User blog comment:WolfgangBSC/The Random Chat Room/@comment-24787182-20150930145939/@comment-27797576-20150930160548

Just read up on one of the articles related to the one harmon posted, and found something interesting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panamax#/media/File:Ship_measurements_comparison.svg

Apparently, the Montana class(if built) could fit in the new locks being made by panama right now IRL. As would the Yamato, and even one of the german studies, H43(H44 could do it if it was 2.5m thinner). Yeah, one of the design studies germany had would FIT in the new canal. And the Nimitz would too if it weren't for the elevators and flight deck........

Mace, submerines aren't that good against a battleship(in fact, the LONG LANCE would do more damage to an Iowa than every modern torpedo. Except maybe those nuclear torpedos, but do the US have them? No. And nuclear torpedos aren't the best either. They were made with the intent of sinking very large carriers. Who own and run the largest carrier taskforces with the biggest carriers in the world? The US. Who also runs the most around the areas where those nuclear torpedos are being made? The US. Class dismissed.). And SSBN's are ONLY effective in the event that a normal conflict escalates to nuclear war. Until then, they are sitting there, doing basically nothing, and not helping the fleet what-so-ever. Sub hunters are more effective, and either way, most submarines will die EXTREMELY quickly to ASW. And how many modern ships have ASW weaponry? EVERY SINGLE VESSEL UNDER THE WORLD! And those that don't carry ASW on board have ASW helicopters. Now how many navies in the world have any effective counters to battleships(or even armored cruisers), short of nuclear weapons? None.