re: #102 Quoth the raven, Covfefe.

Mostly it was related to cost. Sure, we could fill their firepower gap with Tomahawk missiles, or a fleet of cruisers with 5” deck guns, but both options turned out to be much more expensive than the cost of maintenance of a 50-year-old battleship. In the end, the rise of relatively cheap and effective tactical air power (here’s looking at you, A-10 and F/A-18) is really what spelled the demise of the close-fire-support battleship.

And the fighter jocks in high places in the USAF have been trying to kill the A-10 pretty much since they started rolling off the factory floor.