The Iowa, But With VLS - SEA POWER

[@BDM775]

Somehow, many, many millions of dollars slamming into the dirt due to minor oversight in engagement make this scenario very believable

[@EricDKaufman]

They thought the USS North Carolina had been hit and was on fire in WWII once because of the sheer volume of AA fire she was putting out as well.

[@przemysawkrzekobrzegoszczy6332]

Like HMS Agincourt at Jutland, other ships thought she had been hit because her 14 305mm guns threw out so much smoke.

[@ElGordodeAlemana]

You've killed a lot of island. The island was very evil.

[@wolfhunter98]

The sand was...very evil.

[@jkirschy]

The land attack tomahawks are terrain following. The anti-ship tomahawks... Apparently not so much... As for the bit about them being smart... They are. They decided that instead of trying to penetrate Kirov's air defense envelope it would be easier to slam into the ground. :P Edit: As for the surprised reaction to Iowa continuing to fight after taking the initial hit... Battleship remember. It was designed to be hit and continue fighting. That means lots of heavy armor and lots of redundancy in its command and control. Though that only works up to a point.

[@gsigs]

TASM does not have terrain following but it does have inertial guidance, which allows waypoints, which would solve the problem of intervening lands masses. They have chosen not to model this. At least not yet. Soviet missiles? Perfect. US missiles, not so much.

[@wolfhunter98]

The land one seems to work fine. I just assumed the anti ship just never got it as a cost saving as not a ton of land to hug in the ocean.

[@knightvisiongoggles7934]

The USS Oprah: You get a missile! You get a missile! EVERYTHING GETS A MISSILE!!!🤣🤣🤣

[@anthonykodaski6161]

If I were to build the Iowa class in 2025: 34-36 knots max speed 9x 16 Inch Guns(3x3)(1,200 shells) 6x 5 Inch Guns(6x1)(4,080 shells) 10x Phalanx CIWS(100,000 rounds) 4-6x Directed Energy 300x VLS 4-8x VLA rockets(anti-sub)

[@AgentFrosty]

And where exactly would you put all of this? And power it, for that matter? Do you know how much extra energy output just ONE of those DEW systems requires? She'd have to have a dual-reactor powerplant like the Ford class CVN's at minimum. Also, ditch the 16" guns. As much as I love the battleship, those guns are utterly useless for anything other than shore bombardment when it comes to modern naval combat. The Navy would be better served by either building more destroyers, or designing a new cruiser from the ground up with extra VLS capacity, something to replace the Ticonderoga classes they are retiring. Battleships the size of the Iowa class are just too big of a target.

[@taiko1237]

@@AgentFrosty '16-inch guns are utterly useless for anything other than shore bombardment' That could probably be fixed - there are guided rounds (admittedly for shore bombardment) for 127mm guns that have a range of 130km. I suspect it wouldn't be too difficult to come up with a similar arrangement for a 16 inch shell. Considering how much bigger it is it might even be possible to fit enough of a guidance system to hit ships with inside the shell.

[@Wolfe351]

@taiko1237 an 11" guided sabot round was in development for the IOWA's before the Cold War ended which would have extend range of the 16" guns to 50nm!(90km or 56miles) requiring final targeting by a laser equipped aircraft or early drone.....or fire and guess.....lol

[@still_guns]

The RGM-109B TASM's do not have terrain following, though I'm not sure if that's by design. The TLAM's do have it.

[@Stealth17Gaming]

I think it might be by design. Not a lot of terrain to follow for a missile that just sees water anyway. TLAM did need it to complete its mission

[@jamison884]

@@Stealth17Gaming I was going to post this same info. However, the new Tomahawk Block V, bringing the ASM Tomahawk back to the USN fleet, may very well have terrain guidance programmed, as attacking ships inside of bays, harbors, and dry docks is likely a consideration.

[@sannidhyabalkote9536]

@@jamison884 Are they separate versions as before or is it a do all ?

[@jamison884]

@@sannidhyabalkote9536 They're seperate so people can choose which they want to modify, but it's listed as a collection.

