What would a modern battleship look like today? I imagine it

>>34107446
A battlecruiser and a fast battleship were definitely not the same thing to the USN.

File: 1491163264734.jpg (251KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 2048x1365px

>>34107446
This is what it looks like today. Fulfills every role a battleship might need to do.

>>34107460
can it defend itself from submarines, air, or other ships like a battleship can?

>>34107460
Needs a decided anti air ship.

>>34107446
Bombardment is a thing of the past.
The glory of those 16" turrets going off tho, amiright?!
I proposed a 500mm gun design to the US Navy once.
Imagine my shock when I never heard back from them.
Precision/smart munitions are here forever.

File: 1465377299656.jpg (40KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x480px

>>34107446

>>34107478
It has 75 aircraft and 20 choppers for exactly that.

>>34107478

It has an anti torpedo torpedo, and sub hunting helicopters.

>>34107446
>it would be a battlecruiser rather than a battleship, otherwise known as a "fast battleship" to the US navy

wut

>>34107446
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_battlecruiser_Admiral_Nakhimov

>>34107446
>What would a modern battleship look like today?

A carrier.

The smallest carriers today are capable of delivering way more firepower at much longer distances than even the largest and most heavily-armed battleships ever built.

>>34107532
Love it
Upgrade to trimaran possible?

>>34107478

Battleships cannot defend themselves from any of those things. Even the smallest destroyer today can destroy a battleship from over the horizon.

>>34107446
Missiles and railguns. We might see battleships return when railguns are in mass production and each shell delivers the power of an AShM.

Why are boats so expensive? Why does everyone own so few aircraft carriers? You'll have to excuse my puny island mind, I've never seen anything bigger then a cargo ship.

File: GlockPerfektion.jpg (32KB, 600x315px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x315px

>>34107446
Credit goes to khesm on DeviantArt
Leaves no room to sneeze

>>34107604
>Why are boats so expensive?

Because it isn't cheap to build a gigantic floating airport.

>Why does everyone own so few aircraft carriers?

Because they're expensive.

Were you beaten in the head as a child?

>>34107633
>ridiculous design entirely reliant on the idea that nobody will ever figure out how to make anything other than a contact detonator for torps

The past was a magical place.

>>34107632
Dude, kiwifudd said he's seen cargo ships
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_container_ships

>>34107654

I'll ask again: Were you beaten in the head as a child?

>>34107657
I am not the droid you are looking for

>>34107667

Then why are you responding? Don't intrude on a conversation you're not a part of, autismo.

>>34107677
you're the water head that couldn't notice obvious bait

>>34107633
>18 14" guns
>6 turrets with different number of guns in each one
>amidship turret
>stern exhaust
the madmen

>>34107685

Oh, I see. Now that you've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are a fucking retard...it was all a ruse! I was being baited! Hilarious, great meme! You're going to get so many up votes for this.

>>34107692
>>amidship turret
seaman: say whaaa, not allowed on the quarterdeck...boom...no more quarterdeck

>>34107696
stupid bitch
tell your mom to stop butt fucking you for one god damned minute so you can pay attention
Kiwifudd acts mystified by carrier size
then he talks cargo ships
many cargo ships and oil tankers are bigger than carriers
you stupid, mouth breathing moron

>>34107719
ur pretty dum

>>34107657
Ha, I fucking wish I got that kind of attention. No my Dad was the angry armchair veteran variety who only connected with me on drunken hunting trips.

>>34107719
>"It was all a ruse!"
>"That's retarded."
>"HA! RUSED AGAIN! My original ruse was not a ruse - that was just a ruse! You're actually the real retard! haha!"

Did your daddy fuck you too much this morning?

>>34107532
ohohohohoh

I played the hell out of that game when I was in iraq in 2005.

>>34107733
sad
0.02/10 effort

>>34107719
I'm from New Zealand mate, I've never seen an aircraft carrier. I'm just guessing they're massive fucking things because of the whole floating airport aspect of it.

>>34107748
oh sweetie, we are all rooting for you!

>>34107748
>>34107770
Please stop, I just want to know what aircraft carriers are like.

>>34107755

What exactly is so hard about this for you?

Big, complicated things are more expensive to build than small, simple things. If you can't afford the expense, you cannot build them.

There is nothing, literally nothing else to it.

