“monitor”
January 2nd, 2009Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 18:03:01 -0700
>From: TMOliver
>Reply-To: swrctmo@iAmerica.net
>Organization: Kestrel/SWRC/Oliver
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win16; I)
>To: Warren Bruhn
>CC: consim-l@listserv.uni-c.dk, mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re: “monitor”
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Resent-From:
>Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Aug 97 16:01:12 EST
>Resent-To: dave@openlines.com
>X-Status:
>
>Warren Bruhn wrote:
> >
> > Well, since others are not objecting to continuation of this “monitor”
> > thread, I will jump back into it myself.
> >
> > I agree that the VERY LARGE guns that I proposed would not likely be needed
> > for penetration of hardened targets. These guns would NEVER be built. Which
> > is why my proposal for the “monitor” is practically speaking, a > fantasy….(vast snipping)
>
>I’m convinced that we’re looped into a cart before the horse agument.
>Large naval guns were used for support of amphibious ops because the
>ships and guns already existed, having been developed for missions
>against other ships and a/c. Aside from the BBs which had very limited
>mission capability (and no other BBs to shoot at very often), NGFS was a
>”collateral” assignment.
>
>Guns were used because guns existed.
>
>The development of the naval gun mature (even gray-headed) by the WWII
>era even with its succeeding large bore AAW manifestations represents
>technology on the back side of the power curve, and is always subject
>to a near-finite limitation, the destructive power of warheads limited
>by small size, thick casings (to provide for pressure/velocity
>protection), and relatively tiny detonating charges.
>
>In over 90% of its historic NGFS applications, range was of minimal
>consideration. Most shoots were “within the horizon”, with many even
>for small boys at “point blank” range. Extended range applications are
>certainly possible (and exist today), but 2000lb projectile with a tiny
>bursting charge and no terminal guidance represents little more than a
>big bang. Over 55 years ago, the Japanese found an optimum use for
>those “big” projectiles. Dropped from a/c, they were hell on the deck
>armor of old BBs (and given fins a great deal more accurate than when
>fired).
>
>As for the comparison of 5″ (127mm), 6″ (155mm) or even 8″ guns, the 8″
>will never more exist, and the 6′ offers no substantial quantitative or
>qualitative advantages over existing 5″ guns in US Naval service, a sort
>of “Why reinvent the wheel?” equation.
>
>In the US Army inventory, the “big guns’, 8” and 240mm, have been
>replaced by long ranged, more mobile, faster firing, easier to supply
>155mm models, both tracked and towed, and the MRLS launchers and their
>ubiquitous companions in other armies(all a great deal better than
>Congreve’s rockets, Stalin organs, Nebelwerfers and Korean LSMRs).
>
>Given a mission of demonstrably low priority (neither the Navy, JCs and
>Congress are enamored of it), minimal if any budget allocations today or
>in the future (unless there’s a drawn out shooting war), and likely to
>only be addressed by some “make-do” adaptations and combinations of
>”off-the-shelf” equipment and available vehicles, I wish you would put
>your talented mind to a realistic project. Parameters for such might
>include “bolt-ons” to current amphib ships to provide NGFS or the
>adaptation of existing smaller hulls of other types (such as my oil
>field service craft or the current generation of MCM vessels).
>
>The retired Sprucan concept (ahh, the “sizzle” inherent calling them
>APDs to get the votes of old guys) overlooks a critical
>financial/political consideration. If the Navy can’t afford to
>modernize them and operate them as surface combatants, it’s not likely
>to spend a dollar reconfiguring and paying the operating costs to use
>them as glamorized ferries for elite assault troops.
>
>But back to the cart before the horse.
>
>A substantial expenditure for the development of a ship optimized for
>NGFS support implies that anybody inside the Beltway (or in the Fleet)
>realistically envisions an opposed landing across a beach or any sort of
>operation against a coastline defended in depth by modern weapons
>systems unless the threat of such opposition has been largely
>eliminated.
>
>I’m no fan of carriers having lived and served long in one (as a black
>shoe), but the inherent and inescapable difference remains. 100 or even
>200 miles at sea, a carrier can still perform its mission with the
>limitation of reduced weapons loads on strike a/c. The ship can refuel,
>rearm, operate and defend itself (with the help of its entourage). To
>be effective in the NGFS role, any vessel must be able operate inshore,
>well within the response area of numerous enemy weapons systems. Some
>at least token comprehension of the risk factors involved should make it
>clear that even an old Sprucan might be to high-priced to risk (Now, one
>of those museum, Greek, Turkish or Taiwanese Gearings might make a
>different story.). It must emerge to the open sea to rearm and refuel
>(more often than you think), substantially diminishing the time it may
>spend on station.
>
>As for your comment about the 2nd round falling on the target…
>Even a blind pig is gonna find an acorn now and then.
>
>Your adherence to armor is traditional, but armor represents another
>descending footpath leading to the same dead end as the trail of big
>naval guns. We ain’t figured out how to armor sensors or to conduct
>modern naval warfare without electronic communications. Without them,
>any ship is dead on arrival, and they are just as vulnerable on an
>armored vessel as they are on a barge.
>
>Could it be that a significant factor in the development of early gators
>was not just the ability to beach but a pragnatic desire not to put too
>many eggs in any one basket? Our current amphibs are certainly not
>designed to close the beach.
>
>–
>Far too long for a sig, but personally compelling….
>Having been to see the elephant, contemplated the impermanence of
>existence, gazed upon the Apocalypse, and smelled Death’s rotting
>breath close at hand, I seize my rewards from the simplest of
>pleasures….
>The gentle rip of surf on sand, the cool, musty bite of a well-brewed
>ale, the briny tang imparted by a fresh oyster, the dark heart of
>carefully aged whisky, the incomparable savor of the first slash of rare
>beef, the aggressive impact of a powerful pinot, Summer’s first real
>tomato, the smoky complex fire of chipotle sauce, the combined reek
>gunpowder and working dogs across an Autumn pasture, the blessed
>combination of green chile and tomatillo, the ectasy of lump or backfin
>crabmeat (from blues), fresh Gulf Snapper or the season’s first inshore
>shrimp, all prepared with Spartan simplicity, the secret glimpse of a
>shadowed nipple within the gap of a loose blouse, the “Scent of a
>Woman”(not the movie, the experience), the astringent bite of
>lime-dosed gin and tonic in a tropical twilight, the lung-filling tingle
>of the first drag on a post-coital Camel, smoked salmon and a good
>Sunday newspaper….among these are found ample joys to counter
>inevitable misfortune and grief. Oliver Sends/OPIMMEDIATE