navydavesof wrote:
The quote function double quoted half way down.It's not within 5 miles.
I was being Ironic.
navydavesof wrote:
It's not within 5 miles, you just have to be aware of the damage the overpressure, especially repeated discharges, causes on modern electronics. Right around the barrels, the pressure winds up being between 10-20 PSI, and that is right where the 57mm guns are placed. If Turret 2 were to fire over the shoulder, the muzzles would be close to the 57mm guns. The 57mm guns have a Kevlar strengthened fiberglass weather shield, not the STS armor protection of the 5"/38caliber mounts. So, unless you want to greatly reduce the arc of Turret 2's fire, then yes, it is a bad position, a very bad position.
I'm aware of overpressure & electronics, you harden the mounts, according to you I could win a battle without needing AP ammo at all, just fire HE with prox fuses & blow all your systems away without ever actually hitting your ship, just get near. if a system can't be protected from near misses then it's not "Military grade". all gun housings on a BB should have some armor protection. (even if you have to redesign an off-the-shelf system
navydavesof wrote:
Yes, the bow 40mm on the Newport News was destroyed in a storm and was never replaced. But that's not the issue. The 30mm Bushmasters are heavily electronically controlled, not manually like the WWII tech. The Bushmasters have electro optical guidance and electric drive that cannot withstand the wash the 20mm and 40mm guns could.
Thats what "weather" shields are for.
navydavesof wrote:
You have to take into account that the USN does not employ boats the same way the did in WWII. Also with his configuration the space where the Iowas originally had boats is now taken up By Harpoons and VLS tubes.
you design the ships as needed then operate around that.
navydavesof wrote:
A single ship should not be tasked with fighting the whole war, nor would she.
If so, would she be there by her self or would she be accompanied by other fire support ships, carriers, USAF, etc? She does not need to fight the whole war by herself, and you really could not afford to arm her to do it, either.
I didn't say she would, but she might find herself the only available support in a given situation (happened a number of times is Vietnam where fire support was needed but unavailable), if she can carry it then she needs it.
navydavesof wrote:
I don't think you understand how much internal space the AGS requires. The single full AGS would consume the entire bow of a DDG-51. Similar on a BB, the entire space from Mount 51 to 52 would be consumed by a single mount. So, no, there is not plenty of room for the full AGS mount in the mounts in question.
I'm fully aware, you seem unaware of how much volume is available in a BB. they would fit.
navydavesof wrote:
Another thing you must keep in mind, is that the 57mm gun is almost as large as a Mk45 5" gun. That takes up a lot of deck space anywhere you put it.
do you mean the pysical size or the firepower???
either way it's smaller, the tiny shells are near useless in NGSF & the range is not much more than the beach, why the Navy downgraded to a much smaller gun IDK.
navydavesof wrote:
Why mix so many calibers to do the same job? Why not chose one over the other?
There are lots of Mk15s out there. Are you referring to the Phalanx CIWS? Why have it be autonomous instead of coordinating its fire with the rest of the self defense suite?
the only advantage the Mk15 (yes Phalanx duh) has over the Breda is it's autonomous ability to defend against a sudden threat (like a sub launched missile) the 40mm has longer range, can be fed from below to have effectively unlimited ammo & has a wider spread. so I design mine to use these as the primary AMS & Mk15s of GAU-8s as autonomous backups.