tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post6425030258558387413..comments2024-01-03T05:18:54.650-05:00Comments on CDR Salamander: 1120s Polishing MK-48s Brighter TodayCDR Salamanderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05981221786954902349noreply@blogger.comBlogger100125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-6753028214118293242012-12-18T01:38:07.888-05:002012-12-18T01:38:07.888-05:00http://www.monclercheapja.com
The "Moncler ...<a href="http://www.monclercheapja.com" title="http://www.monclercheapja.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.monclercheapja.com</a><br /> <br />The "Moncler Online Shop" actually are a big strike within the marketplace. It arrives acquiring a two-way zip together acquiring a detachable drawstring hood. The highest arm options a wise flap pocket together experiencing a felted logo. The hem too characteristics a drawstring as well as sleeve cuffs show up having a ruched elastic snap. The materials of quilted Moncler jackets is 1% polyurethane and 99% polyamide. They have a very 100% authentic directly down filling and 100% polyamide lining. These Moncler Online Shop is mostly donned comfortably on bare pores and pores and skin likewise and very feel immensely comfy and delicate.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-37551546102051071662011-09-25T23:17:08.177-04:002011-09-25T23:17:08.177-04:00Byron,
My understanding was that the fuel tanks we...Byron,<br />My understanding was that the fuel tanks were cracked and leaking as was much of the associated piping. The mast on one had cracked and oddly enough, we never bought the missiles in numbers to arm all the ships that had missile tubes. Missiles were cross decked.Bistronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-72193864282616453552011-09-25T18:32:29.119-04:002011-09-25T18:32:29.119-04:00Or did they realize that upgrading existing unjts,...Or did they realize that upgrading existing unjts, building, learning, EVOLVING, etc is the way to go. Maybe they learned from us that transormational planning and building is not all that positive. If they have political officers onboard pushing their equivalent of diversity, then we know they are as hosed up as we are.LT Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-33186172818213051072011-09-25T14:27:00.160-04:002011-09-25T14:27:00.160-04:00<cont>
Okay so now that we have the role def...<cont><br />Okay so now that we have the role defined, remember when the Kirovs showed up it was one of the primary reasons why Lehman wanted to bring the Iowa's back into the fleet. To provide a counter piece to those heavy units of the Soviet Navy and show Congress that we had units that could compete with those ships. From what I have read in books about both Lehman, US Navy crusier design and general war figthing theory coming from that portion of OpNav; there was a strong push to revive the strike cruiser concept. There was a couple of thoughts of converting the Long Beach or the California class cruisers partially as proof of concept before either going for new build or converting the Virginia class completely. The hold up was rising defense budget costs and rising ship building costs at the time.<br /><br />So with all that being said, a critical eye needs be done about the Kirov class of cruisers. Realistically it is a Jack of All trades, but a master of none. It is capable of hunting surface ships, but needs to depend on other units for OTH targeting. It has a great SAM missile in a navalized version of the SA-10/S-300, but the ground base version of the missile has advance about four major generations since the S-300V1 was introduced back in the early 1984. So though they are deadly SAMs, the ECM systems have jumped radically since they were introduced. It has the ability to be the center piece as well for an ASW hunter/killer group, but its own ASW sensor suite is early 1970's generation and again would need to depend on its own helo's or other units at the outer convergance zone for locating hostile submarines. So to upgrade all four of the ships in this class so they can compete in a 21st century naval combat against 4.5 gen fighter bombers, 5th gen submarines and advance generation EW battlefield, I would almost wonder if the Russians will run of out cash before the first ship leaves the dry-dock.<br /><br />Last deep thought about this is ask yourself a serious question as to why are they trying to upgrade a 20+yr old hull instead of just going with a new build? Are they hurting that much in thier own shipbuilidng industry as the US is?</cont>SouthernAPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-57604955944184859602011-09-25T14:17:35.385-04:002011-09-25T14:17:35.385-04:00OKay deep breath folks.
