What about Navy's Stealth Destroyer - the Zumwalt

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by El_Guero, Oct 29, 2013.

  1. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    As you habitually do when you're discussing anything that has to do with the US, Michael,you're putting the worst possible spin on this. You may have issues...

    I seriously doubt the NSA's primary objective reason for running a massive, secret information gathering operation is to show off and intimidate people. And if all the US Navy wanted to do was show off and intimidate people, there are simpler and cheaper ways to do it than building capital ships. I would imagine that instead, they're being built because someone thinks they'll do the job they're designed to do.

    And although armchair admirals aren't automatically wrong and real admirals right, the real ones occasionally know what they're doing ln spite of the peanut gallery critics.
     
  2. michael pierzga
    Joined: Dec 2008
    Posts: 4,862
    Likes: 115, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1180
    Location: spain

    michael pierzga Senior Member

    Not the way I see it. Massive civilian surveillance on a global scale demonstrates to the world that the US is dominate

    The US military term is. "Total Spectrum Dominance."

    The military thinkers write policy papers with titles like...." Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025. "


    The phrase OWNING THE WEATHER may seem impossibly arrogant to the rest of civilization, but it nicely compliments total spectrum dominance concept.

    Mega size battle ships anchored off your coastline drives home this point.

    You are either with us or against us

    The ship may never need to fire a weapon in anger.
     
  3. jehardiman
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,045
    Likes: 560, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2040
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA

    jehardiman Senior Member

    True, as you stated you don't know much about military stuff, especially modern capital ship design as it relates to battlespace decisions, you really shouldn't throw outdated under-informed concepts around.

    I sometimes wish I had the time, bandwidth, and permission to address an internet rife with ignorance and conjecture. A place where people came to the 'net to fill in gaps in their education instead of being a whiteboard for self serving bombast and innuendo undertaken by people who never applied themselves to examine the question but believe they have the answer.

    Anyway, I think the ship will live up to the legacy of the man, something that cuts both ways. Is it too big? Perhaps. Too costly? Most likey given modern congressional directed USN contracting practices which allow contractors to take all the money on the table. Sitting duck? Only against some country doing the unthinkable; and if that happens, a single warship will not be the most worrisome thing.
     
  4. michael pierzga
    Joined: Dec 2008
    Posts: 4,862
    Likes: 115, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1180
    Location: spain

    michael pierzga Senior Member

    Tell us about "thermal footprint" and its relevance to ship stealth
     
  5. jehardiman
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,045
    Likes: 560, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2040
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA

    jehardiman Senior Member

    Against who? Against what? What type of conflict? Does it really matter anyway vis a vis a BPDMS?

    As I said, I have neither the time, bandwidth, or permission. There are books and papers and theories out there that will give you a better understanding. The Jane's volumes is where I recommend you start.
     
  6. michael pierzga
    Joined: Dec 2008
    Posts: 4,862
    Likes: 115, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1180
    Location: spain

    michael pierzga Senior Member

    The ship is electric and powered by 78 mega watts of gas turbine generator capacity.

    Evidently this creates a heat signature that can be viewed from space.
     
  7. jehardiman
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,045
    Likes: 560, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2040
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA

    jehardiman Senior Member

    So? Again, what conflict? against who? against what?
     
  8. michael pierzga
    Joined: Dec 2008
    Posts: 4,862
    Likes: 115, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1180
    Location: spain

    michael pierzga Senior Member

    Conflict ? What conflict. i talking about interested amateurs with access to common thermal imaging satellite data , watching the Battleship cruise across the atlantic.
     
  9. jehardiman
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,045
    Likes: 560, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2040
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA

    jehardiman Senior Member

    Why not use photo so you don't confuse it with some higher heat output container ship, or cruise ship? FWIW, DDG 1000 is the about same size and displacement as a Baltimore class CA of WWII, not a battleship
     
  10. michael pierzga
    Joined: Dec 2008
    Posts: 4,862
    Likes: 115, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1180
    Location: spain

    michael pierzga Senior Member

    Oh..so sorry. I thought it was stealth ship, not a cargo ship

    And the term battleship is used widely in the media because Zumwalts are primarily bombardment ships meant for sneaking up on and smashing targets on land.
     
