and tube arty, then they can easily provide the propellent (a even larger and simpler powder to manufacture - again due to the age of the basic design of the gun) for the 5" and 16" guns. Explosive filling is the handicap though. Good news though can be found here: The stuff used in Mortars could be used in the 16" shells as it is sturdy enough to handle the (relatively) lighter impulse of the propellant as it launches the rounds out the tube - and the 5" shells can use the same stuff they are filling howitzer rounds with.


And yes, the actual impulse delivered to the shell of a 16" gun is actually lighter than that of a 5" or 155mm shell. Larger amount of powder yes, bigger boom, oh hell yeah... but the scale of it actually works for us for the same reason Dr. Bull twigged on to the idea that the Superguns he made could actually loft fragile satellites with a powder load that can only be described as massive. Thats the reason he made them for Iraq: the money he was to be paid for them he was already planning spending on building a 60" Supergun to loft communication and other sats into orbit with. An lifelong desire he picked up when he worked on the HARP project, which was *almost* able to put a round into orbit. The gun A 16" gun that was in stocks as a replacement for wrecked guns from battle damage on the Iowa's and was declared surplus at the end of the war.

In short:

Are the Iowa's the end all be all

No.

Are they a massive drain on resources, both pre TDM and post

Oh hell yes.

But can they be supported after the TDM when the supply of high tech parts and high end fuels are scarce at best and non-existant at worst

Yep. The only ships in the fleet save perhaps, the old Knox Class Figs.