• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

World's Worst Warships?

Giordano said:
Interesting article in NY Times in the Atlantic as to current crewing concepts for USA warships in general and for Littoral Combat Ships in particular. Operative goal: "minimal manning." Chilling IMO:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/07/future-of-work-expertise-navy/590647/
Click to expand...

We have 9 half a billion dollar ships (each), the Independence class, that aren't even expected to survive against RPG attacks. The R&D and procurement process for the USN (and USAF) has been incredibly arrogant, wasteful, and I'm sure corrupt over the past 20 years or so that some people should be in jail. They've been so enamored with whizbang new tech that they've overlooked the importance of equipment that actually works. Meanwhile, China, Iran, and Russia have developed actual, good, working anti ship tech.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...navys-littoral-combat-ships-punch-below-23042
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
We have 9 half a billion dollar ships (each), the Independence class, that aren't even expected to survive against RPG attacks. The R&D and procurement process for the USN (and USAF) has been incredibly arrogant, wasteful, and I'm sure corrupt over the past 20 years or so that some people should be in jail. They've been so enamored with whizbang new tech that they've overlooked the importance of equipment that actually works. Meanwhile, China, Iran, and Russia have developed actual, good, working anti ship tech.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...navys-littoral-combat-ships-punch-below-23042
Click to expand...

The LCS was never intended to operate in waters threatened by a near-peer adversary. It doesn't make sense to complain that the ship doesn't have a capability it was never supposed to have.

It does make sense to complain that the US apparently didn't stop to think about wether they actually needed a ridiculously expensive, ridiculously fragile corvette at all, rather than a modern replacement for the OHP class frigates.

I think it would have made more sense to replace the OHP with a similar type - a kind of Burke-lite general purpose ASW/AD picket. And develop a single corvette type with multiple configuration options. A more realistic modular approach. Not the quick-swap dream, but simply realizing cost savings from parts commonality and a single design base. Some get built out as minesweepers, some as special forces tenders, some as supplemental ASW pickets, etc. Each of those roles could be filled by a ship that size, and each of those would fill a capability gap in the USN.

I think the current LCS designs are inferior versions of this concept. Too expensive, not as capable as they could (should) be. But they can work in that role. They'll probably get supplanted by something more sensical in about 10-15 years. Which is probably okay.
 
theprestige said:
The LCS was never intended to operate in waters threatened by a near-peer adversary. It doesn't make sense to complain that the ship doesn't have a capability it was never supposed to have.

It does make sense to complain that the US apparently didn't stop to think about wether they actually needed a ridiculously expensive, ridiculously fragile corvette at all, rather than a modern replacement for the OHP class frigates.

I think it would have made more sense to replace the OHP with a similar type - a kind of Burke-lite general purpose ASW/AD picket. And develop a single corvette type with multiple configuration options. A more realistic modular approach. Not the quick-swap dream, but simply realizing cost savings from parts commonality and a single design base. Some get built out as minesweepers, some as special forces tenders, some as supplemental ASW pickets, etc. Each of those roles could be filled by a ship that size, and each of those would fill a capability gap in the USN.

I think the current LCS designs are inferior versions of this concept. Too expensive, not as capable as they could (should) be. But they can work in that role. They'll probably get supplanted by something more sensical in about 10-15 years. Which is probably okay.
Click to expand...

I have similar ideas about how the RN should be designing Frigates. What they need is a modern 'Leander' or even a modern 'Type 12' (for those old enough to rememeber) for the majority of the work they do.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
It was appreciated that Battleships weren't the force they once were, the RN for example halted building on the Lions and Vanguard switching large ship construction to Cruisers and Aircraft Carriers.
Essentially the only real target for a Battleship is another Battleship.
Click to expand...
They were useful as floating artillery batteries, but so were cruisers.
 
catsmate said:
They were useful as floating artillery batteries, but so were cruisers.
Click to expand...

The thing is, with modern near-peer adversaries, much of the fighting during an amphibious operation is going to be happening from over the horizon. If you need to bring a battleship into range for shore bombardment, you're probably doing something very wrong. Most likely, you shouldn't have embarked on this particular operation in the first place.

And with non near-peers, that much artillery is overkill. A battleship is wasted against Somali pirate camps, and useless in contesting the South China Sea.
 
theprestige said:
The thing is, with modern near-peer adversaries, much of the fighting during an amphibious operation is going to be happening from over the horizon. If you need to bring a battleship into range for shore bombardment, you're probably doing something very wrong. Most likely, you shouldn't have embarked on this particular operation in the first place.

And with non near-peers, that much artillery is overkill. A battleship is wasted against Somali pirate camps, and useless in contesting the South China Sea.
Click to expand...