File: article-2493552-19495ECE00000578-328_964x496.jpg (76KB, 964x496px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 964x496px

>>34107446

>What would a modern battleship look like today?

Daily remind that dreadnoughts were invented in 1906 and were already obsolete by 1943. The entire concept lasted less than 50 years.

>>34107532
What game was this?

>>34107782
K

>>34107805
>and were already obsolete by 1930, it's just that nobody realized it yet and thus failed to capitalize on it by building decent carriers and carrier aircraft

Fixed.

>>34107814
dummy :^P

>>34107677
>Don't intrude on a conversation you're not a part of, autismo.
This dumb mother fucker has no clue how 4chan works
Let me show it's features
You post a dumb ass thing
We all tell you what a dumb ass you are

File: cn6lc0emkx8g56hkyt9d.jpg (58KB, 800x383px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 800x383px

The Russians still have a battlecruiser, so probably something like this only with less rust and slavshit.

>>34107890
This guy gets it.

>>34107755
Kiwi, did you reply to 34107719 by mistake?
7719 was replying to anon

File: Yamato just before her magazines exploded.jpg (38KB, 750x519px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 750x519px

a CGN arsenal ship with ten million VLS cells

>>34107478

how exactly were battleships capable of defending themselves from air or submarine attack? have you never looked at a single ww2 naval engagement or wondered why capital ships have swarms of destroyers and frigates around them?

File: Naval Ops Warship Gunner Introwebm.webm (2MB, 352x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 352x320px

>>34107806

Naval Ops:Warship Gunner

AKA: The Final Countdown movie if it had more dakka.

>>34107633
>Torpedo comes for the bow
*notices bulge*
>OwO
>What's this?

>>34107910
I don't know anymore, I want my parents back.

>>34107498
Pjw pls go

>>34108533
think i'll stay
annoy you more

>>34107755
So you don't have Wikipedia in shittier Australia?

>>34107890
>You post a dumb ass thing
>We all tell you what a dumb ass you are

Except that I didn't post anything of the kind.

You didn't even read the thread, did you? I was providing an answer before autismo-anon sperged out and insulted me for ten posts.

>>34108739
Do you have short term memory loss?

File: Naval shitposting in the 20's.jpg (38KB, 1024x232px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1024x232px

Like this.

>>34108786

I'll repeat the question: Did you read the thread?

It's clear to me that you didn't, and you won't. It isn't necessary for you to continue replying unless it's to apologize.

>>34109278
>I'll repeat the question: Did you read the thread?
>It's clear to me that you didn't, and you won't. It isn't necessary for you to continue replying unless it's to apologize.
reddit spacing
when does summer end

>>34109278
You must think I some other anon
Without the satisfaction you think you deserve, will you hold on without suffering some sort of breakdown?

>>34107755
The old ones are not that big. They have some on public display here where I live, and the retired ones are smaller than ferrys.

I think a lot of the cost is because the parts are specialized. Normal cargo ships have ISO standard widths because of the Panama canal, and the superstructures are mostly interchangeable.

On a carrier everything has to be custom made.

>>34109269

>underrated post.... That could work!

>>34108105

that explains a lot about the Mark 14 torpedo's premature detonation problem

>Battleship senpai your bulge is making my magnetic exploder feel so tingly....
>*explodes too early*

>>34107780
Big and hard and full of seamenn

File: image.jpg (719KB, 1090x670px) Image search: [Google]

719KB, 1090x670px

>>34107446
>>34107900
The Slavs built some crazy shit such as the Kiev class helicopter carrier cruisers
I wish America built battlecruisers as well not just modernise the USS missouri multiple times don't get me wrong removing a few dual 5 inch guns for 4 ciws and multiple tomahawk missiles is some solid ship porn right there

>>34107460

And what happens when a storm diables its entire "main battery"?

>>34107459
>A battlecruiser and a fast battleship were definitely not the same thing to the USN

or any other navy.

>>34108623
Don't call it that, we need NZ as an ally for access to Antarctica.

File: 4j5a92.jpg (329KB, 1599x1036px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 1599x1036px

Go big or go home

>>34107446
A big ass ship covered in an absolute fuckton of missile silos with several multipurpose 5 inchers, several 155mm AGS turrets and maybe railguns down the road. Probably absolutely covered in air defense systems. Less reliance on guns than a traditional BB of course but they'd still be there.

