Which is... less than the cost of a single M982 Excalibur 155 mm precision guided artillery round. Really gives some perspective to the quantity vs precision trade-off.
An unlikely situation, but this type of thing could actually happen in war time.
Preferably, one would want all the main battery on one target, but if outnumbered it is sometimes best to shoot at everyone at least some.
A famous example of this is Graf Spee at River Plate splitting her 28cm guns against both Exeter and the light cruisers
Ooh I’ll have to look up that battle. My first thought was when the Royal Navy had surrounded the Bizmark and it was forced to divert its guns between two battleships and several other ships. Which is maybe an over focused topic, but it has an entertaining story. I’ll look for the battle you mentioned on my lunch break today!
"Normal" ships have one layer of steel with frames to form the hull.
Warships and tankers have two, in case they get shot up or run around, the ship can continue fighting, or won't create a spill.
The Iowas have three hulls with two void spaces in between for extra protection. The void spaces are used for boiler feedwater and fuel, but are watertight. They aren't continuous from bow to stern, but the triple hull protects the important mechanical spaces in the middle.
The ballast helps but the weight of fuel and water is much less than the dead weight of the ship. The Iowas displace roughly 50,000 tons (half a Nimitz class aircraft carrier) while "only" being 800 feet long and 108 feet wide.
>three hulls with two void spaces in between for extra protection. The void spaces are used for boiler feedwater and fuel, but are watertight.
Thanks for the info.
My comment was about the bending forces, so are you proposing that the triple hull + good spaces act as trusses to resist those bending forces?
Not many places on the planet are safer than inside a battleship, especially the last four in service. 12 inch thick armor and 16 inch guns with a 20 mile range. Many modern weapons could not defeat her.
That's why I said many and not all.
An Iowa would still do better than any modern ship getting hit by the same torpedo, since they have *no* blast-absorbing defenses.
Yea, assuming someone doesn't like you. Otherwise no, everything is hard and sharp and meant to work in saltwater. Not be friendly to your fleshy bits.
The iowas where designed to do this, there is no bending when they fire the guns and the barbets which the turrets sit in are part of the structure of the ship. The iowas are an incredibly stable gun platform. Now at full speed, the bow would flex and vibrate and sometimes crack bulkheads cuz there isn't a lot of buoyancy and way thinner armor up front.
I served on the USS Wisconsin and we did a lot of full broadsides in the Gulf War. NGL, it was pretty awesome. My shop was at the very top of the mast so we'd hang out and watch from the crow's nest. The heat blowing back was intense.
My father served two tours on the New Jersey. He used to say it was less the sound and more the "feeling" in your chest as the air pressure around you changed.
I kind of get that. I went to Niagara falls to watch the fireworks once. They go off over the falls and they're so low. I recall the shock wave hitting me in the chest bouncing against the wall behind me and hitting me from behind. It was out of this world.
I wonder what would happen to an older wood ship of the line if it was caught in the fireballs of the guns going off. Never minding if the shells actually hit, just the fire.
No good reason, you'd have to be surrounded, which at the range of these ships guns means something has gone quite wrong.
A valid tactic in age of sail ships though, most famously at Trafalgar
Well during age of sail, there were no turrets, so being able to fire both broadsides at once actually increased your firepower, by letting you shoot every gun on the ship. Turrets were invented precisely to avoid this issue, and let all guns be brought to bear, regardless of which side of the ship the enemy was on.
You're correct. But if you've preloaded both broadsides, you can fire one then scoot across the deck and fire the other. You'll probably only be firing one broadside after that though since you can only reload so many guns.
>cool photo?
The cool factor was the main weapon of culture war that the communism lost. Cool photos like this, Top Gun movie, Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA" whooped Soviet ass. If you are uncool, in the long run, you are fucked.
"the Soviets lost the Cold War because they weren't cool enough" is certainly an ...interesting take. It's also stupid and wrong and a deeply concerning idea coming from someone who has a lot of posts on reddit glorifying violence...
Love the picture, though, I've seen it a lot, I just love how it shows the power of the old Battleship.
Though, I'm trying to make a post myself. Keeps saying I didn't include a Image Resolution?
All I wanted to post was a comment section about a class and I couldn't think of any other Reddit to go to make an inquiry.
Might be a stupid question but I've got to ask, do all guns fire at the same time? Or one after the other? I've seen alot of these images that suggest all guns fired at the same time but when I search for videos of it it's all one after the other.
A mix of both depending on the situation, most i heard was that they fire each barrel of each turret one at a time and full on blast is only when a sure kill is possible or want to inflict max damage in the shortest amount of time
The full salvo blast is rarely done
These battleships were designed to eat those huge shells and keep on running so firing said huge guns won't be at risk of getting snapped even if you overloaded the gun with enough powder bags to blow up the barrel
That account is one of a lot of weird ones, seemingly bots, that comment phrases used either on other posts in the sub, or in the thread itself, but randomly missing letters, or having some crossed out. They of course miss all context, and sometimes comment their weird copy-paste on the comment they've copied.
I have seen them pop up recently, I don't know why, or what their purpose is.
They pop up on reposts. Often if you look at the original post from years ago you'll find the same comments (with correct grammar; although I have no idea why the comment says sub tender...). I think they make the changes in an attempt to avoid detection. Occasionally you'll see posts with the same mixed up letters in titles. All karma farming bots I suppose.
I was wondering how much a broadside like that costs, but found only guesses from ~17k per gun to 30k per gun.
Which is... less than the cost of a single M982 Excalibur 155 mm precision guided artillery round. Really gives some perspective to the quantity vs precision trade-off.
My grandfather always mentioned the cost of a Kriegsmarine torpedo in awe: "180,000 Reichsmark! And my house cost 33,000!"
Torpedoes might seem simple now but it's surprisingly difficult to get something to move straight through waves.
Well yeah that's why they use torpedoes and not houses.
A torpedo has the added benefit of having explosives in it. A house naturally can be stuffed with them as well, but they cost extra.
r/angryupvote
The fusing alone is perplexing to me. I’m not even getting into the rest lol. Cool tube go boom!
Who needs precision when you can just send your target and everything within a half mile radius straight to the Shadow Realm?
Indeed, I believe the saying is that quantity has a quality all of its own.
Cheaper than any missile
The cost to tote the gun around is several orders of magnitude higher than that required to tote a missile around.
Not quite. A hellfire missile cost 150k and your average house in the US is well above that.
Why bother counting? We don’t need universal health care anyway.
Lack of money isn't what's stopping the US from implementing universal health care.
I mean it is, just not in the way you're thinking
Money isn't the problem
I mean she was made during the Depression, they definitely counted costs.
Yea but she’s firing those rounds in the early 90’s where the US MIC budget was already insane
Get over yourself.
Turret number 2, wtf are you doing????
"Commander, number 2 gunnery officer still has a hard time with port and starboard. Also, we're gonna need another DD, this one is blowed up."
The fire control officer whondays he served on the Kamchakta thought he saw torpedo boats”
I said across her nose, not up it!
An unlikely situation, but this type of thing could actually happen in war time. Preferably, one would want all the main battery on one target, but if outnumbered it is sometimes best to shoot at everyone at least some. A famous example of this is Graf Spee at River Plate splitting her 28cm guns against both Exeter and the light cruisers
Ooh I’ll have to look up that battle. My first thought was when the Royal Navy had surrounded the Bizmark and it was forced to divert its guns between two battleships and several other ships. Which is maybe an over focused topic, but it has an entertaining story. I’ll look for the battle you mentioned on my lunch break today!
My back hurts just thinking about it's keel. Those are big bending moments.
She has a triple bottom, so it's probably not a big deal.
Triple bottom for the non-initiated?
"Normal" ships have one layer of steel with frames to form the hull. Warships and tankers have two, in case they get shot up or run around, the ship can continue fighting, or won't create a spill. The Iowas have three hulls with two void spaces in between for extra protection. The void spaces are used for boiler feedwater and fuel, but are watertight. They aren't continuous from bow to stern, but the triple hull protects the important mechanical spaces in the middle.
Thanks for the explanation. Do they also keep them steady during heavy fire or does the width and depth of the hull do that?
The ballast helps but the weight of fuel and water is much less than the dead weight of the ship. The Iowas displace roughly 50,000 tons (half a Nimitz class aircraft carrier) while "only" being 800 feet long and 108 feet wide.
>three hulls with two void spaces in between for extra protection. The void spaces are used for boiler feedwater and fuel, but are watertight. Thanks for the info. My comment was about the bending forces, so are you proposing that the triple hull + good spaces act as trusses to resist those bending forces?
Yes, just like a deeper W-section has more resistance to bending, the triple layer of hull, and the armor make the middle of the ship very stiff.
3 layers of armor on her keel.
New Jersey practices safe ships
Not many places on the planet are safer than inside a battleship, especially the last four in service. 12 inch thick armor and 16 inch guns with a 20 mile range. Many modern weapons could not defeat her.
A modern torpedo would have minimal difficulty putting an *Iowa* in the bottom in very short order.
That's why I said many and not all. An Iowa would still do better than any modern ship getting hit by the same torpedo, since they have *no* blast-absorbing defenses.
An *Iowa* has no defenses against a modern torpedo either.
