Comments on: Key Lawmakers Clap While DD 1000 Sinks

By: Jamal Buckley

Jamal Buckley — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:12:58 +0000

• First step is to choose the medications and for this you must search the prices as well as the quantities that you would like to purchase that are available on the website. Click on “add to cart” in order to select the medicine that is stated in your prescription. Once you are through with the list click on secure checkout and check whether each and every medicine you require is being added to the cart or not.

By: LS2(SW)

LS2(SW) — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:50:26 +0000

it’s actually the Lewis and Clarke Class, not Sacegewea. i was on the maiden deployment of the “L n C” in 2007. that ship performs very well as a light oiler and dry stores. there wasn’t a unrep tasking that it could not perform. though your statement of it being slow.…is very true. it does only have one screw. horrible. currently on DDG59…great platform, great ship. capable of so much.

By: jlsmithdowntown

jlsmithdowntown — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 21:34:38 +0000

the army has MLRS launcher they are cheap, put them on ships.

By: ken Badoian

ken Badoian — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:19:42 +0000

Just a couple of corrections.
1. BB’s propulsion plant is 600 psi not 1200.
2. There are plenty of MM’s/BT’s currently operating steam plants — 600psi — the LHALHP/LH?? classes are examples.
3. The MM rate includes a lot of BT’s that were
assimulated when they combined the rates.
4. Any Nuke plant after of the reactor is a reqular (well almost) conventional steam plant.
5. The engineering plants for the Battleships and all gun Cruisers were very labor intensive.
6. The newer heavy cruisers had an automatic 8″ gun system. Bet they still work.
History lesson — WW1 and 2 the Brits built a ship with one ( only one) large gun , 11′ or 14′ I think. They were called monitors.
All the BS about China , etc. is somewhat on the mark — read Mahon and the influence of sea power.
WE ARE AN ISLAND NATION — Most of WHAT we use come via the sea lanes. Oil the biggie.
The first real warships of our Navy were heavy frigates 44 plus guns , and were considered by the receiving end of their guns stripped down 74’s. USS Constitution everybody.
Of course we have had many real ____ ships since then — fairly FF Knox Class , The one screw Perry’s are two classe that were build on the cheap. They , like all USN Ships , went in harms way and did their job but think what a better job they could have done with two screws and in the case of the Perry’s a real gun instead of the pop gun amidships.
Enough of the nuke debate — we as a country and a Navy have to stop thinking about just the cost of the ship’s and return to the original concept of Old Ironsides and company — the fastest , best build , heavly armed, ships that money could buy.
And they were they as now manned by the best sailors in the world. But remember those frigated were a compromise — just like any warship design -
Idea put the BB’s back in commission and instead of all the mock training at boot camp — send recruits to sea for advanced traning. Holly Stoning deck — chip and Painting , Mess Cooking — even working in their rates — oh what an idea.
Also one editorial comment — BOATS by definition are, except in the case of submarines ( by tradition) are thinks carried on ships. I guess the new Navy walks on floors, paints walls and ceilings, and gose up stairs to the bridge and down stairs to the holes (engine rooms for the non-snipes.
To be a sailor — yea I know new generation — you have to think like a sailor — talk like a saior — and look and walk like a sailor.
The United States Navy is all about FAST SHIPS GOING IN HARMS WAY and comming back.
MMCS ken Badfoian USN Ret.

By: Roy Smith

Roy Smith — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 02:51:01 +0000

“the DDG 1000 has been a great incubator for new naval technologies. I’m in favor of using programs such as this to develop new gear for the next generation of hardware — I see the same thing happening with the FCS program and I’m all for it. And it’s refreshing when services make a tactical retreat on some programs and admit that they’ll be used essentially as R&D labs.“
“I believe that our Navy and our nation are better served by building a large number of DDG 51s and then proceeding with a timely and orderly plan to begin construction of the next generation of nuclear powered cruisers. I look forward to working with Admiral Roughead and Secretary Winter during the return to DDG 51 production.“
My God,we are soooooo f**kin’ screwed!!!!!!!

By: pfcem

pfcem — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:23:00 +0000

G,
Posted by: pfcem at July 25, 2008 12:09 AM DDG 1000 Could Take Fatal Hit
The latest that I have heard is that the USN plans to replace the 22 remaining Ticonderogas with 14 CG(X) “escort cruisers” (essentially 14,000 ton DDG-1000 hull fitted for fleet escort/defense rather than littoral/NSFS) with the 1st to be ordered in FY2011 and 5 CGN(X) “BMD cruisers” (20,000–25,000 nuclear-powered ships with a more conventional flared bow) — the large size of the CGN(X) dictated mostly by the proposed 40″ diameter & 39′ long Northrop Grumman Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) which requires a launch tube the size of 6 Mk-41 cells.

By: G

Sun, 27 Jul 2008 06:05:22 +0000

With the cancellation of DDX, will that mean CGX (the non-nuclear ver.) is canceled too?
I’m curious to know what the CGN-X (the nuclear BMD ship) will be like? Displacement? Features? Armaments? San Antonio hull?
I don’t think it’s possible to put the 155mm guns from the Zumwalt on a Burke. I don’t think there’s enough real estate (note: I’m no expert), unless the new Burkes purchased in place of DDX will be some new flight.
Also, people keep mentioning “flight III” Burkes… I thought the latest are the flight IIA.
Off-topic: We should get some of these to escort our CVNs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hy%C5%ABga_class_helicopter_destroyer
Destroyers that also function as a carrier (how convenient!)

By: whoever

whoever — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 04:58:45 +0000

What you guys seem to be missing here is a possible loss of continuity in design skills.

By: DC2 Jennings

DC2 Jennings — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:24:54 +0000

Roy,
The Iowas are over 60 years old. I was on a ship that was 50 (oldest ship in the fleet at the time) and it wasn’t pretty. I can only imagine with the Big E is like right now. Also you speak of manning (over 1,000 sailors). How many hole snipes know anything about high pressure boilers and steam turbines in the Navy these days? In fact, the Boiler Tech rate was dissolved into the Machinest Mate rate because all of the boiler fired ships were being decommissioned. Even when the Iowas were pounding the beaches of Kuwait, they were using the antiquated fire control system developed during WWII.
What really needs to be introduced is the rail gun, which is still in the developemental stages.
We need to get over the fact that there aren’t any more big gunned ships. Fact is they aren’t necessary.
The Navy did the right thing in purchasing more DDG-51s at the expense of the DDG-1000. We should do the same with the other programs that are costing us too much money right now.
DC2

By: Roy Smith

Roy Smith — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:07:17 +0000

Someone else besides me keeps bringing up the Iowa Class Battleships.You know,in addition to 4 battleships,we had in storage 2 Des Moines Class Heavy Cruisers.Their guns would have totally complemented the Iowa Class Battleships.All of the "logic" offered as to why this wouldn't work is total bulls**t now because the heavy guns from the DDG 1000 that would make either the Iowa Class or the Des Moines Class ships unnecessary,is being scrapped,oops sorry,only 2 are being built for testing purposes only. Forgive me if I roll my eyes over the logic of this decision.Anybody who SERIOUSLY believes that the DDG 1000 is being canceled for something better to come along just as soon as Naval Research can come up with it is totally full of s**t. We saved money by scrapping all of those nuclear powered cruisers,where the hell did the money go,Area 51,the Bermuda Triangle(I guess that' why it's called "top secret")? I think crack ho's is a more plausible explanation than that.I don't see shit concerning the money saved,where it went to. I just see empty ports where ships used to be.