If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Popular Science)   When the Navy's Zumwalt-class destroyer rolls out next year, it'll be the most technologically advanced warship ever, even without horses and bayonets   (popsci.com) divider line 113
    More: Spiffy, Zumwalt, warships, propulsion systems, Zumwalt-class destroyer, anti-ship missile, gas turbines, fire suppression, Operation Desert Storm  
•       •       •

6890 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Oct 2012 at 11:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



113 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-23 09:43:00 AM  
Well, if we are going to build battle-cruisers again we might as well have cavalry too.
 
2012-10-23 09:59:00 AM  
We should staple a horse with a bayonet in it's teeth on the front and name her the USS Republican
 
2012-10-23 10:15:35 AM  
"The Zumwalt generates far more power than it needs. "

I was going to say "rail gun" but then it mentions it at the end of the article.
 
2012-10-23 11:44:24 AM  
"The ship also carries a battery of SM-2 antiaircraft missiles, surface-targeting Tomahawks, missile-destroying ESSM interceptors, and vertically launched ASROC antisubmarine torpedoes, all distributed among 80 missile cells that line the Zumwalt's hull. The location of the cells ensures that the missiles can't all be disabled by a single enemy strike and serves as an extra layer of defense around the ship."

They're lining the edges of the deck with vertical-launch missile cells to serve as a layer of "protection" if the ship is hit.

It uses missiles, which contain explosive warheads and rockets, as armor.
 
2012-10-23 11:48:12 AM  

beantowndog: We should staple a horse with a bayonet in it's teeth on the front and name her the USS Republican


i48.tinypic.com

oi49.tinypic.com
 
2012-10-23 11:55:21 AM  
At least we get to dust off the tumblehome hull and try again. Of course there will only be three Zumwalts total.
 
2012-10-23 11:59:24 AM  

FuturePastNow: "The ship also carries a battery of SM-2 antiaircraft missiles, surface-targeting Tomahawks, missile-destroying ESSM interceptors, and vertically launched ASROC antisubmarine torpedoes, all distributed among 80 missile cells that line the Zumwalt's hull. The location of the cells ensures that the missiles can't all be disabled by a single enemy strike and serves as an extra layer of defense around the ship."

They're lining the edges of the deck with vertical-launch missile cells to serve as a layer of "protection" if the ship is hit.

It uses missiles, which contain explosive warheads and rockets, as armor.


Without getting into details, the concept does make sense when you look at the progression. Traditional magazines were situated central to the ship close to the keel. If they exploded, you stood a good chance of dividing the ship in two and losing everything. The perriphial missile magazines have a greater chance to blow outward to the atmosphere and not inward to the people and engine places. If you are lucky you will still be able to move the hip and deliver ordinance on target.
 
2012-10-23 12:17:05 PM  

ha-ha-guy: Of course there will only be three Zumwalts total.


Unless....
 
2012-10-23 12:19:31 PM  

beantowndog: We should staple a horse with a bayonet in it's teeth on the front and name her the USS Republican


Why not the USS Democrat, since it was a Democrat that said it?
 
2012-10-23 12:20:09 PM  
If it can do this:

"...deliver devastatingly accurate firepower hundreds of miles inland..."

Why is it so important that it can do this:

"It can evade enemy detection; slip into the shallows along foreign coastlines..."

One would think that if the weapons systems have the range to reach hundreds of miles, the whole getting right up against the shore bit isn't so much necessary at all.
 
2012-10-23 12:20:47 PM  
I thought DDG-1000 had been a such a hideously expensive boondoggle that they cut their losses by limiting to 3 ships and some wanted the whole thing canned. $3.3 billion each, just for construction!?

Meanwhile, the existing CGs and DDGs keep chugging along, getting regular repairs and tech upgrades.
 
2012-10-23 12:27:55 PM  
thoroughbredmodels.com

So we're falling back on Civil War designs?
 
