# Battleship versus Aircraft carrier **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 25, 2012, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099 "2012-05-25T20:05:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/21 "2012-05-25T22:32:11Z")
> [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](#): > > (For some reason, I also thought that some carriers had Phalanx in-close-weapons systems, which are anti-ship. But now that I think about it, I’m not sure whether that’s true. [I can’t see any on this picture of the USS Nimitz](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Nimitz_in_Victoria_Canada_036.jpg).) [Phalanx](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS) is an anti-missile system anyway, not anti-ship. (On the Wikipedia article: “The Phalanx CIWS is an anti-ship missile defense system.” It’s not “a missile designed to attack ships”; it’s “a weapon–specifically a high-tech Gatling gun–designed to defend against anti-ship missiles”.) ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/22 "2012-05-25T22:38:31Z")
> [@bucketybuck](#): > > I knew the carrier relied on its planes, but does it really have zero offensive weaponry? Is there not a turret something on the thing? The officers on deck should have service pistols. M9 I think - probably can’t sink a Battleship. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/23 "2012-05-25T22:50:50Z")
> [@Gray\_Ghost](#): > > This [discussion with some basic math](http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-022.htm), is probably of interest in answering the question of how much the Iowas moved sideways when firing a broadside. FTA: Interesting. Thanks for the discussion, **Gray Ghost**. I was more concerned with the [rocking motion of the ship when the guns are fired](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-5ATYPrZnSQ#t=109s). But even the shaking in that video may be more the result of shock waves acting on the camera than the boat moving. And I would guess that an aircraft carrier is more stable than a battleship. So my concern about ship movement may be overblown. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/24 "2012-05-25T22:52:27Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > [Phalanx](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS) is an anti-missile system anyway, not anti-ship. (On the Wikipedia article: “The Phalanx CIWS is an anti-ship missile defense system.” It’s not “a missile designed to attack ships”; it’s “a weapon–specifically a high-tech Gatling gun–designed to defend against anti-ship missiles”.) D’oh! Thanks for the correction. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/25 "2012-05-25T22:57:22Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > That’s the whole **point** of the thing. If you set that condition, then this is not a good test of their relative fighting-strength unless the battleship has no operable guns on board. You have to nobble the situation quite a bit for the battleship to have the advantage. A ten-mile gap, for example (borderline claustrophobic even by WW2 standards) means the BB trashes the CV almost immediately, while a 50 mile range gives the CV a chance to scramble its planes, unless the scenario means it doesn’t get any, in which case… what’s the point? Next up - Typhoon-class sub vs Halifax-class frigate, except the former has no torpedos and the latter can only turn left. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/26 "2012-05-25T23:04:39Z")
> [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](#): > > I’m not an expert, nor do I have classified US military clearance. And my knowledge is pretty much limited to the US Navy. (Other countries may do things differently.) But as I understand it, aircraft carriers’ non-aircraft armaments are exclusively defensive. They do have anti-aircraft missiles, but those are primarily defensive in nature, and presumably would not be particularly useful against a battleship. (For some reason, I also thought that some carriers had Phalanx in-close-weapons systems, which are anti-ship. But now that I think about it, I’m not sure whether that’s true. [I can’t see any on this picture of the USS Nimitz](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Nimitz_in_Victoria_Canada_036.jpg).) All Nimitz-class carreirs have CIWS systems. They’re not very big, and wouldn’t be easy to see on a picture like that. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/27 "2012-05-25T23:16:07Z")
A Viking longship against an _Iowa_-class battleship, but the battleship doesn’t have any ammunition for any of its weapons (shells or missiles) or any fuel for its engines, and in addition to the Vikings, half the crew of the longship are ninjas! ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/28 "2012-05-25T23:26:20Z")
Project Habakkuk vs. a plastic submarine filled with baking soda! To keep it fair, the former has to remain purely hypothetical. ---
