kek. """""""""""""next

It's the same generation hence the same class. It just has a few upgrades while staying cheap.

>>32814961

What the hell I'm supposed to see in those circles? If it is additional radar dishes... there are other radars than AN/SPY-1. It is retarded to imply that a warship could operate with just one radar.

File: 117_052D_DDG_西宁号.jpg (104KB, 1280x867px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1280x867px

When will america finally mass-adopt multimode AESA for their Aegis ships?

>>32814961
It's not a new generation, it's an upgrade (a significant one) to an existing model

File: 1406465081697[2].jpg (166KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 500x400px

>>32815407
>finally mass-adopt

File: spg62_04.jpg (50KB, 567x425px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 567x425px

>>32815401
Mechanically steered illumination radars.

Something literally from the 60s.

>>32815407
When will China finally adopt a carrier that isn't retarded?

>>32814961

No CIWS?

>>32814961
>>32815407
So is this an example of how American experience makes up for China's late adopter advantage?

>>32815433
Does it work and is it effective?
If so, there is absolutely no reason to stop using them.

>>32815647
Protip: Limited guidance channels.

>>32815818
It's not an issue unless you're intercepting mass spam supersonic cruise missiles, which is something China won't be able to accomplish until the Burkes are all scrapped.

File: 224201rb35i1hwhrwcmor1.jpg (542KB, 1600x1065px) Image search: [Google]

542KB, 1600x1065px

>>32815930
China already can even today.

>>32815952
Nope.avi

The Chicoms have yet to demonstrate effective range anti missile interception.

>>32815407
>implying they have multimode AESA

>implying they have the range to target US naval surface fleets.

No.

File: yj-12 launch.gif (2MB, 512x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 512x288px

>>32815978
what are you trying to say?

China has similiar anti-ship strike capability as the USSR/Russia today.

They have at least 140 anti-ship capable H-6 bombers, as well as 300+ JH-7 and Su-30/J-16 anti-ship capable fighter bombers.

And all their shore-based anti ship missile battalions.

File: CH DDG 052D.jpg (296KB, 1600x743px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 1600x743px

>>32815993
Of course the multimode AESA isnt going to detect naval combattants over long distances. Curvature or the earth etc.

But at least the 052C/D (and all other chinese navy ships) have the Type 366 OTH radar onboard. And you also usually use your helicopter to do that. Or your Ocean Surveillance Satellites and other off-board measures.

Also, the Chinese AESA is multimode. They, at least, have no mechanically steered FCR onboard that could be used to guide their long range SAM, which implies that their AESA will do it.

>>32816092
>criticize the Americans for having a """"""60's"""""""" legacy antenna.

>completely ignores the 1920s yagi antenna

Pottery

>>32815818
Protip: only essm uses them, which is a point defense system.

>>32815818
Apparently you missed the fact that there are 3 of the damn things, and are strictly a terminal engagement radar for the ESSM and a backup for the SM-2.

which gives it a fuckton of concurrant intercepts

>>32815433
See
>>32816092

File: de zeven provincien 2.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

why can the rest of the world not into pretty destroyers

>>32816219
There are 3, and one ship can use illuminators from another.

>>32816287
>posts a frigate

yeah, ok.

>>32816177
Yagi is for VHF long range/counter-stealth surveillance.

It doesnt have any fire control functions. It's simply a nice-to-have radar for an air-defense destroyer.

Type 45 is superior.

>>32816369
>implying that isn't political
>implying a 6000+ ton warship with ESSM, SM-2, Harpoon, Mk 46 torps, Goalkeeper CIWS, 3D MFR and a BMD-capable long range radar can't be classified a destroyer

>>32816408
It has a good radar, but its missiles are average and it lacks VLS cells it is fit for but not with.

And the Royal Navy is retiring its only ASHM.

>>32816459
You arent going to become a "destroyer" with only 32 VLS.

File: Cg_CjkSU8AAvvQf.jpg (79KB, 600x815px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 600x815px

>elegant
>chaste
>sleek tower
>refined gun mounts
>feminine bow
simply the best

>>32816459
>BMD-capable long range radar
>no BMD missiles

By your rational, the newer Russian Corvettes can be classified as Destroyers.

>>32816492

>triangular and square shapes
>feminine

Anon... i... have bad news for you

>>32816495
not him but for now they're relying on the americans in the med for those missiles while these ships pass on the information to create a sort of iron dome against iran if i remember correctly

>>32816492
>cant survive Sea State 5
>cant survive the Panama Canal
>looks are ugly as shit

why is this ship such a meme.

File: 141159o3x0ymjx4z9v90mq.jpg (734KB, 2500x1814px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 2500x1814px

>>32816092
I like the shape of its gun.

It's so strange and weird that it's good.

File: zumwalt3232.jpg (1MB, 5033x2831px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 5033x2831px

>>32816515
fuck off you masculine bow cocksucking faggot. go masturbate to your penis bows you disgusting libcuck zumwalt is perfection of the feminine form
>>32816530
fuck off uneducated wikishit autistic memeschink and neck yourself

>>32816478
40 cells VLS with 32 SM-2 and 32 ESSM quadpacked, totaling 64 missiles. There's room for 8 cells more.

That's more than the Type 45 and Horizon-class. So those aren't destroyers anymore?

>>32816495
I didn't imply that at all. It's a combination of everything.

>>32816563
It's simply ugly. Deal with it.

File: zum115.png (271KB, 430x430px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 430x430px

>>32816581
Your ugly and have no aesthetic taste. cry about it libcuck lol :^)

File: stealth gun turret.png (131KB, 632x336px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 632x336px

>>32816551
Yeah, but looks like the Chinese are jumping on the stealth-gun turret meme and will have an AGS-styled housing for the Type 055...

File: zum14.jpg (148KB, 1600x1000px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1600x1000px

>>32816614
the chinks need to be stopped before they embarrass all of naval history with their abortion tier aesthetics and gaudy trash ships

>>32816530
zero for three, see me after class

>>32816747
Three?

Just as the final production run for the Zumwalt?

KEK.

File: 055prow.jpg (377KB, 1705x960px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 1705x960px

>>32816623
Type 055 aesthetic prow >>>>> Zumwalt's jew-nose.

File: zum10.jpg (75KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 800x450px

>>32816813
looks like hyper masculine compensation for small gook dick my dude. also gawdy and ugly likely to be painted ten different collors of female(male) chink shit. clearly a ship for repressed chinese homosexuals that will man it. mcfuckingkillyourself dudester

>>32816578
>That's more than the Type 45 and Horizon-class. So those aren't destroyers anymore?

If you are playing that game, a Type 45 has 60 cells and can actually carry strike oriented missiles like Tomahawks.

>>32814961
>next generation destroyer
>it's fucking tiny

What the fuck? My tax dollars are paying for this shit? That thing couldn't sink a fucking tox boat are you shitting me? This is why we needed Trump in office, these fucking companies are RIPPING US OFF what the fuck I'm beyond pissed. Who the fuck do I call to make sure my congressmen vote against shit like this??? It's a fucking toy sized boat are you kidding me? What personnel will fit on this tiny thing??

File: article-2478654-190B56C200000578-172_634x372.jpg (33KB, 634x372px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 634x372px

>>32816813
While the Zumwalt has a dumb Jew-nose as a prow, telling us of those who actually control the US, the Type 055 has a badass manly kike-killer prow.

>>32816863
You gotta understand the Burkes are already gunna be better than anything the chinks build both aesthetically and technically for the next 40 years. The zumwalt is just out of their league in every respect m8. They will never recover from this.

File: OZ64v5c.jpg (629KB, 3000x2357px) Image search: [Google]

629KB, 3000x2357px

>>32816801
I like how that inferiority complex is seeping in, just relax and join us in enjoying American naval superiority for the foreseeable future.

>>32816908
>manly ship
we get it you gook """sailors""" are gay af

>>32816578
>I didn't imply that at all. It's a combination of everything.

Having a wide variety or a specific quantity of weaponry isn't what makes a ship a Frigate or Destroyer.

