By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
Nuclear-armed Tomahawk missiles capable of attacking at ranges up to 1,700 miles, land attack Tomahawks able to travel 850 miles and even ship-to-ship maritime Tomahawks all armed famous US Navy WWII-era Iowa class battleships. The sheer firepower of the Iowa class, which also included armor-piercing shells, dual-purpose 5-inch guns for surface bombardment up to 10 miles off shore and harpoon anti-ship missiles, is likely a main reason why the US Navy brought the ships back to life during the Cold War in the 1980s. Two Iowa-class battleships attacked Iraq with missiles and 16-inch guns during the Gulf War in 1991.
The sheer firepower of the Iowa class, which also included armor-piercing shells, dual-purpose 5-inch guns for surface bombardment up to 10 miles offshore, and harpoon anti-ship missiles, is likely the main reason why the US Navy brought the ships back to life during the Cold War in the 1980s. Two Iowa-class battleships attacked Iraq with missiles and 16-inch guns during the Gulf War in 1991
An interesting issue of Popular Mechanics from June of 1982 details this firepower and explains the rationale for their return, a US Navy development that lasted into the early 90s.
Interestingly, the 1982 magazine article addressed critics of the ships at the time, expressing concern that the large battleships were vulnerable, easy targets, concerns which would likely prove even more relevant today.
In response, the Navy did something quite similar to what is employed today in Carrier Strike Groups, meaning warships such as cruisers and destroyers would surround and “protect” the larger battleship at the center of what the Navy called a Surface Action Group in the 1980s
The concept is quite relevant today and makes great sense in retrospect as the return of heavy maritime firepower can bring its intended advantage while receiving measurable protection from surrounding warships. Clearly large battleships would likely be more visible targets to adversaries, yet such is the case with carriers as well. It seems conceivable that some of the thinking in the 1980s regarding the Iowa class contained some of these ideas. The risk of deploying large and more easily detected and attacked warships can be greatly offset by cutting-edge ship defense technology, long-range sensing and threat detection, maritime warfare cross-domain networking. Drones operating as aerial gateways transmitting data beyond surface ship radar horizon, course correcting, long-range missiles and a new generation of layered ship-defense technologies certainly raise the possibility that it may again make sense to bring back the heavy firepower of classic battleships. This would be particularly relevant in areas such as the Pacific where there simply are not many land-basing opportunities for heavy firepower across the vast expanse of the region. For this reason, concentrated, long-range yet heavily protected large warships could potentially offer unique and much needed maritime warfare advantages.
Kris Osborn is the Military Affairs Editor of 19FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University