Lets take a look at what ...OKay deep breath folks.<br /><br />Lets take a look at what the Kirov class of heavy guided missile cruisers were designed for, before we start to argue about what we should build in response.<br />If anyone has read Admiral of the Fleet Sergy Gorhkov's articles in the Soviet Navy's version of Proceedings and read some of testamony, let alone a couple of his books (which are very hard to find outside of Europe or Russia now). Following the Cuban Missile Crisis, he saw the Soviet Navy at the time be defeated by the American Navy. The primary reason was that the Soviet Navy wasn't a blue water navy and that the Soviets didn't have an effective counter to the American/NATO carrier battle groups. So what to do about that? Well he emphaiszed that they have large and long ranged submarines that could be used to hunt/kill the Carriers, he also saw the need of heavy surface groups to either go ripping through the convoys or represent another demision in attacking the NATO carriers. So they started with the Kynda class of Guided Missile Cruisers, which did well but required other ships to escort them into range to use thier Shaddock missiles (SS-N-3's). So if you had a ship that could form the center peice of a carrier killing surface action group, it should be able to be a flagship and be multi-roled. That is what lead to the Kirov class. It was envisioned as being the center piece of a SAG that could also be composed of Slava class, Kynda Class, Kresta I class cruisers that could be the surface element of trying to kill a NATO carrier group. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Soviet-Naval-Tactics-Milan-Vego/dp/0870216759/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1316973546&sr=1-9" rel="nofollow">If you read Milan Vego's book "Soviet Naval Tactics"</a>, and read the chapter about how the Soviets did the Math on carrier kiling, the Kirovs were almost considered a constant on how many surface to surface anti-shipping missiles were needed. Combine that with either an Echo, Juliet, Charlie and Oscar class guided missile submarines and two or more Soviet Naval Avation bomber Regiements with either AS-5, AS-4, AS-6. Then things would have looked grim a NATO carrier group caught in this little trap. That is what let to AEGIS being developed tohelp deal with all that hate. Gorshkov also saw that one of the other ways to tie down NATO carriers was through the use of surface raiders to harass the NATO convoys going from the North American factories and warehouses to the European Battlefields, then it would have given his other naval units a chance to gain and hold the intiative in the Norwegian Seas or even the Med. Think about the Pacific and if there was a Kirov operating in the waters between Hawaiian/Guam shipping lanes going to Korea and consider how many Pac Fleet carriers would not be near the Korean Coast providing air support to the ground war while they were busy hunting this raider?<br /><br /><cont></cont>SouthernAPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-35829554702921071832011-09-25T12:32:19.279-04:002011-09-25T12:32:19.279-04:00You make my point. The LPD's are fine china pr...You make my point. The LPD's are fine china pretty to look at and are good for a very limited amount of options.<br /><br />Radar and tracking systems along with laser, Railgun tech along with other technology is making the idea of attacking a enemy with 1,000,000 missiles a bad equation. Hell im starting to wonder if you might see Strategic bomber groups in the near future flying in close like they used to blasting away with EW and Directed energy weapons in pods.<br /><br />Laser technology is moveing FAST most people dont realise how fast.Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-86393876127883177752011-09-25T09:30:09.952-04:002011-09-25T09:30:09.952-04:00A symptom of the disease, not the disease. So the...A symptom of the disease, not the disease. So there was no real reason we had to waste these nearly-new $1.2B warships. Except inefficiency and stupidity. <br /><br />And we currently have a lack of hulls to meet the stated goals of our Maritime Strategy. <br /><br />F*cking brilliant. We ARE diverse, though. And gay-friendly. That ought to be worth the combat power of half a dozen capital units, right?UltimaRatioRegisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-40358410732979123822011-09-25T09:26:34.572-04:002011-09-25T09:26:34.572-04:00Ack! "Acquainted".Ack! "Acquainted".Grandpa Bluewaternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-32395252301073254372011-09-25T09:24:33.802-04:002011-09-25T09:24:33.802-04:00Closest I can think of is a half Armenian one, but...Closest I can think of is a half Armenian one, but I'm more than a little unclear of the taxonomy and boundary criteria of the whole GLBT think.<br /><br />(Sigh) Doubtless we will all be more aquainted with the dogma as we move further into the thicket.Grandpa Bluewaternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-39326859672103826932011-09-25T09:17:38.063-04:002011-09-25T09:17:38.063-04:00Byron, the DDG-1000 outter hull thickness to rou...Byron, the DDG-1000 outter hull thickness to roughly 2.5 inches steel all alongside the new periferal VLS (PVLS) launchers. It's really a great design idea ! amazing, huh ?Guestnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-74514375611110349502011-09-25T08:54:47.681-04:002011-09-25T08:54:47.681-04:00Bistro,
The 203mm (8") is far more capable t...Bistro,<br /><br />The 203mm (8") is far more capable than a 5" in the role of NGF and ASuW. A 260+ pound projectile does exponentially more damage than a 70 pound projo. <br /><br />As for the survival of an LPD, the ASGMs you talk about are indeed bad boys. But will they automatically sink everything they hit? Especially a 20,000 ton vessel? Dunno. Israel had corvette <i>Hanit</i> back in service inside of a month, and she was a much smaller vessel that took a C-802.UltimaRatioRegisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-47467112446107877632011-09-25T07:31:28.044-04:002011-09-25T07:31:28.044-04:00"<span>I loved the Kidd Class and they ..."<span>I loved the Kidd Class and they were not even ours. Built on a DD hull they managed to serve very usefully as AAW escorts and even, if they tried, ASW escorts. As I understand it and I admit it is an imperfect understanding, the first Tico class ships that were retired were retired due basically to shoddy construction, cracks and faulty welds."</span><br /><span></span><br /><span>Not true, Bistro. The Flight1 CG-47 were decomm'd because it would cost too much to upgrade to VLS... Cracks are simply poor design. Most fractures I've worked (the vast majorite of them) occur near stress points in framing members, say where a longitudinal member crosses a transverse.</span>Byronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-3078861942227248512011-09-25T01:52:02.952-04:002011-09-25T01:52:02.952-04:00I no longer know their names the C801 and C802 ASC...I no longer know their names the C801 and C802 ASCM truck launched SSM that can set up anywhere at all and blow any ship out of the water without warning (launch on visual bearing home on radar target). I liked the SSN2. I never treat these as ATG and its predecessor did (like nukes) but rather as ripple fire or TOT missile fire that overwhelms even a real ASCM defense. Let us agree that the LCS has zed missile defense and the LPD has zed missile defense. Fire 4 missiles at each at roughly the same time. Reason enough to stay 25 miles offshore. I think I would be utterly horrified to read the navy's own analysis of an LPD survival rating against a hostile shore landing.Bistronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-29551318435381556832011-09-25T00:51:11.603-04:002011-09-25T00:51:11.603-04:008in guns carry ALOT more of a punch than the 5in o...8in guns carry ALOT more of a punch than the 5in or 6.5 of the AGS. They are far cheaper and can be made just as acurate as any JDAM from a F-18 or F-35 with the new smart rounds.<br /><br />Add to that the ever increasing power and ability of SAMs and other surface to air systems and it looks like the carrier is really going to have its work cut out for it in the future.<br /><br /> "By the evidence invested in the LCS and LPD there is zero requirement anymore to field warships with shore bombardment or self defense capabilities"<br /><br />BOTH of which are evidence the Navy doesnt know what to build as far as ships anymore.<br /><br />The LCS AND LPD are extemely limited in usefulness. The new LPD's are so big and expensive that they require alot of protection and due to new regulations by the navy WILL NOT GET CLOSER THAN 25knmi to shore. LCS can get near shore is indeed expected to.......just as long as no one wants to sink it.<br /><br />The Marines are constantly ready to fight a War. They need a ship that can provide NGFS. THEY are the ones who want it. Seems they arent just accepting that war wont involve terrorist anymore.<br /><br />Many countries are going for many small Heavily armed combatants like the Chinese FACs. Against that threat a Carrier battle group is in deap shit and a LCS squad is F**ked.<br /><br />Point is when it is needed it is there.<br /><br />Having to wait for the Navy to bring in Carriers to strike the beach, the airforce to bring in B-1, B-2's set up all the air assets EWACS, Refuelers etc. Then take out the AA systems close to the shore while worrying about enemy fighters.......<br /><br />Or you could have dedicated heavy cruisers built to destroy all targets on the shore and then give support and added AA and ASuW for the MEU while its fighters protect the skys and look for more targets means you wouldnt have to wait and could begin operations as needed not wait a month for everything to be inplace. Then after the enemy has take careful measure to fortify and beef up the defenses along his coast line or at key points you have a harder job.<br /><br />Im sure others can give you better reasoning but i have work at 530 and i need to hit the hay.Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-19297540481980510172011-09-24T23:17:04.124-04:002011-09-24T23:17:04.124-04:00Mostly I think it is because they have a more sane...Mostly I think it is because they have a more sane contracting office that pays the shipyard workers roughly a $/hour and does not tolerate the shipyard charging the navy $125/hour for firewatch guys who don't speak Russian whenever there is hotwork involved.