|
Kazinsal posted:Hell, the Missouri was laid down in 1941 and finally retired in friggin 1992. That’s a hell of a service life. Battleships were obsolete in WWII.
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
There's a fun setpiece in the 1980 WW3 novel Red Storm Rising where they break the old battleships out to pound the bejeezus out of a Russian force occupying Iceland.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 05:11
|
|
|
They were brought back in the 1980s because Reagan was pushing for a 600-ship Navy and there was no way we were actually going to achieve that. Since the BBs already existed in mothball, modernizing them (read: installing some new electronics and some box launchers) was seen as a relatively cheap way to get 4 hulls closer to 600. Spoiler: it wasn't, because the manning requirements of those things was ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 05:43
|
|
|
Zorak of Michigan posted:Well you see Kirov is not armored to survive a hit from her own weapons therefore More that the Soviets didn't ever call them any such thing, thats something made up by randos in the West. As you say, names change over time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 06:07
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:Hell, the Missouri was laid down in 1941 and finally retired in friggin 1992. That’s a hell of a service life. Planes made battleships obsolete and then guided missiles made sure the gap couldn't be closed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 09:02
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Planes made battleships obsolete and then guided missiles made sure the gap couldn't be closed. Yup things like the battleship Prince of Wales getting easily sunk in WWII was the writing on the wall for naval airpower being a big shift in strategy. Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:There's a fun setpiece in the 1980 WW3 novel Red Storm Rising where they break the old battleships out to pound the bejeezus out of a Russian force occupying Iceland. Battleships being effective are only something that happens in a Tom Clancy military fantasy novels not the the real world. etalian fucked around with this message at 13:23 on Feb 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 13:06
|
|
|
etalian posted:Battleships being effective are only something that happens in a Tom Clancy military fantasy novels not the the real world. Nah they were pretty effective at destroying what they shot at in the Pacific and Vietnam and Korea and the Middle East. Trouble is that only works against stuff within a couple dozen miles of the ocean.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 15:32
|
|
|
The Expanse, Season 5: 20th Century Naval Warfare Discussion Thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 17:42
|
|
|
TommyGun85 posted:The Expanse, Season 5: 20th Century Naval Warfare Discussion Thread I thought I'd clicked the World of Warships thread by mistake...
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 18:03
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Nah they were pretty effective at destroying what they shot at in the Pacific and Vietnam and Korea and the Middle East. Trouble is that only works against stuff within a couple dozen miles of the ocean. I feel like effective needs a lot of asterisks here, since how many crewmen were needed to man those BBs vs say conventional bombing, or the comedy option of putting towed artillery on the deck of an aircraft carrier that was already being used?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 19:52
|
|
|
I wonder how much delta-v a torpedo has. If they're chemical probably like 1-2 km/s
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 20:11
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:I wonder how much delta-v a torpedo has. If they're chemical probably like 1-2 km/s There's no reason you wouldn't put an epstein drive on them, at which point any delta-v estimate goes out the window
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 20:14
|
|
|
I think the writers have mentioned it before, but it's kind of a conceit because all of this would probably be automated and drones would likely be everywhere. Why even have a giant, fuckoff battleship with railguns when you can make a hundred thousand torpedoes with 200G acceleration that can be guided by a few, hardened stealth pinnaces (think a combat Razorback)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
If you replace the gun emplacements with Laser turrets, retrofit the hull to be able to launch fighters, add giant rockets and a forward gently caress you cannon, battleships become viable again as demonstrated in this documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_G-lLmu4go&t=1s
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 20:34
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:I think the writers have mentioned it before, but it's kind of a conceit because all of this would probably be automated and drones would likely be everywhere. for the small ego syndrome
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 21:12
|
|
|
Bedshaped posted:I wonder how much delta-v a torpedo has. If they're chemical probably like 1-2 km/s The Expanse torpedoes are Epstein drives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
naval ship chat reminds me of Obama saying to Romney that the US use less horses and bayonettes nowadays too, and they use less battleships because there are these things called "aircraft carriers".
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 22:30
|
|
|
Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:There's a fun setpiece in the 1980 WW3 novel Red Storm Rising where they break the old battleships out to pound the bejeezus out of a Russian force occupying Iceland. That also has a neat scene where Russian Backfire Bombers launch a ton of missiles at a Carrier group and every missile and gun is tasked with taking them down. It's pretty neat. My argument about drones is that they can be hacked or jammed or a bunch of stuff you can't do to people. Also no drone can react to changing situations like people can. Drone work in the real world because they're used to blow up people who can't defend against them. If the US actually attacked someone who could stand against them, like Iran, Drones would probably prove really ineffective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 22:40
|
|
|
TommyGun85 posted:The Expanse, Season 5: 20th Century Naval Warfare Discussion Thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 22:50
|
|
|
Warmachine posted:I feel like effective needs a lot of asterisks here, since how many crewmen were needed to man those BBs vs say conventional bombing, or the comedy option of putting towed artillery on the deck of an aircraft carrier that was already being used? I pointed out that the manning requirements were ridiculous. Even after they were updated, they still took a crew of 1800 to operate. My point here was that "obsolete" doesn't mean useless; even WWII the battleships wound up being far more useful for providing anti-aircraft support than for shelling beaches, but that doesn't mean you'd be eager to be on the receiving end of that gunfire. And that comedy option would have been useless, guns like that wouldn't be capable of hitting anything from a ship. The mechanical fire control computers on the Iowas were so accurate that they kept them through the refit, replacing them with an electronic system wouldn't have improved on them at all. twistedmentat posted:If the US actually attacked someone who could stand against them, like Iran, Drones would probably prove really ineffective. Drones turned out to be really effective against modern anti-air defenses in Armenia. When the drones are blowing up S-300 missile batteries, that's a big score for the drones.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
At least The Expanse doesn't have manned space fighters
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
bring back battleships when railgun tech is ready imo, it'll much more cost effective to lob kinetic rounds instead of missiles at small groups of 'insurgents'
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 02:00
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:bring back battleships when railgun tech is ready imo, it'll much more cost effective to lob kinetic rounds instead of missiles at small groups of 'insurgents'  rail gun tech has been ready for a while
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 02:11
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:bring back battleships when railgun tech is ready imo, it'll much more cost effective to lob kinetic rounds instead of missiles at small groups of 'insurgents' The US Navy built a railgun that could be fit to a destroyer and could lob fairly accurate shots out for dozens of kilometres and its gone nowhere beyond testing because being able to show the people who grease the MIC wheels a Hellfire exploding on a wedding in the Middle East is worth way more in revenue than the cost savings from splashing the wedding with a railgun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 02:42
|
|
|
I thought I read that even though the rounds are just slags of metal, they are still prohibitively costly, mostly because the gubs themselves were over-engineered.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:The US Navy built a railgun that could be fit to a destroyer and could lob fairly accurate shots out for dozens of kilometres and its gone nowhere beyond testing because being able to show the people who grease the MIC wheels a Hellfire exploding on a wedding in the Middle East is worth way more in revenue than the cost savings from splashing the wedding with a railgun. Pretty sure railguns still have major technology issues. The gun basically wears itself out after a few shots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 05:02
|
|
|
gfarrell80 posted:Pretty sure railguns still have major technology issues. The gun basically wears itself out after a few shots. Yes. Rail erosion is still a significant problem. There's one that's been mounted on a ship for testing at sea but it's by no means ready for prime-time. Check the videos of it firing, there's a huge muzzle blast of flame. But there's no propellant, so why? Because all that is a plasma of material that used to be the rails where they make contact with the sabot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBnoM3TwD0U
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 05:15
|
|
|
Hence, the word "sabotage"
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 05:25
|
|
|
Yea railguns are 'ready' in that they work, but they're nowhere near ready for actual field use and deployment
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 06:20
|
|
|
Directed energy weapon programs are burning through their objectives though!
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 07:42
|
|
|
Kesper North posted:Directed energy weapon programs are burning through their objectives though! Ow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 10:11
|
|
|
Railguns are the opposite of ready, the tech specs of the prototypes sound great because most people vastly underestimate the effectiveness of conventional cannons with modern technology, against which most railguns being tested these days don’t quite measure up great against.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 10:15
|
|
|
Re: level of detail on this show? I just saw the mirror in Holden’s room and it’s a completely shatter proof mirror which is extremely polished metal that they use in prisons. Found that interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 03:47
|
|
|
pictured is the planned replacement for the current M4 rifle
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 04:22
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:pictured is the planned replacement for the current M4 rifle images you can hear. That makes me wonder, what are Expanse guns? are they just fancy gunpowder, or have some kind of gas system?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 04:42
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:images you can hear. That makes me wonder, what are Expanse guns? are they just fancy gunpowder, or have some kind of gas system? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 04:44
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:images you can hear. That makes me wonder, what are Expanse guns? are they just fancy gunpowder, or have some kind of gas system? I think Ty said they're just guns but they use a fancier future explosive instead of gunpowder.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 04:50
|
|
|
In the books, most weapons are designed to be recoiless and less penetrative than a modern handgun. The last two things you want in a firefight are to either throw yourself off kilter due to low/zero G, or shoot at someone and have the bullet go on to pentrate the hull of your ship. Most rounds are similar to the kinds of munition we see in the attack on the station in season 2, but with a little more stopping power.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 05:08
|
|
|
This is canon now. swickles posted:In the books, most weapons are designed to be recoiless and less penetrative than a modern handgun. The last two things you want in a firefight are to either throw yourself off kilter due to low/zero G, or shoot at someone and have the bullet go on to pentrate the hull of your ship. Most rounds are similar to the kinds of munition we see in the attack on the station in season 2, but with a little more stopping power. Neat. It reminds me how in Babylon 5 at one point its said that Earth went totally energy weapons because they have less of a chance to puncture the hull.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
swickles posted:In the books, most weapons are designed to be recoiless and less penetrative than a modern handgun. The last two things you want in a firefight are to either throw yourself off kilter due to low/zero G, or shoot at someone and have the bullet go on to pentrate the hull of your ship. Most rounds are similar to the kinds of munition we see in the attack on the station in season 2, but with a little more stopping power. I'm reading the first book right now. In one firefight, they have hard rubber bullets and bank them down a hall and around a corner for suppression. Still, explosive cartridges are in full effect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 05:38
|
|