The best example I can give is why a Ticonderoga is classified as a cruiser and a Arleigh Burke a destroyer, despite the superficial similarity of the two classes.

>>32816966
The Tico has some bit more endurance than the AB, due to its expanded facilities, larger CIC and flag-staff accomodations, which makes it a suitable ship for being the escort leader or flagship.

>>32815407
>multimode AESA

When we build new ones, really. The performance differences between PESA and AESA radars are minimal to nil; the big advantages are in reliability, cost and bulk. The AN/SPY series radars are very mature systems which are pretty good in reliability already, so there's not nearly enough advantage to be gained by replacing them with new AESA arrays to justify the extreme cost of that.

But with that said the Ticonderoga-class cruisers are aging and will need to be replaced in the next few decades, (probably by more Burke Flight IIIs,) and a new AESA version of the AN/SPY is in development for that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SPY-6

>>32815433

Why not? They're just illumination radars. Literally huge-ass flashlights. Don't really need fancy electronically-steered arrays for that. Those mechanical setups are probably cheaper, even. Maybe if that was the only guidance you'd want fancier illumination radars, but the SM-2 has a backup terminal IIR seeker now and the next upgrade of ESSM will have its own active seeker, so, its cool.

>>32816578
>That's more than the Type 45 and Horizon-class. So those aren't destroyers anymore?

Not that I agree with him (because he's a retard who thinks VLS is all that matters), but that's a pretty shit way of putting it. Both those ships can also quadruple their loadout by stacking in a quadpack-able missile into their VLSs.

>>32815818
>Protip: Limited guidance channels.

Aegis handles that. Every missile is vectored towards the "killbox" and given constant course updates via datalink. Five seconds before impact the missile requests illumination, and an illumination radar lights the target up. I *think* they can even use buddy illumination from a ship other than the one that launched the missile.

And this is why the primary air-search radars are fucking huge, expensive, and super sophisticated beasts, backed up with huge computers, while the illumination radars are simple mechanically-steered flashlights - the actual tracking of everything moving in the air (~battlespace~ or whatever buzzword is in now) is where the real work is done in this system. You don't want your primary radar diverting power for illumination purposes in that kind of setup.

It's not like we don't use AESA illumination radars - the Patriot system uses just one radar for detection-to-kill, and they're being upgraded with AESA as we speak. It's just not a concern for the Aegis system.

>>32816884
What the fuck are you talking about? What game? The Zeven Provincien-class has a 40 cell Mk 41 VLS and thanks to quadpacking the ESSM it carries 64 missiles. The Type 45 has a Sylver VLS and carries a maximum of 48 missiles. It can't carry Tomahawks you retard, unless they nigger rig a Mk 41 VLS next to it. The Zeven Provincien-class however can carry Tomahawks, along with the SM-3, SM-6 and ASROC.

>>32816966
Then what does in your eyes? Displacement? What is the cutoff for a destroyer?

>>32817065
Aster 15 and 30 can't be quadpacked. CAMM will be in the future, but I am not sure if the Type 45 will get them.

>>32816046
>China has similiar anti-ship strike capability as the USSR/Russia today.

Right, so, a little history. Russia's anti-ship strike capability in the late 80s - the peak of their Cold War power - was a concern to the US, so they built the F-14 Tomcat and the AIM-54 Phoenix missile, a very expensive pair of weapons designed to blow Tu-22 bombers out of the air before they could launch AShMs at the carrier fleet.

Russia's anti-ship strike capability is far, far lower than it was in the late 80s, before the Soviet-era collapse. The US no longer has the F-14, but the latest versions of the AIM-120 AMRAAM can reach out almost 70 miles (to the Phoenix's 100 or so) and has much newer/better guidance systems. And we can carry more of them per plane (the Tomcat could technically carry 6, and the radar was designed to engage 6 targets at a time, but for practical reasons of load and landing weight they typically carried only four. Superbugs can carry 6+.)

