With the increasing cost of aircraft along with aircraft armament, don't be susprised if the big gun battleship comcept don't return one day. With moden technology the big guns range and accuracry can be gratly improved and shells are far cheaper than missiles.
There truly lies no more need in building such ships, now with the coming of the aircraft carrier and what not. Nevertheless, we can all still enjoy their badassness.
They should have made a farewell show with all the Iowa class with all of them in battle line formation firing their last shots. That would have been a sight.
@favre4beast We would indeed win in a confrontation, but we are fatter than them. I also don't think that they are any more or less homosexual than the U.S.
@skcocemag No. I was conducting a social experiment for a class of mine.. and I'd say you handled my agressiveness (aka trolling) pretty well.. I'm glad to see not everyone on youtube is as defensive as you.
@USSWISCONSIN64 Skew is when ver few values throw off the mean of a set of numbers. Like this.. 1,1,1,100. The average is now 26, ansteak of 1, because the 100 'skewed' the data. When I said those 10 people could skew the data, I meant exactly what was shown in the above example.. they bring the average from 180 to 300 because they all weigh a million kajillion pounds.
@ELEMENTSFAN666 oh, and ill try to post that whole convo on my channel, cuz some of it is pretty funny. i don't care about your opinion on the matter, whats done is done, and theyre deactivated.
Why are these ships not at sea???..I know they are expensive to operate but just think of the impact they would have setting off the coast of some terrorist nation just waiting to hammer some ones ass???..the physcological effect would be horrendous..knowing that any minute we could loose this old girls guns on your Islamic ass...that would make them think twice about any shit they had planned...
@raginroadrunner i agree that they are magnificent, and intimidating, however the invention of missiles and fighters have all but made them useless, when one missile could sink them...
@4freespeech One of the main reasons why the four IOWA Class Battleships were re-activated was that they were built to take punishing damage, and still go on. Could they ever be sunk - sure with enough ammunition, but it would probably take a very long while. I served on her as an electrician's mate during the Vietnam War. She was a very good ship, but just too expensive to operate.
@MagillJohnM That's why an Iowa Class Battleship should be activated to do ports of call. They are an assemblance of Naval power in one package. The Battleship New Jersey was so demoralizing against Viet Cong troops in southeast Asia in 1968 that they were a major topic of the Paris Peace Talks. In 1969 the New Jersey was mothballed because the politicians said she was to effective! Simply amazing!!
Sorry, but only one of those will not do it, even if it does get through the ASMD. The old SS-N-2C might, but it wouldn't get through the defenses either.
The Exocet has a warhead that was 1/4 the size of the Styx. It wouldn't have a chance of penetrating the armor of the Iowas. But you are correct, they won't be reactivated, but only because of the cost of the crew (~1600) and maintenace.
@RetSquid the exocet sunk quite a few ships in the falklands war. but anyway, theyre bad on gas, expensive, and they don't manufacture the shells anymore. :(
@TheRamthor13 The Exorcet would have minimal effect on the Iowa class ships. The Exorcet is about the equivalent of a 15-16 inch shell which the Iowa class ships are designed for. The reason that the British ship was sunk was because it was made out of aluminum.
@tryithere actually, i hope you realise that those missiles sank 8 british ships, one a cruiser with 23 inch steel armor. the exoxet wouldn't sink one with one hit, however, your ship would be counted as a casualty, because nothing would work, and it would need to be towed. then, another exocet of the plane's wingman... and there are so many more missiles that could do it as well... the mozkit, the styx...
HMS Antelope, HMS Ardent, HMS Sheffield, RFA Sir Galahad The missile that hit the Sheffield didn't even explode, it went through the side of the ship destroying fire fighting equipment and igniting the interior of the ship from it's propulsion. The Antelope was sunk by two 1000 pound bombs that didn't detonate until one went off when the British were trying to disarm it.
@tryithere yes, granted, im no expert on that conflict. i said it as i remember hearing it, and again, that war was irellevant exept for the example of one missile sinking a ship
@TheRamthor13 Check your facts! only two of all the british ships were sunk by exocet missiles. the rest were sunk by bombs. One exocet was even launched from the back of an articulated lorry trailer, but without the nessary guidance system it missed, literaly by miles!
@roythearcher are you, or are you not saying that anti ship missiles would be ineffective against the iowa, the Falklands conflict is irrelevant, the only hint of relevancy is that 30 year old missiles sunk ships, so modern ones...
@TheRamthor13 I'm not saying either! but as these missiles were not designed to inflict damage to WW2 battleships the argument is a bit academic dont you think?
If we had been expected to go into combat with this class of warship then the missiles would have been designed with this in mind and with enough explosive power to sink heavily armoured battleships! But they wern't so what are you trying to say????
All I'm trying to say is get your facts right and then you wont get these comments!!!
@roythearcher for the record i am a bit scatterbrained atm, because i commented on this, and one other bb video, so i have my hands full with comments on both, and i did not mean any hostility, i was just wondering. and no, my original comment was that they would never be reactivated, partly because of costs, and partly because of their vulnerability to modern weapons.
"i agree that they are magnificent, and intimidating, however the invention of missiles and fighters have all but made them useless, when one missile could sink them..."
Since you are such an expert, how about if you describe exactly how one missile could penetrate the armor and do enough damage to sink her. Your assertion is fallacy.
@raginroadrunner Battle ships are beautiful and elegant however shaped charge warheads have made them obsolete. Shaped charge warheads can penetrate steel armor to a depth of 7 or more times the diameter of the charge's cone. The Harpoon missile has a diameter of 340mm therefore theoretically can penetrate ~2380mm of armor whereas the penetrating power of an AP 16” round at point blank range is only ~829mm. The thickest armour on the Iowa’s was only ~ 500mm.
