Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!bingvaxu!sunybcs!rutgers!att!cbnews!goofy!Apple.COM!livesey@apple.com
From: goofy!Apple.COM!livesey@apple.com (John Livesey)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: USS Iowa explosion
Message-ID: <6321@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 6 May 89 03:37:16 GMT
References: <5788@cbnews.ATT.COM> <5853@cbnews.ATT.COM> <5979@cbnews.ATT.COM> <6022@cbnews.ATT.COM> <6159@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 29
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: goofy!Apple.COM!livesey@apple.com (John Livesey)

In article <6159@cbnews.ATT.COM> willey@unsvax.NEVADA.EDU (Adm. Pavel Chekov) writes:
>From: willey@unsvax.NEVADA.EDU (Adm. Pavel Chekov)
>
>     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?

I am sure that it would be technically feasible;  between the wars the
Italian Navy gutted some battleships, not only changing the gun
calibre, but also the number of turrets.

However, you also want to know what you want battleships *for*.  How
many hundred million dollars do you want to spend to finish up with a
good shore bombardmaent system?  It cost four hundred million dollars a
piece just to bring them back into service, so how much would it cost
to make significant changes?     Can a battleship add to the
effectiveness of a carrier group, or would you be better off with more
escort vessels?

jon.