US Navy DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class

shen said:

Navy Matters doesn't like the Zumwalt either

Click to expand...

Shen, in my opinion you should stop projecting what appears to be your conclusion and attitude about things onto those articles you post.

In this case, the writer at Naval matters specically states the following:

Naval Matters said:

At the moment, because of the lack of information I don’t really have an opinion on the Zumwalt. It may turn out to be an amazing platform heralding a revolution in naval technology or it may turn out to be a dead end side street on the naval evolutionary road

Click to expand...

He identifies some things he believe may be issues, but then clearly states he has not formed an opinon yet. Which by default mean he has not decided if he likes it or not.

I believe that the Zumwalt class is going to be a kick-tail group of vessels that will be powerful in their own right, but will really shine in introiducing and bringing forward advanced naval technologies over the next several decades.

Time will tell.

Jeff Head said:

Shen, in my opinion you should stop projecting what appears to be your conclusion and attitude about things onto those articles you post.

In this case, the writer at Naval matters specically states the following:



He identifies some things he believe may be issues, but then clearly states he has not formed an opinon yet. Which by default mean he has not decided if he likes it or not.

I believe that the Zumwalt class is going to be a kick-tail group of vessels that will be powerful in their own right, but will really shine in introiducing and bringing forward advanced naval technologies over the next several decades.

Time will tell.

Click to expand...

I'm a straight forward guy. I don't like double talks, word game and pretending not to have an opinion when one clearly do. I'm not trying to influence anyone, so I don't need to play that game.

You can click on the keyword on that blog and see all the posts he wrote about Zumwalt. And he is not alone. USN doesn't want any more Zumwalt class ships other than the three already ordered. Even these three may be completely useless. Worst case scenario, the hull proves to be dangerously unstable in operation and the three ships permanently tied to piers.

Jeff, don't let fanboyism cloud your judgement. Lasers and rail guns are not the solution for real world problem.

Worst case scenario, the hull proves to be dangerously unstable in operation and the three ships permanently tied to piers.

Click to expand...

The Issue of the Tumblehome hull type come from a dated argument with a misunderstanding. Tumblehome hulls were for centuries the most common naval hull form. from the wooden into the steel age with few issues it was not until the 1905 Battle of Tsushima, when the Russian Pre dreadnought battleships of the Borodino class suffered three sinkings and one capture. The Sunk ships the Borodino,Imperator Alexander III and the Knyaz Suvorov. at the time the ships were facing far more advanced Japanese Ships. The Ships were brand new untested and never really went through proper shakedown. Critical to the failure was that the Japanese were employing a very new cutting edge technology the High explosive shell. This combined with the Japanese Naval position made the Russian Fleet target practice. There HE Shells Fired form well placed Japanese Ships with inter locking fire turned the Superstructures in to Blazing infernos and there internal magazines of powder charges made them literal burning powder kegs.
The captured Oryol served in the Imperial Japanese Navy as a coastal defence ship, Training ship depot ship and from 1912 till 1922, She was sunk as per conditions of the Washington Treaty in 1924 as a target ship.

shen said:

I'm a straight forward guy. I don't like double talks, word game and pretending not to have an opinion when one clearly do.

Click to expand...

Nobody asked you to not have an opinion shen. That is a deflection away from what I said. The author of the post clearly stated that he had not formed an opinion yet...but you projected an opinion (seemingly your own) on his article.

shen said:

You can click on the keyword on that blog and see all the posts he wrote about Zumwalt.

Click to expand...

I read his article...which you linked.

shen said:

USN doesn't want any more Zumwalt class ships other than the three already ordered. Even these three may be completely useless. Worst case scenario, the hull proves to be dangerously unstable in operation and the three ships permanently tied to piers.

Click to expand...

The hull form is not new. It was used by earlier combatant classes for quite some time. New technology and design considerations have made it possible to make it even more stable and applicable today.

shen said:

Jeff, don't let fanboyism cloud your judgement. Lasers and rail guns are not the solution for real world problem.

Click to expand...

Ok, Shen...I am going to warn you straight up. Here on SD you'd best watch your accusations and be very careful and sure about making them. If you do not...you will not last long here. That's simple, friendly advise.

I have worked as a design engineer in the defense industry on numerous projects, including Naval aircraft, naval vessels, and weapons systems and am not speaking from some amped up haze brought on by the likes of fanboy influence that you not only imply...but accuse.

As I said, the article by the man in question makes it clear that he has not formed an opinion and therefore does not "dislike," the vessel based on that article. I quoted you his own comments from the article you linked to.

As to Lasers and Rail Guns...they are in development, but are being field, live fire tested. Of course they are not the solution yet...but they will be in the coming years. You never have innovation and significant steps forward without cost and without risk.

The Rail Gun technology in particular is going to revolutionize surface fire warfare and ship self defense warfare in the coming years. You can count on it. That's not fanboy, Shen, that's simple physics, advances in ship-borne electromagnetic applications, and advances in ships propulsion systems that are making it possible.

All real world technologies that are coming together to influence real world conditions.

Jeff Head said:

Nobody asked you to not have an opinion shen. That is a deflection away from what I said. The author of the post clearly stated that he had not formed an opinion yet...but you projected an opinion (seemingly your own) on his article.

I read his article...which you linked.

The hull form is not new. It was used by earlier combatant classes for quite some time. New technology and design considerations have made it possible to make it even more stable and applicable today.

Ok, Shen...I am going to warn you straight up. Here on SD you'd best watch your accusations and be very careful and sure about making them. If you do not...you will not last long here. That's simple, friendly advise.

I have worked as a design engineer in the defense industry on numerous projects, including Naval aircraft, naval vessels, and weapons systems and am, not speaking from some amped up haze brought on by the likes of influence that you not only imply...but accuse.

As I said, the article by the man in question makes it clear that he has not formed an opinion and therefore does not "dislike," the vessel based on that article. I quoted you his own comments from the article you linked to.

As to Lasers and Rail Guns...they are in development, but are being field, live fire tested. Of course they are not the solution yet...but they will be in the coming years. You never have innovation and significant steps forward without cost and without risk.

The Rail Gun technology in particular is going to revolutionize surface fire warfare and ship self defense warfare in the coming years. You can count on it. That's not fanboy, Shen, that's simple physics, advances in ship-borne electromagnetic applications, and advances in ships propulsion systems that are making it possible.

All real world technologies that are coming together to influence real world conditions.

Click to expand...

can't have a serious debate if you threaten to ban me all the time Jeff.

on the problem of tumblehome hull, the issue is well known.



it may have worked in the Age of Sail when much of the weight was from heavy cannons low in the hull. doesn't mean it works on modern warships.

Regarding the actual blog -- Shen is correct in the sense that comnavyops does seem to be quite critical of the zumwalt class in many respects, throughout his various blog postings over the years.

Bltizo said:

Regarding the actual blog -- Shen is correct in the sense that comnavyops does seem to be quite critical of the zumwalt class in many respects, throughout his various blog postings over the years.

Click to expand...

I think Jeff is spot on in this case. I do follow the postings on Navy matters and the poster do frequently highlight critical areas but the poster is also careful in choice of words. Being critical in certain aspects is not the same as drawing a conclusion on the success or otherwise of the program. The fact is no one really knows until the vessel is put through vigorous field testing against a set of mission parameters in which it was designed to fulfil.

shen said:

can't have a serious debate if you threaten to ban me all the time Jeff.

Click to expand...

Making accusations like you did, shen, is not debate. As I said, if that continues, you will not last long. Right now that is simple advise. Take it or leave it.

If you keep it civil, do not make unfounded accusations, and follow the posted SD rules...there will not be an issue. As it is...your tendency to keep coming back and taking issue in the face of simple advise...IMHO, does not bode well.

But time will tell.

shen said:

on the problem of tumblehome hull, the issue is well known.

it may have worked in the Age of Sail when much of the weight was from heavy cannons low in the hull. doesn't mean it works on modern warships.

Click to expand...

It actually worked well beyond the age of sail.

Bringing it back today does require modern technology and design practices to be applied to make it feasible for vessels like the Zumwalt class.

But that's exactly why some of the best naval designers and architects have been involved with the Zumwalt program.

Having been involved in the past with such efforts, I can say that my bet is going to be on the people who have done the work, prototyped, built and tested the design, and who are now about to get the first one into sea trials.

Time will tell on that too.

Bltizo said:

Regarding the actual blog -- Shen is correct in the sense that comnavyops does seem to be quite critical of the zumwalt class in many respects, throughout his various blog postings over the years.

Click to expand...

Shen did not stop at saying the individual was critical, Blzt.

Pointing out potential problems in an effort to gather information or improve things is not the same as deciding that the idea is a failure.

I read the article posted that was used as the basis for the determination that the author did not like the Zumwalt. That's very straight forward.

I found that the author himself, in the article linked, very directly stated hat he had not drawn such conclusions at that time. I pointed that out, and what, as I stated was my opinion, that the poster was projecting their own opinion, when the author clearly stated that he had not drawn such a conclusion.

That is all. We've about bet it to death now. Best to move on.

Shen on the sloop of war, did you consider the masts? Yes the most concentrated weight would be around the cannon but the masts and sails on ships of that configuration pushed the center of gravity to the deck. Which is about the same for the DDG1000 class due to its abbreviated super structure, turrets, hanger and missiles.