@bcaodp01 actually a while back the navy fired a harpoon missile at a 16" thick slab of class a armor and all it did was charr the metal. yes harpoons deal serious damage.... to modern steel armor, which is much weaker molecularly than the class a armor they put in the battleships. secondly the iowa' s have an internal armor belt meaning theoreticaly harpoon would hit the smaller outer layer of sts armor first, detonating the missle, before it even reaches the main belt..
That's all nice and good until you realize that unlike most other SSMs the Harpoon doesn't have a Shaped Charge warhead.
As a rule of thumb, a shaped charge can penetrate ~7 times its diameter worth of RHS. For the Kh-35 that equates to something in the vicinity of 9½ foot.
Quite a bit more than the 12.1 inches of armour found on the Iowas, even when you take the better quality into account
@raginroadrunner The 16” guns only have an average hit rate of ~32.7% whereas Harpoons have close to 100% hit rate. Furthermore the range of the Harpoon is ~124km compared to ~39km for 16” shells.
@canadiandrummer54 What planet are you living on you stupid bastard? You had better look in a mirror when you talk about scum of the earth You dumb ass racist prick
@canadiandrummer54 you're telling us about racism? You racist prick. Do the world a favor and lock yourself in a room for the rest of your life. Stop polluting the world with your ignorance, racism, and stupidity. Your ass is blocked.
Yo asshole I don't give a shit about the Middle East. Your muslim friends and the jews. With that said the muslims are any better than the jews? We should revert back to the days when the Middle East was nothing more than colonies of the British and French.
@canadiandrummer54 I've had just about enough of your ignorant shit ranting. Have you NO insight WHATSOEVER! You let yourself be SPOON FED what the left wing media has to tell you. You know NOTHING of what is really going on in the world. Keep playing your guitar, you idiot, and have yourself castrated so your absolute disgusting lack of intelligence won't get spread any further through this world! YOU are the one who has to open your eyes, you liberal hippie.
LOLUMAD!? Do something about it. Oh wait those assbag arab countries tried in 1948-1949, 1956, 1967, 1973 to list the major wars. They failed each time. While I am no fan of the Jews. That has to be some kind of record.
sea. The fastest fast battleships ever launched. Just like with Spain, Germany, Italy, Russia, etc. Your country probably looked with envy towards the UK when they ran things. Now you look with envy towards the USA. The battleship the ultimate representation of naval power. Of course your trash country never had a battleship in its navy back then. Nor does it possess a carrier today. So just sit there in your second place in world affairs.
Last time I checked it was the terrorists that fired the first shot at the USA and UN forces. When BB-62 arrived on seen typical of their nature the terrorists fled. As far as it being a "murdering piece of shit." #1 what is a battleship. An unsinkable floating gun platform. Key word gun. What does a gun do? It kills people. Just like the when your heroes strap bombs to their bodies. # Piece of shit. Good one. This very "piece of shit belongs to the greatest class of battleship to ever put to
@mrcraig41 Ahh canada with a small c. where my american dollar can buy and sell those wanabe frenchies. Come by and see the Battleships in Camden NJ or Pearl Harbor
@canadiandrummer54 Americans love to fight beciuse they are good at it. if not for rules of engagement the USA would own the world. cant help it if your country is jealous. afterall almost every good invention comes from the US.
@battleship62 seriously whats wrong with you? If it wasnt for rules of engagement? If it wasnt for rules of engagement the US would already be wiped off the face of this earth by China which would seriously do 90% of the world inhabitants quite a big favour...
@flasher395 Chinese cant cross the street on a green light cant drive a car cant design their own technology the only reason they live in battle is because of rules of engagement by the us.show me an educated Chinese and ill show you an Americanized chink
@battleship62 Okay, did you ever have the idea that you are racist and way to patriotic? Think about if for a asecond even though i dont think that you really get a result. The chinese may have copyed many things, but they are like 1,2billion, how do you think america could stand against them in a battle? They would be annihilated, maybe not because of technology, but because of shere numbers. And your narrow view of the chinese is totally wrong too, they have invented many things.
Germany had better warmachinery than the allies in many aspects during WW2 (just compare tanks, airplane technology, rifles, guns etc.) They still got owned, the reason largely was the enemy's numbers. So you shoudl really stfu if the only things you want to say are unbased pseuda facts and insults.
@canadiandrummer54 "A murdering piece of shit" is all to necessary for national security. Rest assured, though, future "murdering pieces of shit" would shit their loads straight from the air or space-ouch for teh terrorists...
. and so machines of destruction are part of that process. is it wrong that cavemen used sticks and stones to kill their potential lunch? those may very well be considered tools or machines for more efficient killing that made it safer/efficient/more succesfull for the caveman to keep out of harms way allowing them to fight another day.
@canadiandrummer54 *continuation* If good people (like the US, UK, etc) don't have and maintain these machines, then bad people will have them, and better ones that they will undoubtedly use to murder, kill and destroy US. That is YOU, and ME, and your FAMILY. Do you really have too much trouble understanding that?
@canadiandrummer54 if you don't worry about having effective weapons of war, then someone else with malicious intent in the world will. It is our job to safeguard the free world against them. You might remember Japan and Germany during the 1940's, though I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if you don't, that we had to defend the free world against. I don't mean to be conceited here, but you might just be one of the least intelligent and illogical people I've heard of in a very long time.
@canadiandrummer54 everything outside of hand to hand combat ( fist fight) is to some degree a potential killing machine bro. Rifles, Kives. Grenades, Tanks. Battleships. Yea they are for More efficient killing. The US is proud of it . they started the whole country w/ a few hundred people and now would rule the world if we didnt abide by the rules of engagement and fought dirty like other countries.
@canadiandrummer54 Well , me I liked doing my job face to face w/ my enemy . U.S. Army ....Bosnia(99) , OIF(2003-04 & 2007-08) 11B-10 Inf (Primery) & 14S-10 ADA Stinger/Avenger Operator (secondery) MOS . The reason I commented on this is becouse my father served on this ship that is full of history . And one of the greatest ships that I set foot on . So if you don't like this page...WELL MOVE THE HELL ON!!
@canadiandrummer54 wow man, u sound like a future terrorist youself or perhaps your children will be. or maybe just some anti Military GAY FAGGOT from San Francisco.really no disrespect intended. just sounds like that.
@canadiandrummer54 this "piece of shit" was a vital tool that has been used to keep your ignorant ass safe and free. So sleep well, and appreciate your freedom and safety.
No, even though they are in Mothball, doesn't mean the US won't bring them out, they are just waiting for the chance to strike, trust me bud, one daythe Black Dragoon will rain hell from the sea
Oh hell yeah they would, if there was a totally need for them then yes, its like the USAF, they have a number of aircraft out, but also have a number in storage ready to called out at a moments notice
I could visit her a few years ago. Telling the truth I was sexually stimulated by her beauty when being on board. They hardly could kick me out when it was closing time.
Deployed with the Jersey on an accompanying ship in 1983. I've got some good shots of those 16 inch guns firing too. It's quite a site to see up close.
Iowa61, I share your viewpoint, but the danger of using them is that they are vulnerable with a crew of 1800+ one of them would be an awesome trophy for potential enemy. I think they would be excellent as diplomacy pieces rather than wartime.
Not true at all. Actually, the IOWAs are the LEAST "vulnerable" ships in existence. There is quite literally, nothing afloat as tough to sink as an IOWA. They were built specifically with the presumption they would be hit, yet still retain fighting capability. All other naval vessels, even the big carriers, are far more vulnerable than an IOWA...
If they were the same class, then they were the same size, which they were. The USS Iowa was unique though, because it was the only Navy ship that ever had a bath tub before or since.
The ships were practically identical. Some things like AAW layout may have been slightly different. But the ships hull dimensions, tower heights, armor thickness...etc were all the same. Technically the Wisconsin is 11 inches longer then the other three. She collided with a destroyer and the removed her damaged bow, replacing it with the bow of the unfinished Kentucky. Thus her length increase.
Just took the Tour of the big J. It was the only battleship to have 2 swimming pools on deck. You can see this on the display model in during the tour. The pools came from two AA guns that were removed but not caped off yet when she was quickly commisioned again.
Wisconsin is actually a few feet longer due to a repair in the 1950s when her bow was damaged and in order to fix her fast they cut her bow off and welded on the bow off the unfinished Iowa USS Kentucky.
I was a part of the Jersey Battlegroup in 1983. I got to see and take pictures of these guns going off back then. It was quite an amazing sight to see. Signe, Member of USS John A. Moore FFG-19
I think the USS Kentucky was to be BB 65. The bow was removed and put on USS Wisconsin, which had a collision with the USS Eaton, a destroyer in the late '50's.
True they weren't needed in modern times, but you know there's no substitute for Battleship Diplomacy. Carriers have to be kept out of site, but battleships with all the armor, can be deployed in sight.
They are badly needed in modern times. To this day, no weapons platform can do what they do. USN has limited or no effective naval gunfire support capability since the IOWAs were mothballed...
Unfortunately, they don't have the defences necessary to operate in hostile coastal waters. Sure, their armour will keep them from sinking, but it won't save the RADARs and all the other stuff that makes it capable of doing its job.
Thats why they dont go out alone. Just like modern day carriers. The Iowa's make an outstanding Command platform. Can lay more ordinance on coastal targets in a short amount of time then any other vessel. Can survive the most punishing of attacks. But alone they can be vulnerable. With an array of Arliegh-Burkes/Ticonderogas and Sub screens, they however, are still quite capable weapons platforms.
Sorry, but no. You do not send a multi billion platform and 1800 crew members into a hotspot without giving them some way of defending themselves, which the Iowa's don't have, at all.
And they suck as command platforms. Sure, they've got plenty of space, but the electronics fit is between 20 and 50 years old.
And while it's true that the armour will keep the ship afloat, it won't protect all the radars and other sensors that it uses to guide its weapons from being destroyed.
did you even bother reading what I said? Read it again. I said thats why they DONT GO OUT ALONE. They always had/will have (if ever used again) a contingent of cruisers and/or destroyers for both air defense capability and ASW. Secondly, yes they do make excellent command platforms. They were modernized in the 80's with technology that went well into the next decade and would be so again if activated to service with newer communications and data links.
Furthermore, a battleships external sensors/radars were always exposed. However to pin-point target its radar/sensors alone is a million to one shot. Anti-ship weaponry would likely strike the side of the ships hull or the deck, not the ships masts. Which in any event they have contingency back-ups. Their guns can be operated without radar. Their missiles can be fired and then guided by another warship if such a failure were to occur. And yes, they are quite capable of defense.
historically going off the gunnery alone one of these things had multiple layers of fire control, from central to fore and aft then individual turret.... wiping out the radar does dick.
the only thing in history that fucked them up was subs and aircraft, and on a modern front, that's pretty much covered, and as for anti ship missiles?
unless it's got a nuke on and actually HITS it will do dick... they blew one of these babies up with a nuke 110 yards away, ( the nevada) and got fuck all.
The BBs has zilch when it comes to missile defences. All they have are four obsolete Phalanx block 1's.
And there's plenty of anti radiation SSMs out there.
Hitting a radar isn't hard, coalition forces in Iraq demonstrated that quite clearly during the first gulf war. And due to the size and weight of modern radars, you don't carry back-ups.
With the increasing cost of aircraft along with aircraft armament, don't be susprised if the big gun battleship comcept don't return one day. With moden technology the big guns range and accuracry can be gratly improved and shells are far cheaper than missiles.
carsmasher 1 week ago
was this ship used in desert storm in 1990 ?
13jam100 2 weeks ago
There truly lies no more need in building such ships, now with the coming of the aircraft carrier and what not. Nevertheless, we can all still enjoy their badassness.
