CG(X)es to be CGNs

[Lonestar]

25,000 tons(potentially) isn't big enough for you?

Larger size is normally only need for special missions. If the CG(X)N does get to the 25,000tons size it's likely because there will be a weapons load that will physically require it to be that size. As in, the actual munitions will be that big(hint, hint, BMD interceptor missiles).

[ray245]

Nope...even though the idea of large ships isn't that useful...I still hope to see a large modern battleship that is 250M and above.

[Sidewinder]

I have suspicions regarding the decision to change CG(X) into CGN(X).

The CG(X) is intended to replace the existing Ticonderoga-class Aegis cruisers and provide improved missile defense and air warfare capabilities. It will share with DD(X) a common propulsion architecture and a stealthier, faceted hull form with tumblehome bow. This hull form will contain an integrated all-electric power system that is more efficient and survivable than today's propulsion systems, and provides more power capacity for future weapons.

While the planned CG21 was much bigger than the DD21, the CG(X) is essentially a DD(X) hull with more VLSs in place of the gun system, displacing about 14,000 tons. The CG(X) will mark a narrowing of the previously much larger difference between cruisers and destroyers (see also 1975 ship reclassification).

Will a nuclear reactor fit in a modified CG(X) hull, or will they have to design a new hull from the keel up?

[Stark]

Nope...even though the idea of large ships isn't that useful...I still hope to see a large modern battleship that is 250M and above.

While we're talking about wasting resources on giant white elephants, did you just say 250 MILLION tons? You're *insane*. Even if you mean 250,000t, it's *still* nuts.

[Vain]

Nope...even though the idea of large ships isn't that useful...I still hope to see a large modern battleship that is 250M and above.

While we're talking about wasting resources on giant white elephants, did you just say 250 MILLION tons? You're *insane*. Even if you mean 250,000t, it's *still* nuts.

I think he meant 250 meters and above.

[Sea Skimmer]

Supertanker sized warships have been considered, the cost of a 250,000 ton ton hull isn’t very much compared to the all up cost of a modern surface warship. You’d suffer a major penalty on speed and docking, but you’d have good protection against under the keel torpedo and mine hits.

[tim31]

What role would a 250,000 tonne warship play? Battleship? Super Dreadnought? Certainly not littoral warfare What sort of close in weapons systems would you need for a ship that size?

[ray245]

What role would a 250,000 tonne warship play? Battleship? Super Dreadnought? Certainly not littoral warfare What sort of close in weapons systems would you need for a ship that size?

I have no idea...I just like the idea of large warship. Hmm...maybe it can be useful as a white elephant...

[Ritterin Sophia]

What role would a 250,000 tonne warship play? Battleship? Super Dreadnought? Certainly not littoral warfare What sort of close in weapons systems would you need for a ship that size?

SeaRAMs, lots and lots of SeaRAMs. Also you could turn it into the equivelant of an oversized seagoing MRLS with some pretty beefy munitions, the problem is you're pretty much painting a bullseye on it..

[phongn]

SeaRAMs, lots and lots of SeaRAMs. Also you could turn it into the equivelant of an oversized seagoing MRLS with some pretty beefy munitions, the problem is you're pretty much painting a bullseye on it..

Why would you put lots and lots of SeaRAM launchers on it?

[Ritterin Sophia]

SeaRAMs, lots and lots of SeaRAMs. Also you could turn it into the equivelant of an oversized seagoing MRLS with some pretty beefy munitions, the problem is you're pretty much painting a bullseye on it..

Why would you put lots and lots of SeaRAM launchers on it?

Sea RAM is the replacement for the phalanx, which has a much shorter range and can not deal with multiple incoming targets at once, you'd want to leave it completely defenseless?

[That NOS Guy]

Sea RAM is the replacement for the phalanx, which has a much shorter range and can not deal with multiple incoming targets at once, you'd want to leave it completely defenseless?

Obviously as defense against all the ASMs it would attract

[phongn]

Sea RAM is the replacement for the phalanx, which has a much shorter range and can not deal with multiple incoming targets at once, you'd want to leave it completely defenseless?

Why would the ship be defenseless without "lots and lots" of SeaRAM launchers?

[Ritterin Sophia]

Sea RAM is the replacement for the phalanx, which has a much shorter range and can not deal with multiple incoming targets at once, you'd want to leave it completely defenseless?

Why would the ship be defenseless without "lots and lots" of SeaRAM launchers?

That thing's a big target, and people are going to know shit loads of money are sunk into this thing. With the numbers of AshM's this thing is going to be attracting, with anything but SeaRAMs it may as well be defenseless.

[phongn]

That thing's a big target, and people are going to know shit loads of money are sunk into this thing. With the numbers of AshM's this thing is going to be attracting, with anything but SeaRAMs it may as well be defenseless.

And putting in large numbers of SM-2ER and ESSM isn't a better solution? Or tying in conventional RAM launchers with more sophisticated sensors than available on the autonomous SeaRAM launcher?

[Phantasee]

When it's that big, you have room for lots of anything.

[Ritterin Sophia]

That thing's a big target, and people are going to know shit loads of money are sunk into this thing. With the numbers of AshM's this thing is going to be attracting, with anything but SeaRAMs it may as well be defenseless.

And putting in large numbers of SM-2ER and ESSM isn't a better solution? Or tying in conventional RAM launchers with more sophisticated sensors than available on the autonomous SeaRAM launcher?

The Standard missile is not good for shooting down cruise missiles, ballistic missiles perhaps but that's a different challenge altogether, I'm talking about lots of close-in weapons for shooting enemy AShM's out of the air. And with Sea RAM being autonomous you can focus on your other weapons while your ship self-defends, it's not like I'm proposing that'd be the only weapon.

[Illuminatus Primus]

That thing's a big target, and people are going to know shit loads of money are sunk into this thing. With the numbers of AshM's this thing is going to be attracting, with anything but SeaRAMs it may as well be defenseless.

And putting in large numbers of SM-2ER and ESSM isn't a better solution? Or tying in conventional RAM launchers with more sophisticated sensors than available on the autonomous SeaRAM launcher?

The Standard missile is not good for shooting down cruise missiles, ballistic missiles perhaps but that's a different challenge altogether, I'm talking about lots of close-in weapons for shooting enemy AShM's out of the air. And with Sea RAM being autonomous you can focus on your other weapons while your ship self-defends, it's not like I'm proposing that'd be the only weapon.

What are you talking about? Standard and ESSM is the primary air defense of modern guided missile destroyers and cruisers; RAM is a point-defense. SM-3 is an ABM, but SM-2-ER and SM-2 are for defense against AShMs as well as aircraft.

[KlavoHunter]

Of course, you do remember that Congress allocated money and directed the USAF to buy several dozen F-12B Mach 3+ interceptors; but McNamara killed it through sleight of hand...so this isn't a 100% done deal yet.

Are you insinuating that we have some sort of McNamera as the DoD right now, who will kill every intelligent defense project we have going?

[Ritterin Sophia]

And putting in large numbers of SM-2ER and ESSM isn't a better solution? Or tying in conventional RAM launchers with more sophisticated sensors than available on the autonomous SeaRAM launcher?

The Standard missile is not good for shooting down cruise missiles, ballistic missiles perhaps but that's a different challenge altogether, I'm talking about lots of close-in weapons for shooting enemy AShM's out of the air. And with Sea RAM being autonomous you can focus on your other weapons while your ship self-defends, it's not like I'm proposing that'd be the only weapon.

What are you talking about? Standard and ESSM is the primary air defense of modern guided missile destroyers and cruisers; RAM is a point-defense. SM-3 is an ABM, but SM-2-ER and SM-2 are for defense against AShMs as well as aircraft.

Do you have an article, not that I don't believe you, but most technical discussions or articles I've read on the SM-2ER paints its viability against missiles as only the ballistic variety.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Of course, you do remember that Congress allocated money and directed the USAF to buy several dozen F-12B Mach 3+ interceptors; but McNamara killed it through sleight of hand...so this isn't a 100% done deal yet.

Are you insinuating that we have some sort of McNamera as the DoD right now, who will kill every intelligent defense project we have going?

The XM2001 was killed off by Rumsfeld in '02 in favour of the FCS Program, considering that this hasn't been rescinded by Gates and we're still building the LCS, yes, yes I do believe we are.

Incidentally, I'm trying to remember which Defense Secretary tried to kill of the Super Carriers. Can someone remind me?

[phongn]

And with Sea RAM being autonomous you can focus on your other weapons while your ship self-defends, it's not like I'm proposing that'd be the only weapon.

But you don't want full autonomy, you want all your defensive systems tied into one network if feasible. It's not like this ship will be lacking for computer power or radar facilities to track a huge host of inbounds.

SeaRAM and Phalanx are autonomous, yes, but that's because Phalanx was designed as a "bolt-on" solution and SeaRAM its replacement.

Do you have an article, not that I don't believe you, but most technical discussions or articles I've read on the SM-2ER paints its viability against missiles as only the ballistic variety.

Um, virtually every article of any credibility mentions that SM-2ER as primarily defending against antiship missiles and aircraft. Block IVA added TBM defense capability, but that was scrapped in favor of loading both SM-3 and SM-2 onboard ships.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The whole point of AEGIS is to fully-integrate an air defense system from missiles (Standard) to radar (SPY-1) and allowing it to tackle many targets simultaneously and according to prioritization. I'm afraid you're seriously mistaken. If you are relying on RAM you have a serious problem because that means inbounds have failed to be neutralized by the primary defense system. Autonomous defense systems can waste defensive capacity by all targeting the same inbound; they're not talking to each other - that's what "autonomy" means.

[Lonestar]

The XM2001 was killed off by Rumsfeld in '02 in favour of the FCS Program, considering that this hasn't been rescinded by Gates and we're still building the LCS, yes, yes I do believe we are.

Incidentally, I'm trying to remember which Defense Secretary tried to kill of the Super Carriers. Can someone remind me?

Oh, oh, I know! Is it "Rumsfeld"?

[Drooling Iguana]

When peak oil hits, would hooking these and other nuclear-powered naval vessels up to the grid alleviate the energy crisis in any significant way?

It seems that they only way to get a nuclear power plant approved these days is to build a ship around it.