**Author:** ![David42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/29 "2012-05-25T23:37:31Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > It does _look_ kinda like the whole 57,000-ton battleship is moving sideways, but I’m pretty sure that’s just the blast wave from those enormous fireballs stirring up the water down below the muzzles of the guns. That is plausible; BUT why then is the last shock wave at the bow and no further–seems an odd coincidence if shock waves explain it. ---
**Author:** ![bucketybuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@bucketybuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bucketybuck)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/30 "2012-05-25T23:40:32Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > The officers on deck should have service pistols. M9 I think - probably can’t sink a Battleship. Not with that attitude. ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/31 "2012-05-26T00:01:35Z")
The prophet Habakkuk vs a large fresh water catfish. The prophet is blind and the catfish thinks it’s a snail. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/32 "2012-05-26T00:03:25Z")
_Star Trek_ vs _Star Wars_, by which I mean two shrink-wrapped DVDs enter, one shrink-wrapped DVD leaves. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/33 "2012-05-26T00:05:50Z")
> [@furt](#): > > A Nimitz Class carrier has zero offensive weaponry; it’s a bit like putting Rocky Marciano vs. Muhammed Ali, except Ali has no arms. The comparison I was thinking of was a pistol vs. a sword - but the pistol has no bullets. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/34 "2012-05-26T00:10:48Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > You have to nobble the situation quite a bit for the battleship to have the advantag.. Well, I dunno. If the aircraft carrier has no planes and the battleship has no guns and they’re trying to sink each other . . . then we’re down to ramming. And I think a battleship might have the advantage **there.** Sturdier construction, yes? A carrier’s defenses are its planes keeping enemy ships out of shelling-range; a battleship is designed to stand up to shelling from another battleship. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/35 "2012-05-26T00:23:51Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, I dunno. If the aircraft carrier has no planes and the battleship has no guns and they’re trying to sink each other . . . then we’re down to ramming. Well, it _is_ the navy. Oh, you mean ramming the _ships_… ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/36 "2012-05-26T01:19:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, I dunno. If the aircraft carrier has no planes and the battleship has no guns and they’re trying to sink each other . . . then we’re down to ramming. > > And I think a battleship might have the advantage **there.** Sturdier construction, yes? A carrier’s defenses are its planes keeping enemy ships out of shelling-range; a battleship is designed to stand up to shelling from another battleship. Maybe. But what if the battleship was filled with barrels of nitroglycerin? ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/37 "2012-05-26T01:27:06Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Next up - Typhoon-class sub vs Halifax-class frigate, except the former has no torpedos and the latter can only turn left. Ah yes. The USS Derek Zoolander. ---
**Author:** ![colonial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/34f0e0/32.png) [@colonial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colonial)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/38 "2012-05-26T02:44:08Z")
Google the Battle off Samar (one of the Leyte engagements) for an action where Japanese BB (including Yamato) actually _did_ get within shooting distance of USN AC/E. Luckily there were just enough rain squalls to provide some cover for the AC/E and just enough heroic destroyer escorts to perform suicidal attacks on the IJN capital ships to throw them into confusion. 3 out of 6 USN AC/E were sunk, although I am not sure of anyone knows whether by BB or cruisers. The Japanese Admiral was sufficiently daunted by the reception to lose heart and abandon the mission. That was lucky because he could have brushed the opposition aside and gone on to completely destroy the US landing site on Leyte Island. What was not luck was the skill and valor of the USN sailors who saved the day against literally impossible odds. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/39 "2012-05-26T03:09:58Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Maybe. But what if the battleship was filled with barrels of nitroglycerin? Then **both** ships sink, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099/40 "2012-05-26T03:22:27Z")
> [@colonial](#): > > 3 out of 6 USN AC/E were sunk, although I am not sure of anyone knows whether by BB or cruisers. Only one actually, the _Gambier Bay_. You may be confusing that there were 3 US carriers sunk in the entirety of the Battle of Leyte Gulf; the _Princeton_ had been lost earlier to dive bombing and the _St. Lo_ was lost later to kamikaze attack, but only _Gambier Bay_ was lost off of Samar. The loss of the [HMS Glorious](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Glorious) during the Norway campaign is probably the closest thing to the scenario posited in the OP, she was sunk by the German battlecruisers _Schnarnhost_ and _Gneisenau_ along with her two escorting destroyers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battleship-versus-aircraft-carrier/623099.md?page=3)