October 29th, 2013
01:44 PM ET

Bigger, Lighter, Deadlier! Navy launches new stealth destroyer

By Larry Shaughnessy

(CNN) - The Navy's newest warship slipped out of dry dock this week into the waters of Maine, marking a new era for war fighting at sea.

The USS Zumwalt, the first of the DDG-1000 class of destroyers, is longer, faster and carries state-of-the-art weapons that will allow it to destroy targets at more than 60 miles, according to the Navy.

At 610 feet long and 81 feet wide, the Zumwalt is longer and thinner than the USS Arizona, a battleship sunk at Pearl Harbor. But it weighs about half as much.

Much of the ship's superstructure is wrapped in a huge, canopy made of lightweight carbon fiber composite.

The canopy and the rest of the ship is built on angles that help make it 50 times harder to spot on radar than an ordinary destroyer.

"It has the radar cross-section of a fishing boat," said Chris Johnson a spokesperson for Naval Sea Systems Command.

The Navy had planned to spend up to $9 billion in research and development on the DDG-1000 program and up to $20 billion to design and deliver seven ships. But cost overruns cut production to three ships.

When it begins missions, the Zumwalt will be the largest stealthy ship in the Navy.

Coming out of dry dock at Bath Iron Works in Maine does not mean the ship is ready to put to sea.

The shipbuilder will now begin installing a considerable arsenal of weapons, including two Advanced Gun Systems (AGS), which can fire rocket powered, computer-guided shells that can destroy targets 63 miles away. That's three times farther than ordinary destroyer guns can fire.

The DDX will go to sea with a crew of about 150 as opposed to current destroyers which carry a crew of 275. One reason is the AGS is practically self-firing. It needs no sailors to load the shells or remove the spent rounds.

The Zumwalt will also be equipped with a new missile launching system capable of firing 80 missiles, including Tomahawk cruise missiles and Seasparrow surface to air missiles.

Finally it will be able to carry and launch two Seahawk helicopters or four unmanned aerial vehicles.

Its christening had been been scheduled for last month, but the government shutdown forced the Navy to cancel the ceremony.

It's expected to be rescheduled next spring. The shipbuilder plans to finish construction and turn the ship over to the Navy next year.

Post by:
Filed under: Contractors • drones • Navy • Pentagon • weapons
soundoff (1,814 Responses)
  1. sam

    I would have rather spent the money on one or two submarines..I believe they are more stealthy, have greater mission diversity, and are more survivable

    October 30, 2013 at 6:41 am | Reply
    • Saul

      Wake up and smell the coffee!!!

      October 30, 2013 at 9:13 am | Reply
    • Saul

      Do your parents know you are posting here?

      October 30, 2013 at 9:37 am | Reply
  2. Eric Darling

    While this is cool to look at, with $17 Trillion deficits, do we REALLY need this multi-Billion dollar toy put on the tab too? When is this madness going to stop? We seriously need to cut military spending and do it soon. This is ridiculous.

    October 30, 2013 at 6:41 am | Reply
    • Saul

      I agree.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:15 am | Reply
  3. justino

    does Obama know?!!!??

    October 30, 2013 at 6:38 am | Reply
    • Eric Darling

      Yeah, he knows. It's first mission is to visit you.

      October 30, 2013 at 6:42 am | Reply
  4. JM

    Bravo Zulu Zumwalt!

    October 30, 2013 at 6:21 am | Reply
  5. zach

    I have highly doubt this is the navy's or any other branch's newest weaponry or vehicle. First I am led to believe that if it was their newest, they probably wouldn't let cnn or any other mainstream media show the entire world including our enemies. The navy had space ships, shuttles, and satellites and youre telling me this is their newest. Im pretty sure the technology used for this destroyer is at least fifty years behind what they are actually capable of, but most of you will look past this kind of observation.

    October 30, 2013 at 6:15 am | Reply
    • TheNxtBlackPresident

      aye zach you don't know nothing so how bout you shut up

      October 30, 2013 at 6:36 am | Reply
      • bruce

        He has a right to express his opinion like anyone else.

        October 30, 2013 at 6:39 am |
      • Saul

        Instead of telling somebody that he doesn't know. Please, tell us what you know!!!

        October 30, 2013 at 9:42 am |
    • Merle

      Do you know who our president is? He's probably already ordered 3 in the name of Iran, Syria and Egypt.

      Also the DDX project has been around for a little while and it doesn't give a great deal of spec information like what systems are onboard.

      I know a little bit about destroyers because I served on one 😉 the information given sounds pretty correct from what I remember of what I heard about DDX years ago.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:29 am | Reply
  6. eddie

    Fishing boat: any boat that has a rod and reel held by a person to catch fish.

    October 30, 2013 at 6:10 am | Reply
  7. eddie

    Oh and by the way, that hull feature makes the Zumwalt fast. That would be a blazing fast destroyer.

    October 30, 2013 at 5:59 am | Reply
  8. eddie

    What is odd is that a game called warship gunner by koei has this ship design and its armament. It even calls it the Zumwalt class destroyer. It too looks stealthy and has the same hull type and prominent feature (the sharp angle front that goes into the water) It was a popular PS2 game. I still have all 3 versions that came out. The AGS, cruise missile, and ASM are also listed in the game. I can only guess that game developers had a look at the design.

    October 30, 2013 at 5:56 am | Reply
    • Lee

      You are correct. The design itself has been in the making for years and not exactly secret. It is confusing that it is larger than a BB, yet classified as a DD. In game anyways.

      October 30, 2013 at 6:06 am | Reply
  9. Ebaraga

    Waste of money. Spending all that borrowed money to make a better way to kill and destroy.

    October 30, 2013 at 5:50 am | Reply
    • Eric Darling

      Absolutely agree with you 100% – this spending is out of control in the military.

      October 30, 2013 at 6:44 am | Reply
  10. Dreamer

    ahh transformer dude beat me...

    October 30, 2013 at 5:44 am | Reply
  11. Dreamer

    two months from now Boeing will reveal a mass produced mobile suit.

    October 30, 2013 at 5:43 am | Reply
  12. Chuck

    Why do we need Stealth Destroyers? The US NAVY already Owns the 7 Seas!

    October 30, 2013 at 5:09 am | Reply
  13. fredkl

    Wow, next time the US will build Transformers.

    October 30, 2013 at 5:07 am | Reply
  14. Joe Don Whitefish

    How much did the "UGLY" cost?????

    October 30, 2013 at 4:58 am | Reply
  15. Alec Graham

    Essentially, the AGS systems referred to by the article are conventional Electromagnetic rail guns, unless I'm mistaken.

    October 30, 2013 at 4:58 am | Reply
  16. Racemunki

    Yes. But will it be able to beat the NSA?

    October 30, 2013 at 4:55 am | Reply
  17. RADM W Cowles

    Actually, not necessarily 'More deadly'. Relative to existing, latest-build legacy destroyers.

    And at a cost of around $22B spent to build just 3! destroyers ($7B + per ship)...it's obscenely more expensive and unfortunately, a most proper tribute to the absolutely broken and constipated US Defense acquisition process ongoing today, sad to say.

    Flat out there needs to be a comprehensive and radical restructuring of US's strategic planning and a sustainable implementation of acquisition/recapitalization policy.

    October 30, 2013 at 4:32 am | Reply
    • jrdedonato

      Forgive me good sir, but that ship looks like it just steamed out of Murmansk. 1960's Soviet architecture...YUCK!!!!!!!
      RM2 DeDonato, USS Puget Sound AD-38, 1975 – 1979, NORVA

      October 30, 2013 at 4:43 am | Reply
      • Chuck

        I agree, its pretty ugly

        RM2 US Navy 83-88 USS Merrill DD976

        October 30, 2013 at 5:11 am |
      • Carl

        I'm sure the design is more focused on stealth capabilities not aesthetics. I do feel the cost is the ugliest part what's the point who are we threatened by that would cause our country to need such a ship. I would rather see 22 billion put towards our debt, infrastructure or something that would benefit our country with something more than a cool factor.

        October 30, 2013 at 5:31 am |
  18. Adam

    Good to see some good ol fashioned American Innovation.

    October 30, 2013 at 3:55 am | Reply
    • jrdedonato

      That is one uglyass ship. I spent my time in the Nav under Zummi and thanks to his admiralness my uniform looked like a 50's business man's suit...I remember the day I reported aboard the USS Puget Sound AD-38 at D & S piers NORVA. I strolled down the pier and saw a sailor leaving with his seabag over his shoulder wearing the famous dixiecup and did not see it again until I left the NAV 4 years later. As I strolled down the pier for the last time, here came a sailor with his Dixie cup'd uniform! Of all the rotten luck...

      October 30, 2013 at 4:34 am | Reply
    • F. M. Townsend

      You have to understand this is a new Navy where technology rules. I have been in the Navy for 20+ years and I was a skeptic when I returned to sea duty. As a QMC that has been devoted to paper charts and now the Navy has switched all navigation to Digital Nautical Charts that we navigate with and it has been a very reliable piece of technology that I have grown to like and use on a daily bases. Their is no room for old salt dogs anymore, your time has past and the future is here. Lead from the Deck Plates.

      October 30, 2013 at 5:38 am | Reply
  19. Jim

    Dayum this ship is so cool! DDG-1000. Like Death Destroyer of Gods 1000. Its name and number are futuristic and terrifying. ANd that hull! So cool so wow such future! And Zumwalt. Now thats a cool name. I can just imagine the president saying something like "This is no job for an ordinary vessel. SEND IN THE ZUMWALT 1000!"

    AND this ship is gunna have LAZERS in a few years. Frikken lazers! Now who in the world would want to mess with a lazer ship called the Zumwalt 1000? Sounds straight out of the terminator movies.

    October 30, 2013 at 3:51 am | Reply
    • Canada

      I admire your enthusiasm, I agree, this is very cool tech.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:46 am | Reply
  20. stoopid iz az stoopid duz

    It would make great television if this bad-boy went up against the Alaskan fishing fleet hunting tuna in the Bering Sea. Tuna Wars... and then maybe sank some 'Greenpea's' boats to show solidarity with Putin.

    October 30, 2013 at 3:42 am | Reply
  21. mike

    i wish they could have compared this to a modern fighting ship that we could related to regarding capabilities. The fact they're comparing it to a ship of the stature of the Arizona – which was built well prior to WWII – is insulting. Both to the soldiers that died on that ship (are they trying to compare its power and size to a ship that lost so many soldiers? who does that?) Compare it to something contemporary – and hopefully not one that is now a tomb....

    October 30, 2013 at 3:37 am | Reply
    • Mark

      That reply has some merit, but the comparison is a good one to give scale to many attributes and lethality.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:39 am | Reply
  22. Some guy already on a "ship"

    yea, but does it have a deck and a blender?


    October 30, 2013 at 3:14 am | Reply
  23. Thomas

    hmm.. me thinks the story not say anything about the hidden emp weaponry..

    why else get soo close without being known?

    the waters already are.. unless.. 🙂


    thomas 🙂

    October 30, 2013 at 3:09 am | Reply
  24. Jerry619

    Because the US needs another expensive war machine to kill more people….

    October 30, 2013 at 2:59 am | Reply
    • Daniel

      Yeah we're so broke, it's all I read and hear from the politicians. We're cutting food stamps...again for the poor. We need to cut cut cut..................except when it comes to the Military industrial complex. Oh and the stock Markets are hitting all time highs....yeah it's a great time to be a 1%

      This is really disgusting me.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:17 am | Reply
      • Tom

        Cool~!! Another super expensive " Billion $$ TOOL" we need to protect and defend a country with crumbling school systems, failing heathcare and disappearing middle class...! God Bless.....

        October 30, 2013 at 4:26 am |
      • Paul in Orlando

        I couldn't agree with you more. If my family is broke, the last thing I'd do is go out and buy a Ferrari. Our country broke, with 15% of our nation on food stams, yet we have $20 billion borrowed Chinese dollars to build this warship so that we can kill more people in the Middle East? America doesn't need this. I, as an American, don't want this.

        October 30, 2013 at 5:05 am |
  25. Reality

    Lying and pretending about magic is something we can test. Why lie? Why pretend? Why hide when anyone looks at your fake magic?

    October 30, 2013 at 2:54 am | Reply
  26. Will

    But how does it look to a submarine? How much of it is below water and is it obscured on sonar as well as radar? How well would its composite shell hold up (compared to old-fashioned steel alloys) if it was hit by a mine?
    I guess it won't matter really, our current set of enemies don't have much of a submarine fleet, but the tech geek in me wants to hear whatever specs are not classified.

    October 30, 2013 at 2:48 am | Reply
    • Reality

      Yeah, we pretend to bite on that.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:06 am | Reply
  27. Miss Demeanor

    The technology is AMAZING. I measured it. It's only six inches long. If they put them in a bottle and sold them online I bet we could pay for everyones health care.

    October 30, 2013 at 2:46 am | Reply
    • jrdedonato

      Now THAT'S funny...

      October 30, 2013 at 4:45 am | Reply
  28. American Revolution

    Let's start 2nd American Revolution!!

    Let's sink it! American don't need more warship. they're waste of money. Sink it or sell it for metal scrap. Let's place water mine around harbor!!

    October 30, 2013 at 2:16 am | Reply
  29. Mike Jones

    All you foreigners pretending to be Americans are pathetic losers. Ya know, kinda like Le Democrats. And you think this ship has revealed all its capabilities? Imagine the technology you don't know about yet. If you think this is a waste of money, move to another country.

    October 30, 2013 at 1:58 am | Reply
    • Nabeel Sajid

      Hey mike jones, we all migrated to this country at one point in time, so why don't you move to another country.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:16 am | Reply
      • 52pan

        No, you migrated here. Most of us were BORN here. Migrated here because your own country is a toilet? Probably. There are those of us who have a VESTED interest in our own country, like serving in the armed service to help protect our freedoms that we have decided to allow you to enjoy. Decisions can be changed.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:31 am |
      • Reality

        Let’s place our bets on our pure heritage. My ancestors where racist Mormons fueled by racists facts.

        I fully accept your ability to be “honest”.

        Okay, so now lies and ignorance are precious moments of history?

        October 30, 2013 at 3:04 am |
      • Daniel

        If I could afford it I would without thinking twice. Oh Canada oh Canada.....

        October 30, 2013 at 3:21 am |
      • SeanG

        My mom's side is Norwegian and Native American descended, the Norwegian part came with Columbus, the native part is exactly that NATIVE.

        My Father's side is German Irish Turk and Native American and you geussed it been here whether forever or since shortly after its founding.

        American's are mixed but what we have now is mostly foriegners who don't give a dam. Not anything like true Americans who bled and died for just a small benefit for their country.

        October 30, 2013 at 5:56 am |
      • Nigig Pegonaissaing

        Seriously? You are all ignorant immigrants, the real we have been fighting terrorism since 1492, pox blankets, genocide, residential schools, trail of tears, rape and murder of our women, we the First People are still here, when will you realize that money and DDX's cannot be eaten....

        October 30, 2013 at 6:28 am |
    • Reality

      We are the true Americans. We believe in truth, justice and honest discourse. Facts don’t lie. Math doesn’t lie. History doesn’t lie.

      I don’t need to laugh at you, but you seem to need me to laugh at you.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:59 am | Reply
    • Golly Winkies

      All of our caucasian ancestors came to US shores from Europe... but since, according to you, they were the 'real' Uhmurikins (thanks for setting us straight with this important new information) that can only mean they lived here in the US before Europe was peopled, went back across the pond to colonize Europe and then returned. It sure is an interesting 'theory'. Yes indeedy.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:11 am | Reply
    • JimmyJohns

      Mike, I'd absolutely love to emigrate to another nation. Where I don't have a bloated military, people are educated, healthcare is a right and there isn't a school shooting every month....but, oddly enough, those countries don't want Americans.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:28 am | Reply
  30. Peter

    Why didn't the Government just waste $24 Billion on nothing.....OH.They did.....the government shutdown REPUBS.

    October 30, 2013 at 1:53 am | Reply
    • 52pan

      Democraps. President and Senate. Been there for 6 years now and didn't pull the plug?

      October 30, 2013 at 2:34 am | Reply
    • Mark

      Are you kidding??? – MarxistCare is going to rape and pillage this nation, if left to it's own ways.. The Good Representatives were just trying to help matters along. MARXISTCare MUST be destroyed NOW!

      Unless we a going FULL MarxistCare, then this little experiment WILL crash and burn under the word of TEA Party warnings.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:30 am | Reply
      • Mister stiffy

        There is no chance of 'raping and pillaging' this country. Dubya's Great Recession left no one 'untouched'... didn't you get the memo?

        October 30, 2013 at 3:39 am |
      • Mark

        IT's not about Bush anymore, those dollars have been spent. Time to get objective to human nature and the fact that health crd is NOT a right. It is a service. Rights cannot have cost attached to them, it disqualifies their inclusion.

        October 30, 2013 at 3:45 am |
  31. robbiesmith79

    Avengers already have a flying air craft carrier that can blend in with the sky. We're way behind. Come on, spend more money we don't have!

    October 30, 2013 at 1:25 am | Reply
  32. wb

    Well, now that our enemies know what it looks like and we've told them what kind of image it presents on a radar screen I'm not sure what the whole point is. Did we have 29 billion dollars just laying around to turn a big dot into a smaller dot?

    October 30, 2013 at 1:16 am | Reply
    • Narutogrey

      An RCS (radar cross section) the size of a fishing boat means that enemy radar would not pick up anything.

