Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Phanatic
Mar 13, 2007

Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.


Kazinsal posted:

Hell, the Missouri was laid down in 1941 and finally retired in friggin 1992. Thatís a hell of a service life.

Battleships are only obsolete because nobody has a navy worth throwing battleships at anymore.

Battleships were obsolete in WWII.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Chef Boyardeez Nuts
Sep 9, 2011

You're not getting another fucking dime from us, Lowtax

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.

Phanatic
Mar 13, 2007

Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.


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.

feedmegin
Jul 30, 2008




Zorak of Michigan posted:

Well you see Kirov is not armored to survive a hit from her own weapons therefore

Actually this is actually a sillier derail then the original derail about whether a Burke could destroy the High Seas Fleet, since any weirdness in the Expanse's labeling of ship classes can and would be swept away in a great cloud of "the names for space ship classes developed centuries from now were influenced by, but do not correspond to, named used by 19th, 20th, or 21st century wet navies.

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.

Regarde Aduck
Oct 18, 2012

haha


Grimey Drawer

Kazinsal posted:

Hell, the Missouri was laid down in 1941 and finally retired in friggin 1992. Thatís a hell of a service life.

Battleships are only obsolete because nobody has a navy worth throwing battleships at anymore.

Planes made battleships obsolete and then guided missiles made sure the gap couldn't be closed.

etalian
Mar 20, 2006



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 12:23 on Feb 20, 2021

Phanatic
Mar 13, 2007

Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.


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.

TommyGun85
Jun 5, 2013


The Expanse, Season 5: 20th Century Naval Warfare Discussion Thread

Toxic Fart Syndrome
Jul 2, 2006

*hits A-THREAD-5*

Only 3.6 Roentgoons per hour ... not great, not terrible.




...the meter only goes to 3.6...



Pork Pro

TommyGun85 posted:

The Expanse, Season 5: 20th Century Naval Warfare Discussion Thread

I thought I'd clicked the World of Warships thread by mistake...

Warmachine
Jan 30, 2012

I came here to laugh at you





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?

Bedshaped
Apr 1, 2010




Soiled Meat

I wonder how much delta-v a torpedo has. If they're chemical probably like 1-2 km/s

Captain Splendid
Jan 7, 2009

Qu'en pense Caffarelli?

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

Toxic Fart Syndrome
Jul 2, 2006

*hits A-THREAD-5*

Only 3.6 Roentgoons per hour ... not great, not terrible.




...the meter only goes to 3.6...



Pork Pro

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)?

Dalael
Oct 14, 2014
Hello. Yep, I still think Atlantis is Bolivia, yep, I'm still a giant idiot, yep, I'm still a huge racist. Some things never change!

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

double nine
Aug 8, 2013



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.

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)?

for the small ego syndrome

CLAM DOWN
Feb 13, 2007


RICKARUS

It's Moot baby!




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.

stratdax
Sep 14, 2006


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".

twistedmentat
Nov 21, 2003

What's a war hero got to do to get some lubrication around here?



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.

etalian
Mar 20, 2006



TommyGun85 posted:

The Expanse, Season 5: 20th Century Naval Warfare Discussion Thread

Phanatic
Mar 13, 2007

Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.


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.

Eej
Jun 17, 2007

HEAVYARMS


At least The Expanse doesn't have manned space fighters

Wheeee
Mar 11, 2001


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'

Toxic Fart Syndrome
Jul 2, 2006

*hits A-THREAD-5*

Only 3.6 Roentgoons per hour ... not great, not terrible.




...the meter only goes to 3.6...



Pork Pro

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

Kazinsal
Dec 13, 2011






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.

swickles
Aug 21, 2006

I guess that I don't need that though
Now you're just some QB that I used to know


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.

gfarrell80
Aug 31, 2006


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.

Phanatic
Mar 13, 2007

Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.


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

CPColin
Sep 9, 2003

Big ol' smile.

Grimey Drawer

Hence, the word "sabotage"

Wheeee
Mar 11, 2001


Yea railguns are 'ready' in that they work, but they're nowhere near ready for actual field use and deployment

Kesper North
Nov 3, 2011

EMERGENCY POWER TO PARTY

Directed energy weapon programs are burning through their objectives though!

Tarquinn
Jul 3, 2007

"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."



Hell Gem

Kesper North posted:

Directed energy weapon programs are burning through their objectives though!

Ow.

Babysitter Super Sleuth
Apr 26, 2012

THERE'S FASCISM IN MY GIANT ROBOT ANIMES


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 donít quite measure up great against.

Anita Dickinme
Jan 24, 2013



Grimey Drawer

Re: level of detail on this show? I just saw the mirror in Holdenís room and itís a completely shatter proof mirror which is extremely polished metal that they use in prisons. Found that interesting.

Wheeee
Mar 11, 2001


pictured is the planned replacement for the current M4 rifle

twistedmentat
Nov 21, 2003

What's a war hero got to do to get some lubrication around here?



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?

Azhais
Feb 5, 2007


Switchblade Switcharoo

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?

Grand Fromage
Jan 30, 2006

L-l-look at you bar-bartender, a-a pa-pathetic creature of meat and bone, un-underestimating my l-l-liver's ability to metab-meTABolize t-toxins. How can you p-poison a perfect, immortal alcohOLIC?




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.

swickles
Aug 21, 2006

I guess that I don't need that though
Now you're just some QB that I used to know


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.

twistedmentat
Nov 21, 2003

What's a war hero got to do to get some lubrication around here?




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.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cannon_Fodder
Jul 17, 2007

"Hey, where did Steve go?"
Design by Kamoc

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.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply