Keep in mind that we once had many battleships in the fleet. They were rendered obsolete by the airplane.

Battleships are very fat targets in this age.

Bismarck and Musashi were eventually sunk by bombs. Then there was the near-successful attempt sinking USS Cole reflecting the potency of asymmetric warfare, and of course current drone technology which, if Ukrainian boat drones are able to sink large Russian missile cruisers, what more with a battleship about the size of an Iowa?

He’s in it mainly for the belief he wants to show a bigger e-peen.

  • turdcollector69@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    3 days ago

    Anytime someone mentions the CIWS in a situation that isn’t about cruise missiles or drone boats I instantly disregard what they have to say.

    People like that only bring it up because it’s the only thing they know about and they only know about it because it’s extremely flashy.

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      2 days ago

      That’s usually because they’re referring to the Phalanx CRAM system, which is a derivitave of the Phalanx CIWS system used by the US navy. The two look extremely similar (for obvious reasons, they share many components) and often the CIWS label is (incorrectly) used interchangably to refer to both systems. CRAM, which for at least the last fifteen years has been deployed on Navy vessels operating close enough to a coastline that the whole “swarm of drones” tactic is a feasible threat, is more than capable of engaging with those threats, and has repeatedly demonstrated that capability. It’s massively expanded magazine capacity, cheaper ammunition and (greatly) improved mechatronics on top of a more-accurate-at-engagement-range weapon are extremely flashy, but also extremely effective.

    • merc@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      2 days ago

      It’s super flashy, that’s why you see it in movies and stuff. But the CI in CIWS stands for Close In, meaning they’re one of the last layers of defence before something hits the ship. If the Phalanx has to fire, all the other layers of defence have failed. Like most military stuff, stats about it are not available to the general public. But, we do know about some of the failures. For example:

      An Iraqi battery at al-Finţās fired two Silkworms at the formation of allied ships, at 0452 on 25 February 1991. One of the Silkworms misfired and crashed into the sea shortly after the Iraqis launched it, but the other missile hurtled toward Missouri at 605 knots and a height of 375 feet above the water. The U.S. and British ships tracked the incoming missile on their radar. From the bridge of the Jarrett, Lt. Craig Isaacson ordered chaff, torchs, and decoys to be launched to confound the missile’s guidance.[4] Missouri also fired its SRBOC chaff at this time. The Phalanx CIWS system on Jarrett, operating in the automatic target-acquisition mode, fixed on Missouri’s chaff, releasing a burst of rounds. From this burst, four rounds hit Missouri which was 2–3 miles (3.2–4.8 km) from Jarrett at the time.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Jarrett