Skip to comments.
The Navy Thinks This New $7 Billion Ship Is The Answer To All Its Chinese Concerns
Business Insider ^
| 06/03/2012
| Robert Johnson
Posted on 06/04/2012 6:36:33 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
To: SeekAndFind
To: katana
I agree.... I had a thought for a radical, cheap fast attack force...
Take some of the old burke class destroyers, gut them leaving only the reactor and engines... install fast lifting marmac elevators, 1 fore and 1 aft. Convert lower decks into hangar bays. Each ship will carry 4 f35b vertical lift aircraft. Add the laser cannon forward, or the long range gun.
4 of these ships make up a squadron. With one ship carrying 2 helo’s, you have 16 aircraft and 2 helo’s.
That would be one hell of a punch. Pretty hard to take out an entire squadron of these at once.
You could do 8 squadrons of these attack carriers for the price of one big floating target. And these could go where the big boys could not.
To: TexasFreeper2009
1. That eventually someone will come up with a way of detecting it
There is an invention designed to see stealth ships...it’s called binoculars.
Wow! Who would have thought of that!
43
posted on
06/04/2012 8:18:28 AM PDT
by
DH
(Once the tainted finger of government touches anything the rot begins)
To: SeekAndFind
The Zumwalt was originally estimated to cost about $3.8 billion, but so much technology crammed on board that its cost has nearly doubled, and after the first three are built, production will stop. If the technology is powered by Chinese chips with backdoors built into them, then yes, production, guidance, fire and control, engines...the whole boat will stop.
It would be cheaper to just give the Chinese the blueprints to the thing and get it over with. Plus it would give the free traitors another excuse to spend taxpayer money on outsourcing.
44
posted on
06/04/2012 8:28:37 AM PDT
by
Sirius Lee
(Goode or Evil, that's the choice.)
To: andy58-in-nh
China would further retaliate by calling in our debtThis statement is factually wrong. Even if it were possible, the only way they could attempt to enforce this would be to confiscate American assets in China. In which event we would probably begin seizing Chinese assets around the world to compensate the US corporations affected.
45
posted on
06/04/2012 8:34:14 AM PDT
by
Zhang Fei
(Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
To: andy58-in-nh
The real way to fight them is to make ourselves more competitive...I'm all for making what is left of the US manufacturing base more competitive. But, until you have been in my place where the Chinese competitor is able to sit across the table and offer what you have been making for your material cost alone, you don't realize how big the gap is.
I have to question the wisdom of spending such sums on an admittedly potent (and very cool) defense platform when we're broke. Maybe we should think about securing our national borders first. Can we build a reliable fence for $7 billion?
I'm good with that.
To: Paine in the Neck
The Zumwalts are nothing more than crippled subs, unable to submerge. Better to build more real subs.
47
posted on
06/04/2012 8:44:36 AM PDT
by
houeto
(FReepathon 2Q! https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: C19fan
"The current carriers being constructed are $4 billion a unit."
No sir. The Nimitz ships were $4 billion (except for the last one, which was around $6 billion). The Ford class being constructed right now was projected at $13.5 billion in 2011, and is now running at about $15 billion. The Navy says the price will come down on subsequent Fords, but I don't believe them. The price never comes down in situations like this. We're either pricing ourselves right out of a Navy, or we're simply going to pay for it all with Weimar-style hyperinflated dollars from the printing press.
48
posted on
06/04/2012 8:45:12 AM PDT
by
DesScorp
To: C19fan
"The current carriers being constructed are $4 billion a unit."
No sir. The Nimitz ships were $4 billion (except for the last one, which was around $6 billion). The Ford class being constructed right now was projected at $13.5 billion in 2011, and is now running at about $15 billion. The Navy says the price will come down on subsequent Fords, but I don't believe them. The price never comes down in situations like this. We're either pricing ourselves right out of a Navy, or we're simply going to pay for it all with Weimar-style hyperinflated dollars from the printing press.
49
posted on
06/04/2012 8:45:30 AM PDT
by
DesScorp
To: central_va
The Chinese are countering the Zumwalt with a new design of their own rail-gun mounted ship:
50
posted on
06/04/2012 8:49:44 AM PDT
by
Oatka
(This is America. Assimilate or evaporate.)
To: katana
In a conflict with China (or even Iran) it is possible that our aircraft carriers will turn out to be what battleships were in WWII. Large and vulnerable anachronisms of the "Last War". I get worried whenever I hear that they have positioned a carrier inside constricted waters like the Persian Gulf or the Taiwan Straits to make a "statement".
So do a lot of admirals
51
posted on
06/04/2012 8:56:36 AM PDT
by
uncbob
To: Oatka; central_va
To: Oatka; central_va
To: joe fonebone
I had a thought for a radical, cheap fast attack force... 1. Not radical. This comes up every generation or so.
2. Cheap? you are keeping the cheapest part of the ship, the outer hull, going to the expense of gutting it and installing entirely new systems.
3. "Convert lower decks into hangar bays". Sounds so simple. But the only people I can think of who ever did it were the IJN with Hiyo and Junyo. And in that case it was an option allowed for in the original design.
4. C3: you can't really share it out.
54
posted on
06/04/2012 9:16:11 AM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(Gott mit Mitt, Mitt mit uns)
To: central_va
CNS built ‘em that way to deflect cannon balls. USN is building ‘em that way to deflect RADAR emissions.
55
posted on
06/04/2012 9:18:57 AM PDT
by
ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
To: Sudetenland
It doesn't cost 7 Billion per ship. There has been billions in R&D spent so far. The cost per unit is sky high because we are building 2 or 3. If we built 12, the costs would be much less.
These are essentially battleships. Just wait for CGX.
56
posted on
06/04/2012 10:44:42 AM PDT
by
rmlew
("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.")
To: Zhang Fei
I misused the words “calling in” in this context, when what I intended to say was “selling”. China currently owns over $1 trillion in US debt in the form of bonds of various maturities, which it can theoretically sell any time it wants to whoever will buy them. However, mature debt securities must be accepted and redeemed by the issuer (the US) or else offered to be rolled over upon new terms acceptable to the buyer.
57
posted on
06/04/2012 11:15:37 AM PDT
by
andy58-in-nh
(America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
To: rmlew
Any ship without 16 inch armor isn’t a Battleship
To: GreyHoundSailor
Any ship without 16 inch armor isnt a Battleship My recollection could be hazy, but our last battleships, the Iowas and South Dakotas, and North Carolinas only had a belt of 12 inches. The Montanas had thicker belts, but they were scrapped.
I suppose that one could call the Zumwalts Monitors. They do weigh as much as early dreadnaughts.
59
posted on
06/04/2012 5:08:23 PM PDT
by
rmlew
("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.")
To: DesScorp
$7 billion for a destroyer is a crime. Seriously. And the Zumwalt doesnt even have the Burke class anti-air capability. Not enough room to shoehorn that caliber of AA electronics into the current design. I call shenanigans. The AN-SPY 3 Multifunction radar was designed from the beginning with anti-aircraft capabilities. In 2008, Vice Adm. Barry McCullough, redefined these capabilities out of existence with Potomac spin. Because the new system has not been configured, as of yet, for the SM-2 and SM-6 missiles, he decided that there was no such capability.
This ship is a multi-billion dollar solution in search of a problem.
Creating a stealthy fire support ship and being the basis of the CG(X).
Zumwalt would be appalled at his name being stuck on this turkey. He was all about many and cheap... building a huge fleet of small, easy to build and inexpensive warships vs. a small fleet with a few hyper-expensive behemoths. He was the brainchild behind the Sea Control Ship and the Perry class frigate. Sometimes I think someone in the Navy Department named this ship just to insult his memory.
No disagreement.
60
posted on
06/04/2012 5:20:09 PM PDT
by
rmlew
("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson