"llama66" said Bullshittery on the high seas in not cool
China thinks that just because they drew a line around something that they can make it theirs.
And it's this bit of chicanery and thievery on their part that's behind the 75% content component of the new NAFTA. Trump is stopping the flow of dollars to the Chicom military and he's strangling their ability to expand in the Pacific.
"llama66" said Maybe those arsenal ships you scrapped need to be revisited or..or...or build the Montana Class BBN
There is a place for an armored ship with a nice, thick hull. This nonsense of warships that can't take a hit from a fishing boat needs to come to an end.
I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.
"rickc" said I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.
Problem is, I think, cost. Those shiny Zumwalt's that were to replace the Arleigh Burke destroyer cost ~4.5 billion a unit. The Arleigh Burke (Gen 3) costs ~1.8bn to build.
"llama66" said I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.
Problem is, I think, cost. Those shiny Zumwalt's that were to replace the Arleigh Burke destroyer cost ~4.5 billion a unit. The Arleigh Burke (Gen 3) costs ~1.8bn to build.
Bullshittery on the high seas in not cool
China thinks that just because they drew a line around something that they can make it theirs.
And it's this bit of chicanery and thievery on their part that's behind the 75% content component of the new NAFTA. Trump is stopping the flow of dollars to the Chicom military and he's strangling their ability to expand in the Pacific.
They know it.
Maybe those arsenal ships you scrapped need to be revisited or..or...or build the Montana Class BBN
There is a place for an armored ship with a nice, thick hull. This nonsense of warships that can't take a hit from a fishing boat needs to come to an end.
BBCVN?
The IJN had that idea back in the day:
-J.
I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.
Problem is, I think, cost. Those shiny Zumwalt's that were to replace the Arleigh Burke destroyer cost ~4.5 billion a unit. The Arleigh Burke (Gen 3) costs ~1.8bn to build.
I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.
Problem is, I think, cost. Those shiny Zumwalt's that were to replace the Arleigh Burke destroyer cost ~4.5 billion a unit. The Arleigh Burke (Gen 3) costs ~1.8bn to build.
Pffft! That's only 1 B-2 bomber each! Cheap!