Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: BB's Cruise Missle load
Message-ID: <1991Feb5.035025.1812@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 5 Feb 91 03:50:25 GMT
References: <1991Jan28.035448.7775@cbnews.att.com> <1991Feb4.050242.12253@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 25
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
>From: xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan)
>> The buzz in the ship yard was that the Jersy would be back for a
>> further modification in which the after turret would be removed and
>> the fantail would be converted to a Vertical Launch System setup...
>
>... the controlling
>quantity is not deck space, but the "metacentric stability"(?) (the
>tendency of the ship to right itself from a roll); add enough massive
>gear up high, and a ship develops a dismaying tendency to be most happy
>sailing with the stacks pointed down.

I doubt this would be an issue in the case of the BBs, given that you'd
be replacing the massively armored turret/magazine structure with relatively
light missiles.  As I heard it, one problem with doing aft-deck revamping
on the BBs was the difficulty of lifting the 2000-ton turret off!  There
have been various proposals for doing something with the aft deck, including
replacing the aft turret with an armored hangar and flight platform for
Harriers.  The financial climate seems to be against any major modifications
in those old ships, though.
-- 
"Maybe we should tell the truth?"      | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
"Surely we aren't that desperate yet." |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry