Absolutely, we seem to be seeing that trend as we move to non-mechanically rotating radars and integrated masts lower the topside weight, thereby increasing handling. The problem with the DDGs is they’re notoriously cramped for space in the hull, and their service life weight margins are very tight. So anything that…

It becomes a real issue when a ship isn’t designed to have such a high CG. It can really lead to handling issues and sea keeping. In reality most of your dense weight is down low on a ship (fuel, propulsion, generators) to counteract the stuff that you HAVE to put up high (antennas, radars, guns).

Ahhh I see someone else brought up the point about the illuminators. There’s a good write up here on how the US Navy might handle AShM salvo. Specifically when facing the Brahmos.

Here’s the problem with that analysis. While AEGIS can DETECT and track all 24, the ship can only illuminate 3 targets at once (best case scenario due to coverage of the SPG-62 illuminators).

“Been the sole US ship in the Black Sea, in sight of Crimea in the last few years, being buzzed by RUS TACAIR. Chance of war: Low. Consequences if someone on the other side has a bad day goes off the reservation and pickles a round: High.”

One of the inadvertent benefits of CIWS was the gun’s inaccuracy. Think hunting. It’s easier to hit a small target with a lot of small rounds distributed in a wide pattern than it is to hit it with a single bullet. Where this eventually failed was when your target is capable of dodging that pattern of lead that also…

Don’t underestimate the challenges in providing power and cooling. Additionally these units are EXTREMELY heavy and result in raising the center of gravity of the ship (something no ship needs). That concentrated weight also limits where it can be placed. Decks need to be reinforced and such.

The DDG 51’s are, unfortunately, all Gas Turbines Generator Sets.

I’m defending the concept not the program. You’re attacking the concept because of it’s association with the program.

I don’t agree with Papelbon attacking him or even publicly yelling at him, but he definitely got lazy on the pop out. You see that a lot with lazy DH’s. It’s annoying. You get paid millions for your at bats. Give it a 5 second hustle to first base even if you THINK you’re out. You never know when an error’s going to…

So, the PS Vita is to gaming what the Zune was to portable music devices? It’s a damn shame.

Your statement is a perfect example of a Genetic Fallacy, judging something on the basis of where it comes from. Modularity on the LCS is one of the few positives of the program. The fact that the US invented the concept in the 70’s and Danes, Brits, Italians, French, Germans, and many many more adopted it long before…

The 3,000 tonne HMS Antelope was struck by TWO bombs and an aircraft. It sailed to safety under it’s own power just fine with no issue. It wasn’t until a failed attempt to disarm one of the bombs led to massive sympathetic detonations severing the fire main. At point a ship made of steel would have sunk (it was…

Iowas the last ship with true armored citadel in the design. Now this is how susceptible our ships are:

On the downtick?! I’m admittedly an unabashed Pats fan, but still his numbers thus far speak for themselves. He’s on track to smash several of his personal records. Now, obviously they’ve been pass heavy in the first two games, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he conducts this vengeance train all the way into the…

I see. Well I would argue that ship design standards aren’t proportional to suvivability. The Danish Iver Huifeldt Class frigates, for example, have pretty advanced bolt on armor.

The Mistral is 16,000 tonnes with a crew of 160. The LCS is 3,000 tonnes with a crew of 60. Also, aluminum doesn’t burn unless it’s in powdered form. Conversely, the HMS Sheffield melted to the waterline after being hit by and Exocet missile. It was made of steel.

I think we can still design a ship to commercial standards while integrating the rail gun. Even if we keep designing them as we do we’re not really prepared for the kind of shock that a rail gun can generate. That’s why I believe theirs a shock mitigation system designed directly into the turret for the version going…

Lol. You’re absolutely right. That’s what I get for skipping my after lunch coffee.

“It has been argued that this happens due to the fact they are build up to comercial specs, not military ones. They are basically built like any other cargo ship and as capable of taking a missile as one..”