-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Newly commissioned warship USS Zumwalt's guns have no ammunition.
- Thread starter MJPIA
- Start date
- Status
Reminds me of this.
There was more to it but I'm having trouble finding the clip right now though ironically enough google did lead me to a post on Neogaf!
Ceallach
Smells like fresh rosebuds
It's what the contractor decided to charge the Navy, which is why SecNav is like, no fucking way and we are exploring alternate 155mm munitions.
Also, the thread title and article are misleading. The smart rounds are what we are no longer purchasing. The 155mm standard ballistic rounds as well as the BL&P, HE-CVT, Frag and illum rounds, traditional dumb rounds are all still in use.
Full disclosure: Im an active duty E6 L310 in the US Navy.
Hari Seldon
Member
It is being called ammunition but being that they are satellite guided they are more like missiles in reality. Sounds like the Navy wanted something for situations where a Tomahawk is massive overkill. 800k seems about right for what this is.
kahboomkin
Member
We had WWII battleships filling this role previously, so I don't understand why it's so difficult to design a replacement.
Modern artillery up front. 6 or 8 inch with AP and HC shells. VLS cells in the back. Phalanx or (preferably) SeaRAM CIWS. Small caliber secondary guns to defend against small, fast moving attack boats. Armor belt instead of expensive stealth tech.
A modern heavy cruiser.
Modern artillery up front. 6 or 8 inch with AP and HC shells. VLS cells in the back. Phalanx or (preferably) SeaRAM CIWS. Small caliber secondary guns to defend against small, fast moving attack boats. Armor belt instead of expensive stealth tech.
A modern heavy cruiser.
No you didn't unless it was under TINA and considered commercial.
Also, scales of economy is a helluva thing.
YuriLowell
Member
Yes we did and it was under TINA.
Rail guns were always the future for this rig, even going back to the early naughts. This is specifically why the power plant is oversized.
There was a question about when we decided to go future. In high school, I interned at Bath Iron works....The design was in final stages in Spring of 2001. It was hot shit then.
There was a question about when we decided to go future. In high school, I interned at Bath Iron works....The design was in final stages in Spring of 2001. It was hot shit then.
Since nobody likes to put images in ops anymore.
Looks like a Jaguar game
You just built a carrier in starcraft but can't afford interceptors.
Layers of bureaucrats + the ability to hide budgets in a big ol CLASSIFIED filing cabinet + Congress wanting to pork out and make every state be involved in the building of everything and wrap it in a Military Industrial Complex tortilla
Giant Panda
Member
A big lesson here is that cutting production runs doesn't always save that much money. The military in general has way to many projects, that then get their production runs cut to save money, but then this causes unit costs to explode, so in the end the military is left with a couple of each vehicle that are way over budget and yet under equipped.
the struggle was real some times
LumpOfCole
Member
Or when you try to upgrade a unit without first remembering to work a Niter tile.
Valkyr Junkie
Member
They practically are cruise missiles. They're rocket assisted shells with GPS guidance built-in.
MasterOfPastures
Banned
If you are asking why or how it got to this point, let this clip reveal some of the inner workings of the military industrial comples:
the Bradley
the Bradley
GTP_Daverytimes
Member
Since nobody likes to put images in ops anymore.
A ship which looks good but can't perform the duties of ships that cost 4 times less is useless and the continued troubles with this ship highlights the problem with the US's defense industry. Corruption, cost overruns and an idea that you must always build on the cutting edge regardless of cost. At a cost of 4 billion a ship and 7 billion when R&D is factored in you begin to see just how much of a waste of money this whole ship is.
This thread got me interested in our GDP expenditure on the military. US GDP is $17.947 trillion. We spent 3.3 percent or $592.25 billion of this on the military. Imagine what would happen if we got that number down to 2.4 percent or $431 billion.
Anywhoo this ship seems wasteful as fuck. SMH at spending all this money on $800,000 per round.
Anywhoo this ship seems wasteful as fuck. SMH at spending all this money on $800,000 per round.
As noted before, economics of scale boosted the price to 10 times as much as they should be. 80k for a smart round sounds reasonable (as opposed to firing a full 1.5 million cruise missile something). But with the reduction in Zumwalt class orders, the price per unit went up.
(This is ignoring mark-ups etc.)
(This is ignoring mark-ups etc.)
LMAO, first thing that came to mind when I read that line.
PdotMichael
Banned
The problem it needs that ammunition to get a useful range for land attack missions.
capitalCORN
Member
You know how people like to laugh at people who buy Titan Xes for their rigs, when all they have is 1080p monitor?
Yes but the impression people seem to have is that it's now just a big empty gun that leaves the ship defenseless. It isn't, it can still fuck some shit up if need be.
Generalpsyduck
Banned
The things NASA could have done with all that money.
ebullientprism
Member
Wow that ship will be completely defenseless against.......somali pirates? Who is the US navy under threat from again?
Shmuppers
Member
LMAO
Yeah that's how, hope your folks don't get an audit lol
kahboomkin
Member
Oh definitely. I'm sure plenty of members of congress receive generous "donations" from defense contractors. Why else would they approve all of these expensive and often untested tech projects.
To be fair most EVERYTHING has a 2-4x price increase by the time it hits retail. Every see what an iPhone costs apple versus what it costs you? Defense contractors make money like every other business.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
80 MILES AWAY...
That's almost the distance from Houston TX to Beaumont.
$10k per mile for those rounds. Jeez.
That's almost the distance from Houston TX to Beaumont.
$10k per mile for those rounds. Jeez.
Since nobody likes to put images in ops anymore.
did they use an N64 to design this?
That basically is what the Zumwalt is. 2 6.1" guns, 2 1.2" and 80 Missile launch cells. Like I said the Navy has been in bad shape for sometime when it comes to competent people running its design board etc. It is argued Armor is useless in the age of missiles and while that is true to some extent I would much rather be sitting behind 12" of steel armor than 3" of aluminum.
Politics and Naval Command play large factors in things. Just like how Carriers at one time were viewed as a interesting concept but not that important by Battleship Admirals now we have nothing but Carrier Admirals saying how useless everything else is.
Sunster
Member
If we had a new HC it would at least have some impressive looking guns on it.
Ceallach
Smells like fresh rosebuds
Even that isn't true. It can still do traditional NSFS with a spotter and still has greater range than the MK 45.
Since nobody likes to put images in ops anymore.
This polygon mesh is sub model 2 level. Nice graphics budget, US Navy.
kahboomkin
Member
I was thinking something more along the lines of the USS Boston. A Baltimore-class heavy cruiser with the rear turret replaced with missiles.
My biggest gripe with the Zumwalt is that she sacrifices secondary weapons for a small radar cross section. No CIWS means more of her limited VLS cells have to carry sea sparrow missiles instead of cruise missiles.
You're right about navy politics though.
Nevada and Pensacola come to mind when I think about the constant infighting between admirals over designs.
The Military Industrial Complex is basically a continued legacy of Keynesian policies from the Roosevelt Era.
800k spent, but to hire W people and to give X company Y profits, which then employs Z # of people.
Nikodemos
Member
Probably never. It has too many compromises. Even if they replace the turrets with railguns at some point, it will still have many other shortcomings, like poor close-in defences and limited attack capability outside the (rail)guns. .
- Status