In answer to your first question, the effective range of an 2700lb AP Mk8 round from the 16in/50cal (still with the ability to penitrate 10" of class A armor) is 39,200 yards.  FYI that same round can penitrate 15' of 5,000 psi reinforced concrete at 42,345 yds.  A Harpoon can more then double that and a Tomahawk can go a ~ 1,000 miles and then fly to your office, fly down the hall, then around the corner to find you in the third stall from the right in the John before it goes BOOM. 

Not sure what you mean by the LAWS but I presume the mini gun you are refering to is the Phalanx Point 30mm defense gatling.  Iowa had 4 of them in last refit. that would account for a bunch of missles.

That being said in pure ship to ship encounter with in range of the main battery I think the Iowa class were the most deadly ships afloat.  There are plenty who would disagree.  Yamato springs to mind with larger guns and heavier armor but she was not as fast and her fire control was not nearly as good (no radar).  What good are bigger guns if you miss???  Also there is school of thought that while her armor was thicker it was substandard relative to what was used for the Iowa design.  Primarily due to production uniformity problems.  She did take a heck of a beating before she sank though.  It must have been hell for her crew. 

I liked this thread.  Makes for some interesting reads.

Enjoy The Game

I know of no rocket-assisted rounds, but several things were done to boost range. The longest-ranged round proposed for the Iowa was an 11" subcaliber round with GPS guidance. This was expected to achieve a 100nm range, or on par with a Harpoon missile. The longest-ranged round tested was a different subcalibur 11" round that was tested to over 83,000 yards, twice the original 16" range. There were a number of other extended-ranged rounds tested or proposed, including: 
-A full-length HC (aka HE) round, as the Iowa had always used ammunition intended for the North Carolina's guns in that role, which had shorter range. The new HC round was good to 51,000 yards, and produced and deployed in limited quantities during the '80s.
-A 13" subcalibur round loaded with submunitions effective to 70,000 yards in test firings.

Due to the lack of armor, all rounds the Iowa used or could have used, including HC and submunition warheads, would be extremely effective against modern vessels. In fact, submunitions could be even worse for a modern warship than a normal missile due to the importance of sensors and the nature of VLS. HE is in a similar boat.


Also of note in a 1-on-1 scenario, over-the-horizon targeting is a major factor. And which aircraft are carried can make or break the battle. The Kirov class carried 3 Ka-25/27 helicopters. This would be its only means of over-the-horizon targeting. The Ka-27 had a normal mission radius of 200 km with 1.5 hours on station. 3 aircraft is adequate to maintain a constant rotation of 1 unit, or possibly deploy 2 for a very short duration. While it has a service ceiling of 5000m, flying at that altitude does reduce range and endurance, especially if in a hot climate. Also, the most likely version (ASW) does not have true long-range sensors, and no variant is likely to go the full 200 km away due to the limited endurance - they'd prefer to have more time to search and provide guidance updates. This gives a realistic detection range of probably around 300-350 km from the ship, possibly more depending on conditions.
If we go early '80s, it's instead the Ka-25, which had both ASW and specialized surface search units. Both had much shorter mission radius - 150 km, with 1 hour on station - and lower ceiling of 3350m. The radar version could detect a battleship about 275 km away at max altitude. But again, that's a very limited endurance, so it's probably more like 250, or less, realistically. Make it 350-400 km from the ship, total. The Ka-25 ASW variant would be 225-275 km.

The Iowa class carried 3-4 helicopters, or 5-8 Pioneer UAVs. The Pioneer had similar stated combat radius to the Ka-27, but with more limited sensors and 5 hours on station. An Iowa could probably maintain 3 Pioneers almost constantly (5+ with 8 Pioneers). Unlike the helicopters, the Pioneer has no reduced performance at altitude or due to weather. In fact, its performance increases with both. It mainly uses EO/IR sensors, which probably limit its detection range to about 50-70 km (hey: it's for gunfire spotting, not naval engagements). However, it's stated radius is probably only about 2/3 of the real one - at altitude it can maintain LOS communication past 300 km. Make it 350 km spotting capability, but with greater surveillance and searching power.
If still using helicopters, the ship can maintain 2 on station better than the Kirov (assuming 4 of them), but is still mainly going to go 1 at a time. The most likely candidates include:
SH-3 Sea King. With an endurance of 4-5 hours allowing 300+ km forays, it eats the poor little Ka-25/27 for breakfast. However, it has a lower service ceiling. Still, it's probably good for detecting to 350-400 km easy if allowing similar limitations compared to the Ka-25/27.
The SH-60B, which is similar to the Ka-27 in performance but with a better radar. Give it a similar 300-350 km.
The CH-53 was a popular spotter in the early '80s, though only 3 could be carried compared to 4 of the others. It had 5+ hour endurance but no enhanced sensors, so it probably would be limited to visual range. Still, with its endurance, that's 300+ km with plenty of time on station.

In all helicopters, the US has a special advantage: while the Kirov can shoot them down, it can't do so without them detecting it. All had RWRs and, just by being detected, could gain valuable information. As such, they don't necessarily need to detect the ship itself to know where it is. They can work together to triangulate via its emmissions. On the other hand, the Kirov's aircraft can search with impunity. I'd give the Iowa a slight edge though, and the spotting limitations go a long way in hampering missile range advantages. The Iowa, if equipped with TASM, still can't outrange the Kirov because it can't detect it that far out. But the Kirov also loses a good chunk of its advantage if the Iowa can get within Harpoon range.


Going fully modern, the Kirov gets possible access to the Ka-31, which is a game changer, while the Iowa loses the TASM, which really hurts.


Not 1 on 1, and including likley assets, the Iowa has much better surveillance support due to probable E-2s and MALE/HALE UAVs. This would give it an almost guaranteed first shot and pretty much a win.

Actually LAWS went fully operational on a USN ship this week.  It is only a 30MW laser but plans are well along for 100MW and 150MW versions.  Navy clains it cost $.69 a shot.  I suppose they forgot to factor in the billions spent on developing the thing.

Enjoy the Game

Correction: It's not longer an experiment, in fact, the Navy claims it works, and they have been placed in their ships. However, they will use, when needed it. 

Correction: A variant useful against small craft, UAVs, and helicopters is available. No version capable of intercepting missiles has been tested yet. And we don't know how well it will work until we try.

The most important question is its ability to deal with saturation attacks. This will be a function of range and engagement time. But no matter how good it is, it won't be able to engage targets as rapidly as, say, SeaRAM or from as far away (I'm hearing 20km for Block II) - a major issue when dealing with Yakhont/Moskit/Granit/Brahmos. 

not an expert - but as i understand it , water-tight usually means air-tight as well

bulkheads and compartmentalization would keep most of the explosion outside of the hull