Skip to comments.
Colossal Stealth Destroyer USS Zumwalt Ready to Set Sail and Join the Navy
Associated Press ^
| Sep 7, 2016
Posted on 09/07/2016 8:18:01 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Edited on 09/07/2016 9:32:11 AM PDT by Admin Moderator.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next last
To: sukhoi-30mki
Captain James Kirk! Love it.
2
posted on
09/07/2016 8:23:29 AM PDT
by
Zarro
(Tune OUT the MSM. The enemy of our republic.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
3
posted on
09/07/2016 8:24:07 AM PDT
by
Stosh
To: Zarro
Is it on it’s 5 year mission ?
To: sukhoi-30mki
They call it a destroyer bit it is actually significantly bigger than a Ticonderoga class cruiser.
5
posted on
09/07/2016 8:25:37 AM PDT
by
TalonDJ
To: sukhoi-30mki
I wonder how at 15 tonnes the ship was designated as a destroyer. The Zumwalt is 50% heavier than the Ticonderoga class cruiser.
6
posted on
09/07/2016 8:25:56 AM PDT
by
C19fan
To: sukhoi-30mki
This seems to be of the early pre-WWI dreadnaughts prone to problems with respect to control in high s
seas. I'm guessing is has a similar computer controlled navigation system quaternary CC control of he ailerons on he B-2
7
posted on
09/07/2016 8:27:38 AM PDT
by
Gaffer
To: Blue Jays
I am comforted knowing Captain James Kirk is confidently at the helm of the new ship.
As long as he is minding the USS Zumwalt and not out cavorting with attractive green aliens with funny ears.
8
posted on
09/07/2016 8:28:50 AM PDT
by
Blue Jays
To: Zarro
Is the chief engineer Scotty?
9
posted on
09/07/2016 8:29:29 AM PDT
by
Former Proud Canadian
(Gold and Silver are real money. Everything else is a derivative)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Captain James Kirk? Shut the front door.
To: C19fan
“Battleship” is a hard sell, politically. No one builds battleships anymore!
The Zumwalt is, in fact, basically a pocket battleship. It is multi-role, but land attack is a major focus. Imagine the USS New Jersey standing offshore from Lebanon in 1983 pounding the hills around Beirut. That’s pretty much what the Zumwalt would do.
And, of course, the railgun (which I don’t think is installed yet) would add to the capability.
Destroyers are not normally for “power projection” but I think the Zumwalt is.
11
posted on
09/07/2016 8:29:58 AM PDT
by
ClearCase_guy
(Abortion is what slavery was: immoral but not illegal. Not yet.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
U.S. Navy once headed to sea in a snowstorm during builder trials. Now, it's heading into the remnants of a tropical storm as it leaves Maine for goodYeah, because the bad guys call a timeout for snow, and/or rain.
Neat Technology. A 10,000 ton destroyer is pretty big, though.
12
posted on
09/07/2016 8:30:54 AM PDT
by
wbill
To: wbill
On radar it looks like a simple fishing boat. Nothing remarkable.
13
posted on
09/07/2016 8:33:52 AM PDT
by
ClearCase_guy
(Abortion is what slavery was: immoral but not illegal. Not yet.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Interesting that reverse angle on the bow. Seems like it would have much less resistance, as it would cut waves in two, whereas with the conventional bow, the waves smash into the hull and deck.
14
posted on
09/07/2016 8:34:17 AM PDT
by
Rennes Templar
(President Trump: It's all over but the counting)
To: Blue Jays
cavorting with attractive green aliens with funny ears. Kirk, cavorting in the new, "Askable/Tellable" Navy:
Personally, I preferred the old one:
15
posted on
09/07/2016 8:40:56 AM PDT
by
FredZarguna
(And what Rough Beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Fifth Avenue to be born?)
To: FredZarguna
The Jolly Green Giant’s favorite centerfold.
16
posted on
09/07/2016 9:07:13 AM PDT
by
elcid1970
("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam. Buy ammo.")
To: TalonDJ
Yes.
“Destroyer” is a general utility term these days meaning something like:
“Heavily armed non-aviation surface combatant of variable tonnage.”
17
posted on
09/07/2016 9:10:34 AM PDT
by
Captain Rhino
(Determined effort today forges tomorrow)
To: TalonDJ
The Ticonderoga class cruisers were built on the hull of Adams class destroyers and Ticonderoga was supposed to be the DDG-77 (vice CG-47). I have a booklet from pre-christening that calls it that, in fact. However congress thought it cost to much for a mere destroyer so the Navy said “Destroyer? Who said destroyer? It’s a ... a ... cruiser! yeah, that’s the ticket” and congress paid up.
To: sukhoi-30mki
Looks so tall and narrow... like a good-sized wave will knock it over.
19
posted on
09/07/2016 9:26:35 AM PDT
by
Carriage Hill
( Peace is that brief glorious moment in history, when everybody stands around reloading.)
To: ClearCase_guy
“On radar it looks like a simple fishing boat. Nothing remarkable.”
What will it look like to 7 small Iranian speed boats zipping past it at 100 yards?
20
posted on
09/07/2016 9:34:47 AM PDT
by
EQAndyBuzz
(It appears as if Trump is our Yeltsin.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson