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.

(Defense News)   Cool timelapse video of the construction of the USS Zumwalt, a stealth-technology 610-foot long destroyer expected to be delivered to the US Navy in 2014   (blogs.defensenews.com) divider line 28
    More: Cool, General Dynamics, structures  
•       •       •

5265 clicks; posted to Video » on 24 Dec 2012 at 4:37 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2012-12-24 11:25:55 AM
How much is that marvel going to cost us?
 
2012-12-24 11:59:27 AM
Interesting that they've gone back to a ram bow that hasn't been seen in over 100 years, presumably for stealth reasons. It's definitely going to be taking lots of green water over the bow.
 
2012-12-24 12:29:47 PM

NewportBarGuy: How much is that marvel going to cost us?


The unit price is in the billions, though I can't remember the exact number.

Not quite as much of a useless pork-fest as the LCS, but close.
 
2012-12-24 03:11:13 PM

kmmontandon: NewportBarGuy: How much is that marvel going to cost us?

The unit price is in the billions, though I can't remember the exact number.

Not quite as much of a useless pork-fest as the LCS, but close.


$3.45 billion. $1.8 billion for the LCS.
 
2012-12-24 04:09:04 PM
How come I know about this?
 
2012-12-24 04:15:19 PM
This seems stealthy.

vossiewulf: Interesting that they've gone back to a ram bow that hasn't been seen in over 100 years, presumably for stealth reasons. It's definitely going to be taking lots of green water over the bow.


Strange a prominent bow is being used when the stealth bomber was intentionally designed with as many rounded surfaces as possible because it was much stealthier that way.
 
2012-12-24 05:04:58 PM
m5.paperblog.com
 
2012-12-24 05:10:00 PM
I'm of 2 minds on things like this.

1. Awe that we can build things to that scale and complexity.
2. Confusion as to why we are building it. Seems that we could use our abilities to build something more useful in the modern world.
 
2012-12-24 05:26:25 PM

Virtual Pariah: I'm of 2 minds on things like this.

1. Awe that we can build things to that scale and complexity.
2. Confusion as to why we are building it. Seems that we could use our abilities to build something more useful in the modern world.


Really awesome was the way Liberty Ships were completed in 42 days during WW2
During the war, a Liberty Ship could be built in a about two weeks at a Kaiser yard.
Interesting read
Link
 
2012-12-24 05:40:00 PM

Virtual Pariah: I'm of 2 minds on things like this.

1. Awe that we can build things to that scale and complexity.
2. Confusion as to why we are building it. Seems that we could use our abilities to build something more useful in the modern world.


2. Answer: Pork Barrel politics from congress critters who will benefit in some way or other.
 
2012-12-24 05:51:34 PM

vossiewulf: Interesting that they've gone back to a ram bow that hasn't been seen in over 100 years, presumably for stealth reasons. It's definitely going to be taking lots of green water over the bow.


I think it's going to be part submarine. I wonder what it wil be like to conduct flight ops from that thing.
 
2012-12-24 05:54:19 PM

GAT_00: This seems stealthy.

vossiewulf: Interesting that they've gone back to a ram bow that hasn't been seen in over 100 years, presumably for stealth reasons. It's definitely going to be taking lots of green water over the bow.

Strange a prominent bow is being used when the stealth bomber was intentionally designed with as many rounded surfaces as possible because it was much stealthier that way.


You actually don't want a ship to be too stealthy, or it produces less of a radar return than the water around it, and the enemy can see a ship-shaped "hole in the ocean" on radar.
 
2012-12-24 06:09:29 PM

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: GAT_00: This seems stealthy.

vossiewulf: Interesting that they've gone back to a ram bow that hasn't been seen in over 100 years, presumably for stealth reasons. It's definitely going to be taking lots of green water over the bow.

Strange a prominent bow is being used when the stealth bomber was intentionally designed with as many rounded surfaces as possible because it was much stealthier that way.

You actually don't want a ship to be too stealthy, or it produces less of a radar return than the water around it, and the enemy can see a ship-shaped "hole in the ocean" on radar.


Agreed, you want it to look more like some normal variation in wave action on radar.
 
2012-12-24 06:09:43 PM
Not often that one comes across an article using the term 'tumblehome'.
Even stranger to see a ship exhibiting the characteristic.
 
2012-12-24 06:21:21 PM
I tumbled home last night.
 
2012-12-24 06:27:58 PM
Kind of reminds me of this...
 
2012-12-24 06:29:17 PM
this... now with picture goodness.

www.maritimequest.com
 
2012-12-24 06:31:54 PM
We've analyzed their attack, sir, and there is a danger.
Should I have your ship standing by?

Evacuate? In out moment of triumph? I think you overestimate
their chances!
 
2012-12-24 06:49:44 PM

Old_Chief_Scott: I wonder what it wil be like to conduct flight ops from that thing.


Scuba gear mandatory for all personnel.
 
2012-12-24 07:40:16 PM
Wasted money on something that has nothing to do with todays political landscape. An unmanned drone, satellites and intelligence are pretty much all that is needed. We see the futility of boots on the ground in the middle east against enemies that have no air or sea power. The countries that do have such power are too reliant on each other economically to fight. Cool ship though. Too bad it has no use.
 
2012-12-24 07:51:50 PM

mrbach: Wasted money on something that has nothing to do with todays political landscape. An unmanned drone, satellites and intelligence are pretty much all that is needed. We see the futility of boots on the ground in the middle east against enemies that have no air or sea power. The countries that do have such power are too reliant on each other economically to fight. Cool ship though. Too bad it has no use.


It'll make the upper management of our absurdly narrowed defense contractor market extremely richer, and that's what really matters.

I mean, there's absolutely no correlation between over the top defense spending, and the fact that there are only four defense contractors left. None. At all. Just shut up about it already, terrorist lover.
 
2012-12-24 07:55:10 PM
mrbach:
An unmanned drone, satellites and intelligence are pretty much all that is needed.

That is... not very true.

Drones and the like are very useful, but they're completely useless with some way to project actual military force in places too far away to cover with drones (or who have intelligence services that are a bit too good, so satellites and "humint" are pretty useless too for many cases).
 
2012-12-24 08:44:13 PM

NewportBarGuy: How much is that marvel going to cost us?


...you're not supposed to ask that about things Republicans support.
 
2012-12-24 09:11:19 PM
Not sure the framerate, but it looked like there was a 4 hour casual chat going on in a few places while the work was being done.

/never had a job like that
//never been a government worker
\\\wonder if there's a connection?
 
2012-12-25 12:07:09 AM
Fail boat is fail. A billion dollar destroyer designed to operate in shallow water. Yeah...that's smart. Very susceptible to suicide boat attacks or cruise missile attacks. Good thing we aren't building more than 3 of these things.
 
2012-12-25 02:26:15 AM
tillerman35

We've analyzed their attack, sir, and there is a danger.
Should I have your ship standing by?

Evacuate? In out moment of triumph? I think you overestimate
their chances!


We'll have to destroy them ship-to-ship.
Spock, you and Scotty and meet me in the shuttle bay.
 
2012-12-25 05:40:12 AM
I, for one, am glad that the Cold War ended so that we don't have to spend money on--

Oh, wait.

/terrorism hoax
 
2012-12-26 12:55:01 AM

tillerman35: We've analyzed their attack, sir, and there is a danger.
Should I have your ship standing by?

Evacuate? In out moment of triumph?


If one evacuates during an in-out moment of triumph, one will probably never be asked to do the in-out again.
 
Displayed 28 of 28 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report