Defcon 6

DD(X) is going into production by 08-09.

Anyways, regardless this ship does have TMD capability. Go and look at the specs, specifically the missiles it carries. I'll give you a hint, it starts with an S.

Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) is being developed as part of the US Navy’s sea-based ballistic missile defense system and will provide theater-wide defense against medium and long range ballistic missiles. In 1992, the Terrier LEAP (Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile) demonstration program culminated in four flight tests and demonstrated the feasibility of theater-wide ballistic missile defense. This program evolved into today’s SM-3 development program which is based on the SM-2 Block IV airframe and propulsion stack, but incorporates a Third Stage Rocket Motor, a GPS/INS Guidance Section and the SM-3 Kinetic Warhead.

The United States Navy and the Missile Defense Agency are developing Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) as part of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System that will provide allied forces and U.S. protection from short to intermediate range ballistic missiles. The SM-3 Kinetic Warhead (KW) is designed to intercept an incoming ballistic missile outside the earth’s atmosphere. SM-3 is under development by Raytheon at its Missile Systems business unit in Tucson, Arizona.




The Patriot missile system is a good example of this. It can intercept cruise missiles or ballistic missiles, and it can hit aircraft too should the target teams choose to do so. Thats an example, it's more about the fire control systems than the actual missile.



Evidently you missed the rest of the point. You don't understand the idea of wasteful. And honestly, when is a carrier fleet going to run down a freighter? And another thing, you don't have a clue about what tactics it would use. You haven't considered.

The DD(X) is not a budget breaker according to the Navy. Your talking about the U.S Military. An aircraft carrier costs 13 billion dollars. A missile cruiser cost 2 billion. And a DD(X) costs 4.2 billion. A 5.2 billion dollar BB that can handle the work of multiple missile cruisers as well as NCSF support as well as limited support in other areas.


Million dollar missiles are not a substitute. I already made this point. The military used over 40 tomahawk cruise missiles on ONE bunker in Iraq back in 2003. 40! Do your math. Obviously they don't work for every purpose.

JDAM's have to be dropped within 15 miles of tha target, it's just a guided bomb. So it's irrelevant in this arguement don't you think? A 16" shell can fly 300 miles versus a 15 mile guided bomb?

Even a conventional Iowa class 16" gun could fire 23 miles.

No, clearly you don't understand the system or the requirement. They were not activated for this second gul war because they can't get into range since they only have a range of 23 miles. In the first Gulf War they camped off the coast of Kuwait and fired at Iraqi targets in Kuwait. Thats why they aren't activated for this second gulf war. Next time do your research. And also, the secnav is currently thinking about reactivating them because of the DD(X) delay.

41 kts is enough to overtake any current vessel on the sea. The ship isn't built to be a speed boat.

I submit that you don't understand how Mermaid pods work. They are more fuel efficient than current naval propulsion applications. Combined with a USN nuclear naval reactor and your point quickly dissolves.

No, no additional cost constraints. Thats the magic behind the Mermaid pod, you can equip multiple pods without huge increases in cost. They can be fit all along the bottom of the vessel. Missiles or torpedoes are after thoughts. They don't matter. Furthermore, I stated what the speed difference is for.

Closing warfare is not a term from the 1940's. It's a modern term.

Or rather it was around in some term during the 1940's. This just shows you don't actually understand the concepts or tactics behind such a vessel.



Irreleavant

Have them try it. Its a pontless arguement, submarines are force dislocators.

Seal teams are pointless in modern warfare. You don't consider a special ops team as a front line asset. The two gulf wars aside from what you think are not actual wars. They are conflicts really.

Doesn't need one. However it does have UAV support. And I suppose it could have helo support, but just not based on the ship. Helo support is irrelevant. The Iowa class BB's do have helo decks. So obviously someone thought of that idea before. This is just a question of whether I believe it's nessesary or not.


10 inch guns were rarely used in any naval application, and why underdog it? The 16 inch gun carries possibility for higher caliber and greater range combined with stronger punch.

Because those decisions are still forcing naval big wigs to cope with the fact that missiles will never be king. They still need more fire power for ground support. And with the advent of the guided shell, naval warfare is now possible using naval guns once again. And rail guns will just reinforce this when they are perfected. Designing a 10 inch gun is pointless, missiles can handle something that needs less fire power.

Except, you overlooked the real reason. The Navy needs bigger guns. Their extreme expenses with cruise missiles just reinforces this. A bigger gun can shoot further with those rocket assisted shells. And my advanced propellants increase that range further. Thats is like asking why use a cruise missile when you can use a rocket propelled grenade?

Also, the reason that WW2 style turrets had 3 guns per turret isn't to increase firing rate. They usually fired all at the same time. It was for increased salvo efficiency.

This idea is here to stay. A decade ago the Navy came up with the idea for an arsenal ship. But it didn't have any guns, so they trashes it. All it had was cruise missiles and that was not good enough. So that eventually led to the DD(X), which has extreme range with its gun. Which opens up the reasoning for a BB.

And to be honest, if I used conventional hull design, and kept all the rest of the features I've mentioned, I could build my ship for little more than a current burke cruiser. By I didn't, because I want it to be stealthy, and I want it to have the best features. The Navy wants a futuristic, ship, well here it is.