Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Milestone marked on stealthy destroyer under construction at Maine's Bath Iron Works
Associated Press ^ | November 17, 2011 | DAVID SHARP

Posted on 11/17/2011 9:17:24 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki

Milestone marked on stealthy destroyer under construction at Maine's Bath Iron Works

DAVID SHARP Associated Press

BATH, Maine — Two daughters and son of the late Adm. Elmo "Bud" Zumwalt helped Bath Iron Works mark a milestone Thursday in construction of the largest ship to be built in more than two decades at the shipyard.

The ship's co-sponsors, Ann Zumwalt and Mouzetta Zumwalt-Weathers, were accompanied by their brother, retired Marine Lt. Col James G. Zumwalt, at a ceremony marking the "laying of the keel," a Navy tradition dating to the days of sail, when the ship's keel served as the foundation of the wooden hull.

In modern times, ships have no keel so the ceremony marked the completion of the first hull segment. In this case, the hull segment is 180 feet long and weighs 4,000 tons.

Jeffrey Geiger, the shipyard's chief executive officer, said the hull segments of the future USS Zumwalt are the largest to be assembled at the shipyard. In fact, the single module on display Thursday weighed more than a fully outfitted Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate, a type of ship previously built at Bath Iron works.

Several speakers said the new and efficient methods used in building the massive ship as well as the new technologies fit with the efforts of Adm. Zumwalt, for whom the ship is named.

"He was determined to consider unconventional ways of doing business, pushing the Navy in new and uncomfortable directions," said Rear Adm. Ann C. Phillips, the Navy's director of surface warfare.

Bath Iron Works holds a keel laying ceremony to mark the completion of the first completed hull segment of the future USS Zumwalt, Thursday,

(Excerpt) Read more at therepublic.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; US: Maine
KEYWORDS: biw; ddg1000; usn; zumwalt Comment #1 Removed by Moderator

To: sukhoi-30mki

2 posted on 11/17/2011 9:17:58 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Problem is we'll only get 12-20 of these apparently bad-assed monsters.

I'd rather see 90 of the 3,000 ton class conventional Frigate with advanced weapons and electronics.

3 posted on 11/17/2011 9:24:32 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

It seems like a cold-war ship, I wonder who it is supposed to fight.


4 posted on 11/17/2011 9:29:08 PM PST by omega4179 (We can't wait!............. for the end of an error.....1-20-13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Hope its got better plumbing than the new aircraft carrier.


5 posted on 11/17/2011 9:29:41 PM PST by spokeshave (Cain....100% American, 100% Black and 100% for the Constitution...999 an added benefit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Lovely pix, and thanks for posting. Certain of the fundamentals of the naval architecture involved are actually quite conservative - this is a cruiser, not a destroyer. I say that because I served on a missile cruiser with similar characteristics - 674 ft long, 70 ft beam, 13,000 tons displacement. With a crew roughly nine times the size of this one. The only part I have to laugh about is the 30-kt top speed. That would be the unclassified figure, the same one we were supposed to parrot. I would be shocked if this one's top speed weren't 50 or better.

Two six-inch guns, I see, but these aren't your granddad's main battery. I love how they nest into the mounts. Beautiful ship.

6 posted on 11/17/2011 9:42:20 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave

Hope its got better plumbing than the new aircraft carrier.


Which carrier?


7 posted on 11/17/2011 9:43:39 PM PST by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

That ship sure doesn’t look that wide.


8 posted on 11/17/2011 9:44:43 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Problem is we'll only get 12-20 of these apparently bad-assed monsters.

The number that has been approved is 3. The original number was 32, but like the SeaWolf submarine and the F-22 Raptor, cuts in numbers occurred that brought the final tally to only three ships.

9 posted on 11/17/2011 9:48:12 PM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

I always wonder at the lack of guns on the newer designs.

More is always better. Makes you able to keep firing if you lose a couple.


