"Of all the words of tongue and pen, the saddest of these

"Of all the words of tongue and pen, the saddest are: /pol/ was right again."

>>32357449
>>32357407
It's a semi-submersible test bed. It dives partially to hide itself and be more stable. Then it shoots.
It shoots real good.
The cutting edge of technology always has problems.

>>32357480
>it dives
Ballasting down a few inches for stability is not the same thing as diving, you drooling imbecile

>>32357499
>what is semantics?
>why cant I stop sucking fat cocks?

>>32357528
There's a difference between cascading over semantics and using the wrong word.

>>32357549
It semi-dives.

>>32357566
how about I semi-dive your face into some cold, frigid water in the detroit river?

File: 1456111267060.jpg (84KB, 593x539px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 593x539px

>tfw drive by BIW every day
>saw this thing parked there all the time
>tfw will never be allowed to fire the railgun

>>32357573
how about you semi-dive about 50 to 60 times onto my weenie wit ur mouf

>>32357708
nah dude, that's gay.

>>32357608
The USS Zumwalt doesn't have railguns and probably won't ever have them.

>>32357716

Not if the balls dont touch

>>32357407
>W-What you you guys doing with me!!!
>Stop, dont come so close to me, i'll scream!!
>Dont touch me there!!!!
>Help, help me Burke senpai!!!

>>32357480
>It shoots real good.
>Zumwalt
Anon, AGS doesn't really count as "shoots really good" in naval warfare. Meanwhile missiles don't need it to be stabilized. And neither can it hide the ship from enemy missiles.

>>32358436
Name another naval gun system that has a range of 50 nmi or more.

>>32358879
>gun system
That's the point.

It's like being proud of using the best around suicide vest.

>>32358879
>...Anonymous
>12/17/16(Sat)20:07:46 No.32358879
>>>32358436 #
>Name another naval gun system that has a range of 50 nmi or more.
>Another naval gun system that has a range of 50 nmi or more.
>Naval gun system that has a range of 50 nmi or more.
>Naval gun system that has a range
>Naval gun system that has
>Naval gun system that
>Naval gun system
>Naval
>Gun
>System
The point is moot, motherfucker. Planes and missiles reign supreme, and will for the immediate future. By the time CIWS tech makes guns viable again, the railguns the Navy's having a lark with now are going to look piddly.
Neck yourself.

File: 1475782073008.png (209KB, 584x604px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 584x604px

>>32357407
Share they scrapping her already?

>>32359016
Are*

>>32358987
My whole point when apparently starting this argument is that it's a semi-submersible test bed and that's why it has problems and is expensive. It shoots good though, especially when it semi-dives.

>>32359152
>It shoots good though
You keep saying that...

>>32359415
In what way are you implying that it can't shoot good? How does it not shoot good? By what numeric?

>>32359152
I'll give you that. As a test bed, it's great. As a naval gun platform, it's great. The whole thing where it "semi-dives," that's neat too. I LOVE the tumblehome hull, if only for the aesthetics. It just isn't practical, and that's the measure by which warships are deemed to be great.

>>32359555
>By what numeric?
By numeric of existing AShMs and aircraft carriers, which are precisely the reason for naval artillery going extinct for the last half a century.

>b-but muh cheap coast support
>Zumwalt
>cheap
You could order CAS two orders of magnitude more powerful and it still would be cheaper (and safer) than deploying Zumwalt

>b-but muh BANG BANG

>>32359703
You have no argument as to how it does not shoot good.
You have arguments as to why shooting is irrelevant but not for it not shooting good.
It shoots good.
Your argument is invalid.
You lose.
LOSER!

>>32357480
>$100,000 for a single fire of the cannon

>>32358879
I don't remember what it was called, but I saw this concept a while back: it was a long road-like thing, and on it was something with a large engine and wing-like structures, if I recall correctly, it would drive down this road-thing and take-off INTO THE AIR (pretty crazy), supposedly it would carry multiple 2000lb GPS guided bombs

You're the dumbest cunt in this thread, mate.

>>32359732
IT COSTS $100,000 TO FIRE A SINGLE FUCKING SHOT

File: at your home in 30 minutes or less or your next apocalyptic hellstorm of death is free.jpg .jpg (2MB, 2486x3000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2486x3000px

>>32359853
no mate that's obviously too advanced, stop being a fucking idiot this isn't star trek.

File: uss-zumwalt-with-description-2.jpg (268KB, 980x582px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 980x582px

>>32359876

The only reason the ship is so expensive is because they cut down the order from 30 to just 3 so the entire development cost has to be absorbed into those three vessels. And the only reason the ammunition is so expensive is because it isn't economical to produce specialized ammunition for such a small group of ships. A larger buy of Zumwalt destroyers would have avoided these issues. They also could have re-used the stealth tumblehome hull design to create a new sub-class that completely removes the guns and replaces them with mk.41 VLS. So much potential was missed with these warships. There was even an advanced stealthy propulsion system developed for the Zumwalt that didn't make it into the final design because they were worried about reliability issues.

These ships could have been the new backbone of the fleet.

>>32357716
Don't act like you don't love it, you mincing little fop

>>32358974
Hey man, don't knock Achmed's accomplishments. This is all he's got, man.

>>32358879
mk45 might be able to with special rounds.
The navy got their mk45 to fire the prototype BarRnd out to 40nmi in the early 2000s.
BAE Systems claims that the mk45 will be able to shoot their HVP past 50nmi.

>>32360267
Unfortunately HVP is at least a decade away. That's why AGS will be using Excalibur.

>>32360475
HVP is coming along nicely and should be done within a decade.
In 2015 prototype HVP's were fired from the mk45.
In 2016 a railgun fired, tracked, linked, and maneuvered prototype HVPs.
2017 will see lethality testing of its kinetic warhead.
2018 will have live fire testing possibly from railgun, mk45, and 155mm.

>>32360688
Testing prototypes doesn't necessarily mean they're close.

>While a guided hyper velocity projectile – being developed for the Navy’s electromagnetic railgun program – is being proposed for the Navy’s existing deck guns, the development needed to use HVPs operationally in the service would take 10 to 15 years, USNI News understands.

https://news.usni.org/2016/12/13/raytheon-excalibur-round-set-replace-lrlap-zumwalts

Sage and hide bbfag.
>>32359562
>7.5 billion per unit
>Railgun belongs to /v
>Order cancelled
>Ammunition cancelled
>As a test bed, it's great
Post your face when this nightmare is finally over and the Navy can move on.

File: bluegill.jpg (45KB, 500x567px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 500x567px

>>32357449
aint that the truth....

>>32357480
>It's a semi-deliverable test bed. It's developed partially to get the contractors paid and preserve their political influence. Then it goes in the trash.
>It goes in the trash real good.
>The Military-Industrial-Complex always has problems.

>>32359016
I got a bridge to sell ya

File: 38333293.jpg (112KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 400x400px

>>32357480
Join the club of those defending the F-35 over nothing or carriers over battleships. This board is overrun with Slavs.

File: keep-calm-and-fuck-america.png (27KB, 600x700px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 600x700px

>>32361933

>>32361933
I think it's more fifty centers than slavs post-election. The paid vatniks seem to have calmed down now that we're looking forward to better relations with Russia.

>>32360047
>a feature not seen in warships in more than a century
There must be a reason for that, don't you think? It's not like naval architecture was a new science.

>>32362031
i hope you're a drunk subhuman slav and not just a slavboo

>>32361933
It's just shitposters in general. These programs have little publicly released information other than failures reported by the media, and they're easy targets.

File: yf23 front.jpg (110KB, 1545x619px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1545x619px

>>32357407
it might have been...

>>32357449
Ain't that the truth.

>>32357528
Stop typing you mongoloid. Do you even know what diving is, or a semi-submersible ? English is not even my native language and even I can tell you're a fucking mongoloid.
How about you apply the terms you'd use when taking a bath on the Zumwalt?
>Diving in bath
>Submerging in bath
>Sitting in bath.
Which applies best ?

>>32360047
>A larger buy of Zumwalt destroyers would have avoided these issues.

lol how? that would have been even more expensive, just less per ship. the overall amount matters more.

>>32357732
>Implying it isn't the SSN-21 of surface combatants and it's mass-production successor class won't have railguns from the outset.

>>32369172
It's a fair point. The DDX program really outran the construction methods and integration of systems much the same way the Seawolf did.

File: IMG_2193.gif (230KB, 240x152px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 240x152px

>>32357708
>how about you semi-dive about 50 to 60 times onto my weenie wit ur mouf

>>32369288
>construction methods and integration of systems much the same way the Seawolf did
Did those methods and systems come in handy later, in the production of other subs?

File: IMG_0094.jpg (423KB, 2818x1895px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 2818x1895px

>>32367989
HNNNG

File: 8589595.png (660KB, 540x800px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 540x800px

>>32367989
sexy sexy sexy sexy sex!

>>32357407

I see my apartment.

>>32367989
Nice umbrella.

File: 1482110891545.jpg (89KB, 700x520px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 700x520px

>>32373613

>>32363489
>There must be a reason for that, don't you think?
Sure. Pick any of the following:
>stabilizer and hullform technology and design have reached new heights of sophistication over the last decade as hydrodynamic modeling and computer aided design have both fully saturated and matured in the shipbuilding industry
>the need for excellent shipkeeping and how "dry" a ship's deck is in moderate seas is heavily mitigated/obviated by the complete lack of any need for sailors to be on the deck during normal operation. The only part of topside which has to be free of wash in moderate seas is the flight ops area all the way at the stern
>traditional warship design since WWI has been a compromise between all that weight high above the waterline in armor, turrets, sensor/FC/rangefinding towers and the biggest possible fuckin' guns. None of these things apply now - gun systems way far, far less, traditional armor is obsolete and VLS systems distribute weight much more evenly in the vertical dimension. This all means you don't need a massive bow flare to keep your weapons, fittings and secondary sensors from being battered into scrap in high sea states
>keeping weapons systems, rigging and fittings either inside the hull or under cowlings means they are protected from wet deck conditions, which again means you can enjoy the stability advantages of a tumblehome without beating all your toys to shit
>turret automation and the nature of VLS weapons means the usable hull volume disadvantage of tumblehome hulls is completely negated because you are operating with 1/10th the crew to a similar sized WWII ship

Tumblehome has always been more energy efficient from a propulsion standpoint, more stable in most types of seas and more capable of survival in high sea states. It just took naval architecture a while to radically rethink what modern weapons systems mean for warship design due to institutional and design inertia. Naval tradition is hard to overcome.

>>32359876
They should try reloaded rounds, I hear it makes shooting cheaper

>>32359827
$500,000 anon...

>>32374693
This. Most people don't realize the design compromise cost of, for instance, the Iowa's speed. Those old battlewagons with their long, sleek, sexy bow lines for great cruise speed and fuel efficiency turned out to be pretty rough in higher seas - they buried their noses in higher sea states, which meant less speed, more fuel and a rougher, less stable ride.

Tumblehome is where it's at for stability and efficiency. All the downsides are heavily mitigated by modern weapons/sensor/design requirements compared to the boom and shield ships of WWII.

File: 35494b.jpg (33KB, 713x476px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 713x476px

>>32374693
Thanks for these explanations. Any Picture of the Zumwalt in rough seas? I'm curious to see how it passes through the waves instead of "jumping" over them.

>>32375020
I think they're still holding much of that specific data close to the chest for a number of reasons. Still tuning stabilizers, don't want to give absolute handling limits which would give adversaries more information to plan against it, etc. Expect a moderate to high sea state video in the next few years, but I doubt they'll give complete seakeeping performance data on it for some time, as it might be tactically very useful to be able to pop up where least expected.