OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell

OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

Rusty1961 -> OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/11/2018 10:47:17 PM)
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ev5e5j/navy-smart-shells-zumwalt-warship "In late 2016, the Navy admitted it couldn’t afford to spend $600 million per vessel to arm just three ships with a full ammo load. The service cancelled its planned first batch of 2,000 shells, and also suspended a $250 million effort to modify the AGSs to be compatible with different, cheaper rounds" Laughable. Can't even afford the ammo for the ship.

Lokasenna -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/12/2018 2:00:43 AM)
Yes, and? State of the art stuff is expensive. What's your point?

BullwinkleMogami -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/12/2018 2:43:58 AM)
Hi, If 1,000,000 per load out was what was required to win we would spend 1,000,000 per load out. We would spend whatever was required to win. In peace time we have to justify spending and perhaps 600,000 is too much. In peace time. Let the ammo be expended in war and the cost does not matter. There is a vast difference in justifying cost in peacetime compare to war time.

Treetop64 -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/12/2018 4:26:33 AM)
Big difference between pinching pennies for loadouts on experimental platforms in peacetime, and shovelling aboard all that's needed in war. You can afford to be cheap and picky when no one's shooting at you.

FlyByKnight -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/12/2018 4:47:11 AM)
Meh, the source is a division of Vice. They've got their preferred goals and "slant" when it comes to reporting these things.

Klahn -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/12/2018 7:34:56 AM)
The original cost per round was supposed to be $35,000. It shot up after the Navy cancelled almost all of the Zumwalts. The original plan was for a class of 32 ships. The final procurement was 3. The cost of the ships themselves has shot up to $7.5 billion each. Because the guns on the Zumwalt are not usable, it's basically an 80 cell VLS platform with 1 helo and no other capabilities. For comparison, an Arleigh Burke with 96 VLS cells, 2 helos, a 5" gun, CIWS, and torpedoes costs about $1.8 billion fully armed and outfitted.

joey -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/12/2018 8:49:55 PM)
I am shocked; I guess I should not be. But three ships without guns or defensive weapons.... Well at least I have yet another topic to discuss in my college classes.

John 3rd -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/12/2018 10:05:22 PM)
Totally depressing and slightly funny...

Klahn -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/13/2018 5:35:12 AM)
It's an odd duck. It's a stealth ship that was designed for fire support of landing forces. The Navy pointed at the Zumwalt (an evolution of the DD-21 project) as the ship that would replace the Iowa class BBs in that role. In adddition, they planned for a long range munition for the 5" gun on Arleigh Burke class DDGs. That program was also cancelled. A gunfire support ship seems an odd choice for a stealth ship anyway as it can't do it's mission very far from shore. It would be mixed in with a busy array of amphibious warships, landing support ships, and their escorts, which aren't stealthy at all. In fact, the Navy seems to have agreed that the stealthiness of the ship isn't a useful feature. They have ordered a steel deckhouse instead of the stealthy composite deckhouse for the last ship being built in an effort to lower costs. I'm pretty sure at this point that the Navy would love to have every dollar back that was invested in this program. Interesting tidbit: The first commanding officer of USS Zumwalt was named James Kirk.

Barb -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/13/2018 7:12:51 AM)
It tends to boil down into a costs (as all things do): Few multi-purpose ships are costly, but easier to man. But as there are few of them the readiness had to be kept up as much as possible. On the other hand each ship/component cost much more just because there are few of them. Bad thing here is multi-purpose usually do not excel in any single role :D Many single-purpose ships could be obtained at the same price, but will require considerable manpower. On the other hand, maintenance can be slower, and components are much cheaper as there are lot of them. Bad thing here is that single-purpose tends to be not so good at any other mission. Similar to the F-35 vs F-16/18. The requirements for the "state-of-the-art" are so upped that it simply drives the costs and development time sky-high with hope it will decrease long-term costs. On the other hand acquiring "not-so-good" things will probably result in lower buying cost, but higher maintenance/upkeep cost to keep it competitive. To add more fun the the whole thing, the financial institutions (states included) usually got money allocated in two different packages: "Operational Expenses" (or OPEX) and "Capital Expenses" (CAPEX). In the military this would mean approximately: OPEX - fuel, manpower costs, building maintenance, paint, ammo expended on exercises, general maintenance (ship painting, plane maintenance, ..) etc. CAPEX - major modernization programs, obtaining new equipment, obtaining new buildings, land, etc. And here is the "cherry-on-the-cake": THESE TWO ARE USUALLY NOT INTERCHANGEABLE! And institutions (states/military included) are closely watched for their OPEX/CAPEX. High OPEX is not something what you want to see in budget considerations :D

Lokasenna -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/14/2018 12:30:34 AM)
And it's worth noting that manpower in the modern military is not cheap. Which is a good thing, for several reasons - the highly qualified people the military needs to man the high tech "stuff" find other industries just as or more attractive. Also, new ship designs (of which a LCS of this size and modularity is really a first) always cost much more than any successors. It's the cost of R&D, basically. It's not so much that it's "a stealth ship that was designed for fire support of landing forces", it's that it was designed for fire support of landing forces, while also being something of a stealth ship, while also being something of a destroyer, while also being a missile platform, etc.