      October 30, 2013 at 1:41 am | Reply
      • roger watson

        the reality of war is such that all these weapons are actually to expensive to risk in real combat situations with anything but third world adversaries. aircraft carriers are so vulnerable that have be kept well at sea and cant be brought into areas such as the red sea. a first world country such as france, britain, russia could sink these ships in minutes with just the flip of a toggle switch.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:28 am |
      • The Integral

        The SBX radar has been described by Lt. Gen Trey Obering (director of MDA) as being able to track an object the size of a baseball over San Francisco in California from the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia, approximately 2,900 miles (4,700 km) away. A baseball is a lot smaller than a fishing boat, to put it mildly. So much for stealth.

        Do the designers actually believe that the Zumwalt will not be easy to spot from a satellite? Really?

        October 30, 2013 at 2:30 am |
      • ...

        @The Integral

        We have the only operational SBX radar, and only one of them at that. Your assumption also requires that you know beforehand that this "fishing boat" is an actual threat and must be continuously tracked, which means you need to already have visual confirmation.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:38 am |
      • Night Stalker

        @The Integral. For satellite to be effective you have to know where to point your camera. There are millions upon millions of square miles of ocean. Where would you start looking for something that has the cross section of a fishing boat on ground radar?

        October 30, 2013 at 2:49 am |
    • tvw

      this destroyer will be a significant deterrent. Best investment the US has made in a long time. matches up with submarines for stealth. Hate to be on the losing end of that stick. Made in America. What's not to like?

      October 30, 2013 at 2:42 am | Reply
    • rickenpacker89

      I agree! Only in America do we tell all our secret weapons. I'll never forget, three days before we went into Iraq, the news stations were showing maps of how we would attack and when. Freedom of the press. Stupid!

      October 30, 2013 at 3:14 am | Reply
      • Mister stiffee

        How do you know the press wasn't helping out with the deception? (methinks they were)

        October 30, 2013 at 3:47 am |
  33. Chuck

    Snowden will probably tell the world the secrets behind the technology to the world

    October 30, 2013 at 1:11 am | Reply
  34. oneWayfarer

    What a JOKE (A Bad One) $20,000,000,000 WASTED on Three Ships to fight WWII
    Who honestly believes a somewhat smaller RADAR signature has ANY significance
    for something as Big and SLOW as a Naval Vessel?

    October 30, 2013 at 1:09 am | Reply
    • roger watson

      you are correct nasa has no trouble tracking objects in space that are thousands of times smaller than a fishing boat, or maybe there just going crazy with someone elses money?

      October 30, 2013 at 2:33 am | Reply
  35. Doh

    Tumble home hulls capsize in big seas and when they are breached. Anyone who argues this is not the case because "the ship is lighter" has no idea what they are talking about. This is why the Navy is only going to make 3 of them – this design has no place in conventional naval warfare.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:37 am | Reply
  36. Brad Beefcake

    America... F-Yeah! Coming again, to save the mother f'ing day yeah!

    October 30, 2013 at 12:29 am | Reply
  37. Jim Rome

    Why don't we instead take that 29 billion dollars and support our vets with it, instead?

    October 30, 2013 at 12:02 am | Reply
    • Jim Vet

      too many vets and their family are on dope, alcohol or on welfare already. Not sustainable to support them – until they die. Better to hire Blackwater (or Xe if you prefer to call that name).

      October 30, 2013 at 1:18 am | Reply
      • Todd

        I hope you're joking with this comment.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:46 am |
  38. Jim Rome

    If you are in favor of this ridiculous, opulent, useless ornament, then you are one of the following 1) Stupid 2) Stupid, and in the Navy 3) Stupid, and in a defense company that makes these silly ships. 4) Stupid.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:00 am | Reply
    • ThrowMeaBone

      Who died and made you a genius on world politics, modern warfare strategy, and the needs of the U.S Navy in the 21st century?

      October 30, 2013 at 12:53 am | Reply
  39. superman

    Thank goodness we have this weapon. What's its mission exactly?

    October 29, 2013 at 11:54 pm | Reply
    • Saul

      Lol. I agree with you.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:32 am | Reply
  40. Kathy

    This is AWESOME.

    October 29, 2013 at 11:53 pm | Reply
    • Jim Rome

      Awesome like dumping babies into a volcanoe is awesome.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:01 am | Reply
      • Anonymous

        You are obviously not technically inclined nor do you understand how the economy works, just go back to your bean-counting job..

        October 30, 2013 at 12:19 am |
      • Dave S

        Thanks to whoever it was that lent us the money to build this cool toy! Prolly funny money from the Fed, eh? We got some employment out of it, and what's a few more tens of billions in debt?? Doesn't mean a thing in the context of $17 TRILLION.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:34 am |
      • Miss Demeanor

        RE: "Anonymous
        You are obviously not technically inclined nor do you understand how the economy works, just go back to your bean-counting job..."

        Eisenhower warned against the dangers of the military-industrial complex that has arisen despite his warnings. Obviously the person you are insulting has been reading after his work 'bean-counting'. At least pretend to be civil.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:53 am |
  41. marcwinger.com

    It's a fantastic ship. Been reading the specs on it for years. I also read some of the comments here, obviously from foreigners, which reek of jealously.
    After we get that thing out of the White House we'll be able to build more.

    October 29, 2013 at 11:43 pm | Reply
    • Brian

      I'm not a foreigner and I think spending $29 billion on stealth boats with a weapons range of 60 miles is incomprehensibly stupid. Maybe we should invest a few billion into stealth cavalry?

      October 29, 2013 at 11:49 pm | Reply
      • marcwinger.com

        Oh! So you're one of those that subscribe to obama's odd notion that a navy shouldn't be part of the modern world. Though we live on a water planet. Learn more.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:51 pm |
      • Brian

        No, I only subscribe to reality. In reality, there is no threat that this boat is useful against.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:53 pm |
      • Kathy

        I'm an Obama supporter, which doesn't mean I don't back the U.S. military - (having two nephews who are Iraq & Afghanistan war veterans & myself having worked for the U.S. government for over 32 years). Don't "pigeon hole" people just because you have narrow minded views.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:56 pm |
      • Nadirion

        Oh, so Tomahawk missiles now can fly only 60 miles, not 1550 miles as before?

        October 30, 2013 at 12:02 am |
      • Nick

        More than 60 miles away... More than 60, that means a distance greater that 60 miles. Why dont you ask the Navy what exactly is on the ship and what its limitations are im sure they will be delighted to tell you.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:14 am |
      • Saul

        We should spend the $29 billion for the homeless; instead.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:28 am |
    • superman

      Can't think of a better reason to keep the "thug" in office.

      BTW, you want a thug, look no further than Dick Cheney. Never saw a country not worth invading or an innocent not worth blasting to smithereens.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:05 am | Reply
    • Doh

      They are only going to build 3 because the hull design doesn't work on warships. If it gets hit by enemy fire it will sink. It won't be able to go through big seas. There is a reason nobody makes tumblehome warships anymore, and that is because they performed terribly.

      Submarines fill the stealth niche the navy requires, I dont know why they wasted tens of billions on this thing.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:47 am | Reply
    • cheeseroll

      You were obviously born with half your brain missing, like those simpletons who like to classify all critics and detractors as "haters".

      October 30, 2013 at 1:38 am | Reply
    • Saul

      Do your parents know you are posting here?

      October 30, 2013 at 9:30 am | Reply
  42. Brian

    This will be the ultimate weapon against Al-Qaeda's navy

    October 29, 2013 at 11:41 pm | Reply
    • Daniel

      Does Al-Qaeda have a navy?

      October 29, 2013 at 11:49 pm | Reply
      • Brian

        Yes Daniel, Al-Qaeda has a navy. They also have a comedy troupe and their own brand of makeup.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:52 pm |
  43. anoni


    October 29, 2013 at 11:28 pm | Reply
  44. Bubblehead

    Though it's very Jules Vern looking I think it's ugly

    October 29, 2013 at 11:28 pm | Reply
  45. Anonymous

    LOL every time you can submit comments anonymously, you can count on the biggest pileocrepp comments anywhere on the web.

    October 29, 2013 at 11:23 pm | Reply
  46. Tfhkgj Szdrtu

    A total piece of half messured junk...Americant all the way...

    October 29, 2013 at 11:19 pm | Reply
    • Veteran

      Do you happen to live 63 miles away fro the ship? If so, please send your GPS coordinates to Maine

      October 29, 2013 at 11:26 pm | Reply
      • Brian

        Not very hard to get 63 miles away from a boat.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:43 pm |
  47. Hope

    I doubt that the public will know everything this love boat is capable of destroying. Hope it will never be needed...mercy. Regardless, a heartfelt thank you to all Vets on this post.

    October 29, 2013 at 11:07 pm | Reply
  48. Beasterdamus

    Guess its not stealthy anymore...Way to go CNN for posting our newest totally classified sh.t to the world.

