Jura The idiot
General
well there's a certain aviation project which cost incomparably more
US Navy DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class
- Thread starter Scratch
- Start date
Do tell Do tell
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Oh yes because the Burke is not having all kinds of issues. The Problem with the Burke is it has inherent limitations of the time it was designed. It has limitations of Electrical performance And issues of future systems integration.
Jura The idiot
General
one may ask yourself a question if
"$22.5 billion program cost"
is worth it, or if one would prefer "more/newer Burkes" from the post you quoted
me? I'm somewhere in the middle: Jan 7, 2018
now the two Burkes clog the BIW At Bath, a destroyer’s keel is laid more than a year behind schedule
May 16
and their (of 1001 and 1002) "mission" is unclear to me because of:
the pathetic situation with the main gun,
nonexistent larger missiles for not-sure-if-even-existing-VLS
(Source ; Raytheon Co. ; issued Aug. 25, 2003
and issues which only the Pentagon knows about LOL
to sum up, the word is M-I-S-M-A-N-A-G-E-M-E-N-T
kwaigonegin
Colonel
you know what I mean dude. Perhaps I should've said diamonds and emeralds instead
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
and had the ship program been allowed to properly evolve beyond 3 units the end unit price would have stabilized.
A product of the canceling of the ammo type because of the penny wise pound foolish approach taken.
I agree on this. A gun without ammo is useless. So the Navy needs to get it's act together on ammo. There are emerging options for ammo for the AGS, either piggybacking off the Army long range artillery program or pushing for the rail gun. The army long range fires seems like the nearer term option.
It doesn't need new larger missiles yet the MK57 VLS is backwards compatible with existing inventory. IE missiles from the current Burke can be loaded in the MK57.
not even it seems. Some of the Admirals are not aware of the backwards compatibility. Raytheon had to point it out well debunking a report to Congress.
I agree on this but likely my reasoning is different from yours.
1) Congress made a mistake in killing production.
2) the Navy should have developed an alternative for either the AGS as a whole or the ammo.
3) The Program leadership on the Navy side seems totally out of contact in regards to the mission and system capabilities of the class.
4) in lack of management for the above the Media has blitzed the class much as it has every other new US project making it seem worse.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Industrial diamonds and emeralds....you know what I mean dude. Perhaps I should've said diamonds and emeralds instead
Jura The idiot
General
I'll pick this up:
(in which incremental improvements are made to a preceding class of warships);
but in reality since early 2000s basically the opposite was going on, which is 'transformational' projects were funded
(the more fancy stuff promised, the better ... that fancy stuff of course nonexistent at the time those projects commenced);
(it's related to but LOL! I'm not here to blame Don Rumsfeld)
at some point even the Pentagon should've realized this was a way not just to huge delays and cost overruns, but to actually loosing the naval power,
I mean instead of having now an evolved OHP, a Burke FIII in the water, they have LCSs and Zumwalts projects ... drifting
(plus I think the Fords are a mistake, and they should've kept building the Nimitzes)
but yeah, the USN has even more urgent issues like readiness, shipyards ... at the time it says it goes for higher numbers
in multiple posts over the years I think I've made it clear I wished the USN had adopted an evolutionary approach
(in which incremental improvements are made to a preceding class of warships);
but in reality since early 2000s basically the opposite was going on, which is 'transformational' projects were funded
(the more fancy stuff promised, the better ... that fancy stuff of course nonexistent at the time those projects commenced);
(it's related to but LOL! I'm not here to blame Don Rumsfeld)
at some point even the Pentagon should've realized this was a way not just to huge delays and cost overruns, but to actually loosing the naval power,
I mean instead of having now an evolved OHP, a Burke FIII in the water, they have LCSs and Zumwalts projects ... drifting
(plus I think the Fords are a mistake, and they should've kept building the Nimitzes)
but yeah, the USN has even more urgent issues like readiness, shipyards ... at the time it says it goes for higher numbers
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
And they do used it, Flight 1, Flight 2, Flight 2 long hull and now Flight 3 of the Burke but eventually you reach a point where the existing hull for a Ship or other platform just cannot grow anymore.
Again they have each ship in the class is in fact an improvement over the last but there is a limit. Nimitz class has at least 2 types in it's line that could be called sub classes. The Nimitz CVN 78-CVN70 The Theodore Roosevelt CVN71-75 and the Ronald Reagan CVN 76 and CVN77 but the changes made to the class and growth potential maxed out leading to the Ford. And for the record Ford is a Evolved Nimitz in many ways.
Nope. The Ford and Zimwalt class can trace there development histories back to studies and programs Pre 2000 it's only the actual construction and full green light post 2000
How long can you actually keep a system relevant? Is the Question.
OHP had alot of issues in its design and service life. most are just forgotten as they were solved along the way. yet Can you actually get the class to remain relevant compared to other modern vehicles? An Evolved OHP is about as much wishful thinking as Game changers.
I put it this way Could a T72 tank hope to stand a chance against an M1A2SEP2? No of course not. Yet once upon a Time People criticized the M1 as a pipe dream a "Game Changer" some people still do.
Jura The idiot
General
for me it's funny how you reacted to some of my points:
"(the more fancy stuff promised, the better ... that fancy stuff of course nonexistent at the time those projects commenced);" plus the reference to Rumsfeld era
off 50 minutes ago
and here:
"first of the Flight III variants"
Commissioned: 2023 (Expected)
I leave the rest to our Readers
conveniently LOL leaving out
"(the more fancy stuff promised, the better ... that fancy stuff of course nonexistent at the time those projects commenced);" plus the reference to Rumsfeld era
off 50 minutes ago
and here:
leaving out "a Burke FIII in the water" right after the chunk you quoted, while
"first of the Flight III variants"
Commissioned: 2023 (Expected)
I leave the rest to our Readers