*whew* I read something a week or two ago, that the Navy was killing the Zumwalt program--the destroyer platform the new railgun was going to go on. Apparently, I didn't read close enough, because I guess they were going to build 2 before killing the program. But now they're gonna build at least 3. http://www.military.com/news/article/navy-to-seek-third-stealth-destroyer.html?ESRC=dod.nl [good new for Tamar too, I would assume, since they're building the buggers in Maine.]
Man, I hope I'm not speaking out of turn. It was said in chat... I wonder what the Navy is gonna do, 'cause according to Zel (who builds the things), Congress axed the Arleigh Burke's, ending their production run early.
Fucking Navy. They'd better hope we never get into a real war, because I can guarantee you their precious carriers won't survive the opening salvo.
Alright genius, tell me what our biggest naval targets are then? Now tell me how we're going to protect them, when the next generation battlefield is moving towards overwhelming defensive systems with a missile ship?
Dolphins, with "laser" beams attached to their heads. [insert the photo of the dolphin with the laser beam attached to its head here]
We can defend against that now with Aegis and CIWS. And what makes you think we're going to let that threat ship near enough to a CVBG to launch that big bad missile attack? Chris, you aren't stupid but you are talking about shit you don't really know anything about other than what you've read somewhere. I've served aboard a carrier and I can tell you with certainty that with the sole exception of submarines, there is nothing that poses a threat within several hundred miles that the group commander doesn't have intel (and a firing solution) on at all times. As for submarines, which do pose a tangible threat, the tactics exist to smoke them as well if the balloon goes up. As I've mentioned in the past, ASW was my warfare specialty and believe me when I tell you there are relatively simple ways to mitigate even that threat. But your blanket statement that the carriers are 'going down' in the opening salvo of the next 'big war' is not just a sweeping generalization, but utter bullshit.
Not that I'm aware of. At least not yet. CIWS is the last layer of defense before the vampire hits the ship.
Eh. I don't have a huge problem with that. Sorta like the shuttle Enterprise or the Stealth "Fighter". If the thing serves as a platform to test out new technologies and then they later implement them in a more cost-effective platform, it's still a huge step forward, technologically.
I wouldn't think there was a force today that can credibly challenge the United States, let alone the Navy. The future, however, is less certain. The growing trends in naval design seem to indicate stealth as a priority, and people are murmuring about resurrecting the fire ship concept of old. It doesn't take a genius to realize that most of our force projection is invested in twelve ships (granted, with an armada to accompany them). Look, I have the utmost faith in the Navy (even though the Chinese got through your screens). I'm just saying, we have a lot of eggs in a few baskets and the game is changing, both technologically and politically.
That is ever the nature of the game, as we learned to our everlasting chagrin at Pearl Harbor. Hopefully we are wiser today than we have been in the past.
Well i think the royal navy could kick seven shades of crap out of the US if it came down to a dirty fight. About your railguns that seems to be going on the back burner, we just started upgrading our guns from 114mm to a 155mm, so they can use the new Army ammo thats been worked on right now.
No offense, dude, but you guys were barely able to pull off a short war with Argentina. And that was over two decades ago. I don't think the Royal Navy has gotten significantly stronger since the Falklands war. But I'd be interested to hear what you mean by "dirty".
Yeah, uh, exactly how many carriers and aircraft does the RN have at the moment? I have undying respect for what y'all did with what you had in the falklands campaign (I never would have guessed Harriers could take on Mirages and win), but, man, that was Argentina! I get uncomfortable with these US vs Brit "Our AF/Navy can kick yours' ass" threads. We be allies. We're supposed to fight together.
I thought about posting this a couple of weeks ago, but it slipped my mind until this subject came up. Some are wondering at the board where I first saw this whether it's an "extinction level event" for the Royal Navy. Link They're getting their "big" carriers, but they may have to rely on other navies to escort and screen them. A Brit on that board commented: "The biggest threat to this nation's defence since the end of WWII has always been the treasury."
This is where it's pretty much been left so far...I suspect there won't be a lot of finalization until after the election, unfortunately. Zel is sleeping so I can't get anything from him at the moment. I'll see what he says tomorrow, if there is any talk on the deckplates. http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/08/navy_zumwalts_081908w/
Yes, CIWS has been replaced by RAM. As ships go in for service, and upgrades the CIWS is being removed and RAM installed. There is a mix in the fleet right now. USN CVBG's are the least likely to be sunk. They are VERY well protected and are built to withstand 4 to 5 times the damage that the Essex Class CV's took in WWII.
My understanding is that outside of the Hanger (obviously), current CV's are so subdivided and compartmentalized that you'd basically have to break the keel to send her to the bottom. However, it'd take a lot less to take her out of action. From above, take out the fancy exposed electronics and put a hole in the flight deck and she's fucked. From below, use a direct hit or overpressure to wreck the props/shafts and/or pop the shaft seals, and not only do the maneuvering spaces flood, she can't make enough speed into the wind to recover aircraft.
Against a carrier? Nuclear-tipped torpedo, detonated about 100 feet below the keel. Anything less, and you risk dreadful retribution.
Not sure I like the limited capacity of the RAM. I wonder how fast those things can be reloaded. I'm also not sure I like the idea of firing heat-seeking missiles at supersonic inbound missiles. There are advantages to heat seekers over radar guided in this case, not the least of which is 'fire and forget' and reducing the chance of jamming to to debris clouds from other exploded missiles, etc, but in a full blown naval battle there are too many possible sources of heat around to make me sure that the missile is going to go where I want it. CIWS had a simplicity to it that I liked: basically a radar controlled big f'n machine gun, and you could always reload the ammo.
First, the big carriers will retain some of the CIWS mounts in addition to the RAM. RAM is reportedly, easier and faster to reload than the current CIWS. Batch 2 of the RAM is coming online and is even better than existing. Ram Block 2 also has an anti-surface mode for taking out those pesky suicide boats. CIWS does not have that capability at all.
http://www.timesrecord.com/website/main.nsf/news.nsf/0/C2639F76FC2B6D26852574C90056B871?Opendocument Another step forward. Time to see what the House does. One issue with re-starting DDG-51 is that some of the part fabricators aren't making the parts anymore...it could take years to get this going again. Some of them went out of business and fabricating the parts on-site may not be feaseable. The Navy has so screwed the pooch with this stuff it is unbelievable. We are seriously fucked...and we are twice as fucked if Obama gets in office because you can bet fixing this mess won't be on his radar.
DDG-1000 is a dead end for BIW, as it will never be built in numbers. If three get built, nothing new will come down the pike for 10 years. If they continue with DDG-51 at least there will be continuity.
