Why is Japan able to turn the Burke class into a shipclass capable of operating rail guns and lasers, while the US Navy can't do that?
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/year-2015-news/july-2015-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/2925-japan-defense-ministry-unveiled-details-of-q27ddq-class-railgun-a-laser-armed-aegis-destroyer.html
This is a request for people to figure out how to do that.
It's as far removed from being capable as you can get.
Learn to read.
>>29157142
Are you dumb?
>>29157160
>Japanese Ministry of Defense (MoD) request for proposal
>Request for Proposal
>Eventually, the Japanese MoD envisions
>Eventually
Make this thread when it's capable.
>>29157183
nice greentext except that the first ship of the 27DD class got greenlighted
http://www.mod.go.jp/e/d_budget/pdf/280215.pdf
>>29157267
Not seeing anything beyond wanting to put one on the ship.
I think that's why they designed the Zumwalt
Right?
The last time tumblehome hulls were used, was for artillery ships.
Look at how pronounced the tumblehome hull is on the Charles Martel.
The only reason I can think of for the navy to create a new ship class with a tumblehome hull, is they are planning to give it some serious artillery.
Here's another tumblehome hull.
Navies had hundreds of years to create a hull design that handled the recoil from heavy artillery, and the tumblehome seems to be the pinnacle of the design.
Used almost exclusively on relatively light ships with excessively strong guns.
Weren't there wood ships that capsized after firing a cannon broadside? That was before tumblehomes were created, right?
Either the navy was bored, or they needed a new hull for a light ship to handle firing something with severe recoil.
you can make any ship in the world capable of fielding a rail gun or laser weapon. It's just a matter of funding and the will to pay for modifying the ship to be capable of it.
The US Navy would just rather buy a new ship.
>>29157540
Well, they are redesigning the Burke now.
>>29157267
>all the ASW stuff
That turns me on.
>>29157532
>Weren't there wood ships that capsized after firing a cannon broadside
Most of those were early designs where they put the gun ports too low, and the recoil caused them to flood when the gun ports dipped below the water line. The tumblehome design did improve stability when firing ongoing broadsides but largely its benefit was increasing the stability of the firing platform the allow the gunners to provide more accurate fire and in larger hulls to place guns closer to the water line.
[spoiler]Better than the time the Belgians tried to into navy and built what was the biggest, most heavily armed ship in the world at the time it was so top heavy that on its maiden voyage it sank in the harbor trying to make a turn.[/spoiler]
Make me wonder if using the Burke design is somekind of requirement to get AEGIS.
It's not that desiging a hull is something Japan can't do.
>>29157576
Hey, everybody plays the fool.
Don't h8.
>>29157576
Sure you don't mean Sweden and the Vasa?
>>29157125
A Burke-sized hull could house a railgun if the power generation was increased significantly, such as use the gas turbines from the Zumwalt. It's just not economically or politically realistic for the USN to retrofit existing or even future Burkes or redesign around existing hulls. The Future Surface Combatant will get all the cutting edge tech in the Zumwalts at a much cheaper cost.
>>29157515
>>29157532
I think it's a stealth feature more than anything. The waterline doesn't reflect radar so much if the hull makes an obtuse angle with the water.
>>29157125
The first real ship to get a railgun is scheduled to be a Burke class though.
Why are you shitposting like a nigger?
>>29160217
Russian_chicken.gif
Two big misunderstandings ITT.
Tumblehome hulls are the naval equiv to sloped upper armor on a tank. It's nothing to do with making anything stronger against the recoil of the cannons. It strengthens the structure against direct fire in the same way sloping the armor on a tank would. It also reduces the weight of the ship above the waterline slightly, allowing you to build higher for the same center of gravity.
Those two factors made it important in the age of sail.
It's been brought back for the various experimental designs for a different reason entirely - stealth.
Also you do sound like you're very very confused and talking about the Vasa. But the Swedes weren't just getting into navies, they were a leading power pushing the envelope at the time. They simply built it too high and filled it with too many tons (of cannon and ball.)