So, I'm just saying, like, good luck with that air-launched AShM strategy. The US Navy has been practicing how to defeat that kind of attack for three decades now. They're very, very good at it. And while they've let their shipborne tanker capacity lapse, their worldwide network of bases lets them put land-based tankers pretty much anywhere they want (and escort them, too,) so that's less of a problem than you might think. (This is possible because they are filthy fucking rich, to buy that many tankers in the first place, and train their pilots extensively in refueling upside down at night in the rain, etc.)

China is not stupid. China knows this. That is why things like the DF-21 anti-ship variant exist.

>>32817159
>Aster 15 and 30 can't be quadpacked. CAMM will be in the future, but I am not sure if the Type 45 will get them.

I am aware, but the point is that using a quadpackable missile to show the level of missile potential is sort eh.

>>32817159
>Then what does in your eyes? Displacement? What is the cutoff for a destroyer?

You cannot figure out why you are having such difficulty fitting a square peg through a round hole. Anon already gave a good summary of why Tico's are cruisers.

>>32816459
>>32816478

You guys are forgetting:

>Cira 1945: Two ASW/Search floatplanes, medium anti-surface ability with 8-inch guns. heavy anti-aircraft ability in the 5-inch secondary armament, capable of extended operations alone, displaces ~10,000 tons alone.
>"Cruiser."

And then:

>Cira 2000: Two ASW/Search helicopters, medium anti-surface ability with Harpoons/SAMs in anti-surface mode, heavy anti-aircraft ability in the SAM armament, capable of extended operations alone, displaces ~10,000 tons or so.
>"Destroyer."

The way individual navies classify their shit has always been somewhat arbitrary and mostly to make distinctions meaningful to them - they don't really give a fuck what others call them. But it does confuse people. It caused so much confusion once that the Navy had to reclassify shit in 1975 because the public though thought the Soviets had more "cruisers:" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_1975_ship_reclassification#The_.22cruiser_gap.22

Funny shit, innit

File: mk41_12.jpg (49KB, 640x319px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x319px

>>32817159
>What the fuck are you talking about? What game? The Zeven Provincien-class has a 40 cell Mk 41 VLS and thanks to quadpacking the ESSM it carries 64 missiles.
>There's room for 8 cells more.

Type 45's have room for 12 additional strike length cells, allowing large missiles like Tomahawks.

>The Zeven Provincien-class however can carry Tomahawks, along with the SM-3, SM-6 and ASROC.

Zeven's cannot carry Tomahawks, SM-3 or SM-6.

>>32817159
>Then what does in your eyes? Displacement? What is the cutoff for a destroyer?

See >>32817245 If you're defining it in the general terms, as opposed to the way each individual navy uses the terms, then you do it by mission role.

The USN calls Burkes "destroyers" because they're built on a destroyer-shaped hull, and the Ticos are built on a class cruiser-shaped hull. There's other reasons, of course - Ticos are bigger, heavier, and carry more electronic shit and missiles, and have a more formalized mission role (core of a carrier group's air defense) while Burkes are more multi-mission ships. To anyone else it's just a cruiser and a bigger cruiser, but for the USN these are the differences the distinctions are making.

>>32817334
Not him, but:

The Type 45 has room for 72 strike length cells (Sylver or Mk41), the wiring has already been done for 16 cells.

And Zeven has strike length Mk41.

>>32817433
>And Zeven has strike length Mk41.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)#Other_users
>The Netherlands (2005) and Spain (2002 and 2005) were interested in acquiring the Tomahawk system, but the orders were later cancelled in 2007 and 2009 respectively.[48][49]

Huh. Wonder if they'll revisit that decision soon. Raytheon might sell some of those new multi-mission missiles yet.

>>32817208
Well is it? The Brits themselves are doing the same with the Type 26 by saying it will carry 48 Sea Ceptor missiles. They're not saying it has 12 VLS cells.

>>32817228
I was asking what you qualify as a frigate and a destroyer. I don't see how the Tico has anything to do with it, it got the label cruiser in the 80s so it's not really relevant in that regard.

>>32817334
Nigger are you serious? Your pic shows the Mk 41 VLS, the Type 45 has a Sylver VLS. You CAN NOT fit Tomahawks in a Sylver VLS.

And yes the Zeven Provincien certainly can, it has a strike length MK 41 VLS and can fit all those missiles. Dutch government even intended to buy Tomahawks a while ago when Venezuela was threatening the Dutch Caribbean islands. There are also talks about a group buy with Belgium and others for SM-3s.

File: YJ-18 VLS launch.webmKlub-.webm (1MB, 524x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 524x360px

>Burke's MK-41 maximum VLS strike length is about 6+ meters

Kek.

YJ-18 AShM = 9 meters.

>>32816563
autism boat

>>32817508
>Error: Corrupt or unplayable video
just like the country

>>32817471

It still has strike length, even if it has nothing take requires a strike length cell.

>>32817499

On the Type 26, Sea Ceptor isn't being quadpacked. Each Ceptor is getting its own special-single-missile cell. There's 48 Sea Ceptor cells for 48 Sea Ceptors.

Then there's the 24 Mk41 which will probably used for a mix of ASROCs and AShMs.

>Nigger are you serious? Your pic shows the Mk 41 VLS, the Type 45 has a Sylver VLS. You CAN NOT fit Tomahawks in a Sylver VLS.

Reread his post. He's stating that The Type 45 has room for additional 12 Mk41 strike length cells (it's really 24).

File: __fujiwara_no_mokou_touhou_drawn_by_shangguan_feiying__675dbae8bcb60dcb7c17055c9aa4e4e0.jpg (151KB, 353x482px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 353x482px

>>32817508
>>YJ-18 AShM

Yeah, supersonic missiles are bigger. So what?

>>32817599
>It still has strike length, even if it has nothing take requires a strike length cell.

That's a good thing, too. They can always buy some Tomahawks in the future if they decide they need them - but they can't just retrofit their ships with a taller VLS after the fact nearly as easily or cheaply. Seems buying the Strike-length paid off, considering that the Netherlands are getting nervous about Russia.

File: bfb71f65gw1f9al8o2r14g20dw09kb2a.gif (2MB, 500x344px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x344px

>>32817609
It means that the 9m long and 850mm wide strike module can also house ultra-long range SAM, like the HQ-8, which has about 500km range.

>>32816092
How have you not been range banned yet?

Unrelated question, but does anyone know pH and pK figures for 1950s and 60s SAMS and AShMs like the Terrier/Tartar/Talos, SA-N-3, SS-N-2, etc?

>>32817637
Becaue I'm eternal.

>>32817630
>HQ-8

Oh, neat. What is that, a navalized S-400/SA-21? Not a bad idea.

File: double parabolic trajectory 500km+ Surface Air Ballistic Missile.jpg (44KB, 1392x426px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 1392x426px

>>32817699
Yeah, some sort of double parabolic trajectory missile that goes into near-space to double its range.

File: bfb71f65gw1f9al8pm80rg208c08c7wh.gif (1MB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x300px

>>32817718
And which has a booster-stage that is as large as the missile body itself.

File: Type-26-Frigate-overhead-view.jpg (81KB, 1024x288px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1024x288px

>>32817599
From the pics I saw, I could distinguish 24 Mk41 VLS cells and 12 VLS cells for Sea Ceptor. I guess they changed that and will directly mount the canisters onto the ship, which should be relatively easy since the Sea Ceptors are cold launched

>>32817811

Yeah, I don't really recall at any point that there's been only 12 Sea Ceptor vls(s), but I can see how the CGI mislead you.

>>32817649
>Unrelated question, but does anyone know pH and pK figures for 1950s and 60s SAMS and AShMs like the Terrier/Tartar/Talos, SA-N-3, SS-N-2, etc?

I gotcha back bro

https://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/DataWeapon?DB=CWDB

File: 1287206841222.jpg (35KB, 289x400px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 289x400px

>>32816890
I like this post

>>32817718
>Yeah, some sort of double parabolic trajectory missile that goes into near-space to double its range.

Same flight profile the SM-6 uses to get long range - very efficient, high "lofting" trajectory. Pretty good idea for their navy - they don't have carrier aircraft to rely on for long-range AAW and they need/want supersonic AShCMs for several reasons, so this fits nicely into their weaponry paradigm.