    October 29, 2013 at 10:46 pm | Reply
    • Dustin Goldsen

      This program was not classified. There have been reports about the USS Zumwalt for years.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:04 pm | Reply
      • Al

        Yes, this program as a whole is not classified, along with the fact that the radar cross-section, wake, and other signatures have been greatly reduced (to the point where the Zumwalt wouldn't be detected). However, there are many parts of it that are TS (Top Secret) or Above TS. Those parts haven't and will not be mentioned.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:18 am |
    • shutup

      its gonna be a gift to Putin (Obama's boogie man) anyways. Putin "I want this Obama"
      Obama "oooo lawdy yez sir"

      October 29, 2013 at 11:13 pm | Reply
    • Skeptic

      Hey, genius – if it were classified, CNN (and the many other news organizations publishing stories about it) wouldn't know about it.

      I know you need to makes up silly spit because you hate CNN, but in this case, you just look like a fool.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:27 pm | Reply
    • tvw

      It will have THE advantage over other ships that sail the same seas and strike first. The other combatant ships won't know what hit them. This ship is awesome and the knife edge hull will allow it to get into an advantageous position faster that its opponent. The weapons and warfare stuff is always relative.. the guys with the latest and greatest win. Technology has changed warfare since the caveman first used a club, so hooray for the US.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:50 am | Reply
  49. Keelhauler

    Doesn't seem to fit the "destroyer" classification anymore. More of a "Universal Warfare Vessel" or something. Capable, no doubt, but too damned expensive IMO. I'd rather see more, smaller vessels with a bit less firepower but covering more areas. This ship is tough, but it's still just one vessel that can only be in one place at a time.

    October 29, 2013 at 10:38 pm | Reply
    • USA

      One place is all that is needed guess where?

      October 29, 2013 at 10:41 pm | Reply
  50. Truthful1

    OK...all of you spell checking grammar freaks....who the hell cares if somebody can't spell or they are not English Teachers or Journalists....This is a Blog for everyone to respond to the issues not Websters Dictionary. Content my good man...content is what we want to see here. Anyone who dismisses the opinion of an American or others on an American Media based Web Site exorcising their freedom of speech graciously given to us by CNN because they can't spell is narrow-minded, and arrogant. Let freedom ring!

    October 29, 2013 at 10:25 pm | Reply
    • jerrymcm1970

      Exercising. 🙂

      October 29, 2013 at 10:51 pm | Reply
      • Tom

        LOL! Oh that's just too good.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:01 pm |
    • Jerry

      You said that very well, Kudos!

      October 29, 2013 at 11:21 pm | Reply
    • John

      Spokin lik a tru American.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:49 pm | Reply
    • you must be twelve too

      CNN gave us freedom of speech? Thanks... that's one of my homework questions...

      October 30, 2013 at 1:42 am | Reply
  51. Ganesh_India

    Americans should concentrate less on warmongering half way around the world and more on fixing their failed government.

    October 29, 2013 at 10:16 pm | Reply
    • Keelhauler

      Worry about your country, we'll worry about ours.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:29 pm | Reply
      • USA

        Ok, time is now, send all our stealth military, lay waste to all Middle and turn it into Agricultural growth for the rest of us.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:38 pm |
      • Sammy Z

        .....I am worried about our government.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:12 pm |
    • B-

      I agree, we spent money worried about others, while we could spend this money on our own infrastructure and become more efficient...

      October 29, 2013 at 10:51 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      Failed government... well, you're the experts.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:03 pm | Reply
    • usaPatriot22

      Hey bro. Nobody cares. Keep your nose out of our business.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:24 pm | Reply
    • Veteran

      You should do more to stop all the rapes in your country and all the abuses against women and stop blogging here...

      October 29, 2013 at 11:28 pm | Reply
      • Saul

        I totally agree with you.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:19 am |
    • Bubblehead

      Says the guy who's government still believes in and supports the class system... Guess you were lucky enough not to be born into poverty.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:30 pm | Reply
    • Anonymous

      Says the country who just trumpeted their own aircraft carrier....before their submarine blew up in service...

      October 30, 2013 at 12:24 am | Reply
    • Saul

      Indians should focus more on women's rights, and not go about raping them on public buses.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:12 am | Reply
  52. Saul

    To create peace and help humanity is more noble than any weapon for war. Any species from the animal kingdom can make war, but it is so much more difficult to create something that benefits all. Any kind of weapon isn't going to make anybody safer. Weapons have been around thousands of years before Christ, so any new weapon isn't going to solve anything.

    October 29, 2013 at 9:52 pm | Reply
    • Andy

      Didn't the atomic bomb end WWII?

      October 29, 2013 at 10:10 pm | Reply
      • Saul

        That doesn't matter. There is always going to be war. Our country is still making war over seas, and it's never going to end. One war ends and another one begins. It's always going to be that way.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:19 pm |
      • Rikaard

        No, the war was over after Midway. What those did was simply vaporize 100,000 citizens. The single greatest act of human brutality in the history of mankind.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:11 pm |
      • Bubblehead

        No... Read a book

        October 29, 2013 at 11:26 pm |
    • Pablo

      Weapons keep us safe by making it REALLY REALLY costly for others to do us harm.

      If you can destroy your enemies and you are willing it makes others THINK TWICE about harming you.

      History is written and by people who could defend themselves, economically, militarily and socially.

      The weak will perish.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:50 pm | Reply
      • Tom

        Well said. And precisely the reason I have a pistol in the house.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:03 pm |
    • LivnnTX

      My God, Saul. Please, just shut the hell up already. You live on planet Earth in the year 2013. For your records, it's a pretty dangerous place and time to be alive; thus, unlike the utopia in your head, weapons are a necessity in this day in age. I suggest you get a concept and grow up a little, SIr.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:34 am | Reply
  53. AL, KS

    It seems to me that the needs of the Navy in the future, and perhaps in the present, would be better served with more smaller and cheaper ships. Patrolling shipping lanes to combat pirates, and reacting to hot spots in third world areas should be ongoing missions. We could build 6 or more Perry class frigates or Freedom class littoral ships for the price of this so called "destroyer". Just seems like overkill to me.

    October 29, 2013 at 9:48 pm | Reply
    • Alex

      The problem is that those ships don't have much capability in a true war against a powerful enemy. The Zumwalt class destroyers will be able to operate in the littorals because the have very small signatures (radar, sound, ect.). Sadly, there are anti-ship missiles which would be able to take out many ships in the US Navy. These ships also provide more capability than shooting guns and firing missiles. Eventually, when directed energy weapons (lasers) are put on the ship in the 2020s, the Zumwalt-class ships will be able to protect other ships in the fleet even better.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:08 pm | Reply
      • AL, KS

        I guess it just depends on what "true" war you're fighting. In a mission to secure shipping lanes from pirates off the horn of Africa, I'll take a few frigates over one over-sized destroyer. Now a battle in the Taiwan straights against China would be a different story. I would ask which scenario is more likely?

        October 29, 2013 at 10:36 pm |
      • Desert Tortoise

        The next naval war will be a pitched battle with the Chinese. The Perry class was never a good escort for the carrier, too slow, limited air defense capability, no low frequency sonar. In a fight with the Chinese it is just excess baggage.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:51 pm |
    • Pablo

      yes a few large conventional ships, mid-sized ships and many many drone assets.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:50 pm | Reply
    • Truthful1

      As a Scholar in Homeland Security, and a US Navy Veteran working in Counter Intel., Recon., and US Air Force Intel for TAC HQ, six years with Super Carrier Battle Group Surface, and Air Operations, and four years with Operational Research, and Development Flight Test Ops with all branches of the Military, and Allied Military Command with NATO, I can intelligently say that Russia is helping China develop, and deploy three times the Naval capacity that we...the US is developing for operational deployment. This Destroyer is more then necessary. The Nimitz Class Super Carrier Fleet along with our Fleet of Trident "Boomers" Submarines enable a Super Carrier Battle Group operationally deploy and project US Air Power of over a Hundred Air Craft any where in the world at will, and what the Russians, Chinese, and Rogue Terrorist States such as N Korea, Iran, and Syria are deathly afraid of is our Fleet of Trident Nuclear Missile Submarines that can go absolutely any where in the world almost undetected and surface or launch a Sub-Surface ICBM Missile attack that could easily destroy a Continent. Oh yeah.....Secretary of the Navy John Lehman under the Reagan Administration built a 500 Ship Navy that was, and still is second to none. Do you see the Berlin Wall up? Has a Nation-State dared to attack the US Main Land? Our safety, and security all hangs in the balance of America's ability to project Air, and Sea Power with our Special Ops Community deploying our Navy's best....The US Navy Seals created by President Kennedy at the beginning of the Viet-Nam War.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:55 pm | Reply
      • Bubblehead

        The 500 ship navy was a farce. We could never put all of them to sea at one time. As one returned from deployment it would be cannibalized for parts to send the next group out to sea. I remember pulling fire control gear, trim pumps, etc to get the next sub ready for deployment. At best we cold have put 300 ships and subs to sea...

        October 29, 2013 at 11:36 pm |
  54. Sizzle

    BIGGER LIGHTER DEADLIER – And featuring a hull shape not used since the 19th century because it capsizes and sinks in rough seas.

    October 29, 2013 at 9:36 pm | Reply
    • Maha

      Why do you keep saying that? Annoying. Why would a submarine need to perform well in rough seas? Submarines are designed to go below the surface of the water which isn't rough like it is on the surface. Submarines go hundreds of feet below the surface, they don't have to worry about "rough seas" that low.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:50 pm | Reply
      • Sizzle

        It's not a submarine.....

        October 29, 2013 at 9:52 pm |
      • Red October

        Because it's a destroyer not a submarine perhaps?

        October 29, 2013 at 9:54 pm |
      • Bubblehead

        You're a NUB obviously... Get some dolphins and some time on the pond. Subs have to deal with rough seas as well...

        October 29, 2013 at 11:38 pm |
    • Alex

      It needs a low radar cross-section and a low wake, which this design provides. Also, it can survive moderately large waves, especially if it points into them. It will just have to avoid huge storms, which I think is an ok trade-off.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:10 pm | Reply
      • Jeff

        Is it just me or does this design look like Capt. Nemo's ship in the League of Extraordinary Gentleman

        October 29, 2013 at 10:51 pm |
      • Miss Demeanor

        Well, since the UN black helicopters have been outed, obviously the UN needed a new war machine to invoke the Apocalypse on the USA. The fact that this vessel was meant for a smooth body of water irrefutably "proves" my new conspiracy theory (well, to by the tin-hat wearing bunker-building drunken redneck militia that intends to save us from interracial marriage).

        October 30, 2013 at 2:01 am |
    • kyle

      except this ship is much lighter and not very tall. Half of the boat is below the water line. Seems to me its going to be very difficult to capsize.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:22 pm | Reply
      • Doh

        Seems to me you have no idea what you are talking about. If anything because the ship is lighter it will capsize more easily. One of the main problems with Tumblehome is that when the ship is pitching down in high seas the aft will leave the water and it will lose all stability and simply roll over. FACT.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:40 am |
    • Desert Tortoise

      The hull form underwater is entirely conventional. The design is optimized to reduce pitching and rolling so radar reflectivity is minimized. A wet deck is the accepted trade off. The amount of tumblehome above the waterline is nothing like that used on some early steel combat ships. Not even close.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:25 pm | Reply
      • slow day

        Or it could be used to slice Greenpeace vessels like butter. Greenpeace 'pirates' are toast. It's all part of the vast Hallie Burton enviro-hatin' conspiracy...

        October 30, 2013 at 2:05 am |
    • Alex the Great

      But it can ram othe ships and poke holes in them. Touché!!! Kiss my 20 billion ramrod....

      October 29, 2013 at 10:29 pm | Reply
  55. Art

    If I was an enemy commander I would not attack this ship until it had been at sea for at least three weeks.

    October 29, 2013 at 9:25 pm | Reply
  56. mcp123

    "of the most patriotic things we as Americans can do. I care what these "monster machines" can do, and it damn well better be able to keep me and my family safe."

    It doesn't... it was built to fight a war that will never be fought...and if it is fought the world will end and most peoples problems will be over.

    The four frigates they dispatched to Syria recently... each has a loadout of 90 Tomahawk missiles... each one of those missiles could be nuclear tipped. That's 360 cities utterly destroyed... enough ash thrown in the atmosphere from the resulting fires to bring about the next ice age.

    The U.S. military...doesn't know the meaning of overkill.

    October 29, 2013 at 9:19 pm | Reply
    • Air Lar

      Perhaps not, but they do know the meaning of the word "prepared". You're likely one of those folks that complains about your safety when you feel endangered by some event, and then complains about military spending. That or you don't understand the concept of being prepared. If that war "never happens" simply because of the weaponry we have at our disposal, then the cost is worth it. Unfortunately, there is no way to gauge that.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:26 pm | Reply
      • Sizzle

        Actually the Navy scrapped this program – they are building 3 instead of 32. Tumblehome hull design hasnt been used in over 100 years for a reason, it can't handle rough seas and if you manage to put a hole in it the thing is going to sink like a bag of bricks.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:47 pm |
      • Bob

        I have nothing against the U.S. spending money to have a strong practical military, but I don't like the way they use funds to build billion dollar warships, when they still haven't provided the majority of troops with armored IED safe vehicles.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:59 pm |
      • kyle

        Any ship with a hole in it will sink like a ton of bricks.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:25 pm |
      • Desert Tortoise

        Did you see the size of the hole in the Samuel B. Roberts after is struck an Iranian mine in 1988? The explosion penetrated two decks upwards from the ship's bottom, blew the engines off their mounts and cracked the superstructure all the way through. The crew saved her and the ship was repaired and remains in service today.

        A sister ship the Stark, was hit by two Exocet missiles a year earlier. Major damage but the crew put the fires out and brought the ship back to the US under it's own power. USS Tripoli hit an Iraqi mine during GW1, putting a 20 ft by 30 ft hole in the hull. The shock of the explosion blew her boilers out. The crew controlled the flooding, relit the boilers and continued with their mission.

        A hole in a combat ship does not guarantee it sinks.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:30 pm |
    • Maha

      People overstate the fallout from nuclear weapons so hard it's not even funny. There are still ridiculous articles out there that say that places where nuclear bombs have hit aren't inhabitable. The 1.6 million people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima would like to dispute those statements. It's apparent to me that if an atomic bomb hit overhead it might kill me, but if I managed to survive it wouldn't be a big deal. 1.6 million people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima will back me up on this.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:47 pm | Reply
      • marks320

        I'd be willing you bet you can't find one survivor of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts that would characterize the event as "no big deal". Your attempt to trivialize the consequences of a nuclear war undermines any credibility you might have had.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
    • John

      I agree with Air Lar. Your view is short sighted. It seems your point of perspective is in line with all other views aiming at blaming others' solutions, but not giving a solution that would work.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:49 pm | Reply
    • TheThinker

      Your post is totally falacious. Specifically, it is the "Straw Man Fallacy", in which one makes up a ridiculous assertion, attributes the ridiculous assertion to someone, and conludes the person is flawed because of the ridiculous assertion. You made up the notion that the Navy would fire 360 nuclear bombs at Syria without any evidence that this would ever occur, then you blame the Navy as being irresponsible.
      Think, man, THINK.

      Would the Navy REALLY fire 360 nuclear bombs at a small country that is no threat at all the our country?
      You do know that the military would never attack another country without orders, right? President Obama would have to order an attack, especially an attack with 'special weapons". Do you think that President Obama would attack Syria with nuclear weapons?

      Are you saying that the military would use nuclear weapons without orders from the government?

      Time to read up on how things really work!
      Respecting the military's ability to anticipate "the next war" comes when one actually does research.
      Only our military stresses the importance of cutting edge innovation. (That's why everything is so expensive.)
      Leave the military to the experts.
      Less fallacies make for better dialog.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:54 pm | Reply
    • Alex

      First thing, Perry-class frigates, the only frigates the US Navy has right now, can not hold anywhere close to 80 missiles, you must be thinking of Arleigh Burke-Class destroyers. Also, the US doesn't have surface ship nuclear missiles because we have plenty of them in submarines and ICBMs. Missiles from ships are used to precisely hit a target so the the surroundings, including civilians, aren't affected.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:14 pm | Reply
      • Desert Tortoise

        Both the US and Italian Navies had cruisers designed to launch Polaris Missiles back in the early 1960s. These were the USS Long Beach and MMI Garibaldi. As it turned out, surface ships pitch and roll where submerged submarines do not, and the missile guidance could not overcome the motion of surface ships sufficiently to permit an acceptable degree of accuracy. They were also more easily targeted than a submerged submarine. The surface launch Polaris program was discontinued.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:33 pm |
      • marks320

        Surely you're not suggesting there is no collateral damage from a cruise missile strike? That a warhead of that size confines its explosive power and destruction to just the specific target? Nobody is ever affected except the intended target/structure/personnel? You cannot be that naive, can you?

        October 29, 2013 at 10:39 pm |
  57. Reality

    The USA has become the heartless redneck father buying expensive guns and modifying his massive monster truck as his children starve in squalor.

    October 29, 2013 at 9:17 pm | Reply
    • Air Lar

      You come across as an elitist jerk when you make comments like that – hope it makes you feel better.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:28 pm | Reply
      • marks320

        I think he made you think which caused you to feel worse.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:43 pm |
      • Reality

        Does my mere thinking whilst considering facts and history make me an elitist? My analogy was not meant as an insult to anyone directly, it was entirely metaphorical.

