Cool pic. Sharp looking craft there.
The article says it is intersecting "the most powerful surface ship in the world." Isn't that the GHW Bush?
Just a quibble. Such a craft as the Daring probably doesn't fit into the Naval profile of the USA.
But cool is cool...
Pretty cool looking!
China is building a powerful navy, and I do worry about that — but the operational skill of controlling a carrier group takes years to develop. The US can do things no other nation can do, no matter how many ships the other nation may have.
Would someone enlighten me on how you can designate a ship as a “Destroyer” and it has only a single small caliber gun shown. What is it going to destroy?
No torpedos are shown. I presume there are some misiles - surface to surface, surface to air - but what abot surface to undersea? That tower makes for a handy target, visually and on radar.
This seems to be the old missiles vs. guns argument of the 1960s for aircraft. I thought that was settled in favor of guns when the F4H Phantom had to be equipped with a gun pod/internal gun.
ping
Click on pic for past Navair pings. Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist. The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation. This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
Could someone explain the circumstances/reasons wherein a CIC other than aboard the carrier would be controlling flight ops? I assume that if the carrier was damaged, if flight ops were out of commission, that control could flow to another ship in the battle group, as all are connected via data links, and in theory any one could then direct the battle. I know it makes good sense to train for any possibility in combat, but wouldn't the Hawkeye assume control of the air battle first.
I'd appreciate any insight anyone could provide, and/or any links that might explain this is greater detail.
Ping
The UK dropped out midway through preferring to do their own version of a number of the battle management and sensors, which the French and Italians moved on. Basically, the UK uses the Sampson system while the French and Italians use the Thales system.
Originally the UK was going to buil like 24 of these...then 18, then 12, and now they ended up with six.
This type of vessel does fit very well into the US Battle Plan and order of battle. They are basically like our AEGIS destroyers...but have fewer missiles. They have a newer 3-D radar and battle management...and there is a lot of debate on which is "best." I believe AEGIS because of the upgrades and the many, many years of experience we have with it, is probably the best, but the Daribng class Aster missiles, Sampson System, and PAAMS sensors are very, very good.
I just wish they had built at least 12 of them.
By the way, the Italians and French ultimately built two each of their Horizon destroyers which are very similar in looks and capability. Bopth those nations, like the UK are now building their modern frigates which will basically be miniature versions of these vessels and they will build those in much larger numbers because they are cheaper.
You can see each type of the larger destroyers and a full explanation and specification on them at my:
Here are som pics:
We have built approaching 65 Burke class destroyers and also have 22 AEGIS class cruisers, a total of 87 vessels.
In the whole world, a total of five other nations have built a total of 19 AEGIS vessels, five different nations have built a total of 23 AEGIS-like vessels. So the US has 87 Aegis vessels, and the whole world has 42 AEIGIS or AEGIS-like vessels. Pretty telling.
One of the big issues with the Daring class, is that due to the mismangagement by their liberal politicians, the class has been luanched and put into service without their onboard ASW weapons (outside of the helo), and without their principle Anti-surface Warfare (ASuW) missiles. Basically they have their helo, their main gun and the anit-air defenses...those last being their principle purpose. But it is still sad that the Royla Navy had to send these vessels to sea wothout their full self-defense and attack capabilities.
They are experiencing similar debacles with their new carriers, the Queen Elizabeth Class