Zomg BFG

[Matra et Alpine]

Cruise Missile $1.5M *each*
Lump of iron $15 *each*

Lifetime and usage costs will always support BFG solutions.
AND what if the "oppenent" was able to stop fuel getting to the owners of Cruise missiles ?

Even if the gun is $10m then it only takes 10 shots to be cheaper than cruise
AND only one item to service and maintain, not every cruise.
Boeing made $40M converting just 90-odd Cruise from normal to bloxck buster. OUCH

[cmcpokey]

ok... time for the squid to step in.

this has been an ongoing development for about 10 years, to what i can reckon. its all a part of the Zumwalt Class Destroyer program. Also known as DD(X). one of the main problems of the modern navy is its lack of long range gunfire suport. the decommissioning of the iowa class battleships in the 90s led to a significant loss of gun fire capability.

currently the only big guns we have in naval service are the 5" guns found on Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers, and Ticonderoga Class Cruisers, and the 76mm guns found on the Oliver Hazard Perry Class Frigates (the type of ship I am on). These are great for Anti Aircraft, but rather lacking in range and destructive capability when it comes to either engaging Surface Combatants, or Naval Gunfire Support operations for amphibious landings.

The idea of the rail gun is to make a quickly firing, long range, guidable projectile, without the millions of dollars spent on Tomahawks. Great weapons that they are, they just cost huge sums in maintenance, repair, and of course blowing them up. I am a huge proponent of increasing our navy's supply of big guns. And since they have really had a lot of trouble with the development of this gun, it makes me happy to have signs of success.

So for those of you complaining about your tax dollars at work, just think that this investment will pay for it self along down the line. And with luck, those advancements will make their way back to the rest of civilization when you have a small battery powered rail gun you go hunting with.

[clutch-monkey]

So for those of you complaining about your tax dollars at work, just think that this investment will pay for it self along down the line. And with luck, those advancements will make their way back to the rest of civilization when you have a small battery powered rail gun you go hunting with.

a lot of the development work will no doubt lend itself to advancements in other areas as well, no doubt

[Kitdy]

Out of curiosity, when was the last time the US surface ships engaged in active combat against other naval ships?

[cmcpokey]

actually pretty regularly. but typically these days its against small patrol craft size boats. there was the incident with iran a few weeks ago, plus there are numerous incidents like that around the world. we do boardings on suspect commercial vessels all over the world. counter drug smuggling operations in the Caribbean. Anti-piracy in numerous areas. there really are a lot of anti-ship operations. however, there really hasnt been a large scale flet engagement since WW2. there was a lot of tension between the battle groups through the cold war, but there were never any active battles.

[The_Canuck]

Plus this could be used on shoreline targets (like bunkers as they stated) not only other ships...

[Kitdy]

actually pretty regularly. but typically these days its against small patrol craft size boats. there was the incident with iran a few weeks ago, plus there are numerous incidents like that around the world. we do boardings on suspect commercial vessels all over the world. counter drug smuggling operations in the Caribbean. Anti-piracy in numerous areas. there really are a lot of anti-ship operations. however, there really hasnt been a large scale flet engagement since WW2. there was a lot of tension between the battle groups through the cold war, but there were never any active battles.

I was looking for modern US Navy engagements and can't really find anything.

I don't see how the current size of the USN is necessary - even from the perspective of a hawkish conservative. Millions of dollars could be saved with a decrease in the size of the surface fleet and the US could still retain utter dominance of all other fleets in the world.

What happened in this incident with Iran anyways?

[clutch-monkey]

^ i figure a lot of the US fleet is transport for various detachments and supplies - which need protection.
iirc teeth to tail ratio of combat formations to supply formations is 1 to 9

[baddabang]

I was looking for modern US Navy engagements and can't really find anything.

I don't see how the current size of the USN is necessary - even from the perspective of a hawkish conservative. Millions of dollars could be saved with a decrease in the size of the surface fleet and the US could still retain utter dominance of all other fleets in the world.

What happened in this incident with Iran anyways?

Some Iranians in a few dingys decided it would be a great idea to drive straight toward a fleet of American naval ships. After the USS Cole incident the navy isn't taking any chances.

[cmcpokey]

I was looking for modern US Navy engagements and can't really find anything.

I don't see how the current size of the USN is necessary - even from the perspective of a hawkish conservative. Millions of dollars could be saved with a decrease in the size of the surface fleet and the US could still retain utter dominance of all other fleets in the world.

What happened in this incident with Iran anyways?

the reason the size of the US navy seems so large compared to what we do is because you dont actually know all of the things we do. its not a classification issue, just that there are a lot of things we do that the regular public just doesnt see. couple that with the fact that we are desparate to modernize our fleet (we have a large percentage of our fleet commissioned in the 60s-early 80s) and that our missions are dramatically changing, and there is a definite need for not just new ships, but completely different ships than we have previously needed.

large scale fleet engagements that existed in WW2, and that we were preparing for in the cold war have gone away. we are the most dominant navy in the world. no other navy can project their power anywhere in the world like we can. there are other navies that have as good, or better ships. the brits, canadians, aussies, spanish, and to a much lesser extent these days, the russians, all have large navies with real capabilities. they just dont have the world wide presence that we have. compund that with the fact that tey are all our allies, and we dont have a whole lot to worry about.

these days we are more worried about brown water confrontatons. the littoral zones where small patrol boats live. its the primary makeup of a vast majority of the worlds navies, and one where we have been lacking. the DD(X) program that ientioned before has taken a lot of hits, due to the seeming irrelevance of that sort of warship, especially since we have over 50 Arleigh Burke Destroyers. it does remain a mystery though why the governament has reduced funding for the LCS which really seems to be the future of the US Navy.

and Badda pretty well covered the iranian incident.

[The_Canuck]

there are other navies that have as good, or better ships. the brits, canadians, aussies, spanish, and to a much lesser extent these days, the russians, all have large navies with real capabilities.

yea! even if our subs are decades old and catch on fire more then B.C...

[clutch-monkey]

there are other navies that have as good, or better ships. the brits, canadians, aussies, spanish, and to a much lesser extent these days, the russians, all have large navies with real capabilities.

eh, our navy is pretty small and we pretty much specialise in minesweeping to compliment the US navy afaik.
we have a few destroyers and some subs but thats it

yea! even if our subs are decades old and catch on fire more then B.C...

holy shit, did you get the same submarines as us?

[fisetdavid26]

holy shit, did you get the same submarines as us?

If yours are old subs bought from the Royal Navy, then yes.

[2ndclasscitizen]

Some Iranians in a few dingys decided it would be a great idea to drive straight toward a fleet of American naval ships. After the USS Cole incident the navy isn't taking any chances.

Except that while you Yanks got all worried, when the Iranians tried to give the Aussie navy shit, all the Aussie sailors just shouted and swore at the Iranians till they buggered off.

Win.

[clutch-monkey]

If yours are old subs bought from the Royal Navy, then yes.

ah, i just wiki'd it and apparently we built them using swedish tech. figures they'd catch fire, we don't have a history of building the damn things...
iirc they're now fixed with help from the US navy. i guess the risk of having them, you know, get lost at sea with all hands was a good prompt to fix it up