Wonders of Destruction 2

[CurtSibling]

I post this in honour of Admiral Darkshade!!!

 

[IceBlaZe]

There is a reason why they stopped using battleships.

Clumsy, slow and unuseful.

 

[CurtSibling]

I'm sure the Iraqi divisions that got obliterated by the USN's battlewagon's in 1991 would disagree...



The Spitfire is also out-dated...but it is still a beautiful machine...

Iceblaze, have some art in your soul, for crying out loud!

 

[CurtSibling]

Just for Iceblaze, I present the greatest battleship of them all...

The mighty Yamato!

 

[MadScot]

Originally posted by IceBlaZe
There is a reason why they stopped using battleships.

Clumsy, slow and unuseful.

Quite simply not true.

Countries stopped building battleships because they are expensive, and dollar for dollar aircraft carriers (despite being even more expensive[/i] give better value for the price. So when faced with the choice between a carrier or a battleship, you go with the CV every time.

But faced with the choice of 12 CVs, or 8 Cvs and 4 BBs, that would be a harder choice, IMHO. (Noteworthy that the two countries with the $$$ to do so either kept, or built new, BBs or equivalent)

BBs are most certainly NOT slow - perfectly capable of keeping up with any other ship in the fleet in fact. And if by clumsy you feel they are hard to manoeuvre, consider trying to take any kind of avoiding action with a CV. Oh, you can't - not only is it a very large ship, but is forced to maintain a fixed course for the benefit of the planes landing on it.

And as for not being useful; in addition to the very good use the USN made of the BB in the Gulf, consider this. Which is better from a political aspect - to fire a couple of 2000lb shells into hostile territory, laser guided if you like, or to drop them as bombs from an aircraft whose pilot might be shot down and captured. With the need to play the media game at every turn, the death from a distance of a BB is pretty useful.

I know that I would be safer on a CV than on a BB - but I would feel a hell of a lot safer on the BB. There's something about 12 inches of armour plating does that to you.

And if battleships and similar large surface combatants are such a bad idea - why did the Russians build the Kirov?

And one last thing: while you might be impressed intellectually by the power represented by a CV, the ship itself has all the charm of an office block. While a BB looks powerful; how can that not move you?

 

[Simon Darkshade]

My thoughts on the issue have been discussed at length previously.
I will not stoop to respond to the petty attempts at trolling from IceBlaze, as I am taking a bit of a break from the battleship issue; until I start a MA thesis on the History of the Battleship since 1945 in two years.
Suffice it to say, simplistic analysis in any subject is no substitute for thought and understanding.

Anyway, this thread is designed to celebrate all sorts of Destructive Equipment.

Clumsy? No.
Slow? 35+ knots is as fast as a CVN
Unuseful? Learn, child, learn.

In conclusion, it is said on battleships.org that the only reason that the USN retired these grand old ladies was those issues that were taken for granted when they were laid down - the cost of operating a large crew and vessel in an era which lacks big threats. (also the issue of the carrier mafia comes up, but as I said, you can read it when the book comes out)

(Und also, mein Herr Curt, the Yamato may have been biggest, but the Iowas were and are best. )

 

[CurtSibling]

I agree, Dark One!

Iowa, Yamato or Bismarck class...to me they all look majestic!

Battleships are a testament to man's mechanical genius!

I know you feel the same!

 

[CurtSibling]

Here is a living wonder of destruction...General D MacArthur!

What a guy!

 

[Simon Darkshade]

on Dugout Doug. A great man and a great commander, even with his human foibles.

In terms of aesthetic vision, I prefer the lines of the Western battlewagons than the pagoda style towers of the IJN.
I'll have to dig out some of my pics of HMS Hood and HMS Vanguard, two of my favourite lookers (One of me mates down the boozer had a cousin who went down on the Mighty Hood. Small world)

 

[CurtSibling]

Even smaller, oh evil one!

I live 15 minutes walk from where the mighty Hood was built!

John Brown Engineering at the Clyde Shipyards! Now sadly closed down...

Small world!

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Look in a dictionary under Firepower, and you will see the following:

 

[MadScot]

Not a very good shot of her, I'm afraid. But the setting itself is pretty important. There's another couple of BBs or BCs in the background, no idea which they are though.

 

[MadScot]

A varied selection of mistresses of the seas...

SMS Derfflinger:

HMS Vanguard:

(might more accurately have been named HMS Rearguard )

Three USN ladies:
USS California

USS Mississippi:

USS Tennessee plying her trade:

And a relative minnow, USS Alaska:

Apologies for the variable quality. The subject compensates for the image, I feel.

 

[CurtSibling]

Lovely battlewagons, lads!

The sea shall not have this thread!!!

Here is a sleek customer, the PzKw V Panther...in Romanian service...

 

[MadScot]

perhaps the most beautiful jet fighter
Hawker Hunter in stunning paint scheme

ok, a simple link to the picture didn't work, perhaps this will?

 

[MadScot]

Although they aren't as photogenic as BBs, CVs and the like can be interesting. And the concentration of 5 carriers in the last picture is pretty unusual for modern times....
Royal Navy's Assault Carrier HMS Ocean:

and HMS Invincible showing some manoeuverability

And five carriers in formation:

 

[CurtSibling]

Madscot, That's NAVAL POWER!

Great images, love the jet in rainbow colours!

 

[CurtSibling]

Here is group of fellows that are known all over.

They are not wonderful, but they are destructive!

Der Wehrmacht! (or SS in this case) A terrifying turn out of jackboot and steel!

 

[MadScot]

A few shots of USMC hardware:

M1A1:

LAV-AT:

M198 Howitzer:

 

[MadScot]

A cool sequence of a Fuel Air Explosive detonation. It's a little large, but it's impressive.