The Patriot Files Forums  

Go Back   The Patriot Files Forums > Military News > Nuclear Weapons

Post New Thread  Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-04-2022, 11:10 AM
Boats's Avatar
Boats Boats is offline
Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 20,523
Cool Battleships Firing ‘Nuclear Bomb’ Artillery Shells: The Navy’s Wild Idea

Battleships Firing ‘Nuclear Bomb’ Artillery Shells: The Navy’s Wild Idea
By: Brent M. Eastwood - 1945 News - 07-04-22

Photo link:

The idea comes up every now and again on these very digital pages: unretire the old Iowa-class battleships and modernize them. While the debate on this topic is all over the place with many different pros and cons, some ideas during the Cold War on how to do this got pretty interesting:

[With the Korean War in full swing in the early 1950s, the U.S. Navy had its own wants and needs, plus rivalries with other service branches.]
The Army, Air Force, and submarines with the Navy were armed with nuclear weapons, but no surface ships could fire atomic devices.
One plan was to outfit three of the Iowa-class battleships so they could launch a nuclear shell from the vessels’ main 16-inch guns.

“Katie Bar the Door”

Operation Katie was the name of the program. The moniker came from the abbreviation for kilotons (kt). The idea was to take Army tactical nuclear shells and retrofit them for battleship use. These were called Mark 23 “Katie” nuclear projectiles and fifty were produced beginning in 1952 and the first arrived in 1956.

The Iowa-class Battleship Would Deliver the Nuclear Round:

The Navy outfitted the USS Iowa, USS New Jersey, and USS Wisconsin with altered magazines on the warships to carry the shells. Each ship would have ten Katie projectiles and nine practice shells. This would give the navy the biggest and most powerful nuclear artillery in the world – a total of 135–180 kilotons of yield.

Each Katie Nuclear Shell Would Have Ample Power:
The Mark 23 was derived from the Army’s Mark 9 – the first nuclear artillery shell. The Navy’s Mark 23 had a 15-20 kiloton nuclear warhead – about the size of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end World War Two.
So, the Katie would be able to take out a city day or night and in all weather. In a naval battle, it could destroy an entire Soviet battle group. The navy’s nuclear shell was thought to be accurate.
It Took Some Clever Engineering:

These shells required careful engineering. “Naval Gazing,” a blog dedicated to the USS Iowa and other battleships, had this to say about nuclear devices fired from artillery.

“An artillery shell is an incredibly difficult environment to put a complicated device like a nuclear warhead. It must withstand normal handling, thousands of Gs of acceleration as it’s fired, and the centrifuge of a shell spinning at 10,000 rpm or more.”

[Note: Navy Kept It Classified]:

It was no surprise that the navy wanted to keep this under wraps, and they never confirmed or denied the presence of nuclear shells on the vessels.

Could the Katie Have Been Used to “Win” a Nuclear War?

But it is plausible that the shells were employed on the battleships. In those days nuclear planners believed the United States could “win” a nuclear war with the Soviets. The Katie shells showed just how far the military was willing to go with nuclear weapons. The nuclear option that would escalate from a conventional war was a real prospect.

Today the Military is - In the Nuclear Age:

Fred Kaplan, writing in his book The Bomb: Presidents, Generals, and the Secret History of Nuclear War summarized the military’s thinking during the era.

“All of these options envision the bomb as a weapon of war, writ large. This vision has been enshrined in the American military’s doctrines, drills, and exercises from the onset of the nuclear era through all its phases.”

Thus, the Katie was part of a larger military strategy. By 1962, the Katie shells were removed and thankfully never used, although the USS Wisconsin may have fired a practice round in 1957. The body of a Mark 23 shell is on display today at a nuclear museum in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Note: This article was provided by: Brent M. Eastwood:

Now serving as 1945’s Defense and National Security Editor, Brent M. Eastwood, Ph.D., is the author of Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare. He is an Emerging Threats expert and former U.S. Army Infantry officer. You can follow him on Twitter @BMEastwood.
Personal note: Whose to say we don't have such weapons like these?
I wouldn't put it past our Military to have such weapons available - but -
not adverstised. It's not a bad idea to have few dozen mini-nukes to
provide the punch needed at times. However most ships today have
been upgraded just for such events should they arise or ever be needed.
Nothing like having a few Ace's in the hole - to keep the bad guys
in check. What's a good motto: Safety first - as always.

O Almighty Lord God, who neither slumberest nor sleepest; Protect and assist, we beseech thee, all those who at home or abroad, by land, by sea, or in the air, are serving this country, that they, being armed with thy defence, may be preserved evermore in all perils; and being filled with wisdom and girded with strength, may do their duty to thy honour and glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.