Posted on Jan 29, 2019
$23 Billion Later, the U.S Navy Is Figuring Out What to Do with Its Stealth Destroyers
3.4K
16
10
5
5
0
Does not look like a good use of $23 billion by the Navy. What do you think?
$23 Billion Later, the U.S Navy Is Figuring Out What to Do with Its Stealth Destroyers
Posted from nationalinterest.org
Surface Warfare Officer (SWO)
Civilian Supporter
Officer
CPO
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 7
3
3
0
2
2
0
The Navy still doesn't have ammunition for the Zumwalt class's "Advanced Gun System": See https://www.businessinsider.com/destroyer-zumwalts-big-guns-lack-ammo-and-navy-may-just-scrap-them-2018-11 and https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/us-zumwalt-stealth-destroyers-may-lose-their-guns/news-story/a9c [login to see] 69e71affa75db70359b
The destroyer Zumwalt's big guns don't have any ammo, and the Navy may ditch them entirely...
The problematic Zumwalt destroyer may be losing its big guns, as the ammunition is hugely expensive and it turns out the Navy can't get them to work.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
From the article: "...sneaking close to shore in order to bombard enemy forces..."
Okay, I was never in the Navy, but as Joe Citizen, I don't think that's gonna work. It's a surface ship, so it's on the surface. (Maybe I shoulda joined the Navy, I'm pretty good at this.) And, it's the size of a shopping mall. Things the size of a shopping mall, floating around on the surface, don't strike me as very stealthy, or likely, in a world of satellites, maritime patrol aircraft, fishing boats, and sat phones, to sneak up on anything.
Maybe all that special hull and superstructure stuff makes it harder to hit with an anti-ship missile. That sounds useful. But I'm not buying the "sneaking up" on anybody idea. That's mighty shaky.
Okay, I was never in the Navy, but as Joe Citizen, I don't think that's gonna work. It's a surface ship, so it's on the surface. (Maybe I shoulda joined the Navy, I'm pretty good at this.) And, it's the size of a shopping mall. Things the size of a shopping mall, floating around on the surface, don't strike me as very stealthy, or likely, in a world of satellites, maritime patrol aircraft, fishing boats, and sat phones, to sneak up on anything.
Maybe all that special hull and superstructure stuff makes it harder to hit with an anti-ship missile. That sounds useful. But I'm not buying the "sneaking up" on anybody idea. That's mighty shaky.
(1)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
It has a radar cross section much smaller than a ship of its size normally would. When underway, they usually put up panels so other ships will be able to see it on their radar and not run into it.
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
CPO (Join to see) - That seems like it would be useful for reducing the chances of getting hit by an anti-ship missile, but it does not seem as useful for avoiding an Mk1 Human Eyeball.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google