Results 1 to 27 of 27

Thread: Zumwalt destroyers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    50,320

    Default Zumwalt destroyers

    guns out, missiles in. Sure seems like the urge to build something big and expensive is greater than building for a mission.


    https://www.defensenews.com/digital-..._medium=social

    NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — The U.S. Navy is considering a significant change to its new stealth destroyers, one driven by the change of mission announced in last year’s budget documents, the head of the program said May 7 at the Sea-Air-Space conference.

    The service has been struggling to find a use for the ship’s advanced gun system — the largest of its type fielded by the service since World War II — and now is considering stripping them off the platform entirely, said Capt. Kevin Smith, the DDG-1000 program manager at Program Executive Officer Ships.

    The Navy sidelined the guns after the service truncated the buy to just three ships, and after the ammunition, called the Long-Range Land-Attack Projectile, ballooned in price to more than $800,000 per round.

    "The guns are in layup,” Smith said. “We're waiting for that bullet to come around that will give us the most range possible. But given that that is offensive surface strike, we're going to look at other capabilities potentially that we could use in that volume.”

    The ships shifted missions from land attack to ship-hunting and -killing last year. The Navy is integrating the SM-6 missile, which has a surface-attack mode, and are integrating the maritime strike Tomahawk to fill out the new capabilities.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Freeland, WA
    Posts
    27,469

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    A very good friend of mine used to work software for Raytheon and was comfortably employed for years doing missle safety software for the Zumwalts. What a boondoggle the thing is.
    Gerard>
    ​Freeland, WA

    Resistance is NOT futile.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    94,291

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    boondoggle?

    nah mate, its doing exactly what it was designed to do, transfer tax payer dollars to the mic
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    17,760

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Such lines, what a beauty!


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    54,694

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    My son, who served as OS (including weapons systems) on DDG82, a guided missile destroyer, says it seems shortsighted to him. Too many scenarios where the fragility of electronic systems, limited number of trained operators. or the lack of redundancy of weapons systems, could leave the ship crippled. He, for instance, was cross-trained on the 50 cal. guns... and always thought that was a good approach.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Above flood level, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    18,132

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    The more things change, the more they stay the same...

    Jarndyce and Jarndyce

    The Mighty Pippin
    Mirror 30141
    Looe
    Dragon KA93

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,939

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    I have been looking for a reasonable use for this ridiculously expensive elephant for years. It scary that the Navy and pentagon brass have the same problem. When the flavor of the month political bosses are able to siphon massive money into their districts of states for murky projects this is the inevitable result. Realization that such gee wiz weapons can be defeated by large numbers of simple and cheap countermeasures should make even war hawks hide in shame. Heads should roll, but they wont. But out great military needs more funding, or so says our great leader. I would hazard a guess that just one of these monsters costs as much or more than all the US destroyers built in WW2.
    Tom L

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    94,291

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    the navy doesn't want them or need them and would prefered to have between and eight and sixteen addition burke class destroyers

    this was a congressional mandated project, It was intended to take the place of battleships in meeting a congressional mandate for naval fire support.

    dumbest **** ever
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    lagunitas, ca, usa
    Posts
    494

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    It was intended to take the place of battleships ...
    At least the battleships were kinda cool. If you have to pay for something useless at least she oughta look good.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sydney OZ.
    Posts
    13,542

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    The aesthetics remind Ne plus ca change... me of same.
    Quote Originally Posted by Duncan Gibbs View Post
    The more things change, the more they stay the same...

    Xanthorrea

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    2,238

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    I'm reminded of the short story Superiority, written by Arthur C Clarke in 1951. Hugely expensive and devastating new experimental weapons can be a liability. It's a wonderfully dated work ("The Analyzer contained just short of a million vacuum tubes...") but it's Zumwalt through-and-through.

    Andy
    "We were schooner-rigged and rakish, with a long and lissome hull ..."

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    94,291

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by AndyG View Post
    I'm reminded of the short story Superiority, written by Arthur C Clarke in 1951. Hugely expensive and devastating new experimental weapons can be a liability. It's a wonderfully dated work ("The Analyzer contained just short of a million vacuum tubes...") but it's Zumwalt through-and-through.

    Andy
    I am writing this in an attempt to refute some of the lying reports broadcast over the prison radio and published in the papers I have been allowed to see.
    ...
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,939

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Only positive thing that the Zumwalt has done so far is to provide 5,000+ jobs in Maine. Bath Iron Works is thus the largest employer in Maine. Of course Maine just elected a democrat to the governorship and the results of that are not yet fully known.
    Tom L

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    17,760

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Lathrop View Post
    Only positive thing that the Zumwalt has done so far is to provide 5,000+ jobs in Maine. Bath Iron Works is thus the largest employer in Maine. Of course Maine just elected a democrat to the governorship and the results of that are not yet fully known.
    Maybe once the largest employer in the state but now they are fourth. Just barely ahead of LLBean, just a little behind Walmart.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    94,291

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenBauer View Post
    Maybe once the largest employer in the state but now they are fourth. Just barely ahead of LLBean, just a little behind Walmart.
    bath iron works
    llbean
    walmart

    and i always think of maine as a liberal new england state, but in reality they're more like the southern atlantic states of virginia and north carolina - frikking rednecks
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    17,760

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Oh, yeah, get 30 miles from the coast and it’s all redneckistan...

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    17,061

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    The in-trade magazines (Marine Technology, Marine Log, etc.) used to be all a-flutter with gushing articles about the Zumwalt-class ships, touting their technology, their radical-but-game-changing form, etc. Then came articles about stability issues, survivability, cost overruns, etc. Now the subject seems to be avoided like the plague.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hills of Vermont, USA
    Posts
    28,635

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenBauer View Post
    Oh, yeah, get 30 miles from the coast and it’s all redneckistan...
    You meant "get out of Portland & it's all Redneckistan" right?

    Many folks in VT consider Burlington to be a "nice place to visit on the VT west coast".
    "If it ain't broke, you're not trying." - Red Green

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    54,482

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Maybe they can be repurposed as Russian oligarchs private yachts?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Indian Land, SC, USA
    Posts
    1,291

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    ^ They do look similar to those modern, private yachts - at least, I think so. I am biased in favor of the look of the Charles F Adams class, myself.....

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    94,291

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by hawkeye54 View Post
    I am biased in favor of the look of the Charles F Adams class, myself.....
    fletcher class, low freeboard, flush deck, two stacks, bristling with guns

    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    54,694

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Here's the Burke class DDG-82

    5" gun forward. 96 missile cells. Side-mounted torpedos (6) and .50 caliber guns (6). One forward automated 1" sea-wiz (R2D2) 'gatling' gun.

    Last edited by David G; 05-12-2019 at 10:06 AM.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Indian Land, SC, USA
    Posts
    1,291

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    It looks like they were on approach for Underway Replenishment / refueling (?)

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    54,694

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by hawkeye54 View Post
    It looks like they were on approach for Underway Replenishment / refueling (?)
    Dunno... it's a stock image. But that'd be my guess also - ready for some sprucing up.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Freeland, WA
    Posts
    27,469

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Burkes cruise right by my home periodically. Great looking ships. Calling them a 'destroyer' though is absurd; they are as big as WWIi cruisers and more powerful than an old battleship considering the oomph they can deliver downrange.
    Gerard>
    ​Freeland, WA

    Resistance is NOT futile.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    6,622

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by David G View Post
    Here's the Burke class DDG-82

    5" gun forward. 96 missile cells. Side-mounted torpedos (6) and .50 caliber guns (6). One forward automated 1" sea-wiz (R2D2) 'gatling' gun.


    This is timely. My daughter and I passed by one of these on Thursday at Naval Station Everett. We were trying to figure out about the forward gun. I guessed 4 inches, not too bad a guess
    Elect a clown expect a circus

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    n.c. tn
    Posts
    6,962

    Default Re: Zumwalt destroyers

    Quote Originally Posted by AndyG View Post
    I'm reminded of the short story Superiority, written by Arthur C Clarke in 1951. Hugely expensive and devastating new experimental weapons can be a liability. It's a wonderfully dated work ("The Analyzer contained just short of a million vacuum tubes...") but it's Zumwalt through-and-through.

    Andy

    But I cannot be held responsible for my future actions if I am compelled any longer to share my cell with Professor Norden, late Chief of the Research Staff of my armed forces.


    one wonders if this will ever be said of iDJT or Turtle McNurtle..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •