Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ig!bionet!agate!ucbvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!cbnews!unisoft!cander@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
From: unisoft!cander@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Charles Anderson)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: USS Iowa explosion
Message-ID: <5825@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 22 Apr 89 04:30:14 GMT
References: <5788@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Lines: 26
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: unisoft!cander@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Charles Anderson)

>From article <5788@cbnews.ATT.COM>, by military@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker):
> From: chipcom.com!eli
> 
> is the Iowa of the same class as the New Jersey, the ship which
> shelled Beirut?  are the 16 inch guns the same type which shelled
> Beirut?  i believe that these guns are *very* inaccurate, and 
> that many houses and people were destroyed in Beirut arbitrarily.

The inaccuracies that were observed in Beruit were directly linked to
faulty ammunition.  When the funds were approved to recomission the
Iowa class ship, no funds were allocated immediately for the purchase
of new ammunition.  Much of the ammunition in service dates back to
WWII.  Although the ammunition was "reworked" at Concord NWS, it seems
that there is no substitute for fresh ammunition.  It seems to me that
the Navy was scheduled to start receiving new ammunition in 1988 or
1989, but I haven't seen anything confirming this or whether new
ammunition has imporved accuracy.

-- 

Charles.
{sun, amdahl, ucbvax, pyramid, uunet}!unisoft!cander