[@jamison884]

@@sannidhyabalkote9536 The Tomahawks are two different variants still. This is because the ASM model has much more hardware/sensors compared to the land-attack model, allowing the land-attack to have additional range over the ASM model. However, it's still in excess of 1,000 NM I believe (who knows per classified data and improvements to their engines/fuel, etc.).

[@jamesp8164]

My understanding is that this isn’t totally fictional. There was a plan to add VLS upgrades to the Iowas but it was not implemented. Would it have been efficient? Probably not. But would it have been awesome? Absolutely. And there is something useful in a weapon with real psychological effects on the enemy. Being able to park one o ship offshore that credibly has the ability to destroy your entire navy, your entire Air Force, and then shell every coastal city and installation you own into rubble, it makes a heck of a statement.

[@marky657]

That Kirov is a nasty-looking warship, from a destructive point of view.

[@redgriffindiver7740]

My NROTC unit at University of Missouri had a model of the Missouri in the entry hall to the building. We always looked at it and wanted to modify it into a BFMS. AEGIS weapon system. Remove Number 2 turret. Remove the then old 5" guns and replace with six modern 5" or the 8" gun the Navy was toying with in the late 70s/early 80s. VLS tubes in all the places you removed turrets. It would have been glorious!

[@Rhaumar]

While on the Missouri during the Gulf War, we thought about a revamp of the Mighty Mo. Bare with me: Remove all of the boilers and replace with 2 Nuclear Power Plants. You now have a HUGE amount of space between the forward and aft mast. Remove the funnels and the ABL deck. Remove Turret 2. Replace Turret 2 and the ABLE/Stacks area with 6 or more Mk 41 VLS (depending on how they can fit) on the ABLE deck area, up to 4 Mk41 in place of Turret 2. Replace four of the 5" mounts with either Harpoon systems or additional CIWS. Replace the Mount 53 and 52 (mid mount 5") with modern Mk 45 5" mounts. You now have, as a loadout....6 16" guns in two 3 gun turrets. 2x 5" guns. Upwards of 10 Mk41 VLS (610 cells) capable of firing TLAM, TASM, Harpoon, SM2, ASROC, etc and up to 6 or 8 CIWS. This, combined with the nuclear reactors and armor, would allow you to be a pretty self sufficient missile platform capable of saturation missile bombardment and Theater Ballistic Missile Defense.

[@taiko1237]

@@Rhaumar It would probably be cheaper to rebuild it entirely if you're replacing the boilers with nuclear reactors. That would require an insane amount of effort (removing the superstructure, the deck armour and everything underneath entirely, I would assume although I could be wrong).

[@Rhaumar]

@taiko1237 It would require some modifications, though, when the Midway was replacing the older 500MW generators with 750 MW generators, they did cut a hole in the armor deck in order to drop them in. Once in place, they welded the plates back in place. A nuclear reactor would be a bit smaller, overall for the core, than a huge 750 MW generator, so the same method could work, getting the cooling and controls installed afterwards in bits and pieces. The boilers would be harder to remove, though I think they could be disassembled into smaller components. The biggest issue with building a battleship from the keel up is the armor manufacturing methods which are not in place any longer.

[@taiko1237]

​@@Rhaumar I suspect that installing the control systems, cooling and shielding in pieces would still be much more difficult than installing a generator considering all the plumbing you'd have to do with the cooling. I'm also not sure that an Iowa's engineering spaces (even with the removal of the boilers) are the right dimensions for a nuclear reactor and associated components of the requisite size, although I could be wrong about that, so you might have to do even more internal structural remodeling than is apparent at first glance. Also, I suspect that performing nuclear refuelling through an armour belt and deck would be very tricky on a hull not designed for it, not that you'd have to do that very often.

[@Rhaumar]

@taiko1237 Today's nuclear reactors are a fraction of the size of several A-Frame boilers. The removal of 8 boilers would make enough room for two reactors.

[@WirableCrown1]

It makes sense to me to remove the massive turrets and replace them with VLS units, so so many VLS units. IDK how many it could fit this way, maybe hundreds. I will dream about this now

[@douglasthompson201]

TASMs are most emphatically not terrain following. They function the same way as Harpoons.

[@michaell1473]

That was fun, it's nice to see the Iowas get some love. Something tells me the multi-mission loadout might have fared better.

[@Parabueto]

I admit, I love this mod. Sure, TASMs aren't as "smart" as Soviet missiles and they'll all go for one target so you can't just fire them all at once and sink everything, but there is a certain catharsis when cocooned by your VLS escorts that one Iowa has enough missiles to sink the entire Soviet navy. I've also found sending a TLAM stream through a formation at the same time works great. Even though they split a bit from the TASMs I find half the fleet usually panics and shoots the TLAMs allowing the TASMs better odds of overwhelming the target. I've also found TASMs prefer to target Slavas over Kirovs and carriers, weirdly.

[@XrandomnessX]

Their impact is much more satisfying than harpoons imo. And I'm saying that as a fan of the pop up.

[@jimfrazier8104]

Soviet missiles are like Soviet reactors. Very smart and sophisticated, if you believe the propaganda numbers.

[@johnnyenglish583]

@@XrandomnessX in this game, the pop-up stage only seems to make things worse, with Harpoons often changing aim to the chaff cloud above or giving CIWS more time to kill them, unlike in real life.

[@adamkepinski]

An upgrade that was considered but never came (due to different reasons). But now we can play with it ;-)

[@cesarespinozaspain]

I'd love the see the proposed 90's Arsenal ship in a future mod, How many missiles? YES!!!

[@morrit33]

They are keeping the F10 dev menu in the final game! They confirmed it yesterday, and planning on expanding the stuff in it! It started as a dev tool, but people are using it for all sorts of high jinx!

[@gopniksaurolophus6354]

To be fair, anti-ship missiles don't really need terrain-following systems in the same way long-range land-attack missiles do lmao

[@morrit33]

There is another Iowa mod out there called Iowa 21 or something. It is RIDICULOUS. Complete fantasy, but it also had insane range, and ECM jamming. It could probably take on that all on its own. Including air.

[@jdogdarkness]

For the record, none of these ever became a reality, it was proposed refit, but was never implemented.(VLS cells)

[@clonerwesker]

And with this engagement, the US fell into economic ruin due to the sheer cost incurred by the expenditure of missiles.

[@AFNacapella]

I thought seeing them fire the main battery looked scary and impressive, but rapid firing the VLS with no end means someone is going to have a very bad day

[@Rockwolf50]

In Cold Waters you wouldn’t have had the benefit of those two monsters lol. You had to do it with just the sub.

[@Palabrota]

uphill, in the snow, both ways... and we LIKED IT! They never said "we love you" or gave out any participation trophies but the quad-drop of SSN-14s around your position let you know you were appreciated!

[@jimshier2183]

Maybe someday the designers would allow waypoints for the slcm to allow TOT.

[@Conman1181]

Rename that variant, The Oprah Class, you get a missile, you get a missile, you get a missile!! Lol

[@RemusKingOfRome]

Great video, Merry Xmas and Happy 2025.

[@haydenc2742]

I would bet if you went flank speed and stayed em silent w/ air defense free and ran out past the land mass you would have owned them...

[@patrickscheer7736]

Not getting air to air missiles on any battleships with this mod. Only the increased land/surface capabilities. I've got the NTU and Sea Sprite mods running. Any ideas?

[@theghost9219]

In the current patch TASM is suck it go active after 30nm not after it reach the waypoint so it likely random which ship it will target and remember 30nm activation range if you have your ship spread out at 35nm then you ship will become target

[@_datapoint]

I played "Harpoon" way back in ye olde 90's. I remember a scenario with the Iowa and she took missile hit after missile hit after missile hit and she kept fighting. It seems she still has her 18" belt of armor on her hull that could absorb hits from warheads that were smaller than that of a torpedo warhead's.

[@johnnyenglish583]

You're right. Torpedo warheads in WW2 were similar-sized to those on the Tomahawks, yet it took nearly 12 torpedoes and nearly 20 bomb hits to sink the Yamato, even though her damage control parties were much less effective than those on US ships.

[@Dingin4]

It would be nice if the mod included the radars the SM-2 would need. Better still it would be awesome if there had to be an accompanying Tyco to get the ant-air functionality.

[@Palabrota]

agreed, I was wondering what sort of sensor this VLS Iowa is packing. Does the modded ship have the ability to guide more than just a few anti-air missiles at once?

[@theghost9219]

It already has SM-2ER you can select it in the load out tab

[@IKEA_doityourself]

Can you try the finish navy mod ?

[@CaptainAvatar238]

In the book Red Storm Rising, the tomahawks could go to predetermined waypoints and use terrain guidance GPS

[@Aaaasda-lx3oo]

TLAM yes, TASM no

[@redgriffindiver7740]

Any way to contact Gold Leader 108?

[@Stealth17Gaming]

Probably through Steam. Leave a comment on the mod page

[@johnscott7210]

They did draw up plans to refit the Iowa's into this and even a Battlecarrier version but costs of the refits is why they were never refitted into such specifications.

[@Wolfe351]

there was plans for a VLS equipped upgrade but it got canned with the end of the Cold war and then the IOWAs got retired again. the Battlecarrier concept was just that a concept, it was already realised that with the USN large number of Carriers and growing numbers of LHAs and soon to be Wasp class LHDs that it was not a useful conversion for the benefits of a few Harrier's and extra helos

[@joestiller4270]

So you wasn't trying to make that island an new Atlantis 😂😂

[@theaveragegamer7221]

A missile battleship sounds awesome

[@raa729]

I wonder if Stealth started to do infuriating scenarios by design, to outrage people to comment more 😅

[@Stealth17Gaming]

No.

[@IKEA_doityourself]

Can you try the finish navy mod ?

[@raa729]

@ I believe you used tasm before in dangerous straights and slammed them into the island too. ) btw I wonder if real tasm can be set to travel higher and go sea skimming at the last moment, pretty sure it can, even first harpoon can be commanded to do or not to do the jump, how much, etc

[@wastelander89]

Yes I love vls on American ships. Thanks for making these videos good sir. The iowas were planned to have these but it didn't end up happening. I wish thr game would add a more realistic aegis system in the base game for the American ships. I wish we still used iowas in this configuration in real life these days with all the room for activities m iowas can add alot of missles like kirovs. Imagine if the us navy made the iowa class ships into these ships and bring them baxk into service

[@eddz2858]

It's the old story. Don't put all your eggs in the same basket....lol

[@arminblock8934]

A fellow Tom Clancy enjoyer nice to now

[@robcarpenter8465]

I downloaded the ntu mod, the pact mod, the Iowa vls ntu mods, but no standard missles show up on the any iowa class. Just a regular load out of tomahawk and harpoon. No hundreds of misses or standards. What am I doing wrong? The PACT mod worked just fine

[@Stealth17Gaming]

Did you select the correct Iowa? The base Iowa doesn't get it. You have to select another version of the Iowa in the mission editor and then select what type of armament you want under Loadout.

[@robcarpenter8465]

Ahh. Ill try that tomorrow. Thanks !​@Stealth17Gaming

[@adam_turk]

Do MODS interfere with the perfornance of your computer or the game or both?

[@kiliksmith4624]

That’s so weird I was live on Twitch the other day and I used VLS Iowa again an Iran port and the Tomahawks were definitely terrain following…

[@XrandomnessX]

TLAMs are but the anti ship versions aren't. Unfortunately

[@geoffreyrichardson8738]

TASM ooops that stationary target (land) won’t sink. TLAM sucks to be you

[@Wolfe351]

new update out with CVN65, CGN9 60s version and 80s refit!!!

[@mikesaporitojr3313]

You should have brought all 4 in a 2/2 split

[@torturebear]

I am missing the link: Get the scenario here... :)

[@mikekopack6441]

Jesus, might as well just call it the USS Yeet, USS Spammer, or the USS Jesus H Christ!

[@wastelander89]

Can u do more scenarios like this to challenge ntu ships like this. I love scenarios like this. I dont have a pc. I only have xbox series x I hope to see more videos like this 😊💯👍

[@blisteringstars]

and yep its all over the screen 😅

[@voltaire1296]

Still has the 5in 38 literally unplayable

[@ElGordodeAlemana]

🫡