CGX delayed for 10 years

Oh great...

Guess only hope now is that the Japs build their Super Yamato for us.

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I mean DDG (X) of course, the CG project is long does in the water ofc

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Wasn't the DDGX no even going to enter service till the 2030s anyway? Assuming best case scenario with no delays or fuckups?

    Also I don't really care. Burke's are based and I want new cruisers instead.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it was going to be awarded in ~2024/5, laid down in ~2028-30, and launched in the early 2030s with comissioning by the late 2030s.

      Now it'll probably commission in the early 2040s at the earliest.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It would make too much sense for us to continue building Burkes while prioritizing a new cruiser.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    that's from Carl Zha, isn't it.
    I, too, enjoy his bants.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Impressive.

    With this most recent achievement, fate has, in a single stroke, marked the decline of the west and spelled a new era of wondrous prosperity and peaceful global dominance for the Chinese dragon, which promises to firmly stand in sharp contrast to the historically bloody ascent of western powers and the cruel subjugation it brought to the humbler nations of the world. The blessings of Chinese plasma stealth technology, undetectable hypersonic combat vehicles, quantum direct-current electricity, neutrino submarine detectors, gamma titanium mono crystal turbines, quantum aircraft carriers, unmanned autonomous A.I. tanks, near-space ballistic air-to-air missiles, super light tanks, +2km range airburst rifles, quantum enhanced railguns, 5G Remote Surgery, magnetized plasma cannons, and quantum superalloy drones will be the instruments with which China affirms its noble stewardship of 21st century world politics and offers the non-western world a different option; an humanist alternative to the depredations of Western leadership and the opportunity for a more equitable and dignified multilateralism.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Unironically

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Any announcement about delays beyond 6-8 years means it’s not happening.
    It’s even a joke in the industry.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why would they want to?All chinese ships are build so cheap that they are utter garbage.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Well, who knows, even if they aren’t that great they seem to be able to get them seaworthy within 4 years after the project start.
      Meanwhile maintenance is becoming a large problem

      Most western commercial ships are built in Asia and especially China on top of it. So at least most companies seem to believe into at least decent Chinese quality with regards to ship building.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yeah, and I'm sure they build cheap plastic junk in china because it's "decent quality" too

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I know, but the difference is one is for consumers (meaning people without much power in the market especially against supply side oligopolies) and the other one is for industry costumers. Often demand side oligopolies.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Your country stereotypes are at least 15 years out of date.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not him.
            I‘m not sure about that. I don’t believe Chinese quality to be that great. It’s somewhat decent however. It’s in ascendency relatively speaking, since the west is in decline. Importing „specialist“ from the third and second world.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Importing „specialist“ from the third and second world.
              You mean siphoning talent from the entire world?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >t. a fucking retard

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        t. elliot rodger

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You know you’re retarded, right?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you know you're a hapa. I don't have to ask, go marry a chinese girl

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              wrong and wrong, bitch.
              like I said, you're retarded.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    10 years delay? What? If anything, it's 2 years delay. And as said by CNO, it's not a technical problem but it's because they want to refine the ship.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They literally just started designing it.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They've been doing preliminary design shit since at least ~2020/21. They contracted a design firm to help out, but the navy is retaining primary design oversight instead of using an outside contracted firm (like they normally do).

        Since it's being done mostly internally by the navy, it's hard to say how fast/slow the process will be.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It would be more accurate to state that they want to refine the requirements. In short, the USN doesn't actually know what it wants in a warship--and hasn't been able to answer that question since the Cold War ended.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They literally just started designing it.

