Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Navy proposing high-tech destroyer with long-range guns

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:01 PM
Original message
Navy proposing high-tech destroyer with long-range guns
WASHINGTON — The Navy, seeking a greater role as the United States wages wars far inland, is pushing an expensive, experimental destroyer it says will be able to bomb targets well away from shore.

The Navy is trying to improve its ability to conduct fire support _ using heavy guns to assist Marines or soldiers ashore, much like land-based artillery does. The frequency of such naval fire support missions have declined during conflicts of the last half-century, and the Navy has turned to expensive cruise missiles instead of guns to hit targets farther inland.

The proposed destroyer, called the DD(X), would fill a gap opened with the removal from service of the last battleships more than a decade ago, Navy officials contend. But the DD(X) has its critics, who say the Navy is betting on technologies that aren´t fully developed and argue the ship is too expensive.

http://news.mainetoday.com/apwire/D8C07NS00-226.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. The first ship will cost $3.3 BILLION, according to CNN...
Isn't that a little much for one (1) destroyer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. A little too much considering
that a few advanced cruise missles will send it straight to the bottom!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #18
25. not quite that easily ...
I think they'd better bring their lunch for even an Arleigh Burke class DDG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. The next generation Yahonts
should have a pretty good chance of taking one out...

We're talking about a ship that's said to be getting into artillery range....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Aegis and the SM-2 are formidible...
against anything flying, particularly things flying on a steady course and constant speed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Burried News Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. Will it be able to sail up the Euphrates?
Sounds like a pocket battleship. The USS North Carolina is docked in Wilmington. Take it and kick back a few mil to the pols up for reselection - why go to alot of trouble cutting in the contractors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironman202 Donating Member (608 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
3. wtf was wrong with the battleships???? duh....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyingfysh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. their aim was bad
the charges that propelled the shells were old and produced uneven propulsion for the shells. So they often would up hitting friendlies instead. This happened in Lebanon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. I remember when we called in 16" battleship guns in Vietnam.
They were pretty damn' accurate. I don't remember the range, but it was probly something like 20 miles, with 3000 lb. projectiles iirc.

assume they're planning longer ranges for these new guns, but in any case the solution to the old-propellant problem would seem to be new propellant, not new ships.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. The charges were from WWII if I remember correctly.
And are not only old but run a real risk of just lobbing the entire gunmount 10 miles, not the shell. Plus it costs a freaking fortune to keep those things floating. Any how - what a surprise, it seems we need a lot of gunboats to lob shells deep inland as part of our ongoing efforts to win the hearts and minds of those pesky surgeons and furry fighters while we bring them all that freemon and moxy. And at 3.3b they are a real bargain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
achtung_circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. See also here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
5. Its good to know all seniors have drug coverage
Its also good to know we have conquered hunger and illiteracy in the usa
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Welcome to DU
Hint...that term won't endear you to many around here.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kipling Donating Member (929 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. I think he was being sarcastic. Anyway...
This is a bloody stupid idea because Afghanistan is landlocked and the seaside area of Iraq is relatively peaceful, small, and controlled by the British.

Uh oh. Iran has a long, populous coast. I smell doom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-16-05 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
33. ADIOS TO HIM/HER
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. and they hate us for our freedoms
Edited on Mon Aug-15-05 01:18 PM by antifaschits
our freedoms from social programs, literacy, education, pension funding, fair priced medical access for all, but $3.3 Billion for a new bathtub toy? or 8 Billion for an untested star wars pROGUEram? Sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #8
19. nonsense - proven false
we gave up all our freedoms and THEY STILL HATE US. They hate us for our SUVs!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. bravo, or brava, which ever works
I noticed a total absence of Hummers today - for the first time in ages.
It is a small, but important start.

Yet, GM announced that they would be going back to heavier rear wheel drive vehicles.
just in time to declare chapter 11, I'll bet. And a year after they dropped their efficient hybrid research.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Operation "KILL THE BROWN ISLAMIC MAN"
and those little "brown" children too

"FREEDOM IS ON THE MARCH"

freedom to steal the oil that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robeson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
27. But thats what makes us free....
...we have the freedom to cut and end domestic programs, not provide universal healthcare, and dismantle the New Deal. Meanwhile, we also have that special freedom to watch the Pentagon suck our national treasure dry. Thats what makes us better than everyone else! God bless America....

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKthatsIT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
10. This is a waste of tax payers money...Navy = sitting ducks
Really...who stands to profit the most from this?

The russians and iranians are said to have nuke-tipped missles that can take out aircraft carriers. That makes the Navy obsolete, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #10
26. horseshit ...
I think that it is actually the Russian and Iranian Navies that are vulnerable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oerdin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
13. Interesting
Edited on Mon Aug-15-05 01:50 PM by Oerdin
This destroyer is designed to take up the battleship's old role as shore battery? I can't help but think missiles are the better way to go since they're more accurate, longer ranged, and cheaper then designing a new destroyer class. I suspect the navy is trying to find new roles for many of its ships since the ending of the cold war has meant there is no longer a large naval force which can seriously contend with the US and allied navies. Normally, destroyers are used as screening ships for carriers or for ASW type missions since they're so small they need speed more then brut fire-power because they'll never go toe to toe with a capital warship.

This smells more then a little like pork for some congressman's district with a shipyard in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. I think there are only 2 shipyards
Mississippi and Maine. Sounds more like pork for GOP Senators to me. (Although, building them in Maine would be a very good thing, as far as I'm concerned.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. I thought Bath was BRAC'd. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newblewtoo Donating Member (332 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. NO.
Ok. For what it is worth, only PUBLIC facilities can be BRAC'ed. It is Base Realignment and Closure. Bath is a private shipyard which belongs to General Dynamics as does Electric Boat in New London Conn.

Groton Conn. is home to the Naval Submarine base, a government facility. The Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is located in Kittery, Maine and repairs only submarines.

Portsmouth and Groton are on the BRAC list. Not EB and Bath. They are private ( can you say contract out ).



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Sushi Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
15. The Navy has reduced their $$ request for DDX in this years budget
DDX has been on the drawing boards for years now. There has been two shipyard consortiums (grouping of yards) working on the design and all the cost estimates are way overboard (no pun intended).

because of this and the need for other ships in the fleet they have reduce their request (I dont have the numbers because I tossed my last efition of Maritime Reporter) and are thinking of delaying the award of the lead ship for a few more years.

DDX was first concepted at the end of the cold war and has no real value in todays world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bribri16 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
23. Why all the money spent on sophisticated military toys?
Everyone know that we can be taken out with box cutters and some other common items that no one has thought about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newblewtoo Donating Member (332 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
24. Another new ship
This is an interesting link for another new ship, note where it was built.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20050522-9999-1m22launch.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Sushi Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-16-05 03:33 AM
Response to Reply #24
32. Very cool when they go down the ways...
I spent 13 years working in shipyards... still love it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
28. ie gunboats
Edited on Mon Aug-15-05 04:52 PM by blindpig
for Gunboat Diplomacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-05 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
31. Put some wheels on it. Then it can get really close. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC