I want this but with 240 VLS cells two 90mm rail guns and nuclear reactor

I want this but with 240 VLS cells two 90mm rail guns and nuclear reactor

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    That's KINDA what japan wants to do, but probably sans nuclear reactor.

    They want a ~180-220 VLS cell destroyer, and they want to develop a small caliber rail gun for CIWS and HGV/HCM/BMD intercepts that presumably would be fitted to their large VLS cell destroyer if they can get it to fit with the power generation capabilities they have installed. But the railgun idea is likely a mid-life upgrade, not something they'll have ready anytime soon.

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    why not just build a arsenal ship?
    slap the biggest sensors and radar on 2 or 3 ships per fleet that has 10-20 arsenal ships

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think the principle of putting all your eggs in one basket comes into play.

      The more expensive longer range ballistic missile interceptors are too expensive to really stock an arsenal ship and if you did it would represent the VAST majority of your ballistic missile interceptors all in one place.

      If we had 1000s and 1000s of SM-3 and SM-6s sitting around, sure, but at the moment we procure ~50-60 SM-3's a year (and only about 10 are SM-3 IIA), and around 125 SM-6's a year.

      It's simply not enough production, we can barely fill the missile tubes of the deployed DDGs as it is, let alone some theoretical arsenal ship with potentially hundreds of interceptors.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Sadly, The production scale is going to need to be addressed regardless of creating a ship designed for missile spam. The war in Ukraine exposed this fact. Get rekt neolib GWOT era peacenicks.
        Food for thought, imagine how fricked Ukraine would be right now if Bernie sanders had won in 2016 and completely dismantled military procurement.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >we can barely fill the missile tubes of the deployed DDGs as it is
        .. in war you're supposed to have multiple cargo ships doing nothing but carrying you fresh reloads of missiles

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          It's not a question of logistics and transporting missiles, right now it's a question of manufacturing enough missiles.
          Production problem as opposed to logistical problem.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          You don't know how VLS cells work, you can't "reload" at sea, to replace the cells requires an overhead crane system and they played around with having a crane installed on the ship to do it at-sea, but it was deemed to complicated and difficult so it was scraped and they just do it all when they're in port now.

          So yeah, the US VLS cells lack any capability of at-sea reloading.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            so.. build a sea tender with crane?

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Like I said, it has been talked about, but it's just not particularly safe due to the movement of the ships, even normal movement of palletized materiel from one ship to another can be dangerous, let alone 25-foot long missiles that have to be hoisted above the deck by crane and lowered into place.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      In keeping with distributed assets.
      Since those things would be massive targets, it might make more sense to have smaller unarmored LCS sized drone ships with a similar flattop that houses maybe 30/40 VLS. Have them operate with destroyer support, akin to a carrier group, and to keep costs even more low, it just slaves off of all the networked destroyers sensor arrays, something the Air Force is essentially doing with its new net centric warfare anyway.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why not build those as floating, smaller, mostly autonomous designs that can be remotely controlled?
      >Loyal Wingman Naval Edition

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        LUSVs baby

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          P R O L I F E R A T E

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      sovlless

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    You want a type 055B then?

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >this but with 240 VLS cells
    where are we supposed to fit the cells? is it going to tow a floating pod?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      The US's DDG(X) just uses a middle insert section that fits more VLS cells, theoretically you could make a DDG(X) with hundreds of VLS cells if you added enough DPMs (destroyer payload modules).

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Try CSGN or Kirov

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

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