2012-10-23 12:29:09 PM  

Click Click D'oh: If it can do this:

"...deliver devastatingly accurate firepower hundreds of miles inland..."

Why is it so important that it can do this:

"It can evade enemy detection; slip into the shallows along foreign coastlines..."

One would think that if the weapons systems have the range to reach hundreds of miles, the whole getting right up against the shore bit isn't so much necessary at all.


It's important to deliver firepower inland to protect ground forces.
It's important to be able to evade detection, that's obvious. If you ship can sail in shallower water than the enemy, you can go places he can't, thus you may be able to further evade the enemy.

I'm not war monger or anything, but hardware capable of accomplishing a diverse types of missions also seems to make sense economically -- better than having a fleet of specialized ships that rarely see action yet still need costly maintenance.
 
2012-10-23 12:30:26 PM  
Look, if we can't even staple one horse to the prow, what's the farking point?
 
2012-10-23 12:31:05 PM  

Tricky Chicken: FuturePastNow: "The ship also carries a battery of SM-2 antiaircraft missiles, surface-targeting Tomahawks, missile-destroying ESSM interceptors, and vertically launched ASROC antisubmarine torpedoes, all distributed among 80 missile cells that line the Zumwalt's hull. The location of the cells ensures that the missiles can't all be disabled by a single enemy strike and serves as an extra layer of defense around the ship."

They're lining the edges of the deck with vertical-launch missile cells to serve as a layer of "protection" if the ship is hit.

It uses missiles, which contain explosive warheads and rockets, as armor.

Without getting into details, the concept does make sense when you look at the progression. Traditional magazines were situated central to the ship close to the keel. If they exploded, you stood a good chance of dividing the ship in two and losing everything. The perriphial missile magazines have a greater chance to blow outward to the atmosphere and not inward to the people and engine places. If you are lucky you will still be able to move the hip and deliver ordinance on target.


CASE, short for Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment, was created by the United States Navy in 2010 as a system designed to reduce the hazards of carrying volatile or explosive equipment, usually ammunition. CASE is essentially a specialized container structure for housing the equipment, and redirects explosive force in the event that the equipment explodes. While this makes it invaluable for preventing excessive internal damage, CASE does not actually stop the explosion, it merely contains and redirects the explosive force, so after an explosion units likely will be crippled or nonfunctional, though not destroyed outright.

Navy CASE weighs half-a-ton per piece, while Marine Corps CASE does not require any additional tonnage. Both the Navy and Marine Core CASE cost 50,000 dollars. CASE mounted on an Navy ship can only be placed in a midship section, and only protects that midship section. Any other ground, sea, or air vehicle mounting CASE only requires one, which protects the entire vehicle.
 
2012-10-23 12:39:28 PM  

Slappywag: Why not the USS Democrat, since it was a Democrat that said it?


Yes. A Democrat said "horses and bayonets."

In response to a Republican assertion that the 2012 US Navy has fallen behind the strategic and tactical capabilities of the 1916 US Navy.

Just once, I want a Republican politician to come out and say "look, we don't know anything about international security. We don't know anything about warfighting. We just want to give billions of taxpayer and borrowed dollars to defense contractors, okay?"
 
2012-10-23 12:40:27 PM  
Technologically advanced? ... it better have lasers.

The Zumwalt is an ideal platform for power-intensive future weapons systems, such as lasers and electromagnetic rail guns.

Wheee lasers.

blogs.discovermagazine.com
 
2012-10-23 12:43:31 PM  
Well, if we are going to build battle-cruisers again we might as well have cavalry too.

Actually, mounting a couple of wire guided missiles on the sides of the saddle and adding a targeting eyepiece to the rider's helmet would make a horse a dammed good anti-tank platform....


I was involved in early development work (DECKOPS 2020) for the Zumwalt, long ago when the program was know as SC-21 (Surface Combatant 21st Century)

We came up with lotsa cool concepts, like automated docking, hide away heli-pad, unmanned weatherdeck, automated UNREP, etc. One of my favorite ideas (since patented by moi) was to refuel the ship like the Navy already does in flight refueling - i.e. a tanker ship pulls a hose with a guided towed body on it through the water as it cruises, the ship to be refueled sticks a probe out underwater and drives up to the towed body, plugs in and refuels while cruising along. Nobody out on deck, no radar signature, ship can continue to fight, launch missiles while refueling, etc. Stupidly simple. The Navy War College loved it, the Navy engineering groups who do present day refueling HATED IT. It was a threat to their Rice Bowls. So it went nowhere. Most of the other concepts were deleted as cost overruns hit. Some of the concepts were incorporated into Zumwalt. The important thing is that the contractors GOT PAID.

Curiously, the Swedish Navy showed far more interest in automated astern refueling than the US Navy. Oh well. I retire in 147 days. I just don't give a fark anymore.
 
2012-10-23 12:48:23 PM  

mark12A: I retire in 147 days.


Let me take the opportunity to thank you for your service. It sounds like you were involved in amazing work regardless.
 
2012-10-23 12:48:57 PM  

mark12A: i.e. a tanker ship pulls a hose with a guided towed body on it through the water as it cruises, the ship to be refueled sticks a probe out underwater and drives up to the towed body, plugs in and refuels while cruising along.


I bet the commanders of the SSNs creamed their pants over that idea. Something like "OMG YES YES YES, SELL IT TO THE CHINESE!".

/it is a good idea though if you're confident the waters are submarine free
 
2012-10-23 12:49:53 PM  

Click Click D'oh: If it can do this:

"...deliver devastatingly accurate firepower hundreds of miles inland..."

Why is it so important that it can do this:

"It can evade enemy detection; slip into the shallows along foreign coastlines..."

One would think that if the weapons systems have the range to reach hundreds of miles, the whole getting right up against the shore bit isn't so much necessary at all.


The Persian gulf is surprisingly shallow, as is the Red Sea, and much of the larger inland waterways of the globe.
 
2012-10-23 12:51:15 PM  

Tricky Chicken: ha-ha-guy: Of course there will only be three Zumwalts total.

Unless....


Hopefully the USN won't reach a point where they need to start buying shore bombardment ships in bulk.

/I know it does more than that, but that was this one's selling point
 
2012-10-23 12:52:04 PM  
They should go full drone and sail them from the safety of Las Vegas.
 
2012-10-23 12:54:02 PM  

dryknife: They should go full drone and sail them from the safety of Las Vegas.


IIRC the big issue now is the crew needed to run the ship is so small the Navy has concerns they'll have enough warm bodies on the boat to do damage control. So it is possible the next gen of ships will a bunch of guys with bullshiat jobs whose only really job is to patch holes when shiat goes down.

/at least until the Navy gets these up and running
 
2012-10-23 12:54:40 PM  

sprawl15:
CASE, short for Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment, was created by the United States Navy in 2010 as a system designed to reduce the hazards of carrying volatile or explosive equipment, usually ammunition. CASE is essentially a specialized container structure for housing the equipment, and redirects explosive force in the event that the equipment explodes. While this makes it invaluable for preventing excessive internal damage, CASE does not actually stop the explosion, it merely contains and redirects the explosive force, so after an explosion units likely will be crippled or nonfunctional, though not destroyed outright.


Put to use by the Navy in 2010 maybe.
Assembly plants have been using that design for decades in their paint shops. If it goes boom, it goes out where we want it, not into the plant.

They don't call it CASE though. That would be stupid seeing as how that's what the miniatures game Battletech named it in the 90s. .
 
2012-10-23 12:54:53 PM  

sprawl15: CASE, short for Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment, was created by the United States Navy in 2010 as a system designed to reduce the hazards of carrying volatile or explosive equipment, usually ammunition. CASE is essentially a specialized container structure for housing the equipment, and redirects explosive force in the event that the equipment explodes. While this makes it invaluable for preventing excessive internal damage, CASE does not actually stop the explosion, it merely contains and redirects the explosive force, so after an explosion units likely will be crippled or nonfunctional, though not destroyed outright.

Navy CASE weighs half-a-ton per piece, while Marine Corps CASE does not require any additional tonnage. Both the Navy and Marine Core CASE cost 50,000 dollars. CASE mounted on an Navy ship can only be placed in a midship section ...


Does the CASE protect from damage if the Rail Gun is hit? And does the Captain of the ship take 2 points of damage from an ammo explosion?
 
2012-10-23 12:56:16 PM  

dryknife: They should go full drone and sail them from the safety of Las Vegas.


Air power only works when you have a shiat-ton of cooperation from everything that's between you and your target or a nice carrier group relatively close making sure that you don't have to care about that cooperation.
 
2012-10-23 12:57:30 PM  

Rent Party: Click Click D'oh: If it can do this:

"...deliver devastatingly accurate firepower hundreds of miles inland..."

Why is it so important that it can do this:

"It can evade enemy detection; slip into the shallows along foreign coastlines..."

One would think that if the weapons systems have the range to reach hundreds of miles, the whole getting right up against the shore bit isn't so much necessary at all.

The Persian gulf is surprisingly shallow, as is the Red Sea, and much of the larger inland waterways of the globe.


You are right. How about just stop driving there? They fight...someone wins....they still sell oil. The end.
 
2012-10-23 01:01:47 PM  

Tricky Chicken: FuturePastNow: "The ship also carries a battery of SM-2 antiaircraft missiles, surface-targeting Tomahawks, missile-destroying ESSM interceptors, and vertically launched ASROC antisubmarine torpedoes, all distributed among 80 missile cells that line the Zumwalt's hull. The location of the cells ensures that the missiles can't all be disabled by a single enemy strike and serves as an extra layer of defense around the ship."

They're lining the edges of the deck with vertical-launch missile cells to serve as a layer of "protection" if the ship is hit.

It uses missiles, which contain explosive warheads and rockets, as armor.

Without getting into details, the concept does make sense when you look at the progression. Traditional magazines were situated central to the ship close to the keel. If they exploded, you stood a good chance of dividing the ship in two and losing everything. The perriphial missile magazines have a greater chance to blow outward to the atmosphere and not inward to the people and engine places. If you are lucky you will still be able to move the hip and deliver ordinance on target.


I'm by no means an expert but I would imagine most of the warheads are shaped charge. If they're aligned vertically around the deck then the majority of the force of a warhead detonation would go harmlessly straight up and not blow a hole through the whole ship like they would if arranged horizontally.
 
2012-10-23 01:06:34 PM  

brandent:
The Persian gulf is surprisingly shallow, as is the Red Sea, and much of the larger inland waterways of the globe.

You are right. How about just stop driving there? They fight...someone wins....they still sell oil. The end.


Well, that would be an optimal solution, but until we decide to quit electing corporate whores that use our military to do their bidding, we are going to have to drive there. Having the gear to do it would be prudent.
 
2012-10-23 01:11:42 PM  

Click Click D'oh: If it can do this:

"...deliver devastatingly accurate firepower hundreds of miles inland..."

Why is it so important that it can do this:

"It can evade enemy detection; slip into the shallows along foreign coastlines..."

One would think that if the weapons systems have the range to reach hundreds of miles, the whole getting right up against the shore bit isn't so much necessary at all.


Did you stop to consider that maybe it's able to deliver firepower so far inland only when it's right up against the coast? Getting close to shore sure is easier with stealth capabilities...
 
2012-10-23 01:12:59 PM  
You know, if Obama wouldn't shoot off his piehole saying stupid shiat about horses and bayonets in debates, then even dumber trollerific headlines couldn't be written by unimaginative fanboys.

Just sayin'...... 

If Romney wins this election, which is likely, what the hell are you fanboys an fangirls gonna do? Myself, I can comfortably live with an Obama second term. But you, you boys and girls, I'm shaking my head with deep concern about your mental health should the opposite occur and Governor Romney prevails.

That is all..............................
 
2012-10-23 01:27:15 PM  
Look out Taliban and other guys in toyota pickups with machine guns strapped to them!

/Oh look my local school has no money for lunches or band....
 
2012-10-23 01:29:44 PM  
This ship is the naval version of the air forces 'Hanger Queens' - aka the F22.

Sure it does amazing things and costs piles of money, but it is effectively useless because it is too expensive to risk in the field - short of a world war. While this ship might do well in the shallow waters of the Persian Gulf - we would never send such an expensive ship into the Straights during an actual time of hostilities.

/let's call it a Pier Queen!
 
2012-10-23 01:30:31 PM  
Looks cool, but what a waste of farking money.
 
2012-10-23 01:31:00 PM  

sprawl15:
CASE, short for Cellular Ammunition Storage Equipment, was created by the United States Navy in 2010 as a system designed to reduce the hazards of carrying volatile or explosive equipment, usually ammunition. CASE is essentially a specialized container structure for housing the equipment, and redirects explosive force in the event that the equipment explodes. While this makes it invaluable for preventing excessive internal damage, CASE does not actually stop the explosion, it merely contains and redirects the explosive force, so after an explosion units likely will be crippled or nonfunctional, though not destroyed outright.
...


That sounds very similar to how the PVLS works. Except the PVLS doesn't need to be located midships. I would guess that they used the underlying concept of the CASE in the design.

clkeagle: In response to a Republican assertion that the 2012 US Navy has fallen behind the strategic and tactical capabilities of the 1916 US Navy.



Number of ships and "strategic and tactical ability" are far from the same thing. FYI, we STILL have a calvary. And while comparing our modern warships with those of 1916 the ame as comparing horses to tanks, I assure you that we are orders of magnitude more advanced now.

Romney was comparing numbers of ships not capabilities. We are below the number of ships the tacticians determined are needed to meet our national defense strategic goals. He is not recommending we build a bunch of corvettes to meet the needs of 1812. Or Sampson class destroyers.

But you were just derping werent you?
 
2012-10-23 01:33:55 PM  

Rent Party: The Persian gulf is surprisingly shallow, as is the Red Sea, and much of the larger inland waterways of the globe.


It's deep enough to operate aircraft carriers regularly. And the article states that this ship needs thirty feet of water to operate in. So, it has the same draft as an Arleigh Burke.

Honest Bender: Did you stop to consider that maybe it's able to deliver firepower so far inland only when it's right up against the coast?


Because being up close to the coast conveys an extra boost that makes projectiles fly further? Uh no. Being four or five miles closer to the coast just means that you can lob a projectile four or five miles further. Opening a whole new world of target opportunities... oh, wait.. no. Nevermind. What it realistically means is that you've run in close enough for a guy with a T-72 to do some major damage to a $3B ship. BGM-109 will still go 400+ inland. The extra five is bullshiat to get suckers to sign off on useless crap.
 
2012-10-23 01:36:32 PM  

chasd00:
I'm by no means an expert but I would imagine most of the warheads are shaped charge. If they're aligned vertically around the deck then the majority of the force of a warhead detonation would go harmlessly straight up and not blow a hole through the whole ship like they would if arranged horizontally.


Ordinance is so far from my specialty, I am effectively a layman. However, I would assume the propellant is the major concern.

I don't know how warheads work other than making things go boom.
 
2012-10-23 01:36:44 PM  

Tricky Chicken: That sounds very similar to how the PVLS works. Except the PVLS doesn't need to be located midships. I would guess that they used the underlying concept of the CASE in the design.


Err. I'm pretty sure he just rewrote the game text for CASE from the Battletech 3065 tech manual.
 
2012-10-23 01:41:16 PM  
Waste of money

I wonder if we'll ever be able to rein in that bloated military budget
 
2012-10-23 01:44:07 PM  

Click Click D'oh: Because being up close to the coast conveys an extra boost that makes projectiles fly further?


Not sure if serious...
Let me expand upon what I previously said:

Honest Bender: Did you stop to consider that maybe it's able to deliver firepower so far inland only when it's right up against the coast?

As opposed to hundreds of miles off the coast.

Our ships aren't exactly anchored a couple of miles offshore... They're going to stay as far out to sea as possible to minimize their exposure to enemy weapons.

I would have thought that was obvious. In the future, I'll try not to assume that what is obvious to everyone else in the room is obvious to you.
 
2012-10-23 01:44:35 PM  

LowbrowDeluxe: Tricky Chicken: That sounds very similar to how the PVLS works. Except the PVLS doesn't need to be located midships. I would guess that they used the underlying concept of the CASE in the design.

Err. I'm pretty sure he just rewrote the game text for CASE from the Battletech 3065 tech manual.


he did. for once, someone successfully made a reference too obscure for fark.
 
2012-10-23 01:48:08 PM  
ha ha guy:IIRC the big issue now is the crew needed to run the ship is so small the Navy has concerns they'll have enough warm bodies on the boat to do damage control. So it is possible the next gen of ships will a bunch of guys with bullshiat jobs whose only really job is to patch holes when shiat goes down.

We actually addressed that in Deckops 2020. I proposed an idea, which turned out to have already been created - "YachtSaver"
A company made (or still makes) a system that bolts to the wall in the boat that contains a folded inflatable balloon. If your yacht is sinking, jump in your lifeboat and trigger the system before leaving, inflating the balloon in the room and thus keeping the space from filling with water. It was actually did save a yacht abandoned in a storm. Did not sink, and was eventually washed ashore.

Now scale it up to a Navy ship. Hundreds of these systems scattered throughout the ship. In passageways, offices, storerooms, main spaces, voids, etc. Balloons made of Kevlar, inflated from liquified CO2 tanks in each system.

Ship gets hit by a missile? Compartment on fire and filling with water? Get the survivors out of the space and inflate all the balloons in there. Inflating balloons push all the air out of the space, thus removing oxygen from the fire, and displace space so water can't flood the space. Some of the balloons will pop when inflating against sharp edges, but that just releases the CO2 to help snuff out the fire. Of course, the fire suppression sprinklers are going at the same time, protecting the balloons from heat, and the balloons keep the space from filling completely with water.

Viola! Automated damage control. Once again, the idea generated interes, but nobody wanted to fund any experiments with it. It all got published in ASNE Proceedings years ago, but never went anywhere...
 
2012-10-23 01:52:00 PM  

buttery_shame_cave: LowbrowDeluxe: Tricky Chicken: That sounds very similar to how the PVLS works. Except the PVLS doesn't need to be located midships. I would guess that they used the underlying concept of the CASE in the design.

Err. I'm pretty sure he just rewrote the game text for CASE from the Battletech 3065 tech manual.

he did. for once, someone successfully made a reference too obscure for fark.


Too obscure?
Hardly. CASE is great for protecting your mech from ammo cookoffs and can help contain the eplosive damage to an arm or a side, and not the internal.

I just can't remember if CASE was invited by the Clans or the I-Sphere.
 
2012-10-23 01:52:35 PM  

buttery_shame_cave: LowbrowDeluxe: Tricky Chicken: That sounds very similar to how the PVLS works. Except the PVLS doesn't need to be located midships. I would guess that they used the underlying concept of the CASE in the design.

Err. I'm pretty sure he just rewrote the game text for CASE from the Battletech 3065 tech manual.

he did. for once, someone successfully made a reference too obscure for fark.