        Yet, you come hyperactively nipping at my nonexistent heels like a retarded lapdog defending a caricature of your beloved that I was not even addressing. How sad to be you now – a lap dog barking at shadows.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:56 am |
    • TheThinker

      So you stereotype blue-collar white people and hate them.
      Sunday's Gospel was about the Pharasie who prayed "thank you, God, that I am so much better than (those LOW people)"

      October 29, 2013 at 9:58 pm | Reply
      • marks320

        He definitely referenced a common stereotype, one that DOES exist, but I didn't see any evidence of "hate". Until you brought it up while quoting your particular holy book and this week's fairy tale.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:46 pm |
      • Reality

        You fail at stereotyping. I was born and raised from blue color stock. I’m blond haired with blue eyes with ancestors dating back to the mayflower (literally). Yet, I worked hard field labor for $1.10 per hour.

        I admire true blue color workers that take care of their own. I don’t think you know the meaning of work or sacrifice.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:01 am |
      • Reality

        I really think one of us might be enriched within an honest discussion of the “low people”.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:23 am |
  58. Frank A

    What goes around, comes around. Why does the latest Stealth Destroyer look like the Merrimac?

    October 29, 2013 at 9:07 pm | Reply
  59. craig

    Good, another piece of hardware,
    The trillion to bail wall st. did not build a wheel.
    Good job Maine..keep em coming!!

    October 29, 2013 at 9:03 pm | Reply
    • bruce

      I don't see the advantage. So build a ship killing missile that does not use radar... It locks onto the thermal, acoustic or magnetic signature to destroy this ship. We spend billions on 3 ships, and some despot changes a seeker head and takes this out.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:08 pm | Reply
      • kevin

        or just drive a small motor boat up against the side while it's in port and blow a huge hole in it, kill a bunch of people, take it out of service, force us to spend another billion to fix it, and embarrass the US in front of the entire world by showing them that a suicide bomber needs less than $10,000 to disable our latest and greatest technology. these expensive toys sure look great on paper, though.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:18 pm |
      • marcindc

        Same can be said for the government welfare complex, with the exception that unlike the military contractors that produce something like a ship or aircraft that is developed under oversight, the government welfare complex provides large numbers of jobs for bureaucrats that only produce more lazy takers and more bureaucrats. The government welfare complex does that at the expense of those who really need the help.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:33 pm |
      • Alex

        The Zumwalt has worked on lowering all signatures (not just radar). Also to Kevin below (who I can't reply to for some reason), there are armed people on watch while in port. They have thought of that after the USS Cole bombing.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:17 pm |
      • Desert Tortoise

        Even if the incoming missile does not have radar, the launch platform must have it to find the ship and aim the missile in the direction of the target ship so the seeker can find it. A low observable ship design makes it very hard, maybe impossible, for an enemy to detect it, much less target it for a missile.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:53 pm |
  60. George W.

    think about the world and the despotic corrupt nations out there that relish the sight of a weakening America. Albert Einstein said it over 60 years ago upon the implementation of the atom bomb: "I know not with what weapons WW III will be fought – but world war IV will be fought with sticks and stones." If we don't maintain our ability to defend ourselves and our allies – all will be lost in the not to distant future.

    October 29, 2013 at 8:59 pm | Reply
    • Bobby

      Congrats, you completely missed the point of the quote. He's saying the rising destructive capabilities of weapons will spark a war that creates a devastating wasteland where nobody even has decent weapon technology.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:43 pm | Reply
  61. junkie

    Little late to the party.. Other major powers have had these for years.

    October 29, 2013 at 8:58 pm | Reply
    • no

      What makes you think this is the first one, LOL?

      99.9% of the weapons/machinery/etc other countries build for their defense is because they saw it in satellite photos from their spy satellites aimed at the U.S.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:42 pm | Reply
  62. olebarnbuster

    (ALEX)I remember a old man told me its better to SHUT up and let everyone think I'm a FOOL,then to open my mouth and remove all doubt.I think you my friend win the DA of the day award.........whew and its only 8:30 here...

    October 29, 2013 at 8:49 pm | Reply
  63. Jay G

    Gonna be useful against China.

    October 29, 2013 at 8:46 pm | Reply
    • bruce

      I know from working on guidance systems on torpedos long ago. THERE IS MORE THAN JUST RADAR as a guidance system. A ship this large can be tracked acoustically, magnetically or via its thermal displacement, or using many other techniques. I can see stealth for a AIRCRAFT, because they move fast, but its way to easy to acquire this huge boat about a dozen other ways. Did anyone else bother to think of this???

      October 29, 2013 at 8:59 pm | Reply
      • George W.

        I'm sure the signature is minimized acoustically, thermally and magnetically and obviously electronically, granted visually will always be there and satellites will know where the ship is unless it operates in a perpetual nighttime fog...like the concept – but it is hopelessly flawed and a probable waste of money.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:08 pm |
      • bruce

        Thanks George. This thing is SO BIG and slow, you can probably target it using Google Maps.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:13 pm |
      • Joe Navy

        Bruce, the stealth isn't for submarines primarily... you are probably correct in your assumption that there are other ways to track a ship this large and slow in the water... however, what the stealth IS good for are the Mach 2+ anti-ship MISSLES from land, air, and sea platforms that are the REAL ship killers.

        Submarines are always a threat, but that's why high value assets have friendly submarines surrounding them to protect them to begin with. I get where you're coming from, but you have to look at the big picture, your threat analysis does not include all variables for the justification of the stealthy design.

        Current US Navy guy who reads alot.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:14 pm |
      • Desert Tortoise

        Bruce, you are aware it uses electric propulsion with the gas turbines and generator sets up in the superstructure rather than down inside the hull? This motors are superconducting and liquid cooled. This is an extremely quiet design.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:55 pm |
      • Desert Tortoise

        Joe Navy, I don't know what the flank speed of a Zumwalt is, but the flank speed of a Spruance or Ticonderoga topped 40 kts. Definitely not slow. If you ever rode a Tico at flank speed in a turn you would never forget it. Consider that the longer the waterline of a ship, the faster it can go before it begins to plane (rise up on it's bow wave like a speed boat). I would wager, considering the nature of the propulsion (superconducting electric motors in the hull powered by big gas turbines spinning huge AC alternators mounted in the superstructure to minimize hull penetration) that a Zumwalt will walk away from a Tico. Just a guess, but I have not seen a really slow DD or DDG come out of the US Navy in my lifetime.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:05 pm |
    • junkie

      lol, only if China is wanting a fight.. which they don't... USA just a bully full of bluster, looking for the next kid to steal lunch money from. Stamping it's foot flexing it's muscles, and being left behind by the world, no one wants to play with you anymore..

      October 29, 2013 at 9:01 pm | Reply
      • Joe

        Who cares what you think!

        October 29, 2013 at 9:14 pm |
      • Keelhauler

        We're not "playing", we're keeping the rest of the world safe from the REAL bullies. Maybe someday we'll stop and you all can finally realize how pfhucked you are without the "world's policeman."

        October 29, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
  64. just wondering

    The greatest threat this country faces is the uncontrolled greed of the military industrial complex..... fueled by ignorance and paranoia.....that is being pushed on the citizens of this nation....

    October 29, 2013 at 8:44 pm | Reply
  65. Keep Borrowing that Chinese Money

    haha, your country can't even afford these new toys. Embarrassing really! Keep borrowing that money from China.

    October 29, 2013 at 8:31 pm | Reply
    • bruce

      Yep, while we maintain a dozen carrier battle groups China keeps rolling in the money. China lends us the money and collects interest while we deal with North Korea and threats that are on China's border. Same thing with the Saudis... we protect their behinds with blood and treasure, while they talk about replacing us with a new world currency.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:38 pm | Reply
    • Alex

      "Debt held by the public currently stands at about 75% of the GDP" (this means the US citizens). "the largest single holder is China, which has, at last count, about $1.3 trillion in U.S. treasury securities, or about 7.8% of the U.S. outstanding debt." Yes, China only owns about 8 percent of the US Debt.

      October 29, 2013 at 10:25 pm | Reply
      • Desert Tortoise

        No, China is very far from the largest holder of US debt. The Federal Reserve has more US debt instruments than the Chinese. Their debt holdings are about 2% of GDP, nothing to get excited about.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:57 pm |
  66. stepehn pedersen

    Way to spend billions on a secret stealth warship and then plaster it all over the media......LOL

    October 29, 2013 at 8:24 pm | Reply
    • bruce

      Yes, the only thing you can see is the huge trailing price tag.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:34 pm | Reply
  67. fogolabs

    Looks like the Civil War battelship Merrimac.

    October 29, 2013 at 8:14 pm | Reply
    • Willie

      Yeah i see that. Designers got away from that forward jutting bow when they realized if you hit anything with it, the damage will be at or below the waterline. I guess destroyers don't do much in the way of ramming these days though.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:47 pm | Reply
      • Desert Tortoise

        Ever see how far forward the bow sonar domes of bit low frequency sonars protrude underwater? Or how about the bulbous bows of most modern merchant ships. That design minimizes the bow wave, which in turn minimizes resistance.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:59 pm |
  68. V4Vendetta

    Another warship, so we can kill more people...But kids are starving in America today...Priorities?

    October 29, 2013 at 8:12 pm | Reply
    • twerkonaut

      Well, America does have a history of intervention and kicking the can down the road.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:20 pm | Reply
    • Dex

      It's a necessary evil. I mean, we could just melt down or sell our weapons to other countries, perhaps stop production all together, but while we are busy discarding our arms, the rest of the world will continue to keep building and improving their arms. I agree with you it, it's a shame that money has to go toward weapons, rather than food, but having high tech pieces like this are more a deterrent, than anything else.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:32 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        What are you talking about? Our military eclipses all the world's combined armies by far. There is NO need for more.

        October 29, 2013 at 8:38 pm |
      • bruce

        Dex, the real risk to our national security is that we go bankrupt and lose our financial capacity. The wealth has been moving to Asia for a long time. Asia can do the neat electronics too, after all the chips we use are made there. If our economy collapses under too much debt, or we have our currency replaced as the world currency, then no more battleships, carriers or anything else.

        October 29, 2013 at 8:41 pm |
      • Dex

        Alex, that statement is entirely false. China's military continues to grow, Russia is still a very capable force to be reckoned with, and there are a few others who still pose a threat to The U.S. My whole point is that The U.S. cannot simply stop building its arms, while the rest of the world continues to build, as that scenario would only guarantee a successful attack and invasion of foreign powers.

        October 29, 2013 at 9:39 pm |
  69. Kev

    Our next war will leave us all devastated, and with no regard,trust or loyalty to any form of Government let alone ourselves.... To James in Maine -->...Our next war will leave us unable to eat the food you now serve in your restaurant, and as for work there will be plenty of that for those lucky enough ??? to be alive and clean...The nuclear clean up, removal of the dead decaying bodies and carcasses all over the world should keep us busy, as we fight off the pains of hunger from rabid famine...Hey !!! How about all the poisons and gases that will be released ??? I'm sure that will be something we all will have to look forward too....Americans really need to WAKE -UP !!! We are hated around the world and screwed over by our own Government.....

    October 29, 2013 at 8:04 pm | Reply
    • bruce

      Im afraid you are right.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:04 pm | Reply
    • marcindc

      Haha...the zombies don't forget the zombie armies in your nightmarish scenario of death and destruction! I've lived all around the world and your premise that the world hates the US is just plain silly The numbers of citizens in the millions from other countries from every region of the globe that choose to live in the United States illegally also doesn’t tend to support your simple conclusions and assertions. You may be self loathing like most leftist and liberal/progressives about your own country and yourself, but hate has not been my experience in the number of countries I've lived in. Maybe it’s time to turn off the computer, get out and have a little wider view of reality and the real world, you might find more people liking you.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:59 pm | Reply
  70. DuhDude

    Nice stealth technology but who's the moron who thought to include a slideshow with this article? Also, why do they park that boxy old submarine-looking thing behind it in every shot?

    October 29, 2013 at 8:03 pm | Reply
    • Marcus

      It's a floating dry dock, that's why it's in the pictures.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:29 pm | Reply
    • Lennahc

      Whoever let cameras in to photograph the hull design should be hung in public. What is this administration thinking?

      October 29, 2013 at 9:50 pm | Reply
      • Desert Tortoise

        The wave piercing hullform has been used on Australian built catamaran auto ferries for a few decades now. There is nothing even a little bit secret about it.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:07 pm |
  71. bones1918

    Oh yeah? the Navy has an invisible ship? well i have TWO invisible ships. prove me wrong.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:57 pm | Reply
    • Veteran

      Along with all your invisible friends

      October 29, 2013 at 11:29 pm | Reply
      • LivnnTX


        October 30, 2013 at 3:37 am |
  72. Reticuli

    Nice, but just more evidence that the Navy as the "senior" military branch never seems to have issues getting money, but the Army, which bares the brunt of most war duties, had its only stealth project (Comanche) canceled even though the outgoing Sec of Army emphasized it as one of their most important programs. And I can guarantee you helos get more theater use than this destroyer or any of those VSTOL F-35's the marines are getting ever will. Or maybe Comanche was canceled just because the loyal Bushies had it out for Shinseki.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:57 pm | Reply
    • bruce

      Yes, the Navy should think like the Army. Use a SWARM of cheap ships, not one or two mega expansive and delicate capital ships. If we had to go against China, we'd be dealing with swarms of the enemy. The advantages we had during the Gulf War of using GPS and radar stealth are now fully known by our adversaries.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:49 pm | Reply
  73. ali

    فقط من قتل جميع من فضلك !!

    October 29, 2013 at 7:50 pm | Reply
    • Dave

      We will do our best

      October 29, 2013 at 8:00 pm | Reply
  74. Matt

    Why on earth do we need this?

    October 29, 2013 at 7:49 pm | Reply
    • e7

      So we can take over the world and make everyone our slaves.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:58 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        No, it's so the world can join us as salves. Mos of us are already debt slaves.

        October 29, 2013 at 8:29 pm |
  75. 1bird


    October 29, 2013 at 7:47 pm | Reply
  76. Tom


    October 29, 2013 at 7:44 pm | Reply
    • Jeff

      I think, sir, you are ignorant.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:46 pm | Reply
    • Tom


      October 29, 2013 at 7:46 pm | Reply
      • George patton

        You nailed it, Tom. Thank you. These right-wing politicians in Washington will stop at nothing in order to get a vote, including throwing away our tax money on this kind of idiocy!!!

        October 29, 2013 at 7:54 pm |
    • Yakobi

      That presupposes A) you have a submarine, B) you know the general vicinity in order to sneak up on it, C) you can actually sneak up within torpedo range before being blown out of the water.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:49 pm | Reply
    • Bananas


      October 29, 2013 at 7:52 pm | Reply
    • Tiredofyouall

      There's a button on your keyboard labeled 'caps lock'. you should strike that just once then your comments could be read with a bit more sincerity. The immature nature of SHOUTING EVERYTHING YOU SAY does not make your point any stronger, it only serves to show you know nothing about the subject of which you have chosen to speak

      October 29, 2013 at 8:05 pm | Reply
    • Random Person

      The U.S. should drive innovation through research and development of technology and the spending boosts the economy in the long run.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:56 pm | Reply
    • Desert Tortoise

      The Marines have been begging Congress since the 1970s for the Navy to build something with big guns to provide the Marines with gunfire support ashore. They are not intended for use against other ships but against land targets in support of amphibious operations.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:08 pm | Reply
  77. EdL

    In yesteryears destroyers were great. Today, even though we think they are stealth destroyers they could be wiped out easily. I would not enjoy being aboard.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:42 pm | Reply
    • Yakobi

      I'm sure the Navy would be interested in how you believe they can be easily destroyed.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:45 pm | Reply
    • Tom


      October 29, 2013 at 7:50 pm | Reply
      • Johnross1968

        Says the guy who doesn't even know how to turn off his cap lock.

        October 29, 2013 at 8:15 pm |
      • Larry L

        As retired Navy maybe you can answer this question... Sattellite technology, nuclear prolifferation, remote sensing capabilities, and relatively cheap, but sophisticated targeting (and evasion) electronics make anti-ship weapons really tough to defeat. Targets can be hammered with a high density of "sleeper" mines (even nuclear), homing torpedoes, air-to-sea missiles, and even space-based fires. How can we expect to spend so much on surface ships when they appear so vulnerable – especially as technology is so widely dispersed to our potential enemies? In light of modern warfare advances, aren't we putting too many eggs in one basket?

        October 29, 2013 at 9:18 pm |
      • Desert Tortoise

        If you look at the history of modern naval warfare, since the introduction of anti ship missiles in combat in the 1967 Arab Israeli war, most anti-ship missiles have been defeated by electronic countermeasures. In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, all of the 40 something anti ship missiles fired at the Israelis by the Egyptian and Syrian navies were spoofed by countermeasures. In Operation Praying Mantis, all of the Iranian anti ship missiles fired at our Navy were defeated by countermeasures without resort to using our own defensive missiles or guns. In the 1982 Falklands war, four of seven Argentine Exocet missiles were spoofed off their targets by British countermeasures. In fact there has only been one kinetic kill of an anti ship cruise missile when a British destroyer uses a missile to down an Iraqi Silkworm missile aimed at one of our battleships.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:13 pm |
    • Narg

      You do realize that the term destroyer is just that... a term. If you did some homework, you'd notice that this class of ship is over 14,500 tons. That's heavier than the so-called cruisers of other navies. That's right... a US destroyer weighs more than a cruiser. In fact, this ship is heavier than the American Ticonderoga-class... and that's a cruiser! I guess the US Navy just got tired of using the term cruiser for ships that could be cruisers.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:10 pm | Reply
      • ACL

        Exactly. The main reason why this is called a destroyer is due to its guns. Earlier in its development, the DDG-1000 was known as the DD-X, and there was a matching CG-X (cruiser). The cruiser would have used the same hull, but instead of the guns, it would have had more places for missiles. That program was scrapped due to costs.

        October 29, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
  78. angel

    Never undetstood why we try to protect details on military projects, when the media just ends up facilitating those details to the public and our enemies via the Internet. Migh as well publish other sensitive data such as troop movement, tactics, capabilities among others. Oh wait, the already have in the past.

    Some secrets are ment as such for a tactical reasons. Putting budget aside, jeoperdizing our troop's tactical advantage and safety to satisfy curiosity of some is unacceptable.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:41 pm | Reply
    • knowbeforeyoucomment

      or.... being able to tell the world that we have cutting edge weapons is the point of having them.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:46 pm | Reply
  79. sparky

    Great. It can avoid radar, but can't avoid sonar and submarines. Awesome misuse of taxpayer money.

    I guess if something isn't worth doing, it isn't worth doing right.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:41 pm | Reply
    • Jeff

      Just curious what nations submarines you are afraid of.... The Russians are falling apart and the Chinese couldn't field a blue water sub fleet if they had too.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:48 pm | Reply
      • Percy J


        October 29, 2013 at 8:06 pm |
    • Desert Tortoise

      Find out the details of the Zumwalts propulsion. Superconducting liquid cooled (meaning very quiet) electric motors in the hull, energized by gas turbine AC alternator sets mounted in the superstructure to minimize hull penetration and acoustic signature. These will be extremely quiet ships.

      October 29, 2013 at 11:16 pm | Reply
  80. TacSatCableDog

    Youre no Jesus, Alex

    October 29, 2013 at 7:39 pm | Reply
  81. Jim

    Did we learn nothing from WWII? If it ain't a submarine it's a sitting duck.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:38 pm | Reply
    • Gunner

      ....and you, sir, are clueless.

      October 29, 2013 at 8:15 pm | Reply
  82. Ralter

    Ah all those arm-chair admirals here. Confusing "stealth" with "invisible." Instead of "damn hard to target in a battle."

    October 29, 2013 at 7:37 pm | Reply
    • Snickersnee Gubbins

      I'm quite confident that all US Navy officers and commanders know the definition of the word "stealth".

      October 29, 2013 at 8:15 pm | Reply
    • NNN

      Not really- not very many modern anti-ship missiles rely entirely on radar, and then stealth technology doesn't give you any advantage at short detection ranges. Stealth merely attenuates the radar return, so it will save the ASM from switching in its front end attenuators until it gets a little closer. This monstrosity has been in the planning stages for over 30 years. Those were the days of frenzied military spending with reckless abandon, the Navy is trying to save face by following through with the program but it is totally out of line with the fiscal reality of today, and the technology it uses, applications concepts, nearly everything about this platform is dated and nearly obsolete.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:11 pm | Reply
      • Desert Tortoise

        The Marines want the Navy to build ships with big guns for fire support of the Marines in land combat. Were it not for the Marines I doubt this class of ship would have gone forward as far as it has. Even now, the Marines want more such ships while the Navy has other more urgent priorities.

        October 29, 2013 at 11:17 pm |
  83. Alex

    Thenudge, I wonder if you would call Jesus a sanctimonious turd. A brute swine like you would.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:37 pm | Reply
    • Yakobi

      You comparing yourself to Jesus now, Alex? Tell ya what–go convert al Qaeda to peace-loving xtians and then get back to us. Till then, I'll trust the military and the intel community to keep us safe from our enemies instead of you.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:43 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        Like they kept us safe from the 911 attacks, the majority of them from Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan or Iraq? Or the Benghazi embassy attacks? You mean you prefer to be engaged in a perpetual conflict? You're a relic sir. There’s no honor in a pointless war where there’s nothing to achieve an no one wins. If you know yur history, there are no victors in war only survivors.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:55 pm |
  84. ok....

    REAL stealthy telling the world about it, it's place of harborage, it's incomplete status, it's specifications and payloads, and literally making it a floating skyscraper....50 times harder to spot on radar but approximately 100 times easier to spot with a periscope....and yea people is super great that the construction of some old world sea vessel gave you some cash in your pockets but guess what happens when that budget runs out. Pretty soon our entire economy will run off making wartime goods....oh wait.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:37 pm | Reply
    • Wag The Dog

      Exactly right.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:44 pm | Reply
  85. Jon

    Fiscally responsible, can't feed the people but we sure as hell can kill them.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:32 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      I thought the US was the fatest country in the world...

      October 29, 2013 at 7:39 pm | Reply
    • Luke

      We have to protect the hungry from the enemies.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:42 pm | Reply
      • ok....

        NO! Luke, we must protect the cheeseburger! The cheeseburgers!

        October 29, 2013 at 8:18 pm |
  86. George patton

    it is time we have to start leaking pictures of stealthy looking submarines, ships, tanks, planes, drones on internet and let Chinese, Russians sweat.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:31 pm | Reply
    • sparky

      Better yet, leak pictures of fake Photoshop stealth submarines. A lot cheaper.

      And, that's what the Chinese and Russians do, anyway. They're not stupid.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:43 pm | Reply
  87. TacSatCableDog

    People from space !! OMG

    October 29, 2013 at 7:30 pm | Reply
  88. CAL USA

    Has anyone noticed that the Navy has had ships for about 100 years that are more stealthy than this very expensive new toy? They are called submarines, and when submerged they have a smaller radar profile than a glass of water. They are also capable of launching missiles that will reach targets well beyond the 63 miles being touted for the Zumwalt. This is yet another example of the military-industrial complex Ike warned us about. Too bad we're still ignoring him.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:28 pm | Reply
    • Yakobi

      Would you send boomers to attack pirate skiffs off Somalia?

      October 29, 2013 at 7:40 pm | Reply
    • Jeff

      Submarines don't carry as many weapons as destroyers, they also serve a different purpose.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:41 pm | Reply
  89. Anonymous

    Why is it called "stealthy" ? People from space can see it and always know where its going. At least 500 satelites will be tracking its movements. "Stealth" down the drain. What a bummer.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:27 pm | Reply
    • Jorge

      I think your assessment is without merit.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:50 pm | Reply
    • NNN

      They don't even need that much. Wherever they sail this thing there's going to be intelligence gathering small craft that won't even need $1000 worth of laser radar and GPS to pin point its position within a few feet. Then, when the thing starts launching Tomahawks or the long range round or whatever else, those items are easily detected and tracked from which it is a simple matter of determining the launch point for purposes of counter-attack.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:26 pm | Reply
    • Desert Tortoise

      Admiral Ace Lyons hid the big nuclear carrier Eisenhower and it's escorts from detection all the way from Norfolk to just outside the old USSR's territorial limit off Murmansk. He hid the ships from detection in weather system where their satellites and maritime patrol aircraft could not find them. Heavy cloud cover and rain greatly attenuates radar returns. A wiley commander can use weather to his or her advantage to sneak a carrier up to an enemy coast or enemy formation and strike hard. Ships can communicate with signal lights and flags. Aircraft can operate from ships using only light signals. No radios, radars in a receive mode only. Hard but doable, and well practiced. We snuck two carriers into the Sea of Okhotsk without the Sovs realizing it until a mock Alpha strike was launched and showed up on their radars at their territorial limit. Pandamonium on the radios!

      October 29, 2013 at 11:22 pm | Reply
  90. TacSatCableDog

    When do you plan on leaving the country, Alex? Dont go away mad, just go away.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:27 pm | Reply
    • Alex

      You first warmonger.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:57 pm | Reply
  91. Tonne

    Looks like the one we saw in Pearl Harbor. Most people do not want a war or to see us spend billions on a war budget when we have hunger in our nation and poverty. As a positive a person but some what of a Pollyanna I know we need to be on top as a nation with our military strength . It maybe be a false sense of security but we can not be neutral . We have to stand tall and respect all of our military who sacrifice every day to keep us safe.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:24 pm | Reply
    • Jeff

      Hungry and poor??? This country leads the world in deaths from over eating and it is the only place where people drive to the ghetto.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:42 pm | Reply
  92. randy pall

    i bet all the scientists were black.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:22 pm | Reply
    • Miss Demeanor

      I bet only a bigot would be checking.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:13 am | Reply
      • LivnnTX

        That is not true at all, Miss Demeanor. A few bigots aside, it is the federal government and the university systems ensconced deep within this county that overwhelmingly conduct the do the vast majority or color and race inspections and checking. Just so you know, you know? Lol...

        October 30, 2013 at 4:12 am |
  93. Alex

    Should have been called the "USS Corruption".

    October 29, 2013 at 7:22 