"Could the 1000 Mile Cannon Bring Back Battleships?" Topic
7 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't make fun of others' membernames.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Modern Naval Discussion (1946 to 2013) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Profile Article Scenario ideas from Afghanistan in 2002.
Current Poll
|
| Tango01 | 19 Oct 2020 9:41 p.m. PST |
"The U.S. Army is working on a new, long-range cannon it claims can reach out and strike targets at up to 1,150 miles. If the technology works, the Strategic Long Range Cannon (SLRC) promises the ability to fire 50 times farther than existing guns. But the new gun also has the potential to bring back a dormant class of big-gun warships once thought gone for good: the mighty battleship. Earlier this year, Popular Mechanics published leaked photos showing the capabilities of the SLRC. With an effective range of 1,000 nautical miles—at 1,150 miles, that's about 1,130 miles farther than existing guns—the SLRC could be a truly revolutionary breakthrough in artillery warfare…" link
Main page
link
Amicalement
Armand |
| bsrlee | 20 Oct 2020 2:34 a.m. PST |
More likely something akin to the WW1 British Monitor, a lightly armored raft with one or two battleship class guns that would putter around and bombard stationary targets while being protected by friendly escorts. |
| Andrew Walters | 20 Oct 2020 10:14 a.m. PST |
That's someone looking for an article to write. If the gun can fire accurately at that distance, can you still acquire targets at that distance? And how will the enemy respond? Moving/hiding/armoring potential targets? And then there's point defense/EW. As this device gets closer to reality than a Popular Mechanics article potential targets will respond, and that will decide whether it's of any use. |
| Tango01 | 20 Oct 2020 12:32 p.m. PST |
|
| gamershs | 20 Oct 2020 12:44 p.m. PST |
Long range artillery + stelth drone targeting = What hit us |
| Rudysnelson | 20 Oct 2020 1:48 p.m. PST |
I do not think a renewed interest in a 4,000+ crew battleship will happen.
They would be too expensive.
Ground mounted systems would be cheaper easier to fortify.
With cruise misses and drones making it too easy to sink them, they would be a waste of resources. A floating target, hard to support. |
| Lee494 | 22 Oct 2020 2:41 p.m. PST |
Ahhh Battleship. What's in a name. Galley. First Rate. Ship of the Line. Dreadnought. Symatics. They were all Capital Ships. The large warship with 12" of armor plate and massive guns is as dead as the three-decker with 100+ smooth bore cannon. Sorry to say neither will be back. Sad because I am a big fan of both! However, there is always a Capital Ship, the largest class of ship in the navy. Let's omit Fleet Carriers for a minute since the USA is the only country that has more than one or two. I'll argue that the current Capital Ships are really the SSN and SSBN classes. Especially now that many carry cruise missiles and anti ship missiles than can cause the same massive destruction that 16" guns could. Maybe more. And isn't interesting that the US names it's SSBM after States, heretofore reserved for Battleships. And if I recall correctly the Brits have/had some submarines also named after WWII Battleships. So we still have Battleships, Capital Ships. Today they just happen to be submersible! Cheers! |
|
