A 16 inch HC rounds from a modernized battleship would be devastating
Watching the naval engagement between Missouri and the alien mothership in Battleship
sparked a debate between me and a friend.
I for once dont believe that a 16 inch shell can do significant damage to newer ships such as the Zumwalt or the Gerald R Ford class supercarrier
Sure it may do some damage.. but will there be terminal waterline damage if say, a 16 inch shell were to be fired from the Iowa or the Missouri against newer ships ?
IN BRIEF
A 16" inch shell striking any modern warship would do huge damage and a single 1900lb HC shell airburst above the superstructure of most modern warships would have the potential to mission kill it. A full nine gun broadside of 1900 LB HC shells airburst above the deck of a super carrier such as a Ford or Nimitz would destroy the ability of the carrier to launch planes and would produce hundreds of casualties, including much of the command staff. Further even a 1900 LB HC rounds (actually it was considered to be semi armor piercing) could penetrate the deck of carrier, exploding in the hanger of a carrier.
Regarding the $4 billion dollar plus, 14000 ton Zumwalt, it is not a very tough ship and single broadside from a battleship would rip it to shreds, likely killing or injuring most of it ridiculously small crew. It's defense is built around it being stealthy and not getting hit. Its small crew is incapable of performing the kind of ship saving damage control that a properly crewed ship is capable of doing. However, some have conjectured it will make a nice technology demonstration platform. A huge waste of critical defense dollars that could have been far better on just about anything.
If you are in range of 16'" guns, especially those firing precision guided rounds, you are going to be in a world of hurt as the combination of explosive and kinetic energy from such rounds is devastating.
IN A BIT MORE DETAIL
Today's ships are designed with a different mindset than ships of the World War II era. We believe, I believe mistakenly, that we can control the terms of future engagements such that we will be able to destroy the enemy before they can engage us - and failing that we will be able to destroy or evade incoming missiles torpedoes, etc. that this has been the case when facing vastly inferior opponents/Navies has lulled us into a false sense of security. I believe if our cold war with Soviets had gone hot our ships would have been takings lots of damage. (we still would have won, but we would have lost ships) Likewise a conflict with China's regionally powerful Navy and Air Force would put our ships at severe risk of taking damage. and being destroyed.
Since we have not had a shooting war with a peer competitor since WWII I believe it is a mistake, even arrogant, to presume we will be always controlling the terms of engagement.
Consequently, our base assumption that our ships are so sophisticated that we can avoid taking damaging hits is a mistake that has negatively influenced modern ship designs. Regarding what a 1900 LB 16" High Capacity Shell (BTW: it is also semi armor piercing) would do to a modern warships. Well against a Burke a single airburst over the superstructure would almost certainly mission kill the ship as it would destroy the Aegis phased array radar and other key sensors and communication. It would also would produce a lot of causalities including command staff. A single hit into the interior of a Burke would produce a lot of damage and casualties with the potential of mission killing the ship as well - depending on where it struck. Certainly a full broadside into a Burke would utterly devastate it with a good chance of sinking it outright.
Relative to WWII cruisers, our modern cruiser-sized destroyer s(i.e. DDG-51's) have thinner decks, thinner bulkheads, thinner lighter everything. Thus blast and fragment damage will penetrate more compartments than it would on older warships (that were also highly compartmentalized) that had thicker and stronger steel. In fact the STS steel used lavishly in WWII warship construction is actually tougher than the HY 80 that is sparingly used in modern warship construction to save weight as it has better ductility. Further STS is much tougher and vastly stronger than the DH36 steel that makes up the vast majority of steel used on modern warships such at the DDG-51 .
If the unlikely scenario were to occur that a modern supercarrier found itself in the range of a modern battleship with modern fire control and even precision guided rounds it would be a disaster for the carrier as a 9 round broadside of high explosive rounds air burst over the deck of a carrier would mission kill the carrier by endering the flight deck unusable. Of course that scenario would be highly unlikely as carriers are supposed to engage at ranges far beyond gun range. But we are merely addressing just how much damage a 16" gun could do if it was in effective range of a modern warship. The answer being it would be overwhelmingly devastating.
