US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
maozedong
Banned Idiot
I think that's because the US troops no longer patrol the major cities. They spend most of their time on base or training Iraqi forces.
IronsightSniper
Junior Member
Personally, I hate rail guns, I'm the type of guy that advocates an Aircraft carrier that has a deck of VLS systems 
Personally, I hate rail guns, I'm the type of guy that advocates an Aircraft carrier that has a deck of VLS systems
So do you want to convert CVNs to missile ships or have VLS cells in the flight deck? I need to know before I make an comment.
IronsightSniper
Junior Member
A little of the two actually, basically a 1,000 foot yacht with lotsa VLS. Missile spam all the way!
So basically, I'm advocating for a Kuznetsov, except instead of having 24 eight cell launchers, have 96 eight cell launchers!
So basically, I'm advocating for a Kuznetsov, except instead of having 24 eight cell launchers, have 96 eight cell launchers!
Last edited:
I think the Kutznetsov design was and is a bad choise. These two capabilities tend to restrain each other pretty badly. The missiles take up good space for planes and all the litter on deck after launch will be horrible to get rid off.
The huge # of missiles basicly goes back to the arsenal ship concept, wich I guess is pretty much dead due to budget constraints. I don't think such a concept will come back in the future, the need for such a platform is not big enough to justify the costs I think. And there are already 4 SSGN with a rather big missile capability. In two decades when there will be a follow on SSBN design for the Ohios, maybe there'll be some more converted SSGNs.
The railgun is a nice technology, but I think it's usfullnes in actual combat will have to be explored. It offers great opportunities. But I exspect that due to the energy requirements it will only appear on ships the size of the future CG(X) and bigger. On a carrier it probably doesn't make too much sense, as that ship should be even further away from a target then the 100nm range of such a weapon. Maybe if it can get small enough as a AA weapon. Something similar applies to LHDs / LHAs. So that only leaves a CG(X), with a big power reserve.
The huge # of missiles basicly goes back to the arsenal ship concept, wich I guess is pretty much dead due to budget constraints. I don't think such a concept will come back in the future, the need for such a platform is not big enough to justify the costs I think. And there are already 4 SSGN with a rather big missile capability. In two decades when there will be a follow on SSBN design for the Ohios, maybe there'll be some more converted SSGNs.
The railgun is a nice technology, but I think it's usfullnes in actual combat will have to be explored. It offers great opportunities. But I exspect that due to the energy requirements it will only appear on ships the size of the future CG(X) and bigger. On a carrier it probably doesn't make too much sense, as that ship should be even further away from a target then the 100nm range of such a weapon. Maybe if it can get small enough as a AA weapon. Something similar applies to LHDs / LHAs. So that only leaves a CG(X), with a big power reserve.