USS Missouri (BB-63)

Missouri was one of the Iowa-class "fast battleship" designs planned in 1938 by the Preliminary Design Branch at the Bureau of Construction and Repair. She laid down at the Brooklyn Navy Yard on 6 January 1941, was launched on 29 January 1944 and commissioned on 11 June with Captain William Callaghan in command. The ship was the third of the Iowa class, but the fourth and final Iowa-class ship commissioned by the U.S. Navy. The ship was christened at her launching by Mary Margaret Truman, daughter of Harry S. Truman, then a United States Senator from Missouri. Missouri's main battery consisted of nine 16 in (410 mm)/50 cal Mark 7 guns, which could fire 2,700 lb (1,200 kg) armor-piercing shells some 20 mi (32 km). Her secondary battery consisted of 20 5 in (130 mm)/38 cal guns in twin turrets, with a range of about 10 mi (16 km). With the advent of air power and the need to gain and maintain air superiority came a need to protect the growing fleet of allied aircraft carriers; to this end, Missouri was fitted with an array of Oerlikon 20 mm and Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft guns to defend allied carriers from enemy airstrikes. When reactivated in 1984 Missouri had her 20 mm and 40 mm AA guns removed, and was outfitted with Phalanx CIWS mounts for protection against enemy missiles and aircraft, and Armored Box Launchers and Quad Cell Launchers designed to fire Tomahawk missiles and Harpoon missiles, respectively.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Military

[cookiemonsterxlxlx]

Bittemeinrammstein, Why compair Weapons today to the missouri ship? Thats just stupid.

[giro1zm]

3:35 YAMATO :)

[llXBlackOpsXll]

this is one TOUGH ship!!

[PzH200]

Nice! I like those huge canons! the could do somer serious damage I suppose

[dilly2408]

@cookiemonsterxlxlx even in this case....NATO weaponology is far beyond russian weaponology. That guy simply don't understand the comparison between a living legend (USS MISSOURI) and non exisiting legend (no match in russian navy)

[bittemeinrammstein]

@dilly2408 - care to bring FACTS to explain your "bullshit"? You are uneducated twat... simple. How is Su-27 good, and Su-35 bullshit? You're complete moron. Oh hell... you know what equipment is on Kirov kid? DO YOU? holy shit... LMFAO. Iowa have turbine engines. Kirov is nuclear powered dipshit. Iowa carry not aviation, Kirov carry 2 ASW helicopter. Kirov have S-300FM, OSA-MA, TOR, Ak-630, Kashtan-M, and Ak-100 for air defence... Iowa have 20mm Phalanx. xaxaxa... you are so stupid. x)

[bittemeinrammstein]

@dilly2408 - one single Iowa was upgraded with cruise missile, and besides... you think Phalanx can intercept P-700 missile? You are more dumb than I thought. xaxaxa... Tomahawk is cruise missiles who dont have even 30% destructive capability of P-700 missile... jeez.

[dilly2408]

@bittemeinrammstein Not even now the russians ar not capable to match with this technology ! Of course, on the same category of weaponry..... Except Sukhoi 27 and AK 47 Russia is not able to create a real weapon capable to threat the NATO.... T95? bullshit ! Sukhoi 35? Bullshit !

[dilly2408]

@bittemeinrammstein Dude....Iowa class ships doesn't have only that 16 inch guns ! The've been updated during time for modern warfare with modern warning defence(aerial or naval) and weapon systems . Read the files you red dickhead !

Cold War, Gulf War: 9 × 16-inch / 50 cal. Mark 7 guns 12 × 5-inch / 38 cal. Mark 12 guns 32 × BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles 16 × RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missiles 4 × 20 mm / .78 cal.Phalanx CIWS

AN/SLQ-32(V)[4] AN/SLQ-25 Nixie[4] Mark 36 SRBOC