>>34111106
jesus christ my dick

File: shubmarine.jpg (183KB, 1100x619px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1100x619px

>>34107446
pretty much this

>>34111106
What do you use to make these templates anon ?

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (47KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1280x720px

>>34107446
It'd look a lot like this.
Battleships are obsolete shit for modern war.

>>34107446
>What would a modern battleship look like today?
it would look like a shipwreck. if they were worth a shit, we would have built one in the last 60 years.

>>34107633
>Number of guns per turret increases as you reach the ends of the ship
Neat.

Also it looks like only like 4 turrets on the entire ship can rotate more than 10 degrees in any direction.

Why does so much of /k/ have the imagination of a flea?

Stop bitching about how it's obsolete no matter what and imagine what you'd think of for a modern battleship if you absolutely had to build one. 15 gorillion silos and nothing else? Neat! A pair of triple Schwerer Gustav turrets? Fuck yeah! Just spitball some shit.

>>34107446
Arsenal ship

File: 20170530_145947.jpg (144KB, 886x403px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 886x403px

Pic related is how they imagined the battleship in the nuclear era

got this picture from a 1955 spanish enciclopedia

A lot of high caliber guns (like 16x12 or 14 inch guns in four quadruple turrets). Some cruise missiles, and lots of CIWS. Its main role is shore bombardment using modern style munitions like base bleed munitions to lay down a perpetual bombardment well over a kilometer inland. Only America would have any and would have like 12 but several countries would use one or two pocket battleships which use 8 or 10 inch main guns with fewer missiles and are much smaller and cheaper.

File: 1493645339639.png (109KB, 388x443px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 388x443px

>>34111449

Is it supposed to be like a submarine or something?

>mfw enemy battleship surfaces out of nowhere right behind my convoy

>>34111483
the author also claims that the battleships is still useful

a battleship in order to survive the era of air power it needs a thicker armored deck

File: 25234534.jpg (229KB, 1679x1033px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1679x1033px

>>34107446
https://www.myinstants.com/instant/kirov-reporting/

>>34107446
The most important function of the Battleship in WWII was as the keystone of a battle group's AAA defences.

Naturally, the Axis battleships were shit at this and thus they were much less useful.

So in an era where the Axis had built Iowa equivalent battlewagons with plenty of good radar aimed anti aircraft guns, and the Allies had experienced as much trouble attacking Axis battleships with aircraft as the Axis navies had experienced trying to crack a formation with a USN battleship, you might see new construction battleships post war.

I see heavy protection, copious middle sized DP mounts, lots of anti missile defense, loads and loads of anti aircraft missile mounts, redundant radar installations, nuclear power, a reduced main gun armament, drone spotter planes, IRBMs (perhaps with maneuverable terminal stages and nuclear warheads), and, in the modern era, anti-torpedo torpedoes, laser CIWS, and rail guns.

>>34107805
>>34107819
Daily remind that every Iowa-class ever finished is a museum somewhere, so I guess they *can* be made to survive wars.

>>34112128

>you might see new construction battleships post war.

No, you wouldn't. The US navy fully understood after the war was over that the days of relying on guns as the primary method of air-defense were coming to a swift conclusion. The higher performance of jet aircraft meant that gun-based anti-aircraft systems simply weren't as effective as they needed to be. Planes were simply becoming too fast, and able to cruise at higher altitudes where guns couldn't reach as easily. It was this realization that spurred development of missile-based anti-air systems, such as the Tartar, Terrier, and Talos missile systems.

>>34111509

So the idea is that the deck armor is just as thick as the side belt armor? Holy fuck do you know how heavy that'd be? We're talking about a ship that displaces 1,000,000+ tonnes, easily.

>>34112230
>The higher performance of jet aircraft meant that gun-based anti-aircraft systems simply weren't as effective as they needed to be.
Gun-based anti-aircraft systems simply weren't as effective as they needed to be even against Japanese tinfoil prop aircraft's.
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/Kamikaze/AAA-Summary-1045/

File: 1452716989453.jpg (194KB, 1240x827px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1240x827px

>>34107460
Id rather build a much faster boat with railguns

But it works. Its a floating city afterall. Hell thats a county in norway.
>10k sailors ish

>>34112375
>fast boats with railguns

I smell a new module for the LCS!

