Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Navy Test-Fires 33-Megajoule Railgun
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JRSherman" data-source="post: 1392645" data-attributes="member: 13432"><p>I am offering nothing but pure speculation, but in my opinion, yes.</p><p></p><p>The Navy has bookoos of guided missile surface ships, guided missile submarines(SSN/SSGN-with 180 missile capability on the GN IIRC) as well as other launch platforms operating in all regions of the world at any given time. </p><p></p><p>What would the effective purpose be of spending over a billion dollars on another "just missile" platform, short of a weapon requiring massive amounts of energy and steam driven speed to put warheads on foreheads in a quicker time frame? Even if they're non-explosive warheads, the reason at the breech is still the same.</p><p></p><p>Those people on that article saying how there will be less explosives on the ship are loons though. What purpose does it serve to make a standalone unit with only one type of weapon system? Goobers!</p><p></p><p>As far as operating on 150 man crews, most cruisers operate on that or less year round. Fast attack subs have a crew of 135 men, including roughly 25 officers and chiefs that don't do anything but paperwork. </p><p></p><p>That's also one of the crappier things about a small nuclear vessel. Small nuclear crews are an absolute bonejob for the enlisted men running the reactor. The rest of the boat is usually a few people overmanned, but nukes are always undermanned and have no choice but to be there. Diesel vessels, you can just lock them up, leave the pier watches there, and everyone goes home. With small nukes, the enlisted guys are guaranteed to stand 24 hours of duty either every other day, or every third day. Depending on which rate you are, you might be there every other day regardless.</p><p></p><p>Nukes on subs were undermanned the entire time I was in the Navy. Carriers don't have that problem because all the female nukes go to carriers, as well as everybody else who is half sane. Lots of issues go into small nuclear vessels.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JRSherman, post: 1392645, member: 13432"] I am offering nothing but pure speculation, but in my opinion, yes. The Navy has bookoos of guided missile surface ships, guided missile submarines(SSN/SSGN-with 180 missile capability on the GN IIRC) as well as other launch platforms operating in all regions of the world at any given time. What would the effective purpose be of spending over a billion dollars on another "just missile" platform, short of a weapon requiring massive amounts of energy and steam driven speed to put warheads on foreheads in a quicker time frame? Even if they're non-explosive warheads, the reason at the breech is still the same. Those people on that article saying how there will be less explosives on the ship are loons though. What purpose does it serve to make a standalone unit with only one type of weapon system? Goobers! As far as operating on 150 man crews, most cruisers operate on that or less year round. Fast attack subs have a crew of 135 men, including roughly 25 officers and chiefs that don't do anything but paperwork. That's also one of the crappier things about a small nuclear vessel. Small nuclear crews are an absolute bonejob for the enlisted men running the reactor. The rest of the boat is usually a few people overmanned, but nukes are always undermanned and have no choice but to be there. Diesel vessels, you can just lock them up, leave the pier watches there, and everyone goes home. With small nukes, the enlisted guys are guaranteed to stand 24 hours of duty either every other day, or every third day. Depending on which rate you are, you might be there every other day regardless. Nukes on subs were undermanned the entire time I was in the Navy. Carriers don't have that problem because all the female nukes go to carriers, as well as everybody else who is half sane. Lots of issues go into small nuclear vessels. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Navy Test-Fires 33-Megajoule Railgun
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