Battleships were very useful on D-Day and after as they could give artillery support for many miles inland and throw a huge weight of explosives on to a target in a short time.
For example 15" Mk1 guns on RN battleships could throw a 2000lb shell 30 miles.
RN Forward Observers were embedded with the front line troops and could call down fire wherever it was needed.
In addition to the battleships there were 8" cruisers could throw a 250lb shell 17 miles and 6" Cruisers a 115lb shell 14 miles.
Even a Destroyer could throw 50lb shell 10,000 yards and were useful for 'direct fire' against coastal targets.

For weight of fire, HMS Warspite for exampe anchored off Sword Beach and on June 6 fired over 300 shells in 48 hours and was on constant call up until the 9th June when it was withdrawn for resupply.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Battleships were very useful on D-Day and after as they could give artillery support for many miles inland and throw a huge weight of explosives on to a target in a short time.
For example 15" Mk1 guns on RN battleships could throw a 2000lb shell 30 miles.
Click to expand...

Agreed. For contemporary near-peer adversaries, battleships were a huge asset to amphibious and over-the-beach operations.

But for modern near-peer adversaries, the value just isn't there, I think.
 
A full list of the fire support ships off Normandy.

Omaha Bombardment Group
Battleships
USS Arkansas (BB 33). Wyoming class, commissioned 1912.
USS Texas (BB 35). New York class, commissioned 1914.

Cruisers
HMS Bellona. Bellona-class light cruiser, commissioned 1943.
HMS Glasgow. Southampton class, commissioned 1937.
FFL Georges Leygues (French). La Glossonairre–class light cruiser, commissioned 1937.
FFL Montcalm (French). La Glossonaire–class light cruiser, commissioned 1937.

Destroyers
USS Baldwin (DD 624). Livermore class, commissioned 1943. • USS Carmick (DD 493). Livermore class, commissioned 1942.
USS Doyle (DD 494). Livermore class, commissioned 1942.
USS Emmons (DD 457/DMS 22). Ellyson class, commissioned 1941/44, sunk off Okinawa 1945.
USS Frankford (DD 497). Livermore class, commissioned 1943.
USS Harding (DD 625/DMS 28). Ellyson class, commissioned 1943/44.
USS McCook (DD 496). Livermore class, commissioned 1943.
USS Satterlee (DD 626). Livermore class, commissioned 1943.
USS Thompson (DD 627). Livermore class, commissioned 1943.
Destroyer Escorts
HMS Melbreak. Hunt class, commissioned 1942.
HMS Talybont. Hunt class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Tanatside. Hunt class, commissioned 1942.

Utah Bombardment Group

Battleship
USS Nevada (BB 36). Nevada class, commissioned 1916.

Cruisers
HMS Black Prince. Bellona-class light cruiser, commissioned 1943.
HMS Enterprise. E-class light cruiser, commissioned 1926.
HMS Hawkins. Hawkins class, commissioned 1919.
USS Quincy (CA 71). Baltimore class, commissioned 1943.
USS Tuscaloosa (CA 37). Astoria class, commissioned 1934.
Monitor
HMS Erebus. Erebus class, commissioned 1916.

Destroyers
USS Butler (DD 636/DMS 29). Ellyson class, commissioned 1942.
USS Corry (DD 463). Gleaves class, commissioned 1942, sunk 6 June.
USS Fitch (DD 462/DMS 25). Ellyson class, commissioned 1942/44.
USS Forrest (DD 461/DMS 24). Ellyson class, commissioned 1942/44.
USS Gerhardi (DD 637/DMS 30). Ellyson class, commissioned 1942/44.
USS Herndon (DD 638). Livermore class, commissioned 1943.
USS Hobson (DD 464/DMS 26). Ellyson class, commissioned 1942/44.
USS Shubrick (DD 639). Livermore class, commissioned 1943.


Destroyer Escorts
USS Bates (DE 68/APD 47). Buckley class, commissioned 1943.
USS Rich (DE 695). Buckley class, commissioned 1943, sunk 8 June.

Sloop
HNMS Soemba (Dutch). Flores class, commissioned 1926.

Gold Bombardment Group

Light Cruisers
HMS Argonaut. Dido class, commissioned 1942.
HMS Ajax. Leander class, commissioned 1935.
HMS Emerald. Emerald class, commissioned 1926.
HMS Orion. Leander class, commissioned 1934.

Destroyers
HMS Cattistock. Hunt class, commissioned 1940.
HMS Cottesmore. Hunt class, commissioned 1940.
HMS Grenville. G class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Jervis. J class, commissioned 1939.
ORP Krakowiak (Polish). Hunt class, commissioned 1941.
HMS Pytchley. Hunt class, commissioned 1940.
HMS Ulster. U class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Ulysses. U class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Undaunted. U class, commissioned 1944.
HMS Undine. U class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Urania. U class, commissioned 1944.
HMS Urchin. U class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Ursa. U class, commissioned 1944.