>>32816492
>simply the best
>32...uhhh...how about just 3? (and keep building those """"""inferior"""""" Burkes).

>>32817811

It's 24x Mk41 in front of the bridge, 24x CAMM on the front, then 24x CAMM mid-ships. It's split silos. Look around the middle of the ship. Thats why people get confused with numbers.

>do a single slightly offtopic shitpost
>end up learning things
thank you

>>32817630
HQ-8 has comparable range to an SM-6, but is less capable and significantly larger.

>>32818770
We dont know the maximum range of that missile. We only know that it flies a similiar, multi-parabolic trajectory and is a large missile.

It might as well have exoatmospheric interception capability, judging from the size of the booster and its maximum speed of Mach 6-8.

>>32819157
>Our new missile is bigger and so it has a huge 500km range!
That range isn't anything special, here is an example of something that already does it.
>W-Well, we don't know what it's range actually is, it could be farther!

Fanboy or shill?

>>32816463
Wrong they still have helicopter launched, did you know that flight 3 burkes dont have harpoons or whatever the latest ones are

and they are actually just changing over and finalizing order for harpoon-er, and then LRASM

File: Snail 43.jpg (302KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 1920x1080px

>>32817019
>y. The performance differences between PESA and AESA radars are minimal to nil

is this guy fucking serious
learn what LPI means baaka

>>32819433
On a ship radar? It won't work. WAY too much power and too directional.

>>32819550
ur retarded

>>32819578
Says the guy who doesn't know how radars work.

>>32815952
is that real life or bad cgi?

File: 001yay.jpg (268KB, 897x681px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 897x681px

>>32819259
Your first day in PLA watching?

Try to discern anything more substancial from fuzzy screenshots and some bits of leaked papers.

File: 1388910322_98764.jpg (31KB, 580x435px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 580x435px

>>32819741
Mock up during military parade.

The real thing looks like this.

And launch is like that:
>>32816046

Export variant:

http://www.janes.com/article/65364/china-offers-export-version-of-yj-12-supersonic-anti-ship-missile

>>32817981
A pK of 50% for the Sea Cat seems awfully high, but I don't know what some of the other factors that CMANO calculates are

File: Anti Air Ballistic Missile.png (2MB, 1706x1558px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1706x1558px

>>32819259
If you looked at the parabolic trajectory of that paper closely:
>>32817718

You will see that the missile can have a lot more range than 500km. You basically see that it performs a double parabolic trajectory to hit an air target in 20km altitude in 500km range.

But there are hardly any planes flying that high, aside of spy planes or high alt UAVs.

So, if the HQ-8 or whatever designation it has, merely targets a tactical fighter/transport plane that is flying in 10-15km altitude, that parabolic trajectory offers enough velocity to enable the missile to have much longer ranges. A high-dive trajectory to hit a 10km air-target would be possible in like 600-700km distance.

This is basically the same idea behind China's ultra-long range AAM that they have used in the recent air excercise.

Let the missile fly to near-space altitudes and make it dive down, and it will have super long ranges not achievable with other means, including ramjets.

>>32820000
Pk in CMANO seem to be less based on real Pk, but more about missile reliability. So, 70-80% Pk means that it wont malfunction 70-80% of the time. Then, there are lots of factors that will bring down actual Pk%, like target distance, speed, size, radar-reflection, countermeasures, maneuverings etc.

In the end, you might start with a 95% pk missile, but end up with a real pk of like 20%.

>>32819628
says the idiot

>>32816392
>b...but it uses it for (insert reason here)

Your excuses for using 1920s Tech is hilarious. As if long band aesa does not exist.

>>32819895
>>32820035
He has a point. You can't make a claim based on conjecture.

This thinking lead to the belief of the J-20 being some kind of dog fighter, it's not.

>>32817508
Max is about 8 meters, moron

>>32822416

I don't think the supposed "PLA watchers" on here really care about integrity, otherwise they would not have allowed themselves to gain such a shoddy reputation for lying or misrepresentation with intent.

>>32822808
The same """"""""""pla watchers"""""""" that censor their own photos of planes on tarmacs.

Really makes you think.

>>32815978
Fuck you're dumb.

>>32815993
Are you fucking dense? It's called radar horizon. And I do know what ionosphere bouncing is, and you're still retarded.

>>32822808
Integrity to whom? A bunch of fucktards on 4chan? Serious analysis doesn't happen here because the majority of posters have double digit iq and no significant domain knowledge. The straglers who post here are just shooting the shit. Nobody serious gives a shit about retards like you,

>>32822857
What should really make you think is why your mothers didn't abort you after discovering your down syndrome. Fucking retard.

>>32822970
>Serious analysis doesn't happen here because the majority of posters have double digit iq and no significant domain knowledge.

I agree. Chicom shills are truly retarded.

>>32822973
I love it when 50 centers get so upset when I call them out on their bullshit.

So mad~

>>32822970
I'm sure you fancy yourself the minority, huh? Right atop mount dunning.

>>32822970

Umad?

You can personally deny it all you want, we all know how the chitcom reputation precedes them.

I will happily discuss navy matters with anyone, regardless of their nationality, but don't pretend for a second that the "PLA watchers" haven't earned their reputation without good reason.

>>32817362
And the Zumwalt is a Destroyer, yet it's the size of a god damn Heavy Cruiser.

>>32815462
as CIWS is non-aegis it is very much an after-thought in ship's drawings. typically a ship won't receive a CIWS until a few months after hitting the water

Flight III Burke's are a mistake.

>>32823125
nah.

Cutting numbers of the zumwalt was.

>>32823144
You are mistaken to think they are mutually exclusive.

There are two mistakes.

>>32823149
They are connected. If zum was not cut, the flight iii would not exist.

The flight iii itself though is a fine ship, and the best option after Congress cut funding.

File: 2383829761618.jpg (89KB, 634x401px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 634x401px

>>32816492
>elegant
>chaste
>sleek tower

>>32823168
Not that guy, but yes a fine ship if they were entering service ten years ago. The hull is pretty maxed out so upgrades down the line will be minimal, these Burke's are very much dead-in-the-water even mid-term. The "best option" is a fucking band-aid on a gaping wound.

>>32823181

This

How are they even getting around the top weight issue

>>32814961
I'd like to see a full group/class of ships with similar designs to the zumwalt class, all angles n sheeeeiit.

>>32823181
>>32823192
The hull is not maxed out, in either tonnage or space.

This meme was perpetaued by an extremely wrong gao report that essentially said the navy absolutely could not put a 14 foot AMDR on the Burke, it was impossible.

The navy bacially responded by telling the GAO to fuck off and if they don't believe it they can call HII and tell them they are doing the impossible.

You have to remember that the Flight IIIs are very clean sheet in regards to electronics and radar. They are ripping out nearly all of the old legacy analog systems and replacing them with much lighter and exponentially smaller components (sole exception being the AMDR due to increased physical size and water cooling weight, this is where the tonnage increase comes from).

However, the real bottleneck in the design is power. The current planned power packs have only enough juice to run shipboard components, and no overhead for much else. This means, unless they upgrade, no lasers or railguns.

>>32816598
>Your

>>32823181
>The "best option" is a fucking band-aid on a gaping wound.

Zumwalt is that gaping wound. Program was a mess loaded with untested technology, untested concepts, potentially too small crew to perform damage control and whole tactical concept became stupid as hell when CG(X) was cancelled. Risky program to start with and most of the risks backfired. Now they need flight 3 Burkes to fill the gap until 2030's, when there will be Zumwalt 2.0, this time designed around mature technology.

>>32823276

Nah, that's BS because there were basically zero significantly underperforming components to the zumwalt.

>>32823284
>Nah, that's BS because there were basically zero significantly underperforming components to the zumwalt.

AGS that lacks long range precision guided ammo it was supposed to come with.... wait that was cancelled.

Battle management system that can't handle ballistic missile defense, missions legacy ships like Ticos and Burkes can do.. mostly because that mission was supposed to be taken over by CG(X)... that was cancelled.

>>32816463

Only half your post is correct.

There's nothing 'average' about Aster. It is a god tier missile. MBDA makes great lovebabies.

Others have already addressed the AShM part.

>>32819550
>>32819578
>guy provides argument
>no idea what to reply as a counter argument
>"I know, I'll call him a retard, that'll convince everyone"

>>32823333
>AGS that lacks long range precision guided ammo it was supposed to come with.... wait that was cancelled.
They're fitting Excalibur rounds to it, shorter range than the original rounds but still retaining the guided attack capability,

>>32819895
can u dump this paper?

>>32823333
>talks about two items that were working as intended but got cut or cut down due to procrument death spiral.

You just made my point. Protip: LRLAP program was under budget.

>inb4 muh per unit costs!

The above statement is practically a litmus test for morons who don't understand a god damn thing about mass production economics in general and enjoy posting about it anyways.

File: The-Good-Idea-Fairy-3.jpg (93KB, 393x439px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 393x439px

>>32823412
>You just made my point.

Program was set up in very risky way, it was basically asking for procurement death spiral.

>Protip: LRLAP program was under budget.
>inb4 muh per unit costs!

When Zumwalt-class order was cut bellow 7 boats... 'muh unit cost became a slight problem.

The thing is that US military in early 90's when Surface Combatant for 21st century program was started, Navy had not adapted to post-cold war budget realities or missions, it goes even further than that as before a formal program can be started there were studies about all kinds of concepts in late 80's. We are now dealing with aftermath of decisions made between 1987 and 1992. SC21 was supposed to include DD21, CG21/CG(X) and lots of other things. They were going to get rid of frigates without replacement, general idea was to use destroyers and cruisers for frigate mission once those become obsolete. What evolved into Zumwalt is far from the worst idea they had back then, shit, even LCS (in all of its colossal stupidity) isn't the worst idea USN was toying around back in the day.

In the end Zumwalt is a ship that was supposed to fight Soviets on coast of Norway and later on they added naval gun fire support to mission as Gulf War proved that it is still relevant mission.

>>32822926
>>32822918
Anger, the things that make us mad the most are the things we know are true.

>>32823335
Aster is equivalent to an SM-2 with an active radar seeker instead of the dual SARH/IR.

File: JXX-CAC611_4.jpg (31KB, 600x358px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x358px

>>32822808
You are too young to remember that the PLA watchers have pretty much predicted every Chinese military development in the past.

The first leaks about the configuration of the J-20 were posted on /k/ circa 2009.

>>32826324
>PLA watchers have pretty much predicted every Chinese military development in the past.

Welcome to controlled leaks.

>>32826324

That's completely unrelated to my post. This is exactly the behaviour I was describing.

What will a Zumwalt Flight II look like ?

>>32826436
And what are you describing? That amateur watchers who are following chinese military developments for years maybe have a little bit more inside knowledge about their weapons and capabilities?

Because numerous past cases have shown this.

I will now boldly claim something here:

China wil have railgun and directed energy weapon equipped warships in the next 5-7 years, and they will become the standard naval equipment in the next 10 years.

Mark it.

>>32826496

You know exactly what I talking about and I don't have to prove anything to you. Like I've said, other people here know the score.

Nationality has never been relevant to me in discussing weapons, but to claim that you've been here for any amount of time and pretend that those posting about Chinese weapons and systems have not gained themselves a poor reputation, well is ridiculous.

>>32826555
You're a fucking retard.

We're talking about shit like CDF and you're talking about 4chan. Different participants, different Iq lvls. Fucks like you think pissing away on k/ makes you an expert, but you've never cranked an RMS equation in your life.

Fucking retards gonna retard.

>>32827580

No idea what you're talking about buddy. You're the one who has misread my words, ranting on about shit I've never said.

Neither do I think I'm an expert, probably never will be. So just cool it and re-read what has been said.

File: IMG_1103.jpg (19KB, 210x304px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 210x304px

>>32816492
>Mfw this was my state's big contribution
>Mfw all the R&D happened here
>Mfw it gets shat all over
A-at least we're building an Amazon warehouse, right guys?

>>32816492

>breaks down every chance it gets

Simply the best.