AVIATIO 1 month ago
They just don't make 'em like that anymore.
tf424 1 month ago
Are ships like this one still in active service ??
benkowych 1 month ago
@benkowych none are in service, US was the last country to operate battleships
madness979797 1 month ago
look at all the communist commies out of the woodwork. go get a medical merijuana card , u r sick
battleship62 1 month ago
allah oakbar..
MrMilfhunter2003 3 months ago
What an awesome boat!
LLMorse1 3 months ago
we need ships like this to make our presence felt.
hazad626 3 months ago
liberal hippies watch videos like this???
jokkoe 4 months ago
Firepower For Freedom.
Remember Cpt. Snyder
moo1bug2 5 months ago
Slide show boring.... loosing conciseness.
r1cw 5 months ago
another fucking diashow
JoBlowMan 6 months ago
Comes down to one thing. It's gonna pwn your ass
woopdaswoop 7 months ago
They should have made a farewell show with all the Iowa class with all of them in battle line formation firing their last shots. That would have been a sight.
lucius1976 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
served aboard the new jersey from 82 to 85 , great memories, BM3 RANDY WATTS 3RD DIVISION
rattelinon 9 months ago
served aboard the new jersey from 82 to 85 , great memories, BM3 RANDY WATTS 3RD DIVISION
rattelinon 9 months ago
USA IS BETTER THAN FRANCE AND CANADA! WE'D WHUPP YOU IN A WAR! AND PLUS YOU GUYS ARE FAT AND IGNORANT! FAGS!
favre4beast 9 months ago
@favre4beast We would indeed win in a confrontation, but we are fatter than them. I also don't think that they are any more or less homosexual than the U.S.
skcocemag 8 months ago
@skcocemag YEAH FRENCHIESTFU FATASS! NO ONE WANTS TO SEE YOUR CRAP! AND NEVER POST ANOTHER COMMENT OR I WILL SIT ON YOU!
favre4beast 8 months ago
@favre4beast Promise?
skcocemag 8 months ago
@skcocemag No. I was conducting a social experiment for a class of mine.. and I'd say you handled my agressiveness (aka trolling) pretty well.. I'm glad to see not everyone on youtube is as defensive as you.
PS: I'm from the states, and yes.. we are fat.
favre4beast 8 months ago
@favre4beast so being 5foot 9inches and 170lbs is fat?
USSWISCONSIN64 8 months ago
@USSWISCONSIN64 we as a whole. compared to other places we have the highest obesity rates.
favre4beast 8 months ago
@favre4beast Yea true. But there is only like about 10 people I know that are uhh pretty big.
USSWISCONSIN64 8 months ago
@USSWISCONSIN64 those 10 people can skew the data more than one might think =)
favre4beast 8 months ago
@favre4beast Ok? Don't really know what that means.
USSWISCONSIN64 8 months ago
@USSWISCONSIN64 Skew is when ver few values throw off the mean of a set of numbers. Like this.. 1,1,1,100. The average is now 26, ansteak of 1, because the 100 'skewed' the data. When I said those 10 people could skew the data, I meant exactly what was shown in the above example.. they bring the average from 180 to 300 because they all weigh a million kajillion pounds.
favre4beast 8 months ago
@favre4beast oh ok i think i get it now?
USSWISCONSIN64 8 months ago
Its a wonder it doesn't capsize
TheAtomicCUCUMBER 10 months ago
These battlewagons are an incredible sight. I was just down for a visit of the USS Wisconsin and I was awestruck at the firepower.
f89276704 1 year ago
Lol on another video theramthor said a sagger ATM could sink an Iowa lol
ELEMENTSFAN666 1 year ago
@ELEMENTSFAN666 never said sink... i used it as an example of something that could damge it, or blow a turret off.
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@ELEMENTSFAN666 oh, and ill try to post that whole convo on my channel, cuz some of it is pretty funny. i don't care about your opinion on the matter, whats done is done, and theyre deactivated.
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
Why are these ships not at sea???..I know they are expensive to operate but just think of the impact they would have setting off the coast of some terrorist nation just waiting to hammer some ones ass???..the physcological effect would be horrendous..knowing that any minute we could loose this old girls guns on your Islamic ass...that would make them think twice about any shit they had planned...
raginroadrunner 1 year ago
@raginroadrunner i agree that they are magnificent, and intimidating, however the invention of missiles and fighters have all but made them useless, when one missile could sink them...
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 Yeah fer sher. Think if she was offshore of
Iran and those suckers lobbed a lucky missile and SUNK HER.
THAT would be the INSTANT SOFT-ON FROM HELL!
4freespeech 1 year ago
@4freespeech One of the main reasons why the four IOWA Class Battleships were re-activated was that they were built to take punishing damage, and still go on. Could they ever be sunk - sure with enough ammunition, but it would probably take a very long while. I served on her as an electrician's mate during the Vietnam War. She was a very good ship, but just too expensive to operate.
darkstormcloud9 1 year ago
@darkstormcloud9 Well said. I was on the Missiouri during desert storm. When we pulled into the gulf all eyes were on us, an amazing feeling
MagillJohnM 1 year ago
@MagillJohnM That's why an Iowa Class Battleship should be activated to do ports of call. They are an assemblance of Naval power in one package. The Battleship New Jersey was so demoralizing against Viet Cong troops in southeast Asia in 1968 that they were a major topic of the Paris Peace Talks. In 1969 the New Jersey was mothballed because the politicians said she was to effective! Simply amazing!!
lander4545 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13
Name the missile that could do it.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@RetSquid P-270 moskit
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13
Sorry, but only one of those will not do it, even if it does get through the ASMD. The old SS-N-2C might, but it wouldn't get through the defenses either.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@RetSquid ya, or the exocet. but there is no arguing that they were epic in their time. im just saying they won't be reactivated.
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13
The Exocet has a warhead that was 1/4 the size of the Styx. It wouldn't have a chance of penetrating the armor of the Iowas. But you are correct, they won't be reactivated, but only because of the cost of the crew (~1600) and maintenace.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@RetSquid the exocet sunk quite a few ships in the falklands war. but anyway, theyre bad on gas, expensive, and they don't manufacture the shells anymore. :(
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13
True, but none of them had any armor to speak of, and the fires killed the ships, not the missile itself.
But yes, the Iowas are probably gone for good.
RetSquid 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 The Exorcet would have minimal effect on the Iowa class ships. The Exorcet is about the equivalent of a 15-16 inch shell which the Iowa class ships are designed for. The reason that the British ship was sunk was because it was made out of aluminum.
tryithere 1 year ago
@tryithere actually, i hope you realise that those missiles sank 8 british ships, one a cruiser with 23 inch steel armor. the exoxet wouldn't sink one with one hit, however, your ship would be counted as a casualty, because nothing would work, and it would need to be towed. then, another exocet of the plane's wingman... and there are so many more missiles that could do it as well... the mozkit, the styx...
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 Actually it was four British ships.
HMS Antelope, HMS Ardent, HMS Sheffield, RFA Sir Galahad The missile that hit the Sheffield didn't even explode, it went through the side of the ship destroying fire fighting equipment and igniting the interior of the ship from it's propulsion. The Antelope was sunk by two 1000 pound bombs that didn't detonate until one went off when the British were trying to disarm it.
tryithere 1 year ago
@tryithere you forgot about the Atlantic Conveyor.
Admittedly not a warship but it was sunk by an exocet which was originaly destined for the carrier HMS.Hermes.
roythearcher 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 The HMS Ardent was sunk by a number of free fall bombs, not an Exocet.
The RFA Sir Galahad was a troop carrier that was sunk by free fall bombs also, not an Exocet.
You shouldn't just make things up. Out of the Exocets fired in the war, one hit it's target and didn't even explode.
tryithere 1 year ago
@tryithere yes, granted, im no expert on that conflict. i said it as i remember hearing it, and again, that war was irellevant exept for the example of one missile sinking a ship
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 There were three othe British ships sunk but they were sunk by bombs as well.
tryithere 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 Check your facts! only two of all the british ships were sunk by exocet missiles. the rest were sunk by bombs. One exocet was even launched from the back of an articulated lorry trailer, but without the nessary guidance system it missed, literaly by miles!
roythearcher 1 year ago
@roythearcher are you, or are you not saying that anti ship missiles would be ineffective against the iowa, the Falklands conflict is irrelevant, the only hint of relevancy is that 30 year old missiles sunk ships, so modern ones...
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 I'm not saying either! but as these missiles were not designed to inflict damage to WW2 battleships the argument is a bit academic dont you think?
If we had been expected to go into combat with this class of warship then the missiles would have been designed with this in mind and with enough explosive power to sink heavily armoured battleships! But they wern't so what are you trying to say????
All I'm trying to say is get your facts right and then you wont get these comments!!!
roythearcher 1 year ago
@roythearcher for the record i am a bit scatterbrained atm, because i commented on this, and one other bb video, so i have my hands full with comments on both, and i did not mean any hostility, i was just wondering. and no, my original comment was that they would never be reactivated, partly because of costs, and partly because of their vulnerability to modern weapons.
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheRamthor13
"i agree that they are magnificent, and intimidating, however the invention of missiles and fighters have all but made them useless, when one missile could sink them..."
Since you are such an expert, how about if you describe exactly how one missile could penetrate the armor and do enough damage to sink her. Your assertion is fallacy.
BillyRosinet 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@raginroadrunner You are living in fear. Calm down.
LiberalNewsChannel 1 year ago
@raginroadrunner Battle ships are beautiful and elegant however shaped charge warheads have made them obsolete. Shaped charge warheads can penetrate steel armor to a depth of 7 or more times the diameter of the charge's cone. The Harpoon missile has a diameter of 340mm therefore theoretically can penetrate ~2380mm of armor whereas the penetrating power of an AP 16” round at point blank range is only ~829mm. The thickest armour on the Iowa’s was only ~ 500mm.
bcaodp01 1 year ago
@bcaodp01 actually a while back the navy fired a harpoon missile at a 16" thick slab of class a armor and all it did was charr the metal. yes harpoons deal serious damage.... to modern steel armor, which is much weaker molecularly than the class a armor they put in the battleships. secondly the iowa' s have an internal armor belt meaning theoreticaly harpoon would hit the smaller outer layer of sts armor first, detonating the missle, before it even reaches the main belt..
Jed844 11 months ago
@Jed844
That's all nice and good until you realize that unlike most other SSMs the Harpoon doesn't have a Shaped Charge warhead.
As a rule of thumb, a shaped charge can penetrate ~7 times its diameter worth of RHS. For the Kh-35 that equates to something in the vicinity of 9½ foot.
Quite a bit more than the 12.1 inches of armour found on the Iowas, even when you take the better quality into account
chrthiel 8 months ago
@raginroadrunner The 16” guns only have an average hit rate of ~32.7% whereas Harpoons have close to 100% hit rate. Furthermore the range of the Harpoon is ~124km compared to ~39km for 16” shells.
bcaodp01 1 year ago
@bcaodp01 true however, they did their duty.
Question to everyone, what was the Calibre of the Iowa Class Battleship 16" gun?
bobbycv64 1 year ago
@bobbycv64 pretty sure you answered that yourself........ 16"
NorgeJoe 1 year ago
@NorgeJoe
Sorry, wrong answer, the answer is 50 calibre.
BB55 - 60 were 16" x 45 calibre
BB61 - 64 were 16" x 50 calibre
Naval Calibre / Army Cannon is the distance of the barrel divided by the diameter of the barrel, the higher the calibre the farther distance.
Small arms Calibre is only the diameter.
bobbycv64 11 months ago
@bobbycv64 Aha. Learn something new every day. =) Well done.
