These ships are large and undefended. Without significant additional weapons and sensors they wont last a week in a hot war with China . This whole EABO concept seems suicidal to me.

Don't model aerodynamics from nature, model its colors.

take a OSV add a single LCAC and have a small LPD..... then Articulated Tug Barge it, slam a causeway on the beach so a EPF can resupply or push a fuel barge to resupply the land but also any passing ships.

I served on the first ship of this class as a BM. It was an awesome experience.

USMC 1974-78. In 1976 I was in the group of the first Marines to deploy on the new USS Tarawa (LHA-1). We thought that was like a cruise ship over the LPH's, LPD's, LSD's, and LST's of the day. Now I understand that the LHD's are even larger than they LHA's? One concern that I have is these large "Gators" and the Super Carriers. I know that CVN's are pretty well protected against ASW but not sure about an amphib group. WIth more smaller vessels, you can lose one and not be affected too badly. You lose an LHD to a modern torpedo and that is a huge loss. Same with Carriers. With the F-35 coming into play, would the U.S. not be better off with more smaller carriers? Do something similar to the Brit's. A ski jump instead of a costly catapult system which has a high degree of maintenance? If a Cat breaks down, your launch capability is reduced. The ASW and transport could be handled by a CH-53 or the UH-60. I am still undecided on the Osprey. I think IMHO leaner and meaner is the way to go.

I had the honor of studying and graduating here to serve my country in times of peace and times of war. The highest privilege and greatest pride a man can have. Go Navy!

The ESD and ESB are large slow targets!

Dokdo is the inherent territory of the Republic of Korea

Just "Wing It" type of ships to make it work. Why not? I dig it

When do we up-arm the USCG cutters? They already need to do ASW (druggie subs), and they will have to deal with drones in the future as the DDG's did recently . . . particularly is they are performing Escort. Cost of arming auxiliaries and up-gunning Coast Guard vessels should be related. A basic Auxiliary Combat System should be defined. Minimally it has to have sensors (air/surface/[subsurface]), a sensor-weapons fusion system (combat management system), a man-machine interface for display/input (command & decision system). The system must be simple, basic, expandable, as cost effective as we can make it, and can be installed on anything moving, or not. 1. Auxiliary Combat System (Standard) a. CMS i. Computer Processor/Workstations by functional area in a network environment 1. AAW Module (abbreviated) 2. ASuW Module (abbreviated) 3. ESM/ECM Module if applicable 4. ASW Module if applicable like an MIUWU TSQ-108 van b. Communications & Datalink Equipment in standard racks and antennas c. Mk12A w/Mode 5/S IFF system if not already present d. Each weapon system requires: i. Deck space (hardware) 1. Mk15 CIWS or equivalent 2. SeaRAM 3. Hellfire/Spike NLOS/JAGM 4. Guns (various) w/guided programmable ammo 5. Expansion nodes for exotic equipment as required ii. Equipment room space iii. Power & Cooling requirement iv. Cable set standard by platform e. Digital infrastructure (CANES compliant): i. COTS Parts ii. Standard Connectors iii. Fiber Optic Cables (Hardened/Guarded & Redundant) I would start with the latest Aegis Open Architecture COTS equipment set for a plug and play configuration. There should be a single and standard Baseline load with modifications kept to those that are platform specific based upon cable lengths, or multiple weapon locations present/needed. Each community/platform group/organization should have technical representatives present. Keep it simple or you own the last “S”. Build a Land Based Test Platform with a standard representative MACK with all sensor antennas present, and test/certify the configuration. I would put the LBTS at a major harbor near a Naval Base and the system double as a training platform. Upgrades should include a sensor integration expansion rack for added EO/IR sensors/designators, and Guided Rocket Launchers that could employ 2.5” or 5” Guided Rockets.

Fan boys for a system that should never been built tied up shopyards that could have produced the navy we need Navy of the past made too many strategic mistakes This cast makes me mad

and give them all lots and lots of drones, all kinds, lots and lots

is it 6111 or 1116?

Private Mcgillicudy is one of the most screwed soilder in 1945.

Congratulations Valeta Industries 🎢🙏🙏🙏😇

Correct ahead of time Indo Pacific free flow of our future globally Coastee⚓️🌊🏝️🌍🌏🌎🌏✈️🚢⛵️🇺🇸🇪🇸🇵🇭🇩🇪🇫🇷⛵️🇬🇧🇹🇼🛟🎢🧬 becomes balance of simple navigation locally , National , International, disaster relief safety stability and sustainability clear the Presence of Dangerous goods and Piracy ⚖️

Yeh sounds good untill there hacked and used against them lol

For meaningfull control of IOR, we will need both IAC-2 & 3...by the time IAC-3 comes INS Vikramaditya will not have much life left...therefore we must move ahead with IAC-2 similar to INS Vikrant with intended induction being 2030-2034 while the Indo-French IAC-3 could be inducted by 2038

China. The number one superpower in the world.

US warmongers are very crazy, they only help US military industries and politicians get a lot of money

America is so fuct

I’m trying to convince everybody not to go to war anymore and unify as a world, but in the meantime, I’ve given them every idea I can think of 😂. Just think how far ahead we would be as humanity if we were using all of this to finish the research we need to do here on earth. This is so ridiculous that adults act this way. I want to remind everyone we stole a lot of the technology. We have right now and are currently buying off people around the world to fund this technology. We get the kids from around the world to come to school here and use them as tools for war, which is ridiculous. Our entire rocket programs to include NASA in the ICBMs were stolen directly from Germany. Germany should go to the United Nations and file complaints. They did something wrong, but then all of us took that same technology and have been killing each other. if I were Germany, I would say I want the money that you used to build all this we hold the patterns, and you can’t hold a country responsible for a fews peoples actions. If you do, we’re gonna hold the United States responsible for every law that it’s broke to include Palestine right now. Germany could just tell the United Nations no one’s allowed to fire rockets anymore because it’s their damn invention and we’re not going to kill each other. You can now pay Germany every time you launch a rocket here in the United States. Same thing applies to jet technology. You now owe Germany for all of the jets that you’ve built and then tried to say that they were horrible people when in fact, you’ve done the exact same thing and are right now.

I hope they are working on a defense against drones for my Marines.

How many have the Ukrainians sunk so for?

Warrior women. No wonder this country is losing everywhere.

Why would they deploy these next to China with out security. They seize them and take the tech. Kinda stupid

This is one of the many reasons China is sending more spies than ever to the U.S. and hacking worse than ever. They must be stopped.

I have a hunch that what we've seen in this video, i.e. what the Navy has permitted into the unclassified public domaine is just the tip of the iceberg. I hope that there is a much more robust combat capable R&D program underway. As the video hints, we've seen what Ukraine's improvised unmanned maritime attack craft did to the vaunted Russian Black Sea fleet! This is assymetric maritime capability at its best. US procurement budgets are stretched to the limit for more new badly needed fast attack submarine acquisitions. These undersea and surface "drones" could be a significant playing field leveler for the US Navy as it eyes a potential defense of Taiwan from hostile amphibious assault.

Why allow them to steal it in the first place? Start acting like they do, they don't follow international law unless they are on camera. Even then they deny reality.

I hope the Freedom class LCS can be a mothership for the smaller and medium sized drones.

Thanks

IIRC, they were most recently being considered as anchors for the Ford class carriers.

Well still see years of cutting military spending at same time upgrading old then letting go and investing in government programs once one of largest naval fleets and ship building heritage closing down ship or giving money to Irving to close Saint John ship building give them money bring back workforce from west open shipyard back up in saint john New Brunswick cut building times down

❤❤@$ 1:36

❤❤@$ 1:24

❤❤@$ 1:04

.

@$ 2:15 ❤❤.

@$ 2:00 ❤❤.

. 1:49

@$ 1:30 ❤❤.

. 1:13

. 1:03

. 0:48

It's used more for exhibits and show than it's actual use

Wonderful Story read the book and enjoyed! MCPO

In 1940s and 50s, US was the largest creditor in the world, the largest trading nation in the world with the biggest merchant fleet, biggest industrial capacity in the world, the largest manufacturing economy in the world, the biggest steel producer in the world. Today US is NONE of these

One other thing has been nagging me from the interview. Keeping the gear inside the mission bay is good for the gear. How is i for the crews? I say this because I doubt air flow through the mission areas is great nor would such large areas have AC. Might we be better off with lighter, cheaper ships that stow the gear on deck as is common with most of the rest of the ships in the entire world? An awning for shade and the actual sea breeze from sailing might improve morale, save some money, and add to our combat effectiveness. I've seen pics and video on at lest LCS-1 class deployments showing the internal temperatures of the ship being well over 100 degrees. We added AC o our ships after WWII as a lesson learned from the real war experience gained in the Pacific.

I knew a man that worked on this program, Appleman ?? may have been his name

South Korea Hanwha Ocean has upgraded their offer from an improved Jang Bogo-class (Type 209) diesel electric submarine to the KSS-IIIPN called 'Improve Jangbogo-IIIPN class' with a surface displacement of 2,800 tons, a top speed of 21 knots and a length of 77-meters which is smaller then the KSS-3 Dosan-Ahn Changho-class which is nearly 84-meters. Probably due to the removal of the AIP and VLS tube removes as their deemed 'not necessary' at less for now!