>>34107446
Like a much bigger zumwalt, and with railguns and lots of VLS.

>>34110978
That fucking frozen wasteland doesn't even have any sheep on it, I don't see why you yanks want it so much.

>>34111164
didn't make it, found it on an italian forum when they were memeing about the glorious return of triple 381mm turrets

>>34115255
Because middle earf?

>>34112128
>The most important function of the Battleship in WWII was as the keystone of a battle group's AAA defences.

Nope. This was done by dedicated AAA cruisers and carrier-borne fighter craft.

But the rest of your post was nice. Completely false and a waste of time, but nice.

>>34111283
>"HAVE SOME IMAGINATION ALREADY!"
>proposes completely unimaginative ideas already posted seventeen separate times on this thread

>>34115965
I already posted what I figure a modern BB would be, if I was more artistically inclined I'd have posted a design. I'm just sick and tired of people dismissing threads like this instead of just coming up with something. If you're going to come into a thread like this one and bitch about how it's obsolete instead of playing along you probably ought to just find a different thread instead.

>>34115981
>I'm just sick and tired of people dismissing threads like this instead of just coming up with something.

Then come up with something.

Seriously, you're not contributing here. You're just whining that other people aren't contributing. If you want people to do something you have to lead by example first.

>>34116009
>I already posted what I figure a modern BB would be
But I guess I've got no issues writing up a much more detailed description. Bored as fuck.

>>34111527
I dont know why, but i think this ship is sexy af

>>34116025

You haven't posted shit.

>>34111283
>15 gorillion silos and nothing else? Neat! A pair of triple Schwerer Gustav turrets? Fuck yeah!

Trash. Complete trash.

Apply yourself and quit whining about other people already. Your only contribution to this thread is to bitch and moan about the fact that nobody, including you, is actually taking this thread seriously.

>>34116036
Ok dipshit, you need to pull your head out of your ass and realize it was not the post you're bitching about.

>>34116052

QUIT FUCKING WHINING ABOUT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE DO AND MAKE SOMETHING PRODUCTIVE YOU STUPID FUCKING CUNT

>>34116052
Anyways I'm writing up a more detailed description now and if you can unbunch your panties and wait I'll be posting that when I'm done with it.

>>34116071
Just how mad about this are you anon? I guess I should also ask where's your ideas?

>>34116082
needs more turrets
what fucking moron does not have a backup plan?

>>34109292
>Presenting comments in a coherent, readable format=Reddit spacing
I know most of you don't write anything other than internet comments, but it's just natural for some people to format what they type.

>>34116146
I very greatly prefer space
A CSS line-height of 1.6 would be nice
But this isn't a nice site
I very greatly prefer it that way

>>34110146

I was wondering about this the other day, actually, can modern surface combatants fight in very rough seas?

Like, obviously they aren't affected as badly as a CV's takeoff/recovery is but at what point do high winds and bad visibility make it too hard for destroyers to fight? Do modern sensors and stabilization allow two DDs to fight in a real storm?

>>34116101
The gun IS THE BACKUP.

File: GlockPerfektion.jpg (494KB, 1024x731px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 1024x731px

>>34116228
You need a backup to the backup
Whatcha gonna do against a junk or somali pirate boat when your only gun goes out?
Shoulder fire or waste a missile?
Need 2 guns

>>34107532
ah, nostalgia hit me hard like a wave motion cannon.

File: 02156010.jpg (217KB, 1600x1027px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 1600x1027px

>>34109897
Kiev-class were aircraft cruisers. Moskva-class were helicopter carriers.