NorgeJoe 11 months ago
@bobbycv64 they where 50 calibre
Jed844 11 months ago
@Jed844 WELL DONE AND CORRECT :-)
Tell that to most people and they will give you the OLD DEER IN THE LIGHT look.
bobbycv64 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bobbycv64 they were 50 calibre
Jed844 11 months ago
@canadiandrummer54 well arnt u an ass
xXSuperSandvichXx 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 LOL...!!! The cowardy prick liberal ran far, far away....
TerraceYouth 1 year ago
I come to YouTube to watch videos. If I wanted to view a photo slide-show I would go to Flickr or Photobucket.
rja12 1 year ago
ha canadian drummer couldn't stand the heat so he removed his comments .
MetalApocalypse999 1 year ago 2
lmao you guys are fighting with a canadian that has lady gaga videos on his channel lmfao!!!
McWolfcastle 1 year ago 2
@canadiandrummer54 What planet are you living on you stupid bastard? You had better look in a mirror when you talk about scum of the earth You dumb ass racist prick
bigguy4570 1 year ago 4
I was on that boat for a school feld trip about 3y ago. This amazing inside and scary at some parts!!!
DrWinterfrrsh 1 year ago
these ships were works of art, I miss them. we should have just given them to Israel instead of letting them go to rust.
nariiscryer 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 you're telling us about racism? You racist prick. Do the world a favor and lock yourself in a room for the rest of your life. Stop polluting the world with your ignorance, racism, and stupidity. Your ass is blocked.
NorgeJoe 1 year ago 22
Yo asshole I don't give a shit about the Middle East. Your muslim friends and the jews. With that said the muslims are any better than the jews? We should revert back to the days when the Middle East was nothing more than colonies of the British and French.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 I've had just about enough of your ignorant shit ranting. Have you NO insight WHATSOEVER! You let yourself be SPOON FED what the left wing media has to tell you. You know NOTHING of what is really going on in the world. Keep playing your guitar, you idiot, and have yourself castrated so your absolute disgusting lack of intelligence won't get spread any further through this world! YOU are the one who has to open your eyes, you liberal hippie.
NorgeJoe 1 year ago 13
@NorgeJoe test
lander4545 4 months ago
LOLUMAD!? Do something about it. Oh wait those assbag arab countries tried in 1948-1949, 1956, 1967, 1973 to list the major wars. They failed each time. While I am no fan of the Jews. That has to be some kind of record.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
sea. The fastest fast battleships ever launched. Just like with Spain, Germany, Italy, Russia, etc. Your country probably looked with envy towards the UK when they ran things. Now you look with envy towards the USA. The battleship the ultimate representation of naval power. Of course your trash country never had a battleship in its navy back then. Nor does it possess a carrier today. So just sit there in your second place in world affairs.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
Last time I checked it was the terrorists that fired the first shot at the USA and UN forces. When BB-62 arrived on seen typical of their nature the terrorists fled. As far as it being a "murdering piece of shit." #1 what is a battleship. An unsinkable floating gun platform. Key word gun. What does a gun do? It kills people. Just like the when your heroes strap bombs to their bodies. # Piece of shit. Good one. This very "piece of shit belongs to the greatest class of battleship to ever put to
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Shut up Canadian fag ball licker. You Canadian's are nothing but homo's.
boosten323 1 year ago
Shut up Canadian fag ball licker. You Canadian's are nothing but homo's.
boosten323 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54
Go to hell, you arrogant fuck-tard ;)
mrcraig41 1 year ago
@mrcraig41 Ahh canada with a small c. where my american dollar can buy and sell those wanabe frenchies. Come by and see the Battleships in Camden NJ or Pearl Harbor
battleship62 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 Americans love to fight beciuse they are good at it. if not for rules of engagement the USA would own the world. cant help it if your country is jealous. afterall almost every good invention comes from the US.
battleship62 1 year ago
@battleship62 seriously whats wrong with you? If it wasnt for rules of engagement? If it wasnt for rules of engagement the US would already be wiped off the face of this earth by China which would seriously do 90% of the world inhabitants quite a big favour...
flasher395 2 months ago
@flasher395 Chinese cant cross the street on a green light cant drive a car cant design their own technology the only reason they live in battle is because of rules of engagement by the us.show me an educated Chinese and ill show you an Americanized chink
battleship62 2 months ago
@battleship62 Okay, did you ever have the idea that you are racist and way to patriotic? Think about if for a asecond even though i dont think that you really get a result. The chinese may have copyed many things, but they are like 1,2billion, how do you think america could stand against them in a battle? They would be annihilated, maybe not because of technology, but because of shere numbers. And your narrow view of the chinese is totally wrong too, they have invented many things.
flasher395 2 months ago
@flasher395 Technology > Numbers. Moron.
MessatsuHadoken 1 week ago
@MessatsuHadoken To answer it your way:
Psychally retarded persons > You ... Moron.
Now to answer it in an intelligent way:
Germany had better warmachinery than the allies in many aspects during WW2 (just compare tanks, airplane technology, rifles, guns etc.) They still got owned, the reason largely was the enemy's numbers. So you shoudl really stfu if the only things you want to say are unbased pseuda facts and insults.
flasher395 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@flasher395 Psychally? Fucking retard. Go back to call of duty. Technology > Numbers. Idiot German.
MessatsuHadoken 6 days ago
@canadiandrummer54 "A murdering piece of shit" is all to necessary for national security. Rest assured, though, future "murdering pieces of shit" would shit their loads straight from the air or space-ouch for teh terrorists...
tehnewblife 1 year ago
. and so machines of destruction are part of that process. is it wrong that cavemen used sticks and stones to kill their potential lunch? those may very well be considered tools or machines for more efficient killing that made it safer/efficient/more succesfull for the caveman to keep out of harms way allowing them to fight another day.
battleship62 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 *continuation* If good people (like the US, UK, etc) don't have and maintain these machines, then bad people will have them, and better ones that they will undoubtedly use to murder, kill and destroy US. That is YOU, and ME, and your FAMILY. Do you really have too much trouble understanding that?
