Is the future DDG(X) going to be Cruiser or a Destroyer?

Is the future DDG(X) going to be Cruiser or a Destroyer?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    DDG means guided missile destroyer so that'll probably be a clue.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I like cruisers so I think that’s a clue

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It will be the size of a cruiser but the navy will call it a destroyer so that the congress doesn't kvetch about large procurement numbers.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Or because we will build 20-30 thousand ton cruisers, right? CG(X) can still happen and I won't let facts get in the way of my hopes and dreams

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You now remember the Zumwalt
      'destroyer' is larger than several battleships.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Dimensionally, yes. Less than half the displacement though. Tonnage is what really counts for sizes of ships. It's still frickhuge for a DD.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Tonnage comparisions do slightly fail when half of it is the steel armor which isn't really worth it anymore. Though I still think converting old BB hulls to arsenal ships would world. Sure huge EFPs will cut through it like butter but standard anti-shipping missiles would have a hard time, especially if due to networking other ships can spot for it if its integral sensor suite is disabled.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Steel armor still has its uses: any modern carrier worth its anchors will have enough to resist aircraft collisions, which probably translates to ballistic missiles having a reduced chance of shredding through the vessel's insides like an oversized frag grenade.

            Nobody has really bothered using composites to armor ships the way MBTs are, and don't tell me it would be too expensive when the composite factories are begging the DoD to let them build more tanks than they need to keep their facilities from closing down and rotting like the F-22 lines did.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        So a WW2 "destroyer" would be classed as a Corvette in the modern era? Just on tonnage not role.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          By tonnage, yes. Modern terminology is more complicated (and often nonsensical), however.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Not every navy has even had 'corvettes', dumbass.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        And the Zumwalt's capabilities don't even fit well with the destroyer doctrine, anyway. To get the most mileage out of its stealth, it should had been a cruiser performing cruising missions independent of a larger fleet.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Battleships were much wider to accomodate for the ammo of those huge guns and the crew necessary to operate them

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All US large surface combatants are destroyers. Even the Ticonderogas were originally destroyers, and were only renamed because Congress had a panic over the Soviet "cruiser gap".

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All wrong.
    Drone carrier

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    yesterday's cruiser is today's destroyer

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's officially a destroyer, but it does everything a Cruiser does.

    The biggest difference currently for Burke DDGs vs Tico CCGs is the ticos have room and gear for an admirals' staff and to command a larger flotilla/fleet. The burkes on the other hand are lacking some of the communications/command equipment and aren't setup to accommodate an admiral and their staff.

    The DDG(X) however is replacing both Ticos and Burkes and as such DDG(X) is being designed with space for an admiral and staff, as well as the command/control infrastructure for larger fleet operations.

    So by traditional definitions DDG(X) fits the Cruiser moniker more than the Destroyer one, but in really the USN is moving away from class distinctions and going to the term Large Surface Combatant as an all encompassing term for combat ships over a certain tonnage.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Dumb question, what would stop an admiral from hopping around ships in a surface group to keep the command ship obscure? Assuming he took the proper OPSEC precautions like not using insecure radios, using satellite when available, etc.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Room for his personal staff and the equipment needed to quickly and directly interface with command structures locally and further afield. A lot of smaller ships aren't equipped with the space or computer/networking equipment required to facilitate command/control of a larger fleet. Ticos or an aircraft carrier are the main ships with space and facilities for command. The USN also has a dedicated command ships, USS Blue Ridge, USS Mount Whitney.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Oh, I was asking about DDG(X). Like would they all be set up for flag officers or would only some be? What would go in the unused space on the ones not equipped for flag officers?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Potentially larger medical facility or just basic shit like a rec space.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    anyone called these a ChiCom-deroga yet?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      No, you're the first one ever, congrats.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        thanks habibi

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Are those rectangles behind the turret missile hatches?
    That sounds like a LOT of them

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It has like 112 VLS cells.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It has like 112 VLS cells.

      They are 850mm in diameter, similar to Mk57 VLS

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Not all that similar if you're talking internal cell dimensions.

        Mk41 VLS is 25.12" wide, right around 640mm.
        Mk57 VLS is around 28" wide, right around 710mm.

        That's almost 6" wider, not insignificant.

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