Zumwalt Destroyer

could this thing take on china's entire navy and get away with it? why doesn't it fly?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No, it has no ammo.

    In 2025 Zumwalt will replace the guns with new missiles, but we're still a few years away from that.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      so this thing is basically like a mobile stealthily cruise missile launcher? isnt that what we use our ohio class subs for, or at least some of them.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yes, pretty much.

        Just a stealthy missile tug

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Zumwalt also has a pretty good radar and is probably our most survivable air warfare ship. It's a stealthy missile boat with the sonar signature of a diesel sub, drones, and a big-ass AESA.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Raytheon
      a
      y
      t
      h
      e
      o
      n

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Get a load of this gay.
      He seems to think we're a few years from 2025.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    did they fix the hull fractures?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Independence-class LCS ships have hull cracks, and Freedom-class LCS ships have transmission issues.

      Zumwalt is fine structurally and mechanically, but they don't have ammo for the 155mm AGS canons, but they're being replaced with hypersonic glide missiles

      https://i.imgur.com/JZ9x5dD.jpg

      No, it has no ammo.

      In 2025 Zumwalt will replace the guns with new missiles, but we're still a few years away from that.

      after 2025.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I'm still butthurt that railguns got scrapped

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Railgun was always a pipedream.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Congress has been and continues to be retarded when it comes to procurement.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            How so?

            I think last year navy asked for $0 in railgun funding, but congress forced them to take $10M even though they didn't want it.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >you have to eat ALL the railgun funding

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Pretty much, even though the navy was shuttering the program, congress gave them $10M and said give us a good reason why you're shuttering it after having spent all that money.

                Not sure why they gave them $10M to write a paper detailing why the program was getting axed, but that's what happened.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            How so?

            I think last year navy asked for $0 in railgun funding, but congress forced them to take $10M even though they didn't want it.

            The only thing that was ever real about the railgun was the power management systems, which happen to be the same power management systems as the ones for the lasers they're handing out.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >independencce class in the background
    You posted this pic just so I would come in here and defend it again, didn't you?

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Be Zumwalt post-AGS cancelation with no gun, less missiles than everyone else, not a hope in the world.
    >SM-2s and ESSM so at least I can do AAW for the littoral and coastal ops.
    >Maritime Tomahawk and LRASM happen, now we have ASM capability.
    >Virginia Payload Module instead of AGS for hypersonics and/or more Tomahawks pulls the land attack out of the standard VLS to make room for AAW and high-end ASW.
    Hat's off to Zumwalt for being the biggest USN makeover in the 21st centruy.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don't think the APM (Virginia payload module) will suddenly make the Zumwalt a GOOD ship, but at least it's got SOME use.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        How would it be deficient? It's not like there's any equivalent to compare it to. Nobody else has a 15000 ton, ~100 cell, VLO missile ship with the sonar signature of a small sub.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Because the only difference between pre-APM and post-APM is hypersonic glide missiles that have limited use cases unless we get into a real war with China or similar.

          It's ALREADY a stealthy 15000-ton destroyer with 80 VLS cells.

          Adding a dozen hypersonic glide missiles is cool and all, but realistically they have no use outside of a peer conflict. You wouldn't waste such an expensive missile against 95%+ of targets the US has bombed recently.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            If APM is actually derived from VPM the way everyone says it is, converting the tubes to launch a larger number of smaller missiles depending on the mission is going to be a pretty regular practice.
            That also still doesn't sound like a bad ship, that sounds like a good ship getting better.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >If APM is actually derived from VPM the way everyone says it is
              I don't see how it could be anything else based on what we've seen.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/I76KTCo.png

                If APM is actually derived from VPM the way everyone says it is, converting the tubes to launch a larger number of smaller missiles depending on the mission is going to be a pretty regular practice.
                That also still doesn't sound like a bad ship, that sounds like a good ship getting better.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/pcWZ3yE.jpg

                >If APM is actually derived from VPM the way everyone says it is
                I don't see how it could be anything else based on what we've seen.

                https://i.imgur.com/I76KTCo.png

                If APM is actually derived from VPM the way everyone says it is, converting the tubes to launch a larger number of smaller missiles depending on the mission is going to be a pretty regular practice.
                That also still doesn't sound like a bad ship, that sounds like a good ship getting better.

                Even if they're not identical, they're clearly VERY VERY similar.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

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

                [...]

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

                [...]
                [...]
                Even if they're not identical, they're clearly VERY VERY similar.