Sloop
HNMS Flores (Dutch). Flores class, commissioned 1926.

Bombardment and gunfire support ships in the British and Canadian sectors were:

Juno Bombardment Group

Cruisers
HMS Belfast. Edinburgh class, commissioned 1938.
HMS Diadem. Bellona class light cruiser, commissioned 1944.

Destroyers
HMCS Algonquin. V class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Bleasdale. Hunt class, commissioned 1942.
FFL La Combattante (French). Hunt class, commissioned 1942, lost in 1945.
HMS Faulknor. F class, commissioned 1935.
HMS Fury. F class, commissioned 1934. Sunk 21 June 1944.
HNoMS Glaisdale (Norwegian). Hunt class, commissioned 1942.
HMS Kempenfelt. W class, commissioned 1943.
HMCS Sioux. V class, commissioned 1944.
HMS Stevenstone. Hunt class, commissioned 1943.

Sword Bombardment Group

Battleships
HMS Ramilles. Royal Sovereign class, commissioned 1917.
HMS Warspite. Queen Elizabeth class, commissioned 1916.
U.S. Navy battleship Nevada bombarding the invasion beaches: Martin K.A. Morgan.


Cruisers
HMS Arethusa. Arethusa class light cruiser, commissioned 1935.
HMS Danae. D-class light cruiser, commissioned 1918.
OPD Dragon (Polish). Dragon-class light cruiser, commissioned 1917, torpedoed 8 June.
HMS Frobisher. Hawkins class, commissioned 1924.
HMS Mauritius. Fiji-class light cruiser, commissioned 1941.

Destroyers
HMS Eglington. Hunt class, commissioned 1940.
HMS Kelvin. K class, commissioned 1939.
HMS Middleton. Hunt class, commissioned 1942.
HMS Saumarez. S class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Scorpion. S class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Scourge. S class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Serapis. S class, commissioned 1943.
ORP Slazak (Polish). Hunt class, commissioned 1942.
HNoMS Stord (Norwegian). S class, commissioned 1943.
HNoMS Svenner (Norwegian). S class, commissioned 1944, lost 6 June.
HMS Swift. S class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Verulam. V class, commissioned 1943.
HMS Virago. V class, commissioned 1943.

Monitor
HMS Roberts. Roberts class, commissioned 1941.

https://www.historyonthenet.com/naval-artillery
 
theprestige said:
Agreed. For contemporary near-peer adversaries, battleships were a huge asset to amphibious and over-the-beach operations.

But for modern near-peer adversaries, the value just isn't there, I think.
Click to expand...

Modern aircraft and an aircraft carrier can deliver similar weights of ordnance to longer ranges.
 
Sometimes it amuses me to think of it in terms of torpedo boats and torpedo boat destroyers. In this paradigm, naval aircraft are basically fast attack boats that can literally fly. The carrier is just a big attack boat tender. Everything else is a destroyer.

---

Except for submarines. Attack submarines are just another kind of fast attack boat.

Missile subs are the new battleships. Really, that's what happened to the battleship. It went stealthy, increased its range, and increased its weight of metal until it was throwing something else entirely.
 
Battleships were also useful in providing anti-aircraft fire to protect carriers in the Pacific. 16 or 20 5/38's, depending on the ship, and loads of 40's and 20's. They also provided a big attractive target to Kamikaze pilots; one both less valuable and less vulnerable than carriers.
Then again, an Atlanta-Class cruiser had nearly as many 5/38's and could fire more of them in the same direction.
 
Trebuchet said:
Battleships were also useful in providing anti-aircraft fire to protect carriers in the Pacific. 16 or 20 5/38's, depending on the ship, and loads of 40's and 20's. They also provided a big attractive target to Kamikaze pilots; one both less valuable and less vulnerable than carriers.
Then again, an Atlanta-Class cruiser had nearly as many 5/38's and could fire more of them in the same direction.
Click to expand...
An evolution that culminated in the guided missile cruiser, which replaces its superfluous big guns with surface to air missiles.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Modern aircraft and an aircraft carrier can deliver similar weights of ordnance to longer ranges.
Click to expand...

Yeah... and I know someone mentioned it upthread, but the Zumwaut (DDG-1000). Lets spend billions on a ship thats main role is going to be shore bombardment. Because aerial bombing hasn't been proven to be effective... oh wait yeah it has.

And the gun is unusable.

https://news.usni.org/2018/01/11/no...destroyer-gun-system-navy-monitoring-industry

So it was just an extremely expensive new VLS missile launcher platform???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom