Re:The F-35 still has a long way to go
by protomyth on Saturday April 01, 2017 @09:55PM
(#14015329)
If you are looking for a WWII battleship that was too expensive to risk the Tirpitz is probably the best example. I think they let it out once.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Tirpitz did get used a few times, but it was mostly useful as a way to tie up a big chunk of the Royal Navy. Eventually, Tirpitz was sunk by aircraft.
The US's four Iowa-class battleships were quite useful, mostly for shore bombardment. They required a huge crew, 2,700 for WWII, Korea), and, after some modernization, 1,800 in the 1980s and 1990s. It's the crew size that led to their retirement. Each turret needed 90-110 people.
There was naval interest in building some "bombardment ships" intended for shore bombardment of countries that didn't have a significant capability for shooting back. But that went nowhere, since most of the US's enemies in recent decades have been too far inland.
Re:The F-35 still has a long way to go
by WalterBright on Sunday April 02, 2017 @12:20AM
(#14015760)
The battleships proved incredibly vulnerable to aircraft. The Bismarck was disabled by a biplane, of all things.
Re:The F-35 still has a long way to go
by NickNameNick on Sunday April 02, 2017 @12:24AM
(#14015774)
The Tirpitz and also the major portion of the Italian fleet were able to exert disproportionate influence so long as they remained a potential threat.