NorgeJoe 1 year ago 3
@canadiandrummer54 if you don't worry about having effective weapons of war, then someone else with malicious intent in the world will. It is our job to safeguard the free world against them. You might remember Japan and Germany during the 1940's, though I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if you don't, that we had to defend the free world against. I don't mean to be conceited here, but you might just be one of the least intelligent and illogical people I've heard of in a very long time.
NorgeJoe 1 year ago
@NorgeJoe
you can't educate pork NorgeJoe, just let him slip back into his hippy fantasy doo-daa land.
HelmutVillam 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 IF I were President, I would make it illegal to be stupid.
battleship62 1 year ago
@battleship62 lol
seanfleming1 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 everything outside of hand to hand combat ( fist fight) is to some degree a potential killing machine bro. Rifles, Kives. Grenades, Tanks. Battleships. Yea they are for More efficient killing. The US is proud of it . they started the whole country w/ a few hundred people and now would rule the world if we didnt abide by the rules of engagement and fought dirty like other countries.
battleship62 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 Well , me I liked doing my job face to face w/ my enemy . U.S. Army ....Bosnia(99) , OIF(2003-04 & 2007-08) 11B-10 Inf (Primery) & 14S-10 ADA Stinger/Avenger Operator (secondery) MOS . The reason I commented on this is becouse my father served on this ship that is full of history . And one of the greatest ships that I set foot on . So if you don't like this page...WELL MOVE THE HELL ON!!
HellHoundRat 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 wow man, u sound like a future terrorist youself or perhaps your children will be. or maybe just some anti Military GAY FAGGOT from San Francisco.really no disrespect intended. just sounds like that.
battleship62 1 year ago
A great ship. My father was station ed on the ship when it got recommishioned in 83.
President Ragon & Queen Elizabith the III . Long Baech ,Ca . peir 19 . I was only 9 years old at the time.
HellHoundRat 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 You are just jealous that Canada just has a few junk ships with no guns. lol
1STACCS 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 says the coward.
TheLoganlover21 1 year ago
@canadiandrummer54 this "piece of shit" was a vital tool that has been used to keep your ignorant ass safe and free. So sleep well, and appreciate your freedom and safety.
NorgeJoe 1 year ago 4
A place I once called HOME
battleship62 1 year ago
@battleship62 Did you ever knew anyone by Mathew Aldaba? He was a E7 or E8 at the time ...if I remember correctly.
HellHoundRat 1 year ago
@HellHoundRat sorry, I was an E-5 16 inch turret 2 Gunner in 1988-89 didnt hang out with E7-8
battleship62 1 year ago
My dad got pissed that I joined the Army. This is a video during my 2nd toure in Mosul, Iraq .
HellHoundRat 1 year ago
@battleship62 no problem...
HellHoundRat 1 year ago
if i had the money, i would buy them :P
mainminevin 1 year ago
these ships are currently driving us into more and more debt . Im sure China will buy them for a million because we're sure not using them>>>>
Elect4Sure 1 year ago
No, even though they are in Mothball, doesn't mean the US won't bring them out, they are just waiting for the chance to strike, trust me bud, one daythe Black Dragoon will rain hell from the sea
mirlin235 1 year ago
@mirlin235 you crazy! They are not erver ever ever ever going to bring them gas clunkers back.
Elect4Sure 1 year ago
Oh hell yeah they would, if there was a totally need for them then yes, its like the USAF, they have a number of aircraft out, but also have a number in storage ready to called out at a moments notice
mirlin235 1 year ago
@mirlin235 ok now I see. thumbs up!!!
Elect4Sure 1 year ago
Lol yeah, but remeber its only when they are critical needed, nothing other than that
mirlin235 1 year ago
it was a good video, produce another one :)
ShortCardinalsFan262 1 year ago
I actually got to bunk onboard this ship for a weekend. It was an amazing trip!!!!
Mav1843 2 years ago
I could visit her a few years ago. Telling the truth I was sexually stimulated by her beauty when being on board. They hardly could kick me out when it was closing time.
marceeee22 2 years ago
kind of sad her 2 sisters where never finished USS Illinois and USS Kentucky
Wiki them. they where being made stronger than the other 4 all-welded construction, lighter and stronger than the other Iowas
Mrbob200 2 years ago
@Mrbob200 Thanks!...I did not know about her sisters. On Wiki, I also found out about the Montana Class.
Thanks again:)
anajencia 2 years ago
i didnt know that
tomanyasses 2 years ago
Yeah. In a very technical sense. But not "lighter and stronger" in any way that would actually be evident in combat...
iowa61 2 years ago
Deployed with the Jersey on an accompanying ship in 1983. I've got some good shots of those 16 inch guns firing too. It's quite a site to see up close.
Quantanthead 2 years ago
i was there 2day
bewhite08 2 years ago
Iowa61, I share your viewpoint, but the danger of using them is that they are vulnerable with a crew of 1800+ one of them would be an awesome trophy for potential enemy. I think they would be excellent as diplomacy pieces rather than wartime.
InquiringMind63 2 years ago
Not true at all. Actually, the IOWAs are the LEAST "vulnerable" ships in existence. There is quite literally, nothing afloat as tough to sink as an IOWA. They were built specifically with the presumption they would be hit, yet still retain fighting capability. All other naval vessels, even the big carriers, are far more vulnerable than an IOWA...
iowa61 2 years ago 3
that right, i have the book on the iowa bb61 my dad was on it ww2.
tomanyasses 2 years ago
i slept on that ship for a feild trip
rickysaysbye 2 years ago
If they were the same class, then they were the same size, which they were. The USS Iowa was unique though, because it was the only Navy ship that ever had a bath tub before or since.
KiaKing 2 years ago
Some were larger than others. Not by much though, but some had individual modifications and stuff. Like the New Jersey and the Wisconsin.