<br />Perhaps regrettably, they get what they pay for.Bistronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-2181810802668754882011-09-24T23:11:49.260-04:002011-09-24T23:11:49.260-04:00I loved the Kidd Class and they were not even ours...I loved the Kidd Class and they were not even ours. Built on a DD hull they managed to serve very usefully as AAW escorts and even, if they tried, ASW escorts. As I understand it and I admit it is an imperfect understanding, the first Tico class ships that were retired were retired due basically to shoddy construction, cracks and faulty welds. IIRC these ships were delivered roughly about the same time our premier yards were taken to task for their shoddy production practices delivering Level A welds in nuclear submarines to the extent that much of the welding needed to be redone and as mere Level I (at best) the cruisers were delivered in a more abject state, much as the LCS and LPD have been delivered to date. As you said, their life span should have been a minimum of 30 years and the people were robbed when NAVSEA and SUPSHIPS accepted badly built warships but quality matters. A lot. Somebody like Sal can probably find data to support either your point or mine but I'd look at the maintenance history of a specific warship/contrast with class standard and make the budget call that one was the equivalent of a hanger queen (dispose of) or one is OK and in the main sequence. A ship that spends the bulk of time with a lot of C4 or C3 CASREPS is actually not a net positive contributor and actually sucks resources away from those that are healthy.<br /><br />About the only time that I can recall the 5"54 firing in anger was NIMBLE ARCHER and I don't think 5 vs 8 inch made any difference. For 60 years the issue of Shore Bombardment has not reared it's fun head other than at places like San Clemente Island. Some ROC&POE are unclassified. I'd be interested in what the ROC&POE has to say about any class of modern warship design. By the evidence invested in the LCS and LPD there is zero requirement anymore to field warships with shore bombardment or self defense capabilities. On the other hand I think that is due to the recognition that the CVN aircraft are going to devestate any beach defenses/inland defenses with precision guided munitions long before the first LCAC reaches the beach and by extension they'll clear the route to and vicinity of any LZ that Marine Aviation is going to land in.Bistronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-87170436384457670272011-09-24T22:40:16.117-04:002011-09-24T22:40:16.117-04:00Guest, the Navy hasn't put that thick a hull p...Guest, the Navy hasn't put that thick a hull plate on since the days of WW2. The ONLY place you'll find that thickness of steel is the rudder struts and the bow stem. Even the "keel" isn't very thick. I think the thickest plate on a CG is .75 in just one "strake" (strakes are the plates that are set up in lines running from the keel to the main deck. A strake would be the one closet to centerline). I find it very hard to believe that there would be 2.5" plate in any location other than those mentioned.Byronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-59731595537720410512011-09-24T19:08:53.499-04:002011-09-24T19:08:53.499-04:00http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Des_Moines_class_crui...<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Des_Moines_class_cruiser" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Des_Moines_class_cruiser</a><br /><br />Take that. Remove the aft turret add VLS and a Flight Pad. Remove the 5in guns add 2-4 57mm (or phalanx-R2D2) for CIWS. Add 2 ESSM launchers for farther out AA. Remove the two Forward turrets replace em with 2 twin mounted <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8%22/55_caliber_Mark_71_gun" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8%22/55_caliber_Mark_71_gun</a> (capable of launching twelve rounds a minute compared to the AGS 10-oh yea th rounds can be around 260lbs compared to the 75 of a 5in and the slighty heavier 6.5in (155mm) AGS.<br /><br />Hell what what the Zumwalt is is a Slightly more powerful <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_class_cruiser" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Providence_class_cruiser</a> with more missiles because of VLS.<br /><br />Either nuke powered or Conventional and you have one hell of a mean NGFS vessel and one that can also constribut way above its displacment size for Close in AA and area defense,Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-26029210830369064432011-09-24T18:42:44.600-04:002011-09-24T18:42:44.600-04:00Bistro,
The cost of a hull and propulsion system ...Bistro,<br /><br />The cost of a hull and propulsion system represents what percentage of a ship's cost? The CGNs were at just half their service lives, and were useful hulls for myriad tasks. Perhaps not those they were intended for, but neither were the Gearings when rebuilt for ASW. <br /><br />Could a number of those first five TICOS been refitted with 2 Mk 71 8" guns to be used in a NGFS role? If the Mk 26 launchers could not be replaced by VLS, could the system be removed altogether and the space be used for additional 8" magazines, what a hell of a platform that could have been. <br /><br />As for the rebuild issue, if a capital ship is in need of virtual rebuild after 15-18 years of service because she is so worn out, that speaks to massive problems with the quality of the original build/design or the maintenance performed by the crew and yards. Even so, I tend to agree with you. The "virtual rebuild" versus the cost to replace would not be close. The empty ocean where a CG should have been costs even more.UltimaRatioRegisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-2395180062473760362011-09-24T18:15:07.937-04:002011-09-24T18:15:07.937-04:00URR,
Some of those you mention were truly elegant ...URR,<br />Some of those you mention were truly elegant and powerful warships but they had insurmountable problems that could not really be overcome if one expected to continue to use them in a naval war environment against a like power and I think we'd all agree that it does not pay to underestimate any potential enemy or class of enemy. When I worked with the CGNs they were in escort mode to a flagship in a bad place and did very well, I thought. When I worked with them in another role they were AB but excluded from closing within X of the datum because they were so noisy they'd give the game away. If I worked with Aegis it was lost in the noise of working with the CVN they escorted but I have heard that the five were in need of a virtual rebuild and not worth the cost of repairing. [That's one I've always had trouble accepting even though I've been slammed with it time and again by the beancounters], ie, rather than give you $4400 to fix the transmission on that truck, send it to DRMO and suck it up since it will never be replaced and we'll never authorize a USN number even if you do find an adequate replacement that is within your TOE allowance. One of those early Aegis developed severe cracks just rounding the Horn on its way to San Diego from the builder. It went so far south for UNITAS and continued on around with the CO driving it at full speed in heavy seas until the cracks started to manifest themselves in scary places.Bistronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-68678843225576253072011-09-24T17:40:09.851-04:002011-09-24T17:40:09.851-04:00I have to say I tend to agree with Scott. Let us r...I have to say I tend to agree with Scott. Let us remember that it took just two ancient torpedos to sink the Belgrano which was, admittedly, a light cruiser but one with an armor belt I don't think exists on any extant warships and 2 DD escorts. Before advocating building more and larger and more capable stand alone units one should really study the current and projected ASW situation. The only chance a CVN has it's supporting units and I&W. A look through the relatively recent past will reveal how far the DC standards have slipped from the time of war. If one wants missiles one can't do better than the SSGN. If one advocates an LCS type than one should really study the loss of the Korean corvette Cheonan to a torpedo in recent years and the loss of other light warships/PC due to a surprise attack at very close range.<br /><br />We would read the National Strategy of the US and then the Maritime Strategy and figure out our place in both and what we could expect in resources. I think one of the impediments the navy has in approaching the $thrones is in selling a serious argument that surface ships are survivable in an ASW fight short of coordinated ASW and we all agree that the assets to perform that are rather hollow these days and unlike SWOS who can sincerely believe that there is such a thing as six number one priorities, others know better.Bistronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-2476902590747447192011-09-24T17:18:09.794-04:002011-09-24T17:18:09.794-04:00Modern ships like CG DDG LHD have .5 inch thick st...Modern ships like CG DDG LHD have .5 inch thick steel hull.<br />DDG-1000 has much of her hull ~2.5 inches steel.<br /><br />That's both good and bad. Down side is that USS ZUMWALT will not be a Green ship, since it will take uncountable refuelings over the life of that destroyer to push 15,000 tons (partly submerged) thru the water at typical DD / DDG speeds.<br /><br />DDG-1000 has a small crew about this size of new Coast Guard NSC cutters, however, the TOtal COst of Ownership for 30 years must take into account giant fuel bills.Guestnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-79124472703546452122011-09-24T16:23:49.767-04:002011-09-24T16:23:49.767-04:00We thought those same things just after both WW1 a...We thought those same things just after both WW1 and WW2 then after Korea remembered with the help of the russians who when realising America was serious that we werent going to have another war in europe ad yes we would kill EVERYONE. Just to prove that point went to providing money, intell and weapons to our lower teir enemies. Which has carried on to today. China continues this today it feeds our enemies weapons and money as does russia. China has added another wrinkle to the equasion. Monetary warfare. China and others will not attack tempt the US until they have the advantage. Why build a huge fleet when you just have to have enough of a fleet to stop peirs?<br /><br />The united states is for all purposes a island nation. Add in that fleet take our border down to Panama in a worst case senario and along with Canada as long as the US has a strong Navy we could hold agaisnt anything.<br /><br />Oh one more wrinkle..........we must control space now also.<br /><br /><br />Imagine how fast the Libyan campain would have ended if a Advanced Iowas showed up with a Marine corps MEU? Then of course the part we have a problem with.....DONT STAY TO HELP!!<br /><br />Most people and cities are near the coast line. Those who can control the coast can win.Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-50193445173571718272011-09-24T15:50:24.861-04:002011-09-24T15:50:24.861-04:00Well said. THIS is why I am so on-board with a tru...Well said. THIS is why I am so on-board with a true LCS, a battle cruiser. Works for the interdiction role, NGFS, and as a bonus we have LAMPS through the SH-60B Armed Helo det.Naval_Historiannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-62319831259394124782011-09-24T15:22:01.742-04:002011-09-24T15:22:01.742-04:00Remember, it took about 18 torps to sink Yamato......Remember, it took about 18 torps to sink Yamato... Iowa is not much worse in the underwater defence, i think.ewok40knoreply@blogger.com