On 4/21/2014 4:34 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...


The USS Zumwald is just another potential step in the evolution of
destroyer technology and capabilities. It may or may not become the
"go-to" design of the future but in order to determine that, designs,
CAD drawings and schematics have to be turned into hardware for testing.


It shouldn't even be called a Destroyer. It's a Cruiser.
It's 600 feet long.
What next, 300 foot "patrol boats?"
Got a feeling that hull shape won't work well.

Nobody needs battleships or cruisers except the Russia and China. They
haven't been able to steal our designs for smaller missiles. Take a look
at a Soviet Cruiser and tell me what you see?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ch...raina1990a.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US...03-N-5024R-003
_USS_Port_Royal_(DDG_73)_departed_on_deployment.jp g

The technological capabilities of the respective countries in on
display.

The Port Royal is designated a CG. It's about 5000 tons lighter and
40' shorter than the "destroyer" Zumwalt.

It is just a name. There are no more battleships and the Dreadnoughts
and Great White Fleet had "Battleships" that were a whopping 300' in
length.

Destroyers are meant for support of capitol ships and ASW.
Why call the Zumwalt a destroyer? It's not under previous and long held
definitions. Apparently they just "did it."
Pretty stupid calling a cruiser a destroyer.

It is just a name.

Even if the Navy no longer plans to build what they previously called
"destroyers" they should have called the Zumwalt a cruiser.
That's my humble opinion.

When are you going to be the CNO?

That it's named for Zumwalt is fitting. He transformed the Navy from
hard-asses to the "kinder and gentler" Navy.

When my dad had command of a DER he order that all crew would have clean
shaved faces in direct contravention of Zumwalt's new navy. Some in the
crew complained and he said he wasn't going to be writing letters to
mothers and wives of sailors who died from smoke inhalation during
damage control events.

It was hilarious when they change brig to confinement center and
prisoners to confinees.

Now his name is attached to redefining ship classes.

Ship classes changed long before Elmo got his 4th star.

Personally, I don't think that ships will fare well in heavy sea.
It's a cluster**** anyway.

Opinions are like assholes, every one has one and most stink.

Dead end, as the Navy has canceled them, and will build only 3 instead
of the originally planned 32.

Not uncommon at all.

They're going back to building Arleigh Burke class destroyers.

Cheaper, you should be glad.

If they have any sense they'll re-designate the 3 Zumwalt class they
build as cruisers.

Let us know what the CNO when he responds to your plea.



Funny that you mentioned your Dad and his reaction to Zumwalt as CNO.
Not everyone liked the policy changes he ordered. He also set in motion
changes that ultimately had women serving aboard certain types of ships,
a move that many crusty old career sailors had a tough time with. I
remember the debates that went on, discussing things like taking on
ammunition at sea where 50lb and heavier shells had to be loaded by hand
by a line of sailors, passing them from one to another.

By the time my older son served in the Navy women made up a good part of
the crew on the destroyer tender USS Puget Sound (AD-38) that he served
on. They called it the "Love Boat".

When I reported for duty on the USS VanVoorhis in Newport, RI, the
Puget Sound had just been commissioned, was brand spanking new and
initially homeported in Newport. Strange that many years later my son
would be stationed on her.