      AMDR started like over a decade ago.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That's for Flight 3 Burke, not the DDG(X)

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How about we dominate air rather then the fucking sea with the world's largest commercial ship builder ? And we the world's largest commercial aircraft producer dominate the air

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    kind of gay DDG(X) is being canned and not FFG(X) which are shittier and worse than Burkes in every way,
    now we're not only diverting money that could be used to add 10+ new Burkes for ships that will retire within 15 years ala LCS, we're also pushing back the replacement that will inevitably be congress realizing that Zumwalts were the future all along and they screwed the pooch by cucking the program over petty political shit
    >hurr we need more tiny hulls that use tons of sailors just to keep them running, lets buy European and build LCS
    >wait fuck we're having problems staffing every hull and recruitment is going down
    (crew-wise Burkes need ~280, LCS need fucking 100 to operate despite being 1/5th the size of a destroyer, Constellations will need about 200, Zumwalts need only ~135)
    I hate the Navy so goddamn much

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The first ffg(x) boat was laid down back in August. ddg(x) wasn't going to be laid down for at least another 3-5 years as it was.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Zumwalts were the future all along!

      Imagine still being a Zumwalt fanboy in The Year of the Rabbit 2023.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It still holds a place in my heart for being the third best part of the Ghost Fleet novel.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/EG2wcMt.jpg

          >Zumwalts were the future all along!

          Imagine still being a Zumwalt fanboy in The Year of the Rabbit 2023.

          >Zumwalts
          It's role is shores bombardment, not meant to fight other large ship; it would get raped by Burke or 055

          >ywn get to sink a Chinese carrier with a railgun

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            China will have naval realgun before the US at this point

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Well yeah, we stopped all development of our naval railgun.

              in FY22 the navy asked for $0 in funding, the house armed services committee FORCED them to take $10M for it, and I don't think it got anything in FY23.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              They will find out they were useless just like the USA did then.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        t. retard

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I still like them. Three ships wont be a decisive class but making them stealthy ship-killers with enlarged VLS is something. Still think the next cruiser should be on that style of hull with an 8in rapid fire gun.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They're adding the hypersonic missiles that the Columbia-class and Block V Virginia-class subs will be fielding as well.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I still like them. Three ships wont be a decisive class but making them stealthy ship-killers with enlarged VLS is something. Still think the next cruiser should be on that style of hull with an 8in rapid fire gun.

            since the main guns don't have any ammo anyway, might as well throw in some neat new missiles.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Once again PrepHole doesn't know shit about ships.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Fuck you, I like how it looks.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Zumwalts
      It's role is shores bombardment, not meant to fight other large ship; it would get raped by Burke or 055

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    To be fair, destroyers are little more than holdovers from the battleship age. That material is better spent on more submarines.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Burke's are still plenty good and the Constellations will be built in the coming years, that in addition to allied naval buildup keeps the US & friends ahead of any foes.
    There's still a lot to decide on for the design of the next destroyer. And if the trend continues, they're going to be pretty much be cruisers with a lot of VLS (perhaps using the perimeter arrangement of the Zumwalt) and I hope it has a working gun.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. And China is still only on its 7th cruiser. Burger Pacific dominance remains unchallenged.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >perhaps using the perimeter arrangement of the Zumwalt
      Possible, but unlikely. They've never really taken advantage of the larger VLS cells of the zumwalt. Even thin they're larger and capable of containing ~50% more rocket exhaust than the MK41 VLS modules, none of the VLS-designed missiles to date take advantage of that extra space/exhaust capacity.

      They also cost a lot more for the ONLY benefit of mounting them in the perimeter of the ship.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Even thin
        Even though

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The PVLS on the Zumwalt also uses a steel alloy that's incredibly difficult and expensive to work with. This is one of the major factors that led to the Zumwalt's program cancelation.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Somehow I'm not worried about the peole who took 'screen door on a submarine' as a piece of advice.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hmmm... one destroyer or 1000 modern tanks.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      retard who you think this destoyer is meant to destroy, you dont just transport 1000 tanks there

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        > Muh American ship can destroy an entire Chinese SAG all by himself. Brrrrap! Pow! Pow!

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Destroyer, duh. Tanks are mid these days and we already have enough if 'em.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *