How long would this thing last from a land based anti-ship missile?
I imagine a helicopter on the stern would hurt it’s stealthiness.
Already posted here with a different headline. Interestingly enough, both links still head to the respective headlines.
The U.S. Navy’s Stealthy Zumwalt Class Destoyer: Americas New ‘Pocket’ Battleships?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3573255/posts
Ah.I see the problem. You didn’t link to the named source, but rather to someone’s blog “scout.com military warrior”
With appropriate comments on the author’s “Iowa class destroyers”
The writer proves he’s an idiot at either link - or the various editors are trying successfully to make him look like one.
Does it have any small weapons to ward off say, Iranian speedboats?
Fixing these is as impractical as fixing Obamacare. Littoral ships just haven’t worked out.
Or we could make a school of limpet mines with silicone suckers and tiny cameras that can swim like a cuttlefish until they find hulls to stick to ...and guide the school into targets from a remote location...
Huh?
What happened with the railgun system that used solid shot projectiles (extremely cheap) and had ranges in the hundreds of miles?
Don’t need 155 mm howitzers with RAP rounds on ships, we have M109s that carry out that mission just fine.
“new role of stealthy ship killer”... Uhhh you mean a submarine? I much rather take on a Chinese battle group in and old Los Angeles class than in that overpriced tin target.
Tiny radar signatures is a poor strategy when the enemy has satellite coverage. Looks like a fishing boat on radar but like crap piled high and deep in visible spectrum and IR.
Send it an anti ship missile, it has no surface support.
Next...
When the ship you custom designed for a specific job fails, repurpose it to a job it was never designed to do?!
Stupid x 2
“the retirement of the Iowa-class destroyers”
Iowa class destroyers?