Skip to comments.
Analyst: Surface Navy Needs Revamped Payloads for Offensive Warfare
Sea Power Magazine ^
| November 17, 2014
| RICHARD R. BURGESS
Posted on 11/17/2014 6:59:19 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last

Possible Lockheed Martin proposal for the SSC
To: sukhoi-30mki; Jeff Head
2
posted on
11/17/2014 7:04:20 PM PST
by
GeronL
(Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
To: sukhoi-30mki
The 57MM peashooters on the front of the boat are worthless.
3
posted on
11/17/2014 7:32:40 PM PST
by
batterycommander
(...a little more rubble, a lot less trouble.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
There was an article posted yesterday about the US Navy putting a laser system on an amphibious command and control vessel - given the costs involved it seems like a good idea, as long as the thing remains operational during a conflict.
4
posted on
11/17/2014 7:35:26 PM PST
by
Ken522
To: sukhoi-30mki
...the Navy needs a short-term meaning by 2025 adjustment in its weapon payloads and modifications to some ships to enable the fleet to survive cruise missile swarm attacks and be able to take the offensive to achieve sea control. Very telling. This describes when and how the Red Chinese what to engage the US Navy and win.
5
posted on
11/17/2014 7:38:41 PM PST
by
DakotaGator
(Weep for the lost Republic! And keep your powder dry!!)
To: Ken522
...as long as the thing remains operational during a conflict.
Make sure that the WAM doesn't overheat.
6
posted on
11/17/2014 7:40:39 PM PST
by
Army Air Corps
(Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
To: sukhoi-30mki
The US Navy is in need of some serious funding cutbacks. Any military that had enough money to blow on the LCS program has far too much money. Does the USN need more aircraft carriers than the rest of the world... combined? Maybe a tighter purse will have some clarifying effects on spending priorities.
7
posted on
11/17/2014 8:21:02 PM PST
by
jz638
To: sukhoi-30mki; Jeff Head
"Clark also said the only affordable option for the Small Surface Combatant (SSC) program is a modified littoral combat ship (LCS)"
That tells yu all you need to know about this guy.
He knows jack.
Rather, he DOES know...but is being paid by some very rich Defense Contractors.
8
posted on
11/17/2014 8:22:23 PM PST
by
Mariner
(War Criminal #18)
To: sukhoi-30mki
We want mo-betta rockets.
9
posted on
11/17/2014 8:25:13 PM PST
by
smokingfrog
( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
To: All
10
posted on
11/17/2014 8:26:15 PM PST
by
musicman
(Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
To: sukhoi-30mki
11
posted on
11/17/2014 8:54:30 PM PST
by
Taxman
To: Mariner
Little Crappy Ships (LCS). Upgrade the existing CG’s and DDG’s.
12
posted on
11/17/2014 8:56:25 PM PST
by
wjcsux
("In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Clark also said the Navy needs a longer-range anti-submarine weapon than the Vertical-Launch Antisubmarine Rocket, which has a range of only 12 nautical miles.
I worked on a program called Sea Lance in the late 80's. Sea Lance was developed by Boeing to replace ASROC. Sea Lance had significantly more capabilities than Vertical Launch ASROC had. Sea Lance was going to be used in the Los Angeles Class submarines as well as on the CG's and DDG's. Senator John Glenn (RAT-OH) led the charge to kill Sea Lance to protect Goodyear Aerospace (the ASROC contractor) in Akron.
13
posted on
11/17/2014 9:10:55 PM PST
by
wjcsux
("In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell)
To: Taxman

USS Iowa fires a full broadside of nine 16 inch (406 mm) / 50 caliber cannons and six 5 inch (127 mm) / 38 caliber guns
14
posted on
11/18/2014 3:25:10 AM PST
by
PIF
(They came for me and mine ... now it is your turn ...)
To: Mariner
Yeah. When an analysis says nothing but ‘buy more of what is already in the pipeline’ you should see where his paychecks are coming from.
15
posted on
11/18/2014 6:22:59 AM PST
by
TalonDJ
To: PIF
That’s it!
Thanks!
When you really, really need gunfire support, you really, really need a battleship!
16
posted on
11/18/2014 7:49:43 AM PST
by
Taxman
To: Taxman
You are welcome. If you are using Firefox just right click on the image and look for "View image info". This brings up a panel with all the images in a post. Copy the address you want. then

where http:xxx.xxx is the file address you copied to the clipboard pasted between the

. and there you are. Not sure if you did it right? Click Preview. If the image appears then you did it right.
17
posted on
11/18/2014 9:32:35 AM PST
by
PIF
(They came for me and mine ... now it is your turn ...)
To: PIF
Thanks, again. I’ll give it a shot.
18
posted on
11/18/2014 9:43:35 AM PST
by
Taxman
To: PIF
19
posted on
11/18/2014 9:51:03 AM PST
by
Taxman
To: Taxman
You used the tag <a href=” instead of <img src=”
You used the html that designates a link to an image, but not the image itself.
img src causes the image to be “taken” so to speak from wherever it resides on the web and be represented somewhere else.
a href references a particular spot in a page or another site.
You likely tried to drag and drop - that will not work, you actually have to type the html.
20
posted on
11/18/2014 11:33:02 AM PST
by
PIF
(They came for me and mine ... now it is your turn ...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 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