Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

For everything that doesn't fit elsewhere; literature, movies, video games - whatever you desire.
Post Reply
GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

USS Salem: last of the all-gun cruisers in the USN.



This vid is quite interesting for those so inclined – the 8 inch rate of fire is impressive:






More history:

http://www.uss-salem.org/museum/history/history.htm


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Salem_(CA-139)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Another one from the transitional era:

Ordered in the 1957-58 Naval Programme, the Andrea Doria class were designed to operate the RIM-2 Terrier surface-to-air missile (SAM) system and Sikorsky SH-3 Sea King helicopters as both a platform for anti-air and anti-submarine warfare.

The vessels had a draught of 5.0 m (16.4 ft) and displaced 5,000 tons standard and 6,500 tons loaded.
- what a lightweight on today's scales!

The flight deck measured 30 metres (98 ft) by 16 metres (52 ft) and was placed aft of the superstructure. It was cantilevered out at the stern to provide extra operational space.

The class was powered by 4 Foster Wheeler boilers. These provided the power to two double reduction geared steam-powered turbines creating 60,000 horsepower (45,000 kW) which drove two shafts.[2] This gave the cruisers a maximum speed of 31 knots
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Another one from the transitional era:

Ordered in the 1957-58 Naval Programme, the Andrea Doria class were designed to operate the RIM-2 Terrier surface-to-air missile (SAM) system and Sikorsky SH-3 Sea King helicopters as both a platform for anti-air and anti-submarine warfare.

The vessels had a draught of 5.0 m (16.4 ft) and displaced 5,000 tons standard and 6,500 tons loaded.
- what a lightweight on today's scales!

The flight deck measured 30 metres (98 ft) by 16 metres (52 ft) and was placed aft of the superstructure. It was cantilevered out at the stern to provide extra operational space.

The class was powered by 4 Foster Wheeler boilers. These provided the power to two double reduction geared steam-powered turbines creating 60,000 horsepower (45,000 kW) which drove two shafts.[2] This gave the cruisers a maximum speed of 31 knots

I’m quite behind the curve on ships, would that be considered a “light cruiser” for the era?



Where do cruisers fit in the scheme of things presently? Are Destroyers, AC Carriers and Subs the mainstays?



I discovered this site which will probably consume much time:



http://www.militaryfactory.com/ships/na ... ountry.asp


arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by arfah »

.............
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

USS Pegasus

Hydrofoil:



arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by arfah »

.............
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

arfah wrote:
GastonGlocker wrote:Return of the battleship?

https://warisboring.com/is-it-time-to-b ... .dc6is3maz
Interesting.

However, Battleships were slow and cumbersome. So, for a modern surface equivalent you would require a couple of nuclear reactors to power them along.
You will probably require additional power generation for all the latest technological advances in sensors and weapons (lasers and rail guns).

The article states that cruise missiles will not penetrate a battleships armour. Highly likely, so how does a navy beat a battleship?

I think the SSGN is the new battleship as far as land warfare is concerned. You cannot hit what you cannot see.

The best counter to a 21st Century battleship? An SSN.

In my opinion.


Agreed with your assessment.



The article seems a bit “idealistic”. One has to think there is a limited ROI after a certain tonnage in today’s sensor and missile laden surface ships vs steel and big guns. I like where the rail gun and laser technology is going. It seems that with the evolution of drones and 6th gen AC with stealth and optional pilot, the battleship will really have to remain in the past as where does it fit in the task force?



I do suppose there is some value to “show of force” to the uninformed when a heavy is parked offshore. I imagine some investment in smart projectiles from 16 inch barrels would do result in some spectacular hits but more investment in rail gun and guided projectiles there seems prudent.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

Interesting turret gun arrangement:


arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by arfah »

.............
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

USS England. 6 subs in 2 weeks.

http://de635.ussengland.org/

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by arfah »

.............
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1747
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

Image

The Italian cruiser Giuseppe Garibaldi. Her armament included two twin 135/45 mm guns, eight Oto Melara 76/62mm MMI guns, one Mk 4 twin-arm launcher for RIM-2 Terrier SAMs and... four Polaris ballistic missiles.

Image

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by arfah »

.............
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

arfah wrote:
GastonGlocker wrote:USS England. 6 subs in 2 weeks.

http://de635.ussengland.org/
Outstanding!

Japs or Krauts? :-D

---------------------------------



USS England was part of the DE class.

http://destroyerhistory.org/de/classes/



Her citation:

http://destroyerhistory.org/de/ussengland_puc/



It took on the 6 Japanese I class subs and utilized the Hedgehog very effectively. I recall the Hedgehog is a British invention? If so, aptly named DE utilizing it makes it all the better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_England_(DE-635)





This site has been quite enjoyable btw:

http://destroyerhistory.org/





Another that was interesting:

USS Borie. Clemson Class DD took on U-Boat and rammed her to finish the fight.



http://destroyerhistory.org/flushdeck/ussborie/



“On 27 July, the Card task group cleared Norfolk for the first of two offensive patrols, during which it sank eight submarines and was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation for the period ending 25 October. A ninth sinking, however, was Borie’s last action.

Shortly after 2000 on 31 October, while en route back to the United States from Casablanca and detached from Card’s screen to search for two submarines spotted by planes, Borie obtained radar contact on U-256 and closed to ram. The sub promptly dove. Two depth charge attacks forced it back to the surface but it submerged again, stern first, and after a third attack, a large oil slick was observed. Though U-256made it home, Capt. Hutchins believed Borie had achieved a kill and reported, “Scratch one pig boat; am searching for more.”

Shortly before 0200 on 1 November, radar contact was obtained on U-405, which submerged. After a depth charge attack, U-405 surfaced again in gale-force winds and rising seas, apparently unable to submerge. The ensuing surface battle lasted an hour and four minutes as Borie fixed her searchlight on the target and both ships opened fire. For about 20 minutes, Capt. Hutchins circled at 25 knots, frustrated by veteran Korvettenkapitän Rolf-Heinrich Hopmann’s shiphandling skill and his U-boat’s smaller turning radius. An early 4-inch salvo from Borie blew away its deck gun and 20mm fire kept its crew from manning their machine guns. Eventually, Borie found an opening and closed the sub’s starboard quarter to ram. At the moment of impact, however, with U-405 turning hard to port, a wave lifted Borie’s bow onto its foredeck, pinning it below and locking the ships together only 25–30 degrees from parallel.

Utilizing every weapon including small arms, a sheath knife and an empty 4-inch shell case, Borie’s crew maintained “murderous” fire against U-405and its crew as the action of the seas worked the two ships together, crushing and holing Borie’s port side below the waterline.

This standoff continued for ten long minutes before the ships separated; then Borie resumed the chase and gunnery attack and launching a single torpedo, which missed. Resorting to trickery—dousing her searchlight, tracking by radar to close and then steering with engines to kick her stern in close as the sub attempted to ram—Borie next fired a full salvo from her starboard depth charge projectors. Three charges set to detonate at a depth of 30 feet perfectly straddled U-405’s conning tower and exploded, arresting its momentum. Under way again, Borie fired another torpedo that missed but her continuing gunfire eventually scored a decisive hit on the submarine’s diesel exhaust. In surrender, U-405 began firing Very’s stars and crewmembers abandoned ship into rubber rafts. When sub sank by the stern and exploded, Capt. Hutchins later wrote, “a yell went up from all hands that probably could be heard in Berlin.”

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

The Armchair Soldier wrote:Image

The Italian cruiser Giuseppe Garibaldi. Her armament included two twin 135/45 mm guns, eight Oto Melara 76/62mm MMI guns, one Mk 4 twin-arm launcher for RIM-2 Terrier SAMs and... four Polaris ballistic missiles.

Image

Now that is an interesting concept. All options? I suppose it had the room for such mods which speaks to the options available to that size of vessel:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_c ... ldi_(1936)

Apart from some minor changes, much of the latter's rebuilding included four launchers for the U.S. designed UGM-27 Polaris nuclear ballistic missiles. Despite the successful launching tests, the US never provided the missiles, due to political convenience. Instead the Italian government set to develop an indigenous missile, called Alfa, with a successful program, officially halted by the Italian Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ratification and failure of the NATO Multilateral Force.

GastonGlocker
Member
Posts: 321
Joined: 05 Jun 2015, 03:08
United States of America

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by GastonGlocker »

Found a good site that may be of interest here:



http://www.chuckhawks.com/index3.naval_ ... istory.htm



For your viewing enjoyment:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/warship_pictures.htm

FuNsTeR
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: 19 Jun 2015, 21:44

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by FuNsTeR »

GastonGlocker wrote:Interesting turret gun arrangement:

pretty conventional compared to the Nelson class

Image

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7930
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by SKB »

Strangely, HMS Nelson is also the name of HMNB Portsmouth!

FuNsTeR
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: 19 Jun 2015, 21:44

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by FuNsTeR »

SKB wrote:Strangely, HMS Nelson is also the name of HMNB Portsmouth!
wouldn't it be quite fitting if the new type 26 class frigates received the classification of Nelson Class Frigates :mrgreen:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Ships no longer in service - historical thread.

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Post Reply