So whats happening with the Zumwalt class after its whole ammo problem...

I know these arent that official but can we look at the MG-150 design (bottom one) and see that it has FUCKING 320 Mk57 VLS plus 48 IRBM VLS?

Oh god those are hideous. At least the bottom one kind of screams "missile barge".

I think it’ll end up being the Virginia to the Zumwalt’s Seawolf.

Why don’t they get something like an Oto Melara? The new rounds are perfect both for long range ship hunting and precision shore bombardment, on an already proven and probably cheaper launch platform

Not sure how the guns are installed but if they are in pods or compartments then they could be removed and replaced with a more conventional gun. There was talks of swapping them out for more VLS cells.
Kind of a shame that the last ship with a "big" gun didn't have a working gun.

Yes, an Arsenal Ship.. USS Poppin'Iggers

Attached: 0GWqnDWEfG.jpg (640x438, 78K)

>plunging fire is the most effective way to kill a ship without using a torpedo or missile

but we can use torps and missiles, so why use a gun?

Gun go faster

OK I don't know a lot about this topic, but I googled the speed of an SM6 versus a 16 inch gun and I got mach 3.5 for the SM6 at full tilt and mach 2.2 for the 16 inch at muzzle velocity. So it seems to me that the gun is actually significantly slower. Am I missing something here?

Also, as everyone knows, missiles have a much greater range and accuracy than guns. The only guns which have a comparable distance are those that have rocket assistance and GPS guidance, which basically makes them missiles.

>That thing takes any hit from the bow to the midship
>Makes the Arizona look like a firecracker

solution: do not get hit

It's a stepping stone toward rail guns. The USA decided to focus research more into supporting the ship side of that equation over the gun side, because the ship side also addresses problems the burkes are already having, samely load shed and power generation. The DDG 1000 is in no way a good program, but a lot of value will be recouped if we work out how to fuel the extremely energy hungry weapons of the future (HELIOS, rail guns) in this series.

Line the entire perimeter of the top deck with CIWS turrets and chaff launchers.

Yeah, the Zumwalt was designed to meet the power generation requirements of newer energy weapons, and I’m glad the USN hasn’t given up on that for their next hull.

>CIWS turrets and chaff launchers.

nigga it's 2019, we have better methods now

what you want are lasers and smart decoys

>320 VLS
>No search and track radar

wouldn't it make more sense to launch your missiles via another ship or aircraft's radar beams than your own?

I mean turning on your radar is like sending a text message to the enemy fleet saying "HELLO, HERE I AM, COME KILL ME"

they're all going to be part of the same battle group anyways

Yeah but the enemy shooting missiles at a cheapo helicopter or whatever rather than your missile boat sounds like a good plan.

>So whats happening with the Zumwalt class after its whole ammo problem?

Just a cover story while the railgun,laser and seagrowler modules were in testing. Next decent size conventional war watch everyone go OOOOOOOoooooooooooooo!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenal_ship

You mean the 155mm Vulcano?

What happens in a protracted surface standoff between two powerful navies like US at the moment and some future adversary, China maybe.
How long until they expend all missiles in their arsenals? I just can’t wrap my head around these logistical issues.My take is that it won’t be long until we all revert back to standard armaments. Am I wrong or can modern nations crank those complicated missiles at a moments notice?

>can modern nations crank those complicated missiles at a moments notice
Certainly not at the rate that countries did in WWII, but it's also hard to compare peace-time production rates with those one would see in a potential total war.

There's a pretty big stockpile of missiles that can be reloaded by supply ships or ports. I believe there's also older blocks in reserve that could probably go past their expiration date.
I've wondered what a large surface action would look like. If ships fired off all their missiles (are some in a formation told not to fire so the weapons can last longer?), would they recover what vessels were damaged and retreat to regroup/rearm - or would those still combat-capable close to gun range?