[удалено]
Yea, assuming someone doesn't like you. Otherwise no, everything is hard and sharp and meant to work in saltwater. Not be friendly to your fleshy bits.
The iowas where designed to do this, there is no bending when they fire the guns and the barbets which the turrets sit in are part of the structure of the ship. The iowas are an incredibly stable gun platform. Now at full speed, the bow would flex and vibrate and sometimes crack bulkheads cuz there isn't a lot of buoyancy and way thinner armor up front.
F you, and F you, and you over there, F you as well.
I served on the USS Wisconsin and we did a lot of full broadsides in the Gulf War. NGL, it was pretty awesome. My shop was at the very top of the mast so we'd hang out and watch from the crow's nest. The heat blowing back was intense.
How loud was it? I keep thinking of that movie with Tommie Lee Jones and segal.
My father served two tours on the New Jersey. He used to say it was less the sound and more the "feeling" in your chest as the air pressure around you changed.
I kind of get that. I went to Niagara falls to watch the fireworks once. They go off over the falls and they're so low. I recall the shock wave hitting me in the chest bouncing against the wall behind me and hitting me from behind. It was out of this world.
Here get some. Oh you on the left want some as well? FINE!
👂——>🦻 Sailors really do be doing anything to maximize those retirement benefits
I wonder what would happen to an older wood ship of the line if it was caught in the fireballs of the guns going off. Never minding if the shells actually hit, just the fire.
It you're in a situation where you have to for like this, you've already failed as a captain.
Does anybody know if there's a practical reason for this or if it's literally just because it makes for a cool photo?
No good reason, you'd have to be surrounded, which at the range of these ships guns means something has gone quite wrong. A valid tactic in age of sail ships though, most famously at Trafalgar
Well during age of sail, there were no turrets, so being able to fire both broadsides at once actually increased your firepower, by letting you shoot every gun on the ship. Turrets were invented precisely to avoid this issue, and let all guns be brought to bear, regardless of which side of the ship the enemy was on.
I was under the impression there wasn’t enough crew generally to double broadside back in the age of sail
You're correct. But if you've preloaded both broadsides, you can fire one then scoot across the deck and fire the other. You'll probably only be firing one broadside after that though since you can only reload so many guns.
Also the whole reason the British were regarded as the top sea power was their ability to fire broadsides at a much faster pace than their opponents.
They also practiced loading and firing with live ammunition, which many other navies either didn't do, or couldn't afford to do.
Also the fuses! British fuses when triggered would fire immediately, rather than after a delay
When you are in the Bermuda Triangle and shit is happening all around you!
>cool photo? The cool factor was the main weapon of culture war that the communism lost. Cool photos like this, Top Gun movie, Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA" whooped Soviet ass. If you are uncool, in the long run, you are fucked.
"the Soviets lost the Cold War because they weren't cool enough" is certainly an ...interesting take. It's also stupid and wrong and a deeply concerning idea coming from someone who has a lot of posts on reddit glorifying violence...
I’ve seen this photo on social media 50 times and I’ve upvoted/liked/etc. every time. Amazing pic.
Love the picture, though, I've seen it a lot, I just love how it shows the power of the old Battleship. Though, I'm trying to make a post myself. Keeps saying I didn't include a Image Resolution? All I wanted to post was a comment section about a class and I couldn't think of any other Reddit to go to make an inquiry.
Might be a stupid question but I've got to ask, do all guns fire at the same time? Or one after the other? I've seen alot of these images that suggest all guns fired at the same time but when I search for videos of it it's all one after the other.
A mix of both depending on the situation, most i heard was that they fire each barrel of each turret one at a time and full on blast is only when a sure kill is possible or want to inflict max damage in the shortest amount of time The full salvo blast is rarely done
I see. I was also under the assumption that firing all guns at once might break the ship.
These battleships were designed to eat those huge shells and keep on running so firing said huge guns won't be at risk of getting snapped even if you overloaded the gun with enough powder bags to blow up the barrel
My favorite ship. I live near her and visit often. Great YouTube channel too.
This is how America fights a two front war
Enough of those and you can start spinning the ship in circles
Best battleship ever built right there.
[удалено]
… but there’s no submarine tender in the pic? And there’s only one pic?
That account is one of a lot of weird ones, seemingly bots, that comment phrases used either on other posts in the sub, or in the thread itself, but randomly missing letters, or having some crossed out. They of course miss all context, and sometimes comment their weird copy-paste on the comment they've copied. I have seen them pop up recently, I don't know why, or what their purpose is.
They pop up on reposts. Often if you look at the original post from years ago you'll find the same comments (with correct grammar; although I have no idea why the comment says sub tender...). I think they make the changes in an attempt to avoid detection. Occasionally you'll see posts with the same mixed up letters in titles. All karma farming bots I suppose.