Dick J wrote:
The basic problem with that theory is that the 27 knot BB's didn't survive the major scrapping event of 1959-1961. All were either scrapped or farmed out as museum ships. The Montana's would most likely NOT have been in the navy's inventory in the 1980's timeframe, and therefore would not have seen the opportunity to be upgraded. The Alaska's had a significant upgrade potential as well as the speed, but they also succumbed to the "big scrapping" of '59-'61.
The enemies of the battleships since Pearl Harbor have not been navies, aircraft, or economics. They have been politics. Cliffe B has my Amphibious book by Friedman at the moment, but it was very clearly stated several times during the NGFS studies during the 60s and 70s that even though the requirement was put forward that a minimum force of 2 battleships and 2 heavy cruisers were needed in active status, that "there will be no 16" gun on support ships. There will be no battleships." Politics was the biggest enemy of the battleships, nothing more, and that's why the North Carolinas and South Dakotas were decommissioned. They were brand new ships. If politics had not played into it, they would have been 1200 man fleet flag ships and world-class bombardment ships.
Quote:
The Montana's would most likely NOT have been in the navy's inventory in the 1980's timeframe, and therefore would not have seen the opportunity to be upgraded.
Why not? Just because they were 27 knot ships? I think you might be right but for a different reason. I think they might have been in more danger than any of the other battleships, because they were the most powerful. With 12 16" guns a Montana could equal 6-10 CVNs (depending on air wing) with a 5 minute reaction time for call for fire. The Iowas are powerful enough, but a single Montana would replace the ordnance delivery capability of nearly half the carrier fleet. Since I am a glass-is-half-full guy, I say a single Montana would add nearly 50% delivery power to the capital ship fleet.
What the readers would find interesting is their over-load speed would have greatly exceeded 27 knots. If their over-load horse power curves met what the Iowas did, then the Montanas would have been able to make 30 knots. The Iowas sustained 35 knots on a heavy load and 37 knots lightened up a little and Wisconsin made 39 with a 1/3 16" magazine load and maximum power-plant output.
Here are a few examples for the political issue with battleships: The decommissioning of the USS New Jersey after Vietnam is the prime example and the secondary is the decommissionings in 1990-1991. New Jersey was the most effective weapon used during her tour off Vietnam. The Vietnamese had one condition at the Paris Pease Talks of that year: "Get that New Jersey thing away from our coast or we will never come back." They didn't mention the B-52 carpet bombings or the super carriers. There was no real reason for the Iowas to go in the '90s only excuses. They were all 4 going to receive Mk41 Mod0 VLS, Sea Sparrow, a bunch of little things, and 16" ERGM rounds and a SLEP to push them to 2010 before another SLEP had to be considered. Bases in NY for Iowa, Long Beach for New Jersey, I believe Pearl for Missouri, and Corpus Christi for Wisconsin were built to support a battleship battle group.
The other thing, speed, you can only go as fast as your slowest escort. Perrys cannot make more than 27 knots in Sea State 4 or greater. Amphibious groups do not go faster than 27 knots. Only if you are surrounded by Burkes and Ticos can you drive at 33 knots, and even then you have to slow the whole group down so your escorts can cool down. So, the 33 knot business is still ridiculous. Anytime a carrier sprints somewhere at 30+ knots it always leaves its group behind or its group gets a head start on it.
Quote:
BTW, the slow BB speed was 21 knots rather than 24. The 22-23 knot modernized New Mexico's were an exception rather than the rule in the USN.
Yep, I apologize. I was typing too fast and hit the wrong key. I didn't know that New Mexico had a faster speed. What made that possible? Did they go to all the effort of a replacing the propulsion plant, remove weight or what?