>Very large hull, imagine a nimitz hull widened for a more uniform maximum deck depth and lengthened, pointed bow rather than hard edge
>Possibly wave piercing catamaran style at water level to help keep drag down while keeping the ship stable
>Relatively small yet tall tower towards the rear middle of the ship, save deck space for silos and other weaponry
>~50%-70% of deck space dedicated exclusively to missile silos and their use, mainly the center of the ship
>Nuclear powered with a large emergency battery bank
>Instead of ridiculous heavy armor focus on active defense and a solid hull with light armoring just enough to get through ice and a hard to sink interior hull design made up of a ton of hex cells in several layers filled with light and notably bouyant materials
>Four 5"/54 Mk45 Mod 4s on each side
>Two 155mm AGS turrets (zumwalt guns) with one on the bow end and one on the stern, eventually to be replaced with railguns
>Ten CIWS turrets on each side coming together at the bow, four along the stern
>Four RIM-116 RAM launchers on each side
>Majority of silos carry tomahawk missiles with RIM-162s occupying the second largest portion, at least two ballistic missiles also onboard as well as at least ten THAAD missiles and RUM-139 ASROC missiles
>Multiple ScanEagle and/or Integrator (RQ-21) UAVs with two launch catapults and two skyhook recovery systems built into the ship
>Small helipad for easy supply delivery and personnel transfer
>Ten CROWS turrets with mounted M2HB .50 cals distributed along the sides to deal with small boats like one might encounter around somalia

Would be hellishly expensive but should carry a retarded number of missiles aside from being able to dish out a fuckton of shells.

>>34115928
I know where Peter Jackson lives, I could easily go on a roadtrip and murder him in his unguarded home. I think about it some days when yanks never shut up about "middle earf tehehe".

>>34116640
You can't kill Tolkien though, he's already dead.

>>34115255
Bring those penguins some freedom motherfucker

>>34116627
Everything including the kitchen sink is not a way to build a ship

>>34119715
Depends on what you're trying to build and how big you can actually afford to build it. A ship with the ability to launch enough tomahawks to hit basically everything of importance in a target country at the same time would be scary as fuck. It would damn sure be flagship turf.

Don't really care if it would actually work, I'm just imagining a fuckton of missiles launching row by row and somali pirates in a glorified rowboat taking all that CIWS and .50bmg to the face.

File: 1459233426276.gif (910KB, 250x188px) Image search: [Google]

910KB, 250x188px

>>34116299

Faceted surfaces, maybe even a SWATH hullform
Nuclear propulsion because whynot
Flight deck for at least helicopters/UAVs
2+ 203mm AGS variants in autoloading turrets, with provisions for railgun replacements
Peripheral VLS designed to blow out instead of snapping the ship in two
Active anti-torpedo defense systems
RAMs in every quadrant
Mk 110 57 mm guns covering from on high
Two laser weapon system turrets
Some combination of AN/SPY-3 AN/SPY-4 AN/SPY-6 in a Dual Band Radar configuration
Armored keels to resist back-snapping torpedoes
Sonar and tail
Decoys everywhere

>>34122497
>snowflake hull
>unneeded nuke power
>a naval gun caliber that hasn't been developed since the 70s
>meme 57 mm
>meme lasers
>idk radars so lets name them all
>fantasy armor

quality /k/ post

>>34107446
We're never going to have more BBs unless there are huge advances in armor technology. On the other hand, CAs are very likely to come back. It would have railguns or CLGGs firing scramjet projectiles with a total range of 400-500 nmi. I have no idea what the payload might be, but anything going anywhere from 5-7 times the speed of sound is nothing to scoff at. The largest benefit to scramjet projectiles fired from a gun cruiser is that it's much cheaper to launch a dozen scramjet projectiles than it is to launch a comparable number of missiles or fly a couple of multi-role jets.

>>34123083
CLGGanon pls go. It's not a viable technology.

>>34123199
I'm not the one who keeps posting them, but they seem as viable as railguns.

>>34117429
FUCK PENGUINS!! One the slanty eyed big yellow eyebrow cunts stole my snapper!

>>34116755
Who?

>>34123272
Acceleration is too high for anything other than slugs.

>>34116070
Haven't seen it from this angle
Trump needs to lift the sanctions on Russia so they can build this sexy beast
Really wish the world had navy sizes of the late 80s early 90s

>>34112356
Gun based systems were good against conventional attacks but Kamikazes are just a different ball game entirely.

>>34107446
Battlecruiser and fast battleship are not the same.

>>34107805
>>34107819
>and were already obsolete by 1964
FTFY

>>34112128
>Naturally, the Axis battleships were shit at this and thus they were much less useful.
Never mind the Axis had no need for AA because superior land based planes could reach the enemy and guard ships, never mind the Tirpitz scared the allies shitless by just sitting in the far north and they weren't confident enough to take her on without inventing a new bomb.
Now you would have seen battlewagons get more use had Hitler focused more on capitol ships and the US had the carriers at pearl instead.

