Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

design219 · Oct 24, 2009, 04:02 AM

The Associated Press: Navy's newest warships top out at more than 50 mph

Kind of strange looking for a ship, but quite high performance. I suppose with the kind of wars we are seeing today and expect in the future, the need for huge battleships is decreasing.

msuper69 · Oct 24, 2009, 05:45 AM

Originally Posted by design219

...
I suppose with the kind of wars we are seeing today and expect in the future, the need for huge battleships is decreasing.

The battleship hasn't been needed since WW II. The aircraft carrier is now the 'big stick'.

That new ship is one sweet puppy; perfect for fighting (and destroying, hopefully) modern day pirates.

ctt1wbw · Oct 24, 2009, 05:45 AM

This is still not as powerful as the Iowa class BB. The Iowa BB instilled FEAR into the enemy. This will make no impact upon that at all. This could probably be sunk by one MK-48 ADCAP. The Iowa class BB was the most powerful surface warship in maritime naval history.

ctt1wbw · Oct 24, 2009, 05:46 AM

Originally Posted by msuper69

The battleship hasn't been needed since WW II. The aircraft carrier is now the 'big stick'.

That new ship is one sweet puppy; perfect for fighting (and destroying, hopefully) modern day pirates.

Aircraft carriers are way over rated. They are still not as powerful as the Iowa class BB.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2009, 09:38 AM

It's always war with you colonial types.

ctt1wbw · Oct 24, 2009, 09:49 AM

The best offense is a good defense. You have these things in hopes you don't have to use them, but if you don't have them and need them one day, you're ****ed.

mduell · Oct 24, 2009, 11:28 AM

Budget: $220m
Actual cost: $704m

Fix the f%^&ing acquisition process.

finboy · Oct 24, 2009, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

This is still not as powerful as the Iowa class BB. The Iowa BB instilled FEAR into the enemy. This will make no impact upon that at all. This could probably be sunk by one MK-48 ADCAP. The Iowa class BB was the most powerful surface warship in maritime naval history.

The real reason to use a BB is landing/fire support. Nothing says "hello" quite like a 16" shell. Without actually using them for landing support, the AA/missile screen is too much to maintain. Same with carriers -- too many support ships.

Underwater is where it's at, unfortunately. Subs without land attack capability are crippled IMHO.

ctt1wbw · Oct 24, 2009, 12:34 PM

Well, the Iowa class BB used to carry 32 Tomahawk and 16 Harpoon missiles. They can reach out say hello quite well. Plus, all US subs have land attack capabilities. Plus, with the addition of the MK-48 ADCAP, they are quite formidable platforms.

SpaceMonkey · Oct 24, 2009, 12:40 PM

Jeez, why don't you marry it then.

ctt1wbw · Oct 24, 2009, 12:58 PM

I came close. I've slept next to a MK-48 ADCAP. Not the best partner, but you feel safe and secure.

glideslope · Oct 24, 2009, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by design219

The Associated Press: Navy's newest warships top out at more than 50 mph

Kind of strange looking for a ship, but quite high performance. I suppose with the kind of wars we are seeing today and expect in the future, the need for huge battleships is decreasing.

A Seawolf can do that at 1,000' I'd wager the Virginia class is close, but not as fast as a Seawolf.

glideslope · Oct 24, 2009, 07:11 PM

Originally Posted by finboy

Underwater is where it's at, unfortunately. Subs without land attack capability are crippled IMHO.

All current US Attack Submarines have the ability to attack land positions with guided missles. Are you proposing a "Pop Up" 5" gun? : )

Check out the USS Virginia. She can operate in water 60' deep. Her design is specifically for inland type waterway operation. A Team of Seals dropped off at your front door can say "hi" also.

olePigeon · Oct 24, 2009, 07:13 PM

Good thing it has a basketball court.

imitchellg5 · Oct 24, 2009, 07:23 PM

Lots of things in the world exceed 50 mph.

shabbasuraj · Oct 24, 2009, 07:36 PM

I believe that is a badminton court.

Atheist · Oct 24, 2009, 11:24 PM

Originally Posted by glideslope

A Seawolf can do that at 1,000' I'd wager the Virginia class is close, but not as fast as a Seawolf.

My friend David was the commander of the USS Seawolf when she was commissioned. He never would tell me how fast she could go. (But it's probably common knowledge now... LOL)

Captain Curt · Oct 25, 2009, 02:01 AM

I have no background in this kind of thing but it seems to me ...Inland type waterway operation=not operating over the horizon=vulnerable to land based drastically cheaper laser guided weapons. I'd like to enter my vote for the steel hulled prototype over the aluminum hulled prototype. The steel hull prototype is single hull.

KeyLimePi · Oct 25, 2009, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by mduell

Budget: $220m
Actual cost: $704m

Fix the f%^&ing acquisition process.

Agreed. My GF works on this program and after living with this for several years I can tell you that the contractor has bent over backwards to try to keep costs low. The scope creep and last-minute changes have cause the budget to crater. The process really needs to be fixed.

turtle777 · Oct 25, 2009, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by mduell

Budget: $220m
Actual cost: $704m

Fix the f%^&ing acquisition process.

Inflation.

And don't belive the CPI. It's manipulated.

-t

Spheric Harlot · Oct 25, 2009, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

The best offense is a good defense.

I find it quite funny that you have that phrase exactly backwards.

It does explain a lot - though that's poli lounge material.

osiris · Oct 25, 2009, 02:14 PM

I heard that the floor shows are wonderful, and the slots are loose.

analogue SPRINKLES · Oct 25, 2009, 02:16 PM

Very cool looking.

ctt1wbw · Oct 26, 2009, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by KeyLimePi

Agreed. My GF works on this program and after living with this for several years I can tell you that the contractor has bent over backwards to try to keep costs low. The scope creep and last-minute changes have cause the budget to crater. The process really needs to be fixed.

The first one always costs less than the following deliveries. Nobody really knows exactly down to the final dime how much a brand new class of ship will cost.

ctt1wbw · Oct 26, 2009, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

I find it quite funny that you have that phrase exactly backwards.

It does explain a lot - though that's poli lounge material.

That's not really backwards. Granted yes, these ships have a good and potent offense, but the fact they are there and ready to be used is part of the defense. Trust me, I spent 20 years in the Navy on 11 surface and subsurface combatants.

ort888 · Oct 26, 2009, 02:46 PM

Were you ever on an Iowa Class BB?

I hear those are awesome.

ctt1wbw · Oct 26, 2009, 02:54 PM

No, never made it aboard one. They were decommed before I could. I really don't think I could have ever been on one because there were never billets for a Crypto Tech like me on one.

finboy · 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by glideslope

All current US Attack Submarines have the ability to attack land positions with guided missles. Are you proposing a "Pop Up" 5" gun? : )

Check out the USS Virginia. She can operate in water 60' deep. Her design is specifically for inland type waterway operation. A Team of Seals dropped off at your front door can say "hi" also.

No, I was commenting that all attack subs should carry something like a Tomahawk TLAM-D cluster capability. Having a broadside (think cruiser-style) would be nice too though, but those days are gone.

SpaceMonkey · Oct 26, 2009, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by finboy

No, I was commenting that all attack subs should carry something like a Tomahawk TLAM-D cluster capability. Having a broadside (think cruiser-style) would be nice too though, but those days are gone.

I thought vertical launch tubes for Tomahawks were a standard part of U.S. attack sub designs since the more recent revisions of the Los Angeles class?

ctt1wbw · Oct 26, 2009, 07:20 PM

They are. Since SSN-719 (or thereabouts) and up.

Laminar · Oct 26, 2009, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

Were you ever on an Iowa Class BB?

I hear those are awesome.

finboy · Oct 27, 2009, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

They are. Since SSN-719 (or thereabouts) and up.

Sure they are. I think they rack about 50 missiles, but I don't know the mix. I was pointing out that having that capability is important, not trying to point out a shortfall of current (or 688 class) design.

Peter · Oct 27, 2009, 08:26 PM

Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at the Lexington Institute, noted that Independence sustained 44 knots despite a 30-knot headwind and 6- to 8-foot seas in Alabama's Mobile Bay. "For a ship of this size, it's simply unheard of to sustain that rate of speed for four hours," he said.

44knots in 7 foot seas. epic.

ctt1wbw · Oct 28, 2009, 08:01 AM

Originally Posted by finboy

Sure they are. I think they rack about 50 missiles, but I don't know the mix. I was pointing out that having that capability is important, not trying to point out a shortfall of current (or 688 class) design.

Yeah, they can probably carry that many, but there aren't that many VLS tubes. I think there's only 12. But the torpedo room is quite spacious.

Laminar · Oct 28, 2009, 09:23 AM

But what I'M interested in is the Iowa Class BB. I've heard it kind of sucks.

ctt1wbw · Oct 28, 2009, 10:57 AM