  11. jehardiman
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,045
    Likes: 560, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2040
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington, USA

    jehardiman Senior Member

    Why would it need to be stealth if there was no conflict? Indeed in post #42 you argued that the "ship is a trophy intended to show power and intimidate." In order to be useful in gunboat diplomacy your target has to be able to see the gunboat. Now here you complain that you can see it, when stealth against weapon systems is only useful once the situation has passed into at least cold conflict. Make up your mind or otherwise just stop whining like a child confronting bacalao al pil pil for the first time..."I don't know what it is but I don't like it"

    The whole idea of a "stealth" warship is to reduce its signature against a specific group of weapons and/or sensors which are used to hazard it. A submarine is "stealth" in a different way than a ship, which has a different "stealth" than that of an airplane. Nothing is invisible to all sensors at all ranges, however with "stealth" you can pick your killing zone.

    As far as the press calling it a "battleship"...that makes me feel oh so much better. FWIW, inshore fire support has no "sneaking" about it...boots are already on the ground then.
     
  12. Stumble
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 1,901
    Likes: 71, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 739
    Location: New Orleans

    Stumble Senior Member

    Frankly I would have rather seen a modern battleship with 16" guns, or perhaps the 18" that was designed but never delivered. The problem with missiles is that while superbly effective at fixed targets they are crap when trying to suppress ground forces.

    Let me be clear, assuming all the systems work on this vessel I have no doubt that it will be effective at its role. But I have doubts that it is a price effective way to accomplish the task. This is the issue with allowing military leaders to basically buy toys without financial restraint. They will buy the best toys, and that's great, but why bother?

    The rest of the world hasn't really upgraded their armerment since the end of the Cold War, yet we are still pursuing weapons development like it is 1980.
     
  13. Squidly-Diddly
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 1,802
    Likes: 138, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 304
    Location: SF bay

    Squidly-Diddly Senior Member

    "It has the radar cross-section of a fishing boat,"

    "It has the radar cross-section of a fishing boat,"


    In other words it looks like a 'fishing boat' moving in heavy seas at 30knots more or less where the enemy is looking for a Zumwalt class destroyer.

    Hmmmm.

    Reminds me of when they said the Steath Bomber looked like a pidgin on radar....a pidgin flying at 500mph at 20,000ft coming over the North Pole heading to USSR at 4am.


    I get the feeling someone will 'get cute' and slam a anti-ship missile into one of these, then claim they thought it was just an abandoned "fishing boat" and hazard to navigation and they were just 'cleaning up the seaways'.



    Me? I'd be looking into making 'dual use' million ton supertankers that would also function as 'spartan' aircraft carriers without lots of fancy servicing ability, just big flat deck and lots of compartments to absorb lots of missile strikes and generally sail into 'harm's way' without bankrupting the nation.

    Make them basically like any supertanker but relocate(flatten) the aft superstructure and add a modular deck over existing deck, and include various 'next gen' "Environmental" safe guards like full double or triple hull and more and smaller cargo holds and better pumping.

    Build a 100, and next time something 'happens' in "oil producing regions" we'll have the only supertankers no one is gonna mess with.
     
  14. tom kane
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 1,767
    Likes: 48, Points: 58, Legacy Rep: 389
    Location: Hamilton.New Zealand.

    tom kane Senior Member

    I always thought that sitting ducks were decoys.
     

  15. rasorinc
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 1,854
    Likes: 71, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 896
    Location: OREGON

    rasorinc Senior Member

    In the time of my military service Destroyers were an expendible asset right after PT boats. At a cost of 3 + Billion $$$ they better stay way out of range any enemy might have to reach them with their weapons.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. hardcoreducknut
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    5,005
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.