Battleships: A Ridiculous but Awesome Idea (2011) | Hacker News Reader

Battleships: A Ridiculous but Awesome Idea (2011)

scottlocklin.wordpress.com

15 pointsmemorable10 comments

>> The way I see it, the battleship is sort of the ultimate embodiment of the Western military mind.

Maybe, just maybe, the author should have studied a littel bit of one of thr most powerful navies of the early 20th century, the Imperial Japanese one. Because they liked their battleships a lot, despite prioneering modern naval aviation and despite never using their battleships in direct combat.

The article misses a lot, it assumes the only battleship on battleship combat was Jutland. That's simply not true. Surigao Strait[1] and the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal[2] both definitely occurred. As did Hood/Bismarck (this one depends on if you consider HMS Hood a "Battlecruiser" or "Fast Battleship" IMO it's the latter).

But the point of a battleship wasn't just showing off, it was also area denial. You really can't move another surface combatant into an area with a battleship unless it is a battleship (that didn't stop Taffy 3 [3] from trying). So battleships served two clear roles IMO: Area denial and shore bombardment. There is a reason the US Navy kept the Iowas around until the 90s. For what they do there is nothing like them. That said let's also be clear the counter to a battleship is an aircraft carrier, not a battleship based on existing data.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf#Battle_of... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Battle_of_Guadalcanal [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar

Nowadays, guided missile cruisers replaced battleships in the surface role, aircraft carriers in force projection, area denial and long range combat. One could make a point about cheap shore bombardment with artillery so, but then again modern day artillery shells are far from cheap, so guided missile cruisers it is.

Another thing the article misses: submarines were rendered useless by ASW tactics and technology by end of '43. It took the first true submarines in late '44 and '45 to change that again.

And a design, battleships, that stayed between the very early 1900s until the 90s in various forms and shapes proved its usefulness.

Aircraft carriers will be next when it comes to hot war. Drone swarms and hypersonic missiles just entered the game.

What can hypersonic missiles do that wave-skimming anti-ship cruise missiles or ballistic missiles can't do? Carrier groups are certainly vulnerable, but I would think that their vulnerabilities are fairly well understood at this point.

They can not be shot down (yet).

Why not? As a layperson, I assume a CIWS could still fire into the flight path of one and knock it out of the air.

Probably because they can't actual fly yet either.

(That's a bit of a joke but hypersonic missiles have a lot of physics challenges to overcome before being viable)

Get there fast. From very far away. The over simplified example I see posted a lot is “Pearl Harbour at the push of a Button”. It’s completely ignoring any aspect of defence which while not a well developed situation yet, there are definitely technical capabilities that can be improved to offer some level of defence. But the concept is well conveyed, long range surprise attack capability is something a military will obviously want.

Well if drone swarms do prove their worth, how are you going to get the drones to where they need to be?

Is that thing not going to be an aircraft carrier?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com