Rusty1961 -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/14/2018 12:57:40 AM)
https://news.usni.org/2018/07/11/second-zumwalt-destroyer-needs-new-engine-turbine-blades-damaged-sea-trials Okay, the ship was designed around a gun that doesn't work or is too expensive to use and now the engine designed is flawed. What is it about these new weapon systems?

FlyByKnight -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/14/2018 3:23:30 AM)
It's just another symptom of the modern-day obsession with flashy and fancy technology, obvious problems be damned. quote: What is it about these new weapon systems?

BBfanboy -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/14/2018 6:25:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CharlieVane It's just another symptom of the modern-day obsession with flashy and fancy technology, obvious problems be damned. quote: What is it about these new weapon systems? If that ship is one of the new stealth ones, chances are they were trying out new tech in turbine engines to make them quieter too. Such failures during initial deployment seem to be par for the course in rolling out new technology, but usually they find a solution and end up with something impressive. USAF and NASA had lots of rocket failures developing the first IRBMs and ICBMs, but that led to quite reliable systems for the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs.

Rusty1961 -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/14/2018 11:51:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CharlieVane Meh, the source is a division of Vice. They've got their preferred goals and "slant" when it comes to reporting these things. Agreed...how is USNI press for credibility? https://news.usni.org/2018/01/11/no-new-round-planned-zumwalt-destroyer-gun-system-navy-monitoring-industry

Rusty1961 -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/14/2018 11:53:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lokasenna And it's worth noting that manpower in the modern military is not cheap. Which is a good thing, for several reasons - the highly qualified people the military needs to man the high tech "stuff" find other industries just as or more attractive. . Agreed, training and equipping isn't cheap. Perhaps if we spent even more we could defeat the Taliban?

BBfanboy -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 2:49:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rusty1961 quote: ORIGINAL: Lokasenna And it's worth noting that manpower in the modern military is not cheap. Which is a good thing, for several reasons - the highly qualified people the military needs to man the high tech "stuff" find other industries just as or more attractive. . Agreed, training and equipping isn't cheap. Perhaps if we spent even more we could defeat the Taliban? Defeating people with a different ideology in a country that they live in and we don't is a cultural and political battle, not a military one. First we need the patience to say "This might take two or three generations - 30-50 years. Second, don't attack the people, attack the ignorance that their overlords feed them so that they will actually question the underlying assumptions. Third, show them how a world with more freedom works - a concept they currently find threatening because of the absolutism they have been fed since birth. Access to the Internet and Cell Phones comes to mind as a place to start this revolution in enlightenment. In the meantime, we must stop any actions that appear to be an attack on their religion and culture - they must decide to do that themselves.

Big B -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 1:38:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rusty1961 https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ev5e5j/navy-smart-shells-zumwalt-warship "In late 2016, the Navy admitted it couldn’t afford to spend $600 million per vessel to arm just three ships with a full ammo load. The service cancelled its planned first batch of 2,000 shells, and also suspended a $250 million effort to modify the AGSs to be compatible with different, cheaper rounds" Laughable. Can't even afford the ammo for the ship. The obvious question is - "Will each shell do at least 0ne Million Dollars worth of damage?" If not, someone needs to look at this again and rethink it.

Treetop64 -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 1:42:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rusty1961 What is it about these new weapon systems? It's that it's new. Also, in the case of the DDG 1000s it's radical and innovative. And developed in (relative) peacetime, by a nation that can afford to take on such experiments. Snags are inevitable, more so for complex and unconventional new designs such as the DDG 1000, F35, etc. Finally, unlike in generations past, today we have multiple outlets of a hyperactive 24-hour news cycle, hell-bent on clicks, views, and ratings. The slightest potential story will result in maximum exposure, and presented so that it's emotionally provocative. Anything to make the story more interesting. Objectivity, or even truth be damned.

Big B -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 1:53:33 PM)
It's amazing how many people would give the military a blank cheque - because it's the military. When the cannon was invented in the middle ages, they fired - rocks. Now ideally diamonds would be much better at breaking down stone walls, but they are expensive. Today - we want to shoot diamonds. The entire thing is ridiculous.

Lecivius -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 1:55:00 PM)
All depends on which side of the cannon you are on [:D]

Big B -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 2:00:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lecivius All depends on which side of the cannon you are on [:D] No, it depends on if you actually see them taking YOUR money to pay for it..... for the rest of you and your grandchildren's lives [;)][:D]

Zorch -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 2:05:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B quote: ORIGINAL: Lecivius All depends on which side of the cannon you are on [:D] No, it depends on if you actually see them taking YOUR money to pay for it..... for the rest of you and your grandchildren's lives [;)][:D] War is a great way to waste the wealth of a civilization.

joey -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 2:46:35 PM)
It amazes me that we are $22 trillion in debt and we buy ships that can't shoot. Won't it be more efficient and faster to simply flush the money down the toilet than actually build non-usable ships? Albeit it would have to be a really big toilet.....

FlyByKnight -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 2:47:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B The obvious question is - "Will each shell do at least 0ne Million Dollars worth of damage?" If not, someone needs to look at this again and rethink it. [:D] Now there's the worthwhile question to ask. Gotta get that money back somehow.

Rusty1961 -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 3:11:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B quote: ORIGINAL: Lecivius All depends on which side of the cannon you are on [:D] No, it depends on if you actually see them taking YOUR money to pay for it..... for the rest of you and your grandchildren's lives [;)][:D] Exactly. "The growth rate for interest payments is soaring. In fiscal 2018, the government spent $371 billion on net interest, while the Defense Department budget was $599 billion. ... In comparison, net interest on the public debt increased by $62 billion, or 20 percent.The growth rate for interest payments is soaring. In fiscal 2018, the government spent $371 billion on net interest, while the Defense Department budget was $599 billion. ... In comparison, net interest on the public debt increased by $62 billion, or 20 percent. How much longer before inteset on the debt exceeds military spending????

FlyByKnight -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 6:32:01 PM)
One thing is for sure: the USS Zumwalt's namesake is rolling in his grave. [:o]

rustysi -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 6:41:17 PM)
quote: And it's worth noting that manpower in the modern military is not cheap. Which is a good thing, for several reasons - the highly qualified people the military needs to man the high tech "stuff" find other industries just as or more attractive. Depends upon your outlook. When I was in I didn't make much. Made as much my first year out as four years in the service. I was trained, and all Uncle Sam need do was take a look and say, 'Hey buuuddyyyyy', come on back now.[:D] I'd have been back in, in uniform the next week doing my old military job. Just a different philosophy. quote: It's not so much that it's "a stealth ship that was designed for fire support of landing forces", it's that it was designed for fire support of landing forces, while also being something of a stealth ship, while also being something of a destroyer, while also being a missile platform, etc. OK, but to me the problem is these multi role thingies don't usually do any role all that well. quote: Also, in the case of the DDG 1000s it's radical and innovative. And developed in (relative) peacetime, by a nation that can afford to take on such experiments. Snags are inevitable, more so for complex and unconventional new designs such as the DDG 1000, F35, etc. Fine, but at what point do we say, 'enough is enough'. To spend money just to 'prove' technology is not very cost effective. Take the F-22, amazing aircraft, but unsustainable. Especially when one looks at the F-15. What are we spending all that money on? 'Beware the military industrial complex', Eisenhower.

Lecivius -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 7:36:46 PM)
The F-15 is obsolete. so is the F-16, and the F-18. I know where you are coming from, and what you are trying to say. But the weapons systems you are talking about were mid 70's tech. Think of how far everything else has come. Sure, they have been upgraded repeatedly over the years. And dealing with backwaters like Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran ect. they can get the job done. But a navy sky-king better have his act together if he's flying around the South China Sea, or in the North Atlantic. The guys he's flying against are using 5th generation fighters now. The Russians (and Chinese, and damned near everyone else) are equal to, or beyond the U.S. in many capabilities. That has not happened before in 3 generations. I fully agree this thing was one EXPENSIVE dunsel. And the money could have been spent better elsewhere. But at least this fallacy was caught, and rectified by stopping the entire order of ships. Pushing the envelope costs. Lots. You pay it if you want to continue to be the Top Dog.

Denniss -> RE: OT: DDG Zumwalt....$1,000,000 per shell (11/15/2018 10:12:51 PM)
lots of money for something that didn't work out or can't even shoot. reminds me of the over-expensive F-22 and the other one with overruning costs.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.71875