Reactivate the USS Iowa and USS Wisconsin to fight terrorists!

I toured the Mo here in Bremerton, WA on the 50th annv. signing of the end of WWII. She is still in excellant condition as part of the ship was sealed up to protect it from outside air for future need. We could only go into part of the ship. But, it was a wonderful experience. There is a plaque on the deck where General Mc signed the surrender.

You mean that EVERY SINGLE CREWMAN will be between the point of entry into the ship's interior and the magazine access? Wow. It takes a couple hundred sailors to man the main 16" turrets. There will a lot of sailors in and around the turrets, on the deck, and in the superstructure. I've heard tell from a BB veteran that it takes less than two if you've studied the blueprints. BTW, did you know the as-builts are available from NARA? I supose it would take 2 minutes if the terrorists knew where every closed bulkhead was, if they didnt run into the Marine detachment on board, if they didnt run into any sailors with M-16 assault rifles, and if they didnt have a whole lot of explosives Realize this, the forward loading room is the tightest room securtity wise. It was built with 8"-12" of solid steel, so if an explosion occured (such was the case with IOWA in 1989) the whole ship wouldnt go down, but instead the turret would be damaged. Yup, they'd never be able to walk up onto the pier in a foreign port. No. Terrorists would never be able to walk right into ANY navy ship without proper identification. A bunch of middle eastern men in navy issue uniforms, with backpacks wouldnt attract too much attention.

I'm not against carriers. Indeed we need more. I'm just stating that if we rethink the BBs, we might find them filling a hole that cannot be filled easily by any other type of ship. With the ability to cheaply and easily hit targets up to 100 nm from shore, they would be able to cover areas carriers and their escorts can't, or only can under great difficulties. They proved their worth in the Gulf war, and they would have been of inestimable worth in the late great unpleasantness in Serbia.

A single carrier can cover up to 75% of the world, but a BB can bring far more concentrated firepower quicker to a local action than a carrier can.

I say that we should look at completely modernizing these behemoths (reactors, VSTOL aircraft, etc.) and reexamining their roles. The addition of BBs to a carrier task force would be interesting - and extremely deadly.

You mean that EVERY SINGLE CREWMAN will be between the point of entry into the ship's interior and the magazine access? Wow.

It takes a couple hundred sailors to man the main 16" turrets. There will a lot of sailors in and around the turrets, on the deck, and in the superstructure.

Like I said: snipers to clear the deck (hey, set up a GPMG and hit the ship during morning quarters, you'll take down a couple of hundred potential defenders right there). There aren't THAT many sailors in the turret spaces in port, and most (if not all) will be unarmed.

I've heard tell from a BB veteran that it takes less than two if you've studied the blueprints. BTW, did you know the as-builts are available from NARA?

I supose it would take 2 minutes if the terrorists knew where every closed bulkhead was,

Look on the as-builts. You'll see where the hatches are.

if they didnt run into the Marine detachment on board,

Set up a diversionary assault to (a) force everyone topside to stay behind armor and thus not be able to see what's going on and (b) distract MARDET by making for another critical target.

if they didnt run into any sailors with M-16 assault rifles,

I was unaware that sailors routinely hauled loaded rifles around in their day-to-day work.

and if they didnt have a whole lot of explosives

All you need is enough to set one set of powder bags off, the rest will go as well.

Realize this, the forward loading room is the tightest room securtity wise. It was built with 8"-12" of solid steel, so if an explosion occured (such was the case with IOWA in 1989) the whole ship wouldnt go down, but instead the turret would be damaged.

The Iowa came perilously close to having the entire forward magazine go up, and that WOULD have sunk the ship. Please note the loss of the Roma (a modern and well-protected capital ship) to a glide bomb in 1943; basically, the second bomb got lucky, entered the powder magazine, and that was all she wrote.

Yup, they'd never be able to walk up onto the pier in a foreign port.

No. Terrorists would never be able to walk right into ANY navy ship without proper identification.

You must hang around Washington too much, you need to spend a LOT more time with the fleet. Once they're on the pier, getting aboard ain't difficult. Most Navy security, IMNHO, is a really bad joke.

A bunch of middle eastern men in navy issue uniforms, with backpacks wouldnt attract too much attention.

One: Al-Qaeda might be smart enough to use Bosnian Muslims--your target set now includes Slavs. Two: the pier is foreign territory, the Navy will have a hard time preventing ALL Middle Eastern males from getting access.

Sorry but this is a lame, misinformed post. Every ship is vulnerable to EXOCET cruise missles. Battleships are not alone in that. Also, every ship requires an aircraft carrier for protection. Just like an aircraft carrier dependes on the AGEIS destroyers for protection from both incoming missles and submarines. A battleship, like a carrier, is a capital ship. It relys heavily upon other support ships for protection. Without support ships our mighty carriers could be sunk quite easily.