10 posted on 11/17/2011 9:49:27 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
When my ship - the Chicago, CG-11 - was designed there weren't any guns at all. None. Off Vietnam it was realized that once inside missile range anyone with a patrol boat could just stroll on up, so a couple of WWII-vintage 5-inch guns were placed port and starboard pretty much as an afterthought. These were old, 5"-38 single mounts, hand-loaded. On the base ring they read "USS Wasp" - no kidding, they had taken them off a real WWII carrier.

In our case the theory was that the ship was (1) strictly to be used in carrier battle group air defense, and (2) always to be accompanied by something with a few more close-range teeth. That was WWII thinking, and we ended up out there pretty much on our own. My first billet aboard was Assistant Gunnery Officer, and let's just say that I was a little disappointed to learn that the best a heavy cruiser had to offer was a couple of hand-fed 5" guns. With a pointer and a trainer and little me sitting on the side of the thing as check-sight observer. We'd have competitions between the sailors on one side and the Marines on the other to see who could load these beasties the fastest.

This one, though, is different. The 155's aren't really the main battery - that would be the vertical-launched missiles. For close-in work there are the 57-mm mounts. I think they'll do all right, myself.

11 posted on 11/17/2011 10:08:36 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I bet someone suggested that it had some form of limited subsurface maneuverability, similar to some watercraft.

Imagine a wavetop missile zooming in at high speed, with a sudden burst of power the vessel uses outstretched diving planes at high speed and can momentarily travel underwater as a countermove.


12 posted on 11/17/2011 10:12:54 PM PST by Eye of Unk (E-Cat is the future, unless we want to live in the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

A few years ago I had the chance to have a few drinks and cigars with a few career navy officers from the JFK. One thing they all agreed on was that Bath Iron Works of Maine built the best ships used in the navy.

To a Mainer, having a job at BIW is a real point of pride. To a native Mainer having a strong work ethic is the only way any man should live.


13 posted on 11/17/2011 10:16:26 PM PST by warsaw44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

The real problem is the material they are building these ships with.


14 posted on 11/17/2011 10:28:24 PM PST by STD (Cut Taxes, Cut Spending Stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: STD

Perhaps someday soon some geek will find a self growing carbon fiber interlaced with something like titanium and diamonds and it will be basically like a giant organism, they grow it in a specific design, an organic structure.

Kinda reminds me of a submarine TV series years ago.


15 posted on 11/17/2011 10:34:06 PM PST by Eye of Unk (E-Cat is the future, unless we want to live in the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

Cut to insignificance, all three programs.

Why bother?


16 posted on 11/18/2011 1:46:48 AM PST by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I still don’t understand how in rough seas that bow design won’t tend to force the nose down under the waves.


17 posted on 11/18/2011 3:43:55 AM PST by hattend (If I wanted you dead, you'd be dead. - Cameron Connor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: unkus

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2809158/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2808422/posts


18 posted on 11/18/2011 3:48:29 AM PST by hattend (If I wanted you dead, you'd be dead. - Cameron Connor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
When my ship - the Chicago, CG-11 - was designed there weren't any guns at all. None. Off Vietnam it was realized that once inside missile range anyone with a patrol boat could just stroll on up, so a couple of WWII-vintage 5-inch guns were placed port and starboard pretty much as an afterthought. These were old, 5"-38 single mounts, hand-loaded. On the base ring they read "USS Wasp" - no kidding, they had taken them off a real WWII carrier.

The Oriskany, CVA-34 had the 5"-38s you described until it was decommissioned.

19 posted on 11/18/2011 5:10:36 AM PST by CPOSharky (The only thing straight, white, Christian males get is the blame for everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hattend

Thank you.


20 posted on 11/18/2011 5:42:22 AM PST by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

Excellent chance those 155mm guns will be able to use the extended range GPS guided rounds developed for the land 155’s.


21 posted on 11/18/2011 11:48:02 AM PST by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson