Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Karliner

Right, the idea is the same as the idea that a weedy highschooler can KO a pro boxer...as long as the boxer can’t block, dodge, or hit back. Certainly at that point, I don’t believe that the battleship, fully manned, maneuvering and fighting back could have been sunk by aircraft at that time...and any antiaircraft artillery at the time was small arms, a few 3” guns and whatever invective could be thrown.


17 posted on 10/08/2021 8:09:56 AM PDT by ferret_airlift
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: ferret_airlift

True, certainly not the planes in 1920.


24 posted on 10/08/2021 8:29:07 AM PDT by Karliner (Heb 4:12 Rom 8:28 Rev 3, "...This is the end of the beginning." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: ferret_airlift
...and any antiaircraft artillery at the time was small arms, a few 3” guns and whatever invective could be thrown.

The new 5" 38 naval gun (early 1940s), when fitted on the the newer BBs was a formidable AA weapon. It featured 55 pound RP fused projectiles, so "close" was often good enough.

My battle station (1961-1964) was loader in #2 mount. Never fired a shot in anger though. My "war" was the Cuban missile Crisis. We evacuated military dependents and civvy contractors from GTMO.

39 posted on 10/08/2021 8:46:54 AM PDT by JimRed (TERM LIMITS, NOW! Militia to the border! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson