Largest destroyer ever built for US Navy heads to Atlantic for testing

The USS Zumwalt is 610ft long, weighs 15,000 tons and cost $4.4 billion to build

The USS Zumwalt is underway for the first time conducting at-sea tests and trials on the Kennebeck River  Photo: U.S. Navy/General Dynamics Bath Iron Works via Getty



The largest destroyer ever built for the US Navy cut an imposing figure as it drifted down the Kennebec River in Maine and toward the open ocean on Monday.

The USS Zumwalt, a 610-foot, 15,000-ton behemoth, will undergo sea trials before joining the US fleet some time next year.





Its pricetag of $4.4 billion (£2.9 billion) is almost as astounding as its bulk, but Navy Captain James Kirk, the ship's skipper, said he was "fired up" for the Zumwalt to finally set off for the Atlantic Ocean.

The first Zumwalt-class destroyer, USS Zumwalt, the largest ever built for the U.S. Navy, passes spectators at Fort Popham at the mouth of the Kennebec River  Photo: AP/Robert F. Bukaty

"We are absolutely fired up to see Zumwalt get under way. For the crew and all those involved in designing, building, and readying this fantastic ship, this is a huge milestone," he said.
So advanced are the Zumwalt's stealth capabilities, that it registers on radar as a small vessel, about the size of a fishing boat.
It is about 100ft longer and 20ft wider than the navy's current class of destroyers, and boasts more advanced weaponry.





http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/12038097/Largest-destroyer-ever-built-for-US-Navy-heads-to-Atlantic-for-testing.html



Looks more like a Submarine

One TORPEDO and it will be a Submarine!!

The concept of a destroyer is passé.  Only the aircraft carrier remains in the same essential role since WWII, as the rest of the hardware have moved on to accommodate new roles and new technology.

The reason why the term 'destroyer' remains useful is because it brings to mind a smaller, less expensive ship.  It is more attractive to say to Congress, we want you to fund a destroyer...no matter that the price tag has risen all out of proportion and the ship itself is the size of a large battle cruiser.

Original Quill wrote:The concept of a destroyer is passé.  Only the aircraft carrier remains in the same essential role since WWII, as the rest of the hardware have moved on to accommodate new roles and new technology.

The reason why the term 'destroyer' remains useful is because it brings to mind a smaller, less expensive ship.  It is more attractive to say to Congress, we want you to fund a destroyer...no matter that the price tag has risen all out of proportion and the ship itself is the size of a large battle cruiser.

I disagree ,you mention the aircraft carrier remains in the same essential role, however without destroyers you have left that essential role/asset vulnerable to attack Destroyers and other ships form part of a co dependent battle group ,the concept has far from passed

korban dallas wrote:

Original Quill wrote:The concept of a destroyer is passé.  Only the aircraft carrier remains in the same essential role since WWII, as the rest of the hardware have moved on to accommodate new roles and new technology.

The reason why the term 'destroyer' remains useful is because it brings to mind a smaller, less expensive ship.  It is more attractive to say to Congress, we want you to fund a destroyer...no matter that the price tag has risen all out of proportion and the ship itself is the size of a large battle cruiser.

I disagree ,you mention the aircraft carrier remains in the same essential  role, however without destroyers you have left that essential role/asset  vulnerable to attack Destroyers and other ships form part of a co dependent battle group ,the concept has far from passed

But there are other measures that fill that function.  The original idea of a destroyer was, "...a small, fast warship, especially one equipped for a defensive role against submarines and aircraft."  Generally, it served as an escort vehicle, and sported less than 5-inch guns.

The destroyer began to change when it merged with the light guided-missile cruiser, abandoning the defensive, strictly escort role in favor of a more offensive-minded vessel.  Now, of course, it's totally electronic, and who knows whether it's a destroyer, light cruiser, or in the case of the Zumwalt, a heavy cruiser designed for multi-purpose warfare.  It is certainly not the fast, light, tightly mobile speed-ship that was originally intended.

Again, the reason why the Navy clings to the name or designation of 'destroyer', is to invoke the aura of inexpensive...which it is not anymore.

nicko wrote:One TORPEDO and it will be a Submarine!!

you old cynic you

I have a friend who's Grandson serves in Subs, I hope i'm not giving away secrets, but he says "we have an Nuclear Tipped Torpedo that can track a target 5 miles away from launch. He's bullshitting---------------isn't he?