>>34107446
>battlecruiser rather than a battleship, otherwise known as a "fast battleship"
Wrong.

But let's evaluate battleships.

They're perfect close-support vessels as long as your targets are in its main guns range. With modern computer systems the accuracy stopped being a problem so you can pop $500 shell that carries more explosives than $5000 unguided bomb with accuracy of guided one. This is legitimately great thing and nobody has ever complained about let's say, USS Iowa's ground support capability.

Their biggest problem however is the fact that once you cross the range of their main guns all you have are missiles, and it's safer and more efficient to have multiple missile-firing destroyers rather than single battleship. The air, nuclear and anti-missile danger are as relevant to them as they are to aircraft carriers in fact due to having armour it's probably tiny bit safer than those.

If we wanted to re-think the battleship today then, we have to come up with an answer for the main artillery range while taking improved accuracy in account.

The obvious solution would be a railgun, since big ship = big power generators = can power a railgun. Let's focus on conventional artillery though because railguns are still not very practical.

The re-worked battleship would have(I think it would have) profile resembling Nelson or French Richelieu except it would have single, one main calibre turret on front and superstructures shifted backards. 3 guns or so, just to guarantee having sort-of-sustainable RoF, using special ammunition with slow-burning powder and very long barrel length to maximise range with conventional shell(rocket assisted shells make the biggest advantage of Battleships - being very cheap close support solutions - null because of increased cost). Secondary armament(152mm guns) would be reduced to maybe 6 pieces. Saved displacement would be used for additional armour and multiple layers of AA and anti-missile system mounted on a single ship(cont)

>>34123083
>We're never going to have more BBs unless there are huge advances in armor technology.
Or missiles and planes shit the bed.

File: Laser_Defense_System.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>34124933
>This is legitimately great thing and nobody has ever complained about let's say, USS Iowa's ground support capability.
Well there was that one time in Lebanon but they messed up the powder mixture.
And as far as AA well...

>>34124933
The speed is obviously capped at 30-35 knots - even if we'll manage to make the whole thing smaller than typical battleships, it would still have to cooperate with carrier task forces.

As such we have a long-range artillery support ship shooting trucks out of its main guns each time it fires that - at the same time - is a part of anti-air/anti-missile umbrella of CTF.

Now the obvious question whether it's worth making one of these though. All surface vessels are dead meat during WW3 regardless of class and without railguns the range of those "long" guns will still be underwhelming when compared to airplanes. The anti-ship capability is certainly there, especially if you have airplanes or drones sending you coordinates of your target, together with its speed and direction.
>>34124947
>Well there was that one time in Lebanon but they messed up the powder mixture.
Not an issue with the battleship itself.

>>34111483
>>34111449
you guys not read the thread? The description is right here
>>34107633

>>34112182
That's because all they ever did were escort carriers and shore bombardment.

>>34111160
Was the dolphin okay?

>>34107446
Why am i looking at that Aviation Cruiser.

>>34111106
Damn that's cost 70 millions of dollars building that shit, upgrade would also expensive as fk.

>>34125382
Are we talking WW2 currency or current currency?
Because 70 mil is like half an F35.

File: 51twO5fhbpL._SX346_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (46KB, 348x499px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 348x499px

>>34107446

I recently started listening to this book on Audible. There is a part where he discusses the British battleship Prince of Wales and the battlecruiser Repulse. Both ships were sunk by a Japanese air attack shortly after Pearl Harbor. As he was hearing radio reports of what was going on, he was bewildered that planes could battleship so easily. His entire naval education had told him that sort of thing shouldn't be possible. Of course, he was aware of the Pearl Harbor attack but that hadn't been nearly as impressive because that had relied on surprise. That a combat-ready battleship in formation could be so easily sunk by aircraft alone was quite a shock for him.

>>34107446
An LPD like the San Antonio class lengthened and packed with vls capable of carrying 300+ missles for strike missions against ground based threats, aerial denial and bmd duties, all capable of being slaved to sensors on aircraft and other ships and ground based assets. Ideally it would replace carriers as the main striking power of the fleet with carriers falling into the role of fleet defense and support of landing operations.

>>34123880
Bullshit. The Army is already working on it.

>>34109897
>solid ship porn
must fap on that