                >VPM (Virginia Payload Module)
                >APM (Advanced Payload Module)
                oddly enough, they have nothing to do with the DDG(X)'s new DPM (Destroyer Payload Module)

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                If so, and by switching some SM-2 to quad-packed ESSMs, it could essentially have a loadout comparable to a Tico cruiser.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I get what you're saying with this, but modular VLS fuckery aside, I think you're underselling how relevant PCS could be.
            >Iran
            >North Korea
            >China in a wide range of potential scenarios scenarios
            >Russia again, eventually, especially if they're going to have a breakup and balkanization, especially after a few decades in the Chinese sphere.
            Nothing creams the USA's pants more than a decapitation strike on a would-be fortress nation.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah but we also expect DDG(X) to field the missile, on top of the Block V Virginia-class and the Columbia-class subs.

              So it's not like Zumwalt won't be in good company come the 2030s.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                There's an element of the lean on flexibility and an element of 'hide the birdie' all at once. A wide variety of launch platforms means there's no specific platform you can plan against under the assumption that this is what is going to launch hypersonics at you. You can place your missiles on the platforms where they'll be most useful depending on the mission, and your enemy has to account for the possibility of missing some or even all of them.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          We only have 3
          Same reason behind detracting from the su57.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Same reason behind detracting from the Su-57
            >The limited run of peerless vessels that operate independently of each other is the same as failing to manufacture a full squadron of fighters intended to close a large capability gap.
            This doesn't seem like the same situation at all.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >thing a is not exactly like thing b so you can't form an analogy or compare them
              Listen, I could address your specific concern but it'd just lead to you having anyother one ad infinitum so let's just not do that.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Ships operate more independently, especially ships like Zumwalt that will not operate alongside another Zumwalt outside the most intense scenarios, and there are no others like them on earth. Fighter jets are organized and operate in large groups, which there are not enugh Su-57s to form, even though Su-57 was developed to match stealth fighters that already outnumber it many, many times. You're making a bad analogy, they're obviously not the same in relevant ways.
                I just get the feeling you don't actually have anything specific left to say.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I just politely told you that I don't have the give a damn to engage you on your personal investment in this for whatever reason you have for it. There is literally nothing I could show you short of a webm of god himself telling it to you and you would probably still just tell me I was misinterpreting him. Why the ever living fuck would I want to subjective myself to that?
                >I just get the feeling you don't actually have anything specific left to say.
                And this feeling came from where? Me holdiing a different prespective than you?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >And this feeling came from where? Me holdiing a different prespective than you?
                Nah, being a huge melodramatic infant about why you can't be fucked to just talk about, instead of just fucking off if you're really so insulted by the idea of explaining yourself.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                And in with the ad homs already when I don't give you what you want.
                Don't know what to tell you bud, I don't owe you anything. If you want people's cooperation then you got to give them a reason to do it. Best of luck.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You interjected yourself without being asked anything, so you're fully free to go. Many such cases on anonymous chans. You too though, be well.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You responded to me. I have told you multiple times now that I am not interested.
                I on the other hand responded to a question that someone (you?) asked in a public thread on a public board on a public site. So no, I did not "interject." Go take it to your reddit DMs if you want a private chat with someone.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Buddy, you're the guy who doesn't wanna talk about it. Go then, nobody is stopping you. But comparing Zumwalt to Felon is dead stupid. Say something real about it, or stop feeding me the (you).

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I on the other hand responded to a question... in a public thread.
                Uhh... That's what it means to interject, my friend.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >say (something) abruptly, especially as an aside or interruption
                No, the floor was figuratively opened for answers, there was no interjection on my part.

                Buddy, you're the guy who doesn't wanna talk about it. Go then, nobody is stopping you. But comparing Zumwalt to Felon is dead stupid. Say something real about it, or stop feeding me the (you).

                I don't want to talk with you (assuming you are the same anon) about it if you are going to be so entrenched out of the gate. I explained to you why I felt that way politely and then more directly. If you want to take offense at that then be my guest but don't pretend like I am trying to remove you or stifle anyone's discussion. I'm fine, you're the one who is taking issue with me not giving you what you want.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >*bad analogy*
                >"This is obviously a bad analogy, here's why."
                >"I don't owe you anything."
                I'm not offended, your statement just didn't make any sense. You got offended at the idea of clarifying yourself, which makes me wonder why you bothered saying anything to begin with. How can I be upset with you? I don't even know why you're here.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >You got offended
                No
                I pre-empted this baseless claim and have reiterated it once. No idea why you feel the need to push it so hard but it assuredly is not making me rethink my choice to decline to engage with you on your preferred topic.
                >How can I be upset with you?
                Things I never said

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If it had a riveted, yes.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the chinese could probably disable it by throwing a fishing net into its propeller

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    She's a big ol' bitch.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Why yes I enjoy brutalist architecture, how could you tell?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Normally nah but it kinda fits.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >It's just a modern Moskva
    I'm getting a particular feeling about OPs post and meme ships with a very hyper-specific use case.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Something tells me that the Zumwalt can probably search in more than one direction at once, and without interfering with internal comms.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Still a meme ship.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          What do you mean by that?

