• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Railguns

P

philbob

Commander
Red Shirt
... Well naval fans what do you think...
gonna see a return of the battleship
carriers are too expensive and there is now a global trend toward Large Amphibs and smaller carriers

plus the strike distances and destructive potentional of the EM railguns equiped ships will equal that of a crusie missle or airstrike

but there will alway be need for a carrier for air cover now

any other opinions? :vulcan:
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

I see a possible resurrection of the submersible aircraft carrier first put forward and developed by the Imprial Japanese Navy with the I-400 class submarine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-400_class_submarine
With UCAV and vertical electro magnetic launch tubes, a quick response carrier without escort into enemy waters can be acomplished to provide air support for extracting insurgents, create diversions for stealth air raids and provide air support for secret landing operations.
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

Actually, most of the submarines now being built are geared towards coastal operations, such as the new Virginia Class. For such missions as mobile missile platforms to insertion of special ops.

The US Navy, itself, is building the large CVN carriers as well as the Royal Navy with the new Queen Elizabeth Class, the French Navy in their newer version of their Charles De Gaulle, the Indian Navy, the Brazilian Navy, the Russian Navy, and the Chinese Navy (still have plans) for large carriers.

The smaller blue water navies are going for smaller carriers because they are designed to operate close to their home countries. Australia, South Korea, Japan, Spain, The Netherlands, and Italy all have small carriers or building small carriers. The US, UK, and France have small carriers to support larger invasions.
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

The US is building a new generation of the Nimitz class, called the Gerald R. Ford class, currently disignated CVNX. It's flight deck is somewhat re-arranged than the current Nimitz class with the command island further back than it is currently. They will also utilize the EM catapults along with several other enhancements in the "stealthy" department.

The first one, will replace the aging CVN-65 Enterprise in 2015. :eek: Yeah I know...the Big E is going down first.

This new carrier is being designed to make full use of the new F-35 fighters and the F-18 Superhornets.



Now as for railguns go, I don't really see the return of the BB as we know it, but I can see a return of a more heavily armed BC to fight off other enemy naval ships. (Yeah, I'm looking at you China, Iran, and North Korea.)
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

Railguns will actually save the large carrier because they can be used to destroy antiship missiles faster.
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

yea but becasue the rail guns are faster an can travel farther and pack more a punch you are going to see a demand when this becomes wide spread public knowled for more of these ships. copled with cost effectiveness...you got a winning deal


I dont think the carrier is going away i just thinks its importanace is shifting to assualt ships seem to be the current fashion and it makes sence for smaller countires.

I personally would like to see a return of the old flak barrriers defense...i think it would be intresting to see a Zumwalt or its derivitive establishing a flak barrier for missile defense
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

I think the railguns that they have planned are designed to replace the largest guns on the ship.

I don't imagine that they would use them against missles.
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

It is but if you read about the naval plans and the advanced muntions and ordanced under design it is posible
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

bdb said:
I think the railguns that they have planned are designed to replace the largest guns on the ship.

I don't imagine that they would use them against missles.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what the Phalanx guns are for.
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

those arnt really effective....and are beeing replaced with RAM and ESSM point defense missiles....the Phalanx is now used as litoral warfare and small craft defense


besides im just trying to stretch the imagination with my flak idea
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

Doesn't the navy utlize a two tier approach, using RAMs and ESSM to target ASM while they still have distance and switch over to Phlanx when incoming missles have penetrated the point defense missles defense line because although point defense maybe accurate nothing is 100% and you would want back-up just in case.

If Phlanx used explosive ammo with proximity fuse like eariler anti air craft guns then I think it will be more effective.
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

ProwlAlpha said:
The smaller blue water navies are going for smaller carriers because they are designed to operate close to their home countries. Australia, South Korea, Japan, Spain, The Netherlands, and Italy all have small carriers or building small carriers. The US, UK, and France have small carriers to support larger invasions.
Click to expand...

One point of clarification, Japan under article 9 of the constitution can not possess any weaponry that can be interpret as a force for belligerency like aircraft carriers.So NO Japan does not possess nor have any plans to possess aircraft carriers for fixed wing aircrafts.
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

area defense missiles guided by Aegis and CEC then the ships PD missiles if eqqipped then the the CIWS, late model Arleigh Burke class (DDG-51) Destroyers are no longer equiped with Phalanx CIWS a mistake in my opinion but it decrease the ships radar signature...


i do belive it is a prox fuse for the Phalanx rounds dont quote me on that tho
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

have you seen the JDS Hyuga, DDH-181

looks like a mini carrier beautful ship though
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

philbob said:
i do belive it is a prox fuse for the Phalanx rounds dont quote me on that tho
Click to expand...

Doesn't look that way according to Wiki;

The U.S. Army's version of the Navy's CIWS Phalanx anti-missile system is called the "C-RAM" (counter-rockets, artillery and mortars) defensive weapon.

Whereas naval Phalanx systems fire depleted uranium or (more recently) tungsten armor-piercing rounds, the LPWS uses the HEIT-SD (High-Explosive Incendiary Tracer, Self-Destruct) ammunition originally developed for the M163 Vulcan air-defense system. These rounds explode on impact with the target, or upon tracer burnout.
Click to expand...

As for DDH Hyuga-class, there are not able to launch fixed wing aircrafts unless heavily modified with usage of Sea Harrier Jump jets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hy%C5%ABga_class_helicopter_destroyer
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

i think a JSF could operate off it
and its not to hard to upgrade with a ski ramp

yee of little faith lol
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

i think we should seriously look at upgrading the Arleigh burks with as much DDG-1000 tech as possible i will elaborate in a little while
 
Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

philbob said:
... Well naval fans what do you think...
gonna see a return of the battleship
carriers are too expensive and there is now a global trend toward Large Amphibs and smaller carriers

plus the strike distances and destructive potentional of the EM railguns equiped ships will equal that of a crusie missle or airstrike

but there will alway be need for a carrier for air cover now

any other opinions? :vulcan:
Click to expand...
Battleships have been relegated to the annals of history. The Navy is pursuing smaller, faster, and lighter ships to be manned by few people but that can pack a helluva punch. The railgun helps deliver that need.

Johnny Rico said:
The US is building a new generation of the Nimitz class, called the Gerald R. Ford class, currently disignated CVNX. It's flight deck is somewhat re-arranged than the current Nimitz class with the command island further back than it is currently. They will also utilize the EM catapults along with several other enhancements in the "stealthy" department.

The first one, will replace the aging CVN-65 Enterprise in 2015. :eek: Yeah I know...the Big E is going down first.

This new carrier is being designed to make full use of the new F-35 fighters and the F-18 Superhornets.
Click to expand...

The Navy has been planning to incorporate the EM launch capability for years. It's also well beyond time for that turd, CVN-65, to be scrapped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dryson
Monoecious Disease and Aliens
Replies
6
Views
5K
Dryson
Dryson
ColdFusion180
Star Trek: Lower Decks - CF089 - "Cyberpunk'd" (Challenge Entry - Oct/Nov 2025)
Replies
1
Views
219
ColdFusion180
ColdFusion180
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top