NorgeJoe 2 years ago
For all intents and purposes, they are identical. Rumor has it that one may be a few inches longer than the others. Please. No difference.
iowa61 2 years ago
The ships were practically identical. Some things like AAW layout may have been slightly different. But the ships hull dimensions, tower heights, armor thickness...etc were all the same. Technically the Wisconsin is 11 inches longer then the other three. She collided with a destroyer and the removed her damaged bow, replacing it with the bow of the unfinished Kentucky. Thus her length increase.
Cirux321 2 years ago
@Cirux321 11 inches longer. They should have painted it black.
tryithere 2 years ago
Just took the Tour of the big J. It was the only battleship to have 2 swimming pools on deck. You can see this on the display model in during the tour. The pools came from two AA guns that were removed but not caped off yet when she was quickly commisioned again.
229guy 2 years ago
And a two level conning tower for flag staff...
iowa61 2 years ago
Wisconsin is actually a few feet longer due to a repair in the 1950s when her bow was damaged and in order to fix her fast they cut her bow off and welded on the bow off the unfinished Iowa USS Kentucky.
roaklin 2 years ago
I was a part of the Jersey Battlegroup in 1983. I got to see and take pictures of these guns going off back then. It was quite an amazing sight to see. Signe, Member of USS John A. Moore FFG-19
Quantanthead 3 years ago
Wow, cool. Well thank you for your service :)
NorgeJoe 2 years ago
Thanks for supporting our great nation. You easily earned my respect.
turkey12356 2 years ago
The tour guide told us that the USS New Jersey was the largest of them all, but he might be wrong...
NorgeJoe 3 years ago
I was told the same thing when I visited her in Camden, NJ. I was told she was 7 inches longer than her sisters.
InquiringMind63 2 years ago
I think the USS Kentucky was to be BB 65. The bow was removed and put on USS Wisconsin, which had a collision with the USS Eaton, a destroyer in the late '50's.
danielrause 3 years ago
The Kentucky was approx. 65% complete in Philadelphia when her construction was canceled.
InquiringMind63 2 years ago
The USS New Jersey is an IOWA class battleship along with the Missouri, Wisconsin, and Iowa.
expertmarksman16 3 years ago
LOL! I CANNOT believe I made that mistake! Thanks for pointing that out to me. I knew that... sorry.
NorgeJoe 3 years ago
No sweat man, if you really want your mind blown look up the Montana class, its a shame none were ever built.
expertmarksman16 3 years ago
Heh, yeah... too bad. :P
NorgeJoe 3 years ago
well they weren't really needed sense we have Missile cruisers
SpywareHater 3 years ago
Well, these were fully outfitted with Tomahauk cruise missiles. And, yes. You're right. ;)
NorgeJoe 3 years ago
True they weren't needed in modern times, but you know there's no substitute for Battleship Diplomacy. Carriers have to be kept out of site, but battleships with all the armor, can be deployed in sight.
InquiringMind63 2 years ago 2
They are badly needed in modern times. To this day, no weapons platform can do what they do. USN has limited or no effective naval gunfire support capability since the IOWAs were mothballed...
iowa61 2 years ago
How could we get an Iowa class BB to Afghanistan?
Trekkerjon 2 years ago
Afghanistan is land-locked... ;)
NorgeJoe 2 years ago
Unfortunately, they don't have the defences necessary to operate in hostile coastal waters. Sure, their armour will keep them from sinking, but it won't save the RADARs and all the other stuff that makes it capable of doing its job.
chrthiel 2 years ago
@chrthiel
Thats why they dont go out alone. Just like modern day carriers. The Iowa's make an outstanding Command platform. Can lay more ordinance on coastal targets in a short amount of time then any other vessel. Can survive the most punishing of attacks. But alone they can be vulnerable. With an array of Arliegh-Burkes/Ticonderogas and Sub screens, they however, are still quite capable weapons platforms.
Cirux321 2 years ago
@Cirux321
Sorry, but no. You do not send a multi billion platform and 1800 crew members into a hotspot without giving them some way of defending themselves, which the Iowa's don't have, at all.
And they suck as command platforms. Sure, they've got plenty of space, but the electronics fit is between 20 and 50 years old.
And while it's true that the armour will keep the ship afloat, it won't protect all the radars and other sensors that it uses to guide its weapons from being destroyed.
chrthiel 2 years ago
@chrthiel
did you even bother reading what I said? Read it again. I said thats why they DONT GO OUT ALONE. They always had/will have (if ever used again) a contingent of cruisers and/or destroyers for both air defense capability and ASW. Secondly, yes they do make excellent command platforms. They were modernized in the 80's with technology that went well into the next decade and would be so again if activated to service with newer communications and data links.
Cirux321 2 years ago
@chrthiel
Furthermore, a battleships external sensors/radars were always exposed. However to pin-point target its radar/sensors alone is a million to one shot. Anti-ship weaponry would likely strike the side of the ships hull or the deck, not the ships masts. Which in any event they have contingency back-ups. Their guns can be operated without radar. Their missiles can be fired and then guided by another warship if such a failure were to occur. And yes, they are quite capable of defense.
Cirux321 2 years ago
historically going off the gunnery alone one of these things had multiple layers of fire control, from central to fore and aft then individual turret.... wiping out the radar does dick.
the only thing in history that fucked them up was subs and aircraft, and on a modern front, that's pretty much covered, and as for anti ship missiles?
unless it's got a nuke on and actually HITS it will do dick... they blew one of these babies up with a nuke 110 yards away, ( the nevada) and got fuck all.
scumbucket218 2 years ago
Sorry for the long wait.
The BBs has zilch when it comes to missile defences. All they have are four obsolete Phalanx block 1's.
And there's plenty of anti radiation SSMs out there.
Hitting a radar isn't hard, coalition forces in Iraq demonstrated that quite clearly during the first gulf war. And due to the size and weight of modern radars, you don't carry back-ups.
chrthiel 1 year ago