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I just think Fire Scout is really cute.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The new Firescout (MQ-8C) is bigboi

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >RoboHuey
        Hot. Bet it's got big ol' pods.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Nope, it's actually completely unarmed, though it theoretically has the space for weapons and I suppose in future deployments could be armed if deemed necessary BUT, its primary role is to feed targeting data back to the ship for enhanced beyond-the-horizon capabilities.

          The MQ-8C has a nice fancy radar, and a 15-hour endurance to allow a significant amount of loiter ability and coverage area for targeting/surveillance

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Friendly reminder that LCS did Longbow Hellfire for counter-drone before IM-SHORAD made it cool.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Why is us navy still buying lcs? Why not cancel the order and scrap them?
      What are they going to do with them

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Tl;dr is that the Navy needs small ships, most of the LCS hulls are good enough to still be useful in at least one of the regions the USN is operating in, and they've already spent a ton of money and don't want it totally wasted. They're using them to patrol littoral zones and counter small surface threats, from coastal missile ships down to small unmanned boat swarms. In fleet scenarios they operate in concert with Zumwalts and Burkes, and eventually Connies and DDG(X), using the stealth characterstics, AESA, and drone search capabilities to provide info for the activities of the bigger ships from closer to the shore.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Forgot to add, they are scrapping the first four hulls, two of each class, for being too fucked to work with.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            More than that.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Proposed
              Even if they do, they may not do all of them, and still need them for another year. One way or another, the thrust of it is that the ships now are mostly fine for what the Navy wants them for, and until potentially right now they haven't been in a position to be too choosy. They need something to operate drones and launch NSMs close to land.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Can lcs do minesweeping?
          Also arent lcs a little too under armed to get close to the shore? Even non state groups have asm now
          At least usn ordered a normal class of frigates now.
          All these projects where just a massive waste of money.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Both classes of ships have rolling airframe missile launchers for ASM intercepts. Not ideal, but should at least be good enough to comfortably patrol alone anywhere but the most hostile areas where we'd likely only be deploying a carrier strike group and not small LCS boats anyway.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              As of like the last year or two, the LCS minesweeping module is finally operational, so yes. But it's still a pretty marginal capability. The LCS are relying on Zumwalts for area air defense in coastal operations, they also have SeaRAM, the top US short range SAM. That's another reason why it makes perfect sense for the APM tubes to be multipurpose, it opens up more room for the long range SAMs on a vessel with higher survivability than other surface combatants like Burke and Connie. That isn't going to change dramatically until DDG(X).
              The USN has long been unable to resist fucking something up and making cost way too fucking much, but it has been nice to see how they've come around.

              It's been suggested that the decommissioned LCS be donated to Taiwan or even Ukraine.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I can't imagine they'd want them. It's one thing to try and make the most of sunk costs, but those early hulls really are fucked.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            As of like the last year or two, the LCS minesweeping module is finally operational, so yes. But it's still a pretty marginal capability. The LCS are relying on Zumwalts for area air defense in coastal operations, they also have SeaRAM, the top US short range SAM. That's another reason why it makes perfect sense for the APM tubes to be multipurpose, it opens up more room for the long range SAMs on a vessel with higher survivability than other surface combatants like Burke and Connie. That isn't going to change dramatically until DDG(X).
            The USN has long been unable to resist fucking something up and making cost way too fucking much, but it has been nice to see how they've come around.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Make LCS 50% bigger, add a 76mm. Jobs done.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I point you to the Constellation-class.

      Though it's only got the same 57mm the LCS's have, it's got 32 VLS cells which makes it a real threat to anyone.

      VLS cells are far more important for a modern ship anyway. In fact the ship class that the Constellation-class is based on (FREMM) originally comes with the Italian 76mm gun, but the US Navy wants to use the 57mm gun with its low-cost guided shells.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I didn't say remove 57mm 😉

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          76mm is too similar to 57mm. There would be no point.

          57mm and 120-155mm I could get behind, but 57mm AND 76mm? What would be the point?

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Mk 57 is a good boi who didn't do nothing wrong.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Also didn't do anything right.

      It's got the capacity to house slightly larger missiles and with more powerful exhaust forces, but there are no currently planned/developing missiles that will take advantage of that because they only exist on the 3 Zumwalt boats, and everyone else has Mk 41 VLS cells. So all current and future missiles are designed around Mk 41 VLS cell specifications, not Mk 57 VLS cells.

      Maybe if they choose the Mk 57 (or a similar size/spec) VLS for DDG(X) we could see future missile development accommodate some of the advantages Mk 57 affords, but as it stands now Mk 57 provides ZERO functional benefits over Mk 41. If anything they're worse because they take up more physical space due to the larger missile diameter capability.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >There will be no advancements because nothing now can use them
        Retard

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's a big reason why Zummies return on radar more like tiny Nordic missule boats rather than like other USN destroyers, but otherwise yeah.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >It's a big reason why Zummies return on radar more like tiny Nordic missule boats rather than like other USN destroyers, but otherwise yeah.
          isn't that more due to the hull design and coatings?

          Nothing stops you from removing the useless 155mm guns and putting Mk 41 VLS cells in their place. Would be just as stealthy as it currently is and would likely add an additional ~60-90 VLS cells.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Mk57 is part of that hull design. Fitting flush with the rest of the hull is an RCS minimization feature. So DDG(X)with Mk41, while stealthy enough to reduce detection and tracking distances, probably won't be able to get up to the level of Metal Gear-tier fuckery within hostile waters that the Zumwalts are expected to do.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah but nothing about Mk57 is REQUIRED to make a flush edge, i mean it's not like Mk57 cells make up the ENTIRE length of the ship, it's still flush.

              You can easily make DDG(X) a similar hull design without the edge-mounted VLS cells that Zumwalt uses.

              Yes, it's a somewhat efficient use of the space, but it's in no way required to make a flush side to your ship like Zumwalt's hull does.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Anon this is the naval equivalent of having pylons on your stealth fighter. It can still be stealthy, it just won't be AS stealthy.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Are you retarded? Do you not understand that you can still slope the hull AND have central VLS modules? It will be just as stealthy as an identically sloped hull with Mk 57 VLS cells.

                How are you so retarded you can't even understand something as basic as the fucking hull altering the ships RCS and the hull shape not being dependent on what kind or where the VLS cells are.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >A large raised platform sitting on the deck with dozens of exposed cell doors is not a change in hull shape.
                I don't know what you mean by this, but there's no need to be angry.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                anon that's not a large raised platform.

                you can just build your deck edge 2-3 feet higher and have your VLS cells recessed below the deck sides if you're really worried about the ~20-30" above deck height of that installation.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >How are you so retarded
                Bro you need to chill. yall were having a nice convo

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Not that anon, but what exactly do you think the Mk57 VLS cells are doing for the stealth exactly?
                You can just make your ship larger, put your normal Mk 41 VLS cells in the center, and then slope your hull in the same way the Zumwalt currently does. There is nothing that the Mk57 does that adds to the stealth, they just complement the hull design and allow for efficient use of the space. But they don't actually provide any stealth benefit themselves, you can just as easily have it be just a plain old regular hull that slopes and is flush.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I get what you're saying, but it would be trivial to have it redesigned to be flush with the deck and flush on the hatches/hinges if it were desired. It's just never been done because the only ship that has needed it so far was the Zumwalt, and they wanted the peripheral installation to save space so a new designed vertical launch system was fine as long as it had backwards compatibility with older VLS missiles.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Anyone know if that mad-fires program is still coming along? Haven't seen any news recently.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Nothing in the last 2 years or so, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist anymore or got cancelled or anything, but it's not gonna be fielded anytime in the next 2-3 years you can be pretty sure of that much.

      >There will be no advancements because nothing now can use them
      Retard

      I never said there wouldn't be advancements, simply you're not going to develop a larger missile with more powerful rocket motor that WONT work in a Mk 41 VLS but will work in a Mk 57 VLS simply because the Mk 57 is only on 3 boats with limited systems. For example, a theoretical higher-performance SM-3 that is slightly wider and with a more powerful first-stage booster taking advantage of the higher exhaust force tolerance of the Mk 57 VLS cell. Theoretically, it's a missile we'd love to have, BUT Zumwalt does not have AEGIS hardware and software systems, it has decent radar, but nothing specifically designed for ballistic missile detection.
      So obviously SM-3 is designed around and will continue to be designed around the Mk 41 VLS because that's what our AEGIS BMD ships are equipped with.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I’m a little salty we cheaped out over the guns for Zulwalt. Just a little though since I do understand the reasoning behind the decision; it was the smartest move in a world with no peer adversaries. Still, the cost complaint sounds like an excuse because:
    1. America fuck yeah!
    2. Costs would have rapidly fallen as the factories get tooled up, more efficient, and designs tweaked.

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