[Newsbot]

Title: South China Sea: Chinese ship forces US destroyer off course
Category: World
Posted By: DrCaleb
Date: 2018-10-02 10:07:36

[BartSimpson]

Sounds like a good enough reason to reactivate a couple of battleships. Chinese destroyers won't even make a dent in those beasts.

[llama66]

Bullshittery on the high seas in not cool

[BartSimpson]

llama66 llama66:

Bullshittery on the high seas in not cool

China thinks that just because they drew a line around something that they can make it theirs.

And it's this bit of chicanery and thievery on their part that's behind the 75% content component of the new NAFTA. Trump is stopping the flow of dollars to the Chicom military and he's strangling their ability to expand in the Pacific.

They know it.

[llama66]

Maybe those arsenal ships you scrapped need to be revisited or..or...or build the Montana Class BBN

[BartSimpson]

llama66 llama66:

Maybe those arsenal ships you scrapped need to be revisited or..or...or build the Montana Class BBN

There is a place for an armored ship with a nice, thick hull. This nonsense of warships that can't take a hit from a fishing boat needs to come to an end.

[llama66]

BBCVN?

[xerxes]

llama66 llama66:

BBCVN?

The IJN had that idea back in the day:

[llama66]

Only cool if it had the type 94 guns

[xerxes]

Sorry. Ise-Class, not Yamato class. 14in. Type 91 guns.

[llama66]

Dammit let's fit some type 94's on this bitch with a couple dozen VTOL fighters and gunships and name it the "Kick-ass class" or someshit.

[rickc]

I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.

[CDN_PATRIOT]

Time for someone to give the Chinese a bloody nose.

-J.

[llama66]

rickc rickc:

I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.

Problem is, I think, cost. Those shiny Zumwalt's that were to replace the Arleigh Burke destroyer cost ~4.5 billion a unit. The Arleigh Burke (Gen 3) costs ~1.8bn to build.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

rickc rickc:

I thought that gunships (not as large as battleships of course) were supposed to be making a comeback due to the magnetic rail gun. They do not need to carry gun powder bags, and the projectiles do not have a warhead. No more need to worry about the fatal shot to the magazine. Smaller faster ships are harder to hit and you do not sacrifice as much when the ship does go down.

Problem is, I think, cost. Those shiny Zumwalt's that were to replace the Arleigh Burke destroyer cost ~4.5 billion a unit. The Arleigh Burke (Gen 3) costs ~1.8bn to build.

Pffft! That's only 1 B-2 bomber each! Cheap!