ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 710
Jan 13 12 1:45 AM
Posts: 911
Jan 13 12 3:20 AM
drunknsubmrnr wrote:BMD is a priority now, not littoral ops. Having said that, the new Burkes are not going to be the same as the Block II/IIA.
Posts: 9664
Jan 13 12 4:30 AM
The DDG-1000 is going to set the record for the longest procurement cycle for a warship ever. GHW Bush was in office when DD21 started. Its 2012 it has been 20 years! Its a total load of crap. You don't save money by delaying construction.
Jan 13 12 7:01 AM
Posts: 6743
Jan 13 12 1:20 PM
AegisFC wrote:Part of the navies interest in Flight III Burkes is that several years ago congress passed a law mandating that future surface combatants be nuclear powered. The Flight III is at least partially an attempt to get around congressional stupidity since after all it is just an upgrade to an existing design.
(b) Requirement To Request Nuclear Vessels- If a request is submitted to Congress in the budget for a fiscal year for construction of a new class of major combatant vessel for the strike forces of the United States, the request shall be for such a vessel with an integrated nuclear power system, unless the Secretary of Defense submits with the request a notification to Congress that the inclusion of an integrated nuclear power system in such vessel is not in the national interest. [emphasis mine]
Posts: 4218
Jan 13 12 4:56 PM
that WAR CRIMINAL? No vessel of the USN should be so dishonored as to bear that mother humping, bastard's name.Hell man, even a sanitation tank holding barge would be insulted with the name Zumwalt. He was a war criminal in Nam, odering agent orange, a known carcentagent, to be used on his own sailors and, what is ever worse if possible, on many tens of thousands of innocent civilians, many, many of them children in the delta.He was an utter diaster as CNO who did as much damage to the fleet as LBJ and Strange Mac did during the entire basket Fvck we call the Vietnam war.steevy wrote:Re-class them as cruisers and the added benefit you don't have to name them after Zumwalt. Amen to that steevy
Posts: 5924
Jan 13 12 8:51 PM
Posts: 1369
Jan 14 12 3:38 AM
Jeremy M H wrote:drunknsubmrnr wrote:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------BMD is a priority now, not littoral ops. Having said that, the new Burkes are not going to be the same as the Block II/IIA.Part of me wonders if the CG(X) solution is not what the GAO starts asking about.
drunknsubmrnr wrote:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------BMD is a priority now, not littoral ops. Having said that, the new Burkes are not going to be the same as the Block II/IIA.
OSCSSW: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------He [Zumwalt] was an utter disaster as CNO who did as much damage to the fleet as LBJ and Strange Mac did during the entire basket Fvck we call the Vietnam war.
Jan 14 12 5:04 PM
Scott Brim wrote:Jeremy M H wrote:drunknsubmrnr wrote:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------BMD is a priority now, not littoral ops. Having said that, the new Burkes are not going to be the same as the Block II/IIA.Part of me wonders if the CG(X) solution is not what the GAO starts asking about. Just as a point of information, back in 2008, Admiral Marfiak guesstimated that his vision for a 22,000 ton BMD-optimized CG(X) cruiser would cost roughly $4 billion per hull for procurement of twelve hulls, including R&D. It is rumored that subsequent Navy estimates done in 2010 put the unit cost for such a warship at $8 billion per hull.
Jan 14 12 9:42 PM
that made the War Crminal Zumwalt such a disaster for the USN. FYI ships are nothing but tools. The real war winning weapons are men. What makes those men, kids really, into effective USN Blue Jackets are:1. Discipline 2. Training3. Belief in the integrity, technical ability and determination of those who command them4. Pride in the instituition that expects them to DIE, if need be accomplish the mission5. Adaquate Logistic supportAs the Red Baron so succinctly put it. "It's not the crate but the MAN in the crate!" In all those key areas he was an utter disaster.Furthermore, there was nothing particularly revolutionary or new about a High Low mix of warships Scott.All navies, inlcuding the USN, always had the high low mix.Part if my support for the Low end LCS, is becasue I know this truth. Not a particularly well laid trap there old buddy---)))) Scott Brim wrote: OSCSSW: He [Zumwalt] was an utter disaster as CNO who did as much damage to the fleet as LBJ and Strange Mac did during the entire basket Fvck we call the Vietnam war. Senior Chief, I am curious as to what your assessment might be of the USN's shipbuilding strategy during the period of Zumwalt's command, particularly the hi-lo mix aspect of the 1970's shipbuilding strategy.
Posts: 4117
Jan 15 12 12:52 AM
Jan 15 12 1:10 AM
Jan 15 12 3:15 AM
Posts: 3569
Jan 15 12 3:25 AM
Jan 15 12 4:06 AM
Jan 15 12 4:17 PM
Jan 15 12 7:29 PM
Posts: 4105
Jan 15 12 8:31 PM
Jan 16 12 1:07 AM
Jan 16 12 1:19 AM
Share This