The Ship Model Forum

Maintaining battleships much beyond 1960 would not be a rational decision. Its execution could also be expected to be dominated by something other than rationality.

[quote="Timmy C"]Would it not be probable that the Iowas would be used for spare parts to upkeep Montana, rather than the other way around?[/quote]
The [i]Iowas[/i] were valued for their speed. The [i]South Dakota[/i] would have been the most economical to operate, based on fuel and manning needs. She was also designed with additional flag spaces only [i]Iowa[/i] and [i]Maine[/i] would have had otherwise. [i]Montana[/i] would have had nothing to offer a post-war navy except a very large crew requirement.

Would it not be probable that the Iowas would be used for spare parts to upkeep Montana, rather than the other way around?

Doubt it.

She might of beaten Vanguard to the breakers yard

[quote="richter111"]

Just imagine the Montana pulling up outside your coast.



Ric[/quote]


It would induce fear in small powers no more severe than would an Iowa, and it would induce laughter in big powers no more side splitting than would an Iowa.

My guess, (for what it is worth) is that she would have followed the career of the Iowa class ships. It was a prestige weapon platform. Just as the Iowas were.

Just imagine the Montana pulling up outside your coast.

Today it would be a museum piece somewhere.

Ric

[quote="Anonymous"]At the end of the WWII some of the South Dakotas were said to be capable of only 25 knots. North Carolina always had a vibration induced speed restriction that effectively made them 23 knot ships except under extreme emergencies. Postwar studies to modernize either class always involved replacing their engineering plants.[/quote]
All the newer battleships had some issues with vibration, as did the [i]Atlanta[/i]s and a few other types. As to their relative speeds, each class suffered as the topweight of AA batteries was added. [i]Iowa[/i] lost 1 knot for each foot of displacement over her design draft. The same was very much the case for the other modern battleships. Therefore, reports of their top speed are not indications of their material condition but of their overweight, which was immediately remedied on ships in commission after V-J Day.

The study to increase the speed of [i]South Dakota[/i] was not taken as a result of any deficiency in her plant, but as a consideration of how to employ her in company with the new 35 knot supercarriers like [i]Forrestal[/i]. The USN was in such poverty in the period 1946-1980, that any economy was considered, even if it was trying to wring a few more years out of a thoroughly obsolete ship. In the end, the mothball fleet was disposed of not because the ships were less valuable, but because the cost to maintain them was impinging on the (proportionally) ever smaller budget the Navy was allotted. The only time the postwar USN got it's due was under the AEgis of Secretary John Lehmann.

as I recall, [i]South Dakota & Massachusetts[/i] were extensively refit after the end of the war and stayed in commission an extra year, the other two going directly into mothballs at the end of their service. [i]North Carolina & Washinton[/i] were in good enough condition to spend another year active in the Atlantic before heading to mothballs.

The war ended so abruptly and many of the battleships, even the older ones, had been cared for in the period between the landings on Okinawa and V-J Day in anticipation of Operation Olympic, scheduled to begin in the autumn. None of them were in a bad way materially, even the old reciprocating ships like [i]Arkansas[/i] and [i]Texas[/i] were ready for the next phase, and a few newer ones like [i]Colorado[/i] were being fit with the latest blind-fire Radar fire controls and still heavier AA batteries.

At the end of the WWII some of the South Dakotas were said to be capable of only 25 knots. North Carolina always had a vibration induced speed restriction that effectively made them 23 knot ships except under extreme emergencies. Postwar studies to modernize either class always involved replacing their engineering plants.

After WW2 the North Carolinas, and South Dakotas were in good material condition. Montana as a 'one of' class would have been a candidate for scrapping because of that fact. Most likely Montana would have been maintained in reserve as a source of spares for the Iowa class. She would have been scrapped in the early 1960s after spending ten years as a spare part source. Like Kentuckey she would have been picked over badly when Kennedy was president. Kentuckey had provided a new bow for the Wisconsin after she collided with another ship.

[quote="Alpha 54"]What would have happened if at least one Monatana had been built and completed?Would it have been scrapped like the Carolina's and South Dakota's or modernized like the Iowa's.The only reason I think they might have scrapped is there speed of 28 knots.[/quote]


Not necessarily. South Dakotas and North Carolinas were somewhat worn out by war service. Montana would have been brand new and unaffected by war service. Also, the emotional impact of some special traits of the ship should not be underestimated. If Montana were completed, not only would she be the biggest and strongest American battleship, so also has a solid claim to being the biggest and strongest battleship in the world. This kind of trait would have some definite, if hard to quantify, life extending attributes. This is especially true when military policy and budget is substantially effected by the fluff of emotionalism as is often the case with US defense budgets.

I agree that there would be little likelihood the ship would survive the end of the 1950s, unless her greater bulk would have made a conversion into a half-amphibious landing ship possible.

The [i]South Dakota[/i]s were considered for conversion to amphibious support carriers at the end of the 1950s, and rejected on cost grounds. The 28 knot speed would have been no impediment in a 25 knot amphibious fleet.

A possible argument against a [i]Montana[/i] amphibious ship is the removal of the two after turrets and foundations would have upset the trim even worse than in [i]South Dakota[/i], which was cited as a reason not to convert her in 1960 (and the [i]Iowa[/i]s to hybrid assault carriers two decades later).

Remember, a 16-inch turret, barbette and foundation weighs the same 3,000 tons Chuck asserted did not flood [i]Musashi[/i]'s interior compartments after the very first torpedo hit.

Scrapped no doubt. Of little use to the modern post war USN. The concept was a decade out of date. Not to say it wasn't a fine idea in it's time.

Bob B.

What would have happened if at least one Monatana had been built and completed?Would it have been scrapped like the Carolina's and South Dakota's or modernized like the Iowa's.The only reason I think they might have scrapped is there speed of 28 knots.