It is hard to believe this monstrosity is real. It looks like something out of the cone head movie. Is there any point in trying to make a huge surface ship more “stealthy”. A submarine obviously could benefit from detection evading technologies, but a huge surface ship??? What a waste of billions and billions of tax payer dollars. The Navy should be ashamed.
I must admit, I felt much the same way as you do.
But I read a book called “Skunkworks” about the development of stealth technology in the mid-late Seventies.
In it, once they figured out the concept for stealth in an aircraft, they realized stealth was completely scale-able.
If they followed the same concepts in the construction of an aircraft carrier or other naval vessel, they could make it nearly as absolutely stealthy as a stealth fighter. Not make it’s radar cross section decrease by the same amount...actually MAKE the RCS the SAME as a stealth fighter! It sounds completely absurd, but that is what Ben Rich (who took over for Kelly Johnson, a legend at the SkunkWorks) explicitly said in his book.
It was shocking to him as well.
There are a lot of things the Navy has to be ashamed of in 2017 (with the collisions and breakdowns in training and leadership) but I wouldn’t put these ships at the top of the list. These are technology platforms, IMO.
And I love beautiful warships.
I tried some photoshop on one, and thought it made it look much more attractive...:)
I did this because I was having a Freeper discussion with one of our British cousins across the pond who was discouraged at the visual unattractiveness and wimpiness of their newer Type-45 vessels, and this cheered him up...so I did it for the Zumwalt which is even homlier (below is the Type-45 which visually looks FAR more warlike in the dazzle scheme):
These are simply for fun, not to be taken seriously, but...they DO look better IMO...:)
Build subs with lots of cruise missiles.