LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
They looked neater than they performed. They were expensive and designed for fast strike, not for the roles of other small combatants in the US Navy.Originally Posted by Master Chief
Iowa Class Battleships
Virginia Class Nuclear Attack Submarines
Amphibious Assault Ships
Aerligh Burk Class Destroyers
Nimitz Class Carriers
Littoral Combat Ships
Ok, all the numbers came from "Jane's Warships" 2006 edition.
As for the Sovremennny class DDG's, why I said I love them I think they are a well balanced ship. Good AAW and Good ASuW. And now they have a mod. version not sure if its russian or china that made the VLS. I think the Udaloy II are ok, when they changed the to the SS-N-22 missiles. Now I know they most likly could not put 1/2 of theses units to sea at any one time but that is the numbers Jane's is putting out.
And as for the Pegasus class, for a small littoral ship. Why not fast and good armament. Perfect for gulf area work. Hell 8 harpoons, and a 3 in Dp-gun. At least good to keep them for the coast gaurd ships.
Last edited by Master Chief; 21 Dec 06, at 19:48.
They looked neater than they performed. They were expensive and designed for fast strike, not for the roles of other small combatants in the US Navy.
Thanks MC!!
Just my take:
Its hard for me to call the Sovs "wel-balanced" when ASW capability is virtually non-existent.
However if you operate a Sov and Udaloy together thats a "horse of a different color".
But surprisingly the Russain Navy doesnt do this at least not often. It been my observation that two Udaloys are more often seen operating together.
But they lack an area AAW missile system.
Of course this may be a fuction of availability.
The Sovs propulsion system has been a headache whether this is due to inherent design flaws or lack of proper maintenance funding is not quite clear.
It should be interesting to watch China's experience with the class over the next few years as the newness wears.
On the Pegasus: They were fast and they did carry Harpoons. But good CG cutters? I dont see the utility. And as Galrahn seems to hint at far to expensive for the CG to operate.
Most nations seem to be attempting to gradually wean themeselves of small,fast combatants.
OPVs/Frigates over 1000 tons full load(In some cases far over) becoming more popular as they are seen as more useful over a broader array of missions. And better seakeeping abilities in general.
IMHO what really drives the size of LCS is effective, efficient & safe all-weather helicopter operations.
Again another of my observations is that ships under 3000tons full-load are hard-pressed at best to meet that requirement.
The ones that we just got definitely do not have VLS. If you are thinking about the shtil VLU, that's not really ready yet, but is planned to go on project 22350 I think.
Yes, there is a version of the Sov. with VLS I have to find the picture and info on it.
I was totaly wrong about the VLS sov. class. It was a moc-up. Sorry I stand corrected.
"Peace through Power" Late Ronald Reagan
Diesel Electrics are needed to train against future threats.
W
To return to its traditional ways that have gone by the wayside.
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.
USN needs more Flight II/A Burkes. With the decommisioning of the last of the Spruance, there is a lack of LAMPS III capability in the surface fleet.
Amen!
"Peace through Power" Late Ronald Reagan
Ahhh...but as envisioned when they came out in the '80s, battleship battle groups are capable of acting as fillers for the CVBG's, and add Presence and Power Projection
Any international dispute can be resolved through the liberal application of cruise missiles.
Why would they not be able to hit targets on top of a mountain?? And even, supposing, that the guns couldnt, we still have those 'hawks. Not that I ever contemplated t-hawk strikes at high altitude when I was shooting, mind you...
Any international dispute can be resolved through the liberal application of cruise missiles.
Really?? I am of the mindset that the term obsolete is actually obsolete nowadays. We have already proven that all that's needed is the will and the $$$...look at the buffs
Any international dispute can be resolved through the liberal application of cruise missiles.
LoL.Most of the battles in Bosnia were more than 50 miles inland. US controlling zone is more than 90 miles inland.
What use of the battleship there?
Do not forget that you still will need an air support for targeting.
If memory serves, that's why the battleships were fitted with Pioneer, and have the capability to operate more advanced UAV's
Any international dispute can be resolved through the liberal application of cruise missiles.
again, as has been stated and and restated on the board, the reason the BB's are not in service is politics, and the air-centric navy
Any international dispute can be resolved through the liberal application of cruise missiles.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: