Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wasatch!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!maniac%garnet.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
From: maniac%garnet.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George W. Herbert)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: USS Iowa explosion
Summary: Mm.Lets See...
Message-ID: <6272@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 5 May 89 00:35:19 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 33
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: maniac%garnet.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George W. Herbert)

In article <6159@cbnews.ATT.COM> willey@unsvax.NEVADA.EDU (Adm. Pavel Chekov) writes:
>     Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, one of the 
>major objections to the battleship in a modern navy is it's lack of ability
>to defend itself from air attack. Also, with the accident on the Iowa, a 
>replacement 16" gun is needed and none exist

Not true: First of all, from the description of the accident, I doubt the 
gun got destroyed.  Second of all, there are about four (3?) battleships 
in various museums with fill equipment, plus the navy does have more spares.

>     Would it be feasible to remove turret #2 from the Iowa and replace it
>with a verticle launch system for SM-2 missiles to give the battleship 
>protection from aircraft. Not only would this add to the defense of the ship,
>but it would also give the Navy two 16" gun replacements.
>     If this is feasible:
>	1 : How many SM-2's could be accomodated? (ready to fire and reloads)
>	2 : Could an anti-submarine defense be fit into this re-fit?
>	3 : Would the re-fit be worth the time and money?

Ahh, engineering time (break out handy-dandy hp-15c and blueprints...:)

Feasible, yes.  How much do you want to modify?  If we pull the barbette down
to the old powder magazine, we have space for a pair of 61-cell VLS (Mk-41, see
Janes wpn systems.)  The resulting combo would weigh less, and be more or less
compatable structurally with the rest of the ship. 
  The result would be space for ~100 SM-2's assumin some other missiles in use. Plus guideance gear, will be lighter than existing turret.  But might run
about $100m for guideance and electronics.  (maybe that's too high. $50m?)
 Vertical Launch Asroc could be fitted, providing lots'o ASW.  Would it be worth it?   mmm.   Why not spend
the money on a DDG-51?  well, refit might be cheaper.  I dunnow.  Comments?