Yea I am very curious about that particular scenario. If there is someone knowledgeable it will make for a fantastic read .
Scant info is out there in regards to this, probably for a good reason

What happens in total war scenario(let’s ignore nukes for the sake of simpicity).
Would us govt took executive control of all major military suppliers on the us soil?

Partly because it hasn't happened yet. The last large scale naval battle I can think of was the Indians and Pakistanis in 1971. Or the Israelis and Egyptians in 1973 which was the first time missile boats engaged each other.
Everything else was one-sided and hard to make any conclusions from.
So I think if/when there was a large surface action against two evenly matched sides, there would be a lot of surprises and hard lessons learned.

Guns are faster than torpedos, harder to intercept or spot than missiles.

I present the following counterargument:
Imagine the lightshow if you loaded tracers.

Not really. I was on a WestPac DDG and we usually only sailed with like 70% magazines out of port, I assume bc there weren't enough missiles. That was when they were starting to phase out the early SM2s though, so maybe it's not always like that

Thereis nothing right on the Zumwalt. Starting with the hull form which isn't sustainable for carrier operations in high sea states.

I track SM production because of Raytheon stock. Production is still pretty low.

SM-2 is still in LRIP while Raytheon tools up more production lines. There's also a lengthy backlog for int'l customers.

SM-3 was still in LRIP last year with the 2015-2018 covering 11 missiles per year.

SM-6 is in full rate production and only produces around 90 missiles a year.

Production is pitiful

>harder to intercept or spot
No. Shells are round, and round objects are easily detected by radar. They also fly a very predictable ballistic path. The only low-observable munitions right now are recent-gen strike missiles like JASSM/LRASM and Storm Shadow/SCALP

Attached: butts.jpg (1200x675, 96K)

WSMR just got their railgun installed for full range testing of HVP so not likely.

Well they're definitely working on something.

Attached: 20190613_130736.jpg (4032x1960, 2.71M)

That is kinda suspicious.
If the guns dont have operational ammo, why are they working on the forward gun and have it covered?

I would rather win the fight and write my own history than record you getting fucked in the ass, regardless of how "cool" it is to people who weren't there.

Completely incorrect.

I expect your genes will be erased in the next war.

it's shit. Just buy Chinese instead

Attached: soulvssouless.jpg (3105x1248, 807K)

>The Advanced Gun Systems will remain on the ships, but in an inactive status for future use, when a gun round that can affordably meet the desired capability is developed and fielded.
secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/20pres/RDTEN_BA5_Book.pdf#page=2044&zoom=100,-41,612

>Posts a chink Arleigh Burke knockoff and says it has more soul than a fucking space ship looking monolith of a boat with the most unique design to ever be launched in a modern navy

>burke knock off
you wish the burke is as half as impressive as the 052D let alone the 055.

It's like saying Kate Beckinsale is an Amy Schumer knock off

Attached: spook.webm (640x800, 619K)

>Burke knockoff
Nah, the 052Ds are Burke knockoffs. The 055 manages to be a shittier Tico knockoff.

When the LSC program finishes in 2020s and we get a Tico replacement, are the chinks gonna shut the fuck up about their 1 working 055 and only 8 planned?

>only 8 planned
Shit, seriously?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_055_destroyer

thediplomat.com/2018/03/china-kicks-off-work-on-6th-type-055-guided-missile-destroyer/
>The PLAN plans to field at least eight Type 055 destroyers in the coming years.
>“We can confidently say that, as far as destroyers are concerned, there is no generation gap between China and the U.S. anymore,” a Chinese naval expert told state-run Chinese media last year. As I noted, however, Western analysts “have pointed out major design flaws in the ship including the low positioning of its flat-array radar system.”

