Shipbucket
http://67.205.157.234/forums/

DDG-1000 Sea trials
http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6375		 Page 3 of 4
Author:  heuhen [ December 26th, 2015, 5:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
erik_t wrote:
[anyone posts anything about anything]

NORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAYNORWAY
Every post about absolutely anything in the world, invention or made in, or it was we that come up with the idea....

USAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSAUSA

even on youtube... it's funny that.... must be a sort of inferior complex.

But then I might know where it come from... all those documents I see talking about invention or ideas that some country have invented or improved... but in the reality there was several Norwegians behind it. Or that documentary about the world best special forces that was on the TV for some years ago... where they used actors that purposely made Norwegian special forces look bad, they even had problem with loading a gun!

We was during viking age big and scary, but now.... yeah that's funny.
Author:  acelanceloet [ December 26th, 2015, 8:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
Heuhen, sorry to say, but I somewhat agree with Erik_t on this. You are, and I think you agree if I say it this way, an Norway fanboy. but could you please leave comments in topics that are actually related to the subject? I mean:
heuhen wrote:
while here in Norway and Sweden, we have done it or several years now... it's called the skjold class and Visby class.

Sorry just had to. This is just so old news that I have grown a epic man bear... literally.
this is an vague and unrelated post, I have no idea what you are refering to and for that reason chose to just ignore this post and many others like it. that should not be the purpose of your posts, I suppose, as they take effort to be written haha :P so maybe better to leave them unposted.
Author:  apdsmith [ December 26th, 2015, 10:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
iiradned wrote:
Further examination of the video yields that USS Zumwalt is currently sporting 4 commercial type radars. Two on top the deckhouse forward and one on each aft corner of the hangar.

Hopefully they're only there for the trials and not when she is commissioned.
I don't think anyone's actually addressed this (it kind of went off on a tangent) - if the warship wants to look like a civilian vessel (at least from an emissions perspective) it's probably cheaper to match a civilian set's emissions by just buying a civvie set than trying to coax a mil-spec radar to look like a civvie set, especially given that the requirements for a navigation radar aren't particularly demanding (it may be that for that specific job, a military version would not offer any benefit anyway)

Regards,
Adam
Author:  erik_t [ December 26th, 2015, 10:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
Indeed, a substantially-sized radar return (even one matching a 60ft yacht) that is completely silent electronically is more suspicious than one radiating a nav set.
Author:  Thiel [ December 26th, 2015, 10:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
And lets not forget that navigation radars are pretty good at just that, navigation. And stuff like RACON signals and SART beacons are only visible on x-band radars.
Author:  Western_1 [ December 30th, 2015, 2:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
The more I read about the DDG-1000 the angrier I get. Those cost over-runs are downright unacceptable. The Government needs to redesign the Nunn-McCurdy rule so that it is based on percent of cost growth from program induction, not year over year. That might be the kick in the nuts needed to get some of these contractors and designers to do their jobs correctly. Though I am sure plenty of blame likely lies with command not properly outlining their needs beforehand and the constant push to have "swiss army ships" that do everything.

DDG 1000 should have been a 10k ton Type 45 Destroyer with a bigger hull and larger power-plant for future changes. More off the shelf parts, more specialization. Then, make our hardest hitting surface combatant a 30k ton CGN with plenty of room for all the lasers, rail guns, AEGIS replacement, drones and other stuff the navy can think of.

While were at it, no littoral combat ships over a thousand tons. Make a bigger Visby, then call it good on littoral combat ships. The current LCS ships are just really crappy light frigates. Instead, the LCS should be a proper frigate and about 5k tons in size. I would love to see an independence class, but twice as large. Also, give about six to the coast guard as national security cutters.

/rant
Author:  Morten812 [ January 1st, 2016, 9:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
[ img ]
Author:  Wikipedia & Universe [ May 11th, 2016, 2:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
krases wrote:
While were at it, no littoral combat ships over a thousand tons. Make a bigger Visby, then call it good on littoral combat ships. The current LCS ships are just really crappy light frigates. Instead, the LCS should be a proper frigate and about 5k tons in size. I would love to see an independence class, but twice as large. Also, give about six to the coast guard as national security cutters.

/rant
LCS's are basically corvettes trying to be hipster. Just make some corvettes that are able to punch above their weight, reach relatively high speeds for their size, and do MCM work with a little bit of interdiction.

As for the Zumwalts, I think they're great, but once they realized they could only have a few, they should have shifted the mentality to treating them as neo-Long Beaches: Testbeds that go out and fight.
Author:  Hexelarity [ May 11th, 2016, 2:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
Most stealthiest ship ive seen
Author:  TimothyC [ May 11th, 2016, 3:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: DDG-1000 Sea trials
Wikipedia & Universe wrote:
LCS's are basically corvettes trying to be hipster. Just make some corvettes that are able to punch above their weight, reach relatively high speeds for their size, and do MCM work with a little bit of interdiction.
No, the LCSes are not, and apostrophes are not for pluralizing. The LCSes are light surface combatants that can defend themselves (as well as any Perry could), while carrying a pair of helos to do things. There are sacrifices for the high speed they were made to reach, but they have proven to not be the horrible monsters that some have made them out to be. Plus, we're getting them in service, which is worth more than any paper study.
Page 3 of 4 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/