Posted on 02/20/2019 6:54:36 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
Good job!
I think it was President Jelly Jar that axed these ships
So, rail guns aren’t going to sea in the near future - at least with the US Navy.
Update the Fletcher class.
What did he axe them?
So, it's not totally helpless....
>>>>So, rail guns aren’t going to sea in the near future - at least with the US Navy.<<<<<
They might. The gun that was axed was not a rail gun. While this ship was being built, it was thought the rail gun tech would be realized in time to use it on this ship. That is why this class produces so much electricity. However when the rail gun wasn’t ready a special gun was installed to use a type of ammo that had a rocket assist. The range iirc was bout 100 miles with fins and stuff and guidance to make it hit coordinates precisely. The only problem was that the ammo was so darn expensive. This is in contrast to the rail gun. Where the ammo is dirt cheap. So the ship was a fail. It was supposed to be expensive to build, but cheap to fight/train with. Now it was also expensive to fight/train with too.
I watched them test the 30mm guns on TV. One of them failed (needed a replacement part for the mount). The other one was dead on.
What members of Congress supported this boondoggle?
Congress gearing up to fight WWII again.
Another gubment blunderfest. Does anyone ever get punished enough to make others pay more attention to their work? It can’t all be blamed on the capriciousness of politicians and appropriations.
They damn well better focus on the stealth. Because if someone knows they are there they sure as hell can’t shoot their way out if it.
Besides, these days with women drivers crashing them into tankers, instead of stealth they really need radar reflectors, a rotating beacon and a dayglow orange paint job.
Why not just use rockets or missiles even?
Making a gun do what a rocket or missile does seems completely unnecessary.
Where are the battleships? The carriers? Oh, never mind, we still build those floating targets while China builds carrier "islands".
——prove itself to be hugely capable ——
capable of what? what purpose will the vessel serve?
“Yes, but these go up 11..”
Yes, it’s a rocket, but now we fire it from a cannon...
Saw one of these at the Bath Iron Works in Maine. Funky looking.
When they cut the class back to only three ships, all the development costs for the ships and every weapon of feature specific to that limited use also had to pay for itself in the small number produced.
The ship had been envisioned to replace the usage of large battleships in Sea to Land artillery and missile fire. A littoral ship.
Wiki does a nice summary saying:
The ship is designed around its two Advanced Gun Systems, their turrets and magazines, and unique Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) ammunition.[9] LRLAP procurement was cancelled, rendering the guns unusable,[9] so the Navy is re-purposing the ships for surface warfare.[12]
The special ammunition ran up to 800k per shell since only three ships could have used them and the Navy scraped the whole deal since they aren’t thrilled with the handling and other features.
Can we say “gunboat”? A very expensive one.
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.