>Well they're definitely working on something.
>That is kinda suspicious.
>If the guns dont have operational ammo, why are they working on the forward gun and have it covered?
What I was thinking is, say you have a secret railgun project further ahead than the public one or some other secret energy weapon. You want to deploy a small number of them in secret but it's a little hard to keep an entire ship out of sight. Suddenly you have these zumwalts with turrets that hide the guns, supposedly they couldn't get the guided rounds cheap enough, despite the army, oto melara having no issue with guided rounds. Yet apparently you still build 3 of them and include the turrets but supposedly existing 127mm guns or some oto melara gun aren't fitted instead for no obvious reason.
While the public railgun systems aren't ready yet it's possible that one is for mass production, they could easily have a more effective one that works very well but isn't economical to build in large numbers. Secretly having them on the few zumwalts could make for a good surprise in the event of a naval conflict with china or other significant navy.

Not to mention the 055 would be considered a cruiser in any other navy. they basically just admitted the 052D isnt an equal to the Burkes and only their massive cruiser is.

by the time they have 8, their railgun will be deployed on the 055A

But cope more.

the 052D is superior to the burkes and they can shit out 15 of those per year. The 055 is not ready for mass production yet

052D vs Burkes
Quoted a naval expert

"Better in some aspects, worse in others.

For firepower she only has 64 VLS cells vs the Burke's 96, but the Chinese VLS are much larger (85cm vs 55cm diameter) and can pack a supersonic anti-ship missile in addition to the usual arsenal.

For sensors, her suite is more advanced, with a dual-band (S and C-band) AESA vs the Burke's S-band search radar and X-band illuminators. Not even a contest here, really, the 052D is ahead by miles.

Cleaner hull design and less clutter also means she appears smaller on radar vs the Burkes, but the usefulness of a reduced RCS is hotly debated.

Overall, more or less on par with the Burkes, maybe slightly better. The 052D is generally agreed to be the all-round best destroyer in its displacement range. The Burkes are ~2,000 tons heavier."

So the burkes have limb dick small vls but compensated by number, plus outdated radar, AND no stealth.

So this is the power of the mighty burkes.

Attached: happyimin.gif (200x150, 1.65M)

I thought the LCSs didn't produce enough electrical power for rails and/or lasers? I thought the next generation of destroyers was supposed to have larger power generation facilities for that purpose.

They'd probably be better as a SAG, especially if they ever restart production of its guided shells or stick railguns on it

>For sensors, her suite is more advanced, with a dual-band (S and C-band) AESA

The C-band are illuminators.

its getting replaced by VLS, i think.

cope

>Chinese VLS are much larger (85cm vs 55cm diameter)

Mk41 are 25" and do not have to accommodate piping for hot launch missiles inside of their cell.

>Two 30mm guns
>Deadly
To a fishing boat, maybe

Selective reading?

Jesus 90 a year? Ouch. We shot 5 of them in about 30 seconds during a test with the contractors onboard when they were rolling the SM6 out to the fleet. That's like 3 weeks worth of the entire global production capacity of the missile

Remember the Alamo

>shame

They can do that now. All the DoD needs to do is issue DX rated purchase orders. Those are mandatory to accept and get priority scheduling in a shop.
Sauce;
dcma.mil/DPAS.aspx

Considering the USN is buying 125 SM-6 a year you probably should ignore the 'shareholder'.

The gun kept shaking the frame to pieces...and the concept of it is pants-on-head retarded.

>Let's take the battleship, which is already obsolete, and make it less effective and more expensive.

Fucking contractors, man. They could sell dick to a lesbian.

BUT IT HAS STELATH MAN> STEALTHHHHH
IT IS THE F#% OF THE SEE STWALTH AND MUTLIPURPOISE MANNNN

Yeah. It’s a very powerful round

your fanfiction is noted

>they can shit out 15 of those per year.

>9 built since 2014
>11 still under construction

Thats actually very impressive is there a nation on earth that has 11 destroyers in production i dont think so

125 includes FMS for int'l customers afaik, although I could be wrong.

Either way, the USN has a baseline requirement of 1800. Assuming the USN procures 125 per year for itself and if it uses none, which isn't the case, it would take 15 years to reach the baseline.

Not really. By under construction I included both those under construction and those fitting out. China also has the largest and fourth largest ship builders in the world, so its not really surprising.

The US doesn't have a single ship builder in the top 10, but still has 10 Arleigh Burkes under construction or being fitted out.

The US doesn't export the SM-6.

>Dat 3rd design
Hnnnnnngh

That's what the zumwalt Is being redesigned to use, fin stabilized ammo

Yes it does

raytheon.mediaroom.com/2017-01-10-Standard-Missile-6-approved-for-international-sales

news.usni.org/2017/01/10/sm-6-cleared-international-sale-australia-japan-korea-early-customers#more-23191

defensedaily.com/raytheons-standard-missile-6-approved-for-export/international/

In this one single ship yard, there are 15 destroyers (a mix of both 055 and 052D) under various stage of construction. And you can also see their third carrier being built on the right side.

Attached: ddgproductions.png (960x679, 782K)

Doesnt disprove the fact that china is only planning to field 20 052Ds and 11 of their 055s
Even if they were immensely better than everything else and thats a discussion for another time, they wouldnt be good enough to defeat all 86 Arleigh Burkes (including the ones planned to be built) including Japan's 30 destroyers, and South Korea's 12 destroyers (Also including the ones in construction)
China's navy expanded alot in a short amount of time but all evidence points to them slowing their expansion so they can actually train crews for these new ships.

how disappointing then.
It's ironic that China, of all places, lacks man power to operate those ships.

They dont lack manpower but its the fact they have to train their brown water navy personnel in actually using their new big boy ships.

how long would it take? How the hell they are gonna man the 6 carriers they plan to have by 2030?

fuck if I know.
The only thing for certain right now is they arent expanding their naval fleet past 20 052Ds and 11 055s
And now that they put their best cards on the table and arent planning any new designs for years. The US can work around those designs for their new LSC program that replaces the Ticos and whatever ends up replacing the Arleigh Burkes

Once you get a proper cadre it gets much easier to train people, but to do that you need to rain cadre with the basic skills and get them real world experience using them. You also can't really start with the 'old guard' in this case, as much of the old PLAN got shit training to begin with and would just be poison to use for cadre.

>How to do it with six carriers?

Their current plan doesn't really answer that. I think they hope that automation and technological advancements will cut the crew requirements down a lot from what they are now, but it's sort of absurd to think that when they'd need to develop and implement automation as original research.

If they really do try to build more Russian ramp carriers or god forbid Kitty Hawk knockoffs they will end up with the people to operate 2 carriers and surge three, with half their fleet being nothing but a reserve.

You do know that the US already tested Hypersonic munitions out of the standard Burke main cannon last year right?
And that they moved a rain gun to white sands testing range for final testing, AND that the next LSC program to replace the Ticonderoga Class is probably going to include railguns, not to mention that the Zumwalt class is really the only naval ship around right now that actually has the power requirement for a railgun.

popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a25804867/us-navy-hvp-heavy-gun-shells-rimpac/

The USN's 125 is not FMS.

>LSC program to replace the Ticonderoga Class
that doesn't make any sense.

popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a28105977/large-surface-combatant-zumwalt/
>"The U.S. Navy’s 22 Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruisers are the main air defense platform protecting the fleet’s eleven aircraft carriers. Built during the 1980s, the Ticonderogas are starting to age out and need replacing. The Navy, which will continue to build Burke-class destroyers through the early 2020s, has pointedly refused to classify LSC as either a cruiser or destroyer, but it’s clear once in service the ships will take over the job of quarterbacking the defense of carriers from aerial threats."
>"It’s unknown what kind of weaponry LSC might pack, but current Ticonderogas are equipped with two 5-inch guns and 122 vertical launch missile silos. LSC would probably need just as many silos, if not more, in order to protect a battle group from large-scale missile barrages. It would also need the ability to protect against anti-ballistic missiles such as the Chinese DF-21D. It could also be equipped with offensive railguns and defensive, anti-air lasers, depending on whether or not either technology is mature enough to go to sea in the 2020s."

But raytheon will be able to sell the navy a fuckload more missiles.