DDG-1000 Makes its own Fail Stuff

[kham]

SAL and the boys do a far better job of fisking these retarded douchebags than I could, but it still worth the look. To say with a straight face that a fucking 6.1" popgun is remotely close to the destructive capabilities of a HE 16'' /45Cal naval shell is not only laughable, but flies in the face of basic physics as well as common sense. Evidently you have to have your brainstem disconnected to work for NavSea and the associated brain trust. Behold and weep, these assclowns will never shed a drop of blood over their abortion. And some of the guys are getting a mite riled, URR especially -- I do like his idea to catapult Admiral Asshole naked into Fallujah de jure and see how his gunfire support works out

[nachtjaeger]

Sad, really. All those billions of dollars wasted in what is basically a circle-jerk.

There was another alternative: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_cruiser

Nice dream, huh?

[kham]

The only problem with the design concept is that it is trying to be too many things at the same time; most of it's launchers are for air defence, and not enough for antiship work. Plus, only one 8" tube ? Limits the throw weight seriously.

If you really want to throw metal, you want
USS Saint Paul CA-73

[kham]

Or one of these

But even I recognize their day is gone. Something more CA-like though would have been not that hard to do. But too many powerpoint assholes with agendas thinking that actual gunfire support means "guns" and "lots of them" that eewww so dirty and passe.....

[Mynock]

Go take a hike over the beaches at Normandy and look at the 40 foot craters that are STILL THERE. That, my friends, is a battleship gun.
This thing I don't get. It's like firing a gun out of a crossbow and then firing the gun because that gives the bullet an extra 30 feet of range......??
If you wanted a small long range cruise missile why not just add a few more missile launchers.....?

[kham]

But but but...

Thats not transformational!! ellleventy!!!!!!

This is what happens when you let techno fucking wonks who literally dont know one end of a gun from the other plan things. A Gunners Mate 3rd Class would have debunked this thing in 5 minutes; A Chief less, and with far less polite language. Since for gunfire support, you need, well, y'know, GUNS

If they would stop trying to be fucking transformational, these retards running the Navy would have probably 3 new ship classes in service, NOW. When you let airplane designers in and think that planes and ships are the same.... you end up with shit like this. Even now, you read the comments at Sal's and there are still acolytes screaming at the temple of uber-tech ---- which doesnt exist yet --- AND NEVER WILL. IF IF IF.....if your granny had wheels asshole, she'd be a wagon. Scotty didnt just pull that phrase out of his ass. Betting the entire farm on systems that arent invented yet - and never will be -- is psychotic

[kham]

"By 1944 the Fletcher-class destroyers …were the first class of U.S. warship to be designed free of treaty limitations." "Because the absence of treaty restraint enabled the Navy's General Board to tailor the new destroyers to their mission rather than to the requirements of diplomates.." quoted from The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors, page 44. "From February 1942..to June 1944.. 175 Fletcher-class destroyers would be built…" "With a displacement of 2,050 tons (2,700 with a full fuel load), they were swift, seaworthy, and stout, with considerable firepower." They were smaller than the 24 LCS that are planned by NAVSEA.

Yeah....

You could also point out that an Elco PT boat has more firepower than an LCS but you would be some sort of asshole. Not to mention, the basic response would be WUT?

The really sad part is that anyone with a grasp of naval history or naval wargaming knows more about ballistics and how firepower actually works than the so-called experts spending treasure on these things ; blood will come, it is sadly inevitable

[nachtjaeger]

Why can't we use big, dumb, cheap rockets to launch heavy "smart" munitions ballistically into the "funnel"? Something like a larger version of the Sturmtiger's 380mm (15") breech-loading rocket launcher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmtiger That would allow for cheaper smart munitions as they won't have to stand up to the stresses of a gun launch. More on the 38 cm Raketenwerfer: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_38cm_RTG.htm

Go take a hike over the beaches at Normandy and look at the 40 foot craters that are STILL THERE. That, my friends, is a battleship gun.
This thing I don't get. It's like firing a gun out of a crossbow and then firing the gun because that gives the bullet an extra 30 feet of range......??
If you wanted a small long range cruise missile why not just add a few more missile launchers.....?

[kham]

We do
We use airplanes for that, usually in the form of laser-guided or GPS-guided bombs; smart bombs are just iron bombs with guidance kit fitted.

But naval gunfire support is no different from artillery, delivered from the sea. What the techno-wonks dont get and never have gotten, is that it used to be from multiple tubes and in rapid fire. Highly accurate when directed by ANGLICO teams, but they seem to think uber-tech way better. You cant invent a better hammer. That concept eludes them. And just to take the St Paul as one case, she could deliver 18 x 8" (203mm) shells per minute at a minimum. Her 5"/38 secondary guns (127mm) far faster, in fully automatic mode, over 30 shells a minute; whats more, when firing at longer ranges (max range of 5"/38 was 17,600 yds ~ 8.8 nautical miles) the trajectory would be such that the shells would be coming in at high angles, like mortars; when using VT fuses, these would be utterly devastating, slaughtering any enemy in the open, or even in foxholes

It's all about volume of fire; techodweebs don't get that, or just ignore it

[Mynock]

Why can't we use big, dumb, cheap rockets to launch heavy "smart" munitions ballistically into the "funnel"?

We have those. They're called MIRV's.
Honestly I think the problem is nobody is willing to admit that big naval guns have pretty much become antiquated. What are you doing with that 5" gun that you couldn't do with a smaller more economically packaged missile system like a TOW or a Stinger or some ground based version of the Hellfire?
Warfare has changed.....you don't come rolling in on a beachhead and flattening everything with artillery fire while flinging bodies into the path of machine guns anymore because it's not necessary. Satellites pinpoint your target and one well placed laser guided munition takes it out. Then you insert a cleanup team via helicopter to occupy the crater. Less fuss, less muss and less collateral damage. It may not be as romantic but it's damn effective.