Shipbucket

heuhen wrote:To have a platform big enough to carry many tomahawk. similar amount does a destroyer carry today.

Quite.

When they were brought back into service, the Iowas mounted 16 Tomahawks. The ABLed Spruances and Virginas mounted just 8 each. It was this larger battery, combined with superior seakeeping (remember, launching from the Barents Sea was expected) is the main reason they were returned to service. They had a leg up on the proposal to reactivate Des Moines and Salem because there were four Iowas, and they had much larger fuel bunkers that could support smaller escorting ships when deployed. With the proliferation of the VLS refit Spruances, VLS Ticos, and Burke class destroyers the need for the Tomahawk deployment capabilities was reduced, and combined with the high manning requirements, the ships were pushed back into reserve and eventual decommissioning.

In my opinion, if there were a quartet [you need this many to make any sustained deployments of strategic Tomahawks work] of Alaskas that had survived (with the associated logistical train) in the reserve fleet into the early 1980s, they would have been a close competitor to the Iowas for reactivation. The power plant that the Alaskas used was still in USN service aboard CVT-16, and there were 4 other complete sets aboard Oriskany, Shangri La, Bon Homme Richard, & Bennington. They might have lost the aft turret for additional power generation and deck space, but it's a hypothetical that has fascinated me for some time.

TimothyC wrote:When they were brought back into service, the Iowas mounted 16 Tomahawks.

Minor nitpick, the Iowas carried 32 Tomahawks and 16 Harpoons.

In my opinion, if there were a quartet [you need this many to make any sustained deployments of strategic Tomahawks work] of Alaskas that had survived (with the associated logistical train) in the reserve fleet into the early 1980s, they would have been a close competitor to the Iowas for reactivation. The power plant that the Alaskas used was still in USN service aboard CVT-16, and there were 4 other complete sets aboard Oriskany, Shangri La, Bon Homme Richard, & Bennington. They might have lost the aft turret for additional power generation and deck space, but it's a hypothetical that has fascinated me for some time.

The Iowa power plant was still in service in the Sacramento-class, literally. Sacramento and Camden each got one half of the power plant originally procured for USS Kentucky (BB-66).

ghost792 wrote:

TimothyC wrote:When they were brought back into service, the Iowas mounted 16 Tomahawks.

Minor nitpick, the Iowas carried 32 Tomahawks and 16 Harpoons.

Quite right. Mea Culpa. That actually makes each Iowa worth the 4 ABLed Spruances that would have been needed to match the number of Tomahawks.

ghost792 wrote:

In my opinion, if there were a quartet [you need this many to make any sustained deployments of strategic Tomahawks work] of Alaskas that had survived (with the associated logistical train) in the reserve fleet into the early 1980s, they would have been a close competitor to the Iowas for reactivation. The power plant that the Alaskas used was still in USN service aboard CVT-16, and there were 4 other complete sets aboard Oriskany, Shangri La, Bon Homme Richard, & Bennington. They might have lost the aft turret for additional power generation and deck space, but it's a hypothetical that has fascinated me for some time.

The Iowa power plant was still in service in the Sacramento-class, literally. Sacramento and Camden each got one half of the power plant originally procured for USS Kentucky (BB-66).

Quite. If the Iowas were to have been in service post 2005, the power plants from the Sacramentos would have had to have been salvaged. In addition Seattle and Detroit each got half of the Plant from Illinois.