LowbrowDeluxe got it, so technically it wasn't too obscure for Fark, just me. My Fark-fu is no match for the elites of Farkdom.

But now I'm concerned. Are the engineers starting to build the things from the games they played and movies they watched when younger? If so, where is my Cheri 2000?
 
2012-10-23 01:54:06 PM  

Click Click D'oh: Rent Party: The Persian gulf is surprisingly shallow, as is the Red Sea, and much of the larger inland waterways of the globe.

It's deep enough to operate aircraft carriers regularly.



As a sailor on one of the first carriers to operate in the Gulf, I can state categorically that floating carriers there is a relatively recent phenomenon, and that their operating area is pretty limited. It's not like they just float around anywhere they want to go.

Shallow water operations matter.
 
2012-10-23 02:03:51 PM  

mark12A: I was involved in early development work (DECKOPS 2020) for the Zumwalt, long ago when the program was know as SC-21 (Surface Combatant 21st Century)

We came up with lotsa cool concepts, like automated docking, hide away heli-pad, unmanned weatherdeck, automated UNREP, etc. One of my favorite ideas (since patented by moi) was to refuel the ship like the Navy already does in flight refueling - i.e. a tanker ship pulls a hose with a guided towed body on it through the water as it cruises, the ship to be refueled sticks a probe out underwater and drives up to the towed body, plugs in and refuels while cruising along. Nobody out on deck, no radar signature, ship can continue to fight, launch missiles while refueling, etc. Stupidly simple. The Navy War College loved it, the Navy engineering groups who do present day refueling HATED IT. It was a threat to their Rice Bowls. So it went nowhere. Most of the other concepts were deleted as cost overruns hit. Some of the concepts were incorporated into Zumwalt. The important thing is that the contractors GOT PAID.

Curiously, the Swedish Navy showed far more interest in automated astern refueling than the US Navy. Oh well. I retire in 147 days. I just don't give a fark anymore.


If you're allowed to say, where did you work? I was at JHUAPL with the Power Projection group and we just didn't know where SC-21 fit in traditional classifications. Heck, we used to have year-long arguments about how the Burke class was really a cruiser.
 
2012-10-23 02:08:35 PM  

zarberg:
If you're allowed to say, where did you work? I was at JHUAPL with the Power Projection group and we just didn't know where SC-21 fit in traditional classifications. Heck, we used to have year-long arguments about how the Burke class was really a cruiser.


Sounds like he is from Dahlgren or Carderrock.
 
2012-10-23 02:08:52 PM  

lantawa: You know, if Obama wouldn't shoot off his piehole saying stupid shiat about horses and bayonets in debates, then even dumber trollerific headlines couldn't be written by unimaginative fanboys.

Just sayin'...... 

If Romney wins this election, which is likely, what the hell are you fanboys an fangirls gonna do? Myself, I can comfortably live with an Obama second term. But you, you boys and girls, I'm shaking my head with deep concern about your mental health should the opposite occur and Governor Romney prevails.

That is all..............................


Same thing we did with bush: protest Romney policies, and watch as the nation burns while conservatives cheer.
 
2012-10-23 02:13:36 PM  

Honest Bender: Honest Bender: Did you stop to consider that maybe it's able to deliver firepower so far inland only when it's right up against the coast? As opposed to hundreds of miles off the coast.


Hundreds of miles off the coast in the Gulf? So, Navy SOP is to beach your ship on the other side of the gulf before opening fire? But wait... isn't the advantage of being a stealth ship completely negated if SOP is to open fire from hundreds of miles away, since you are well below the horizon and thus completely invisible to radar anyways?

Face it, lobbing Tomahawks is lobbying Tomahawks and there's no good reason to go driving right up to the coast to do so.

Rent Party: As a sailor on one of the first carriers to operate in the Gulf, I can state categorically that floating carriers there is a relatively recent phenomenon


Recent as in the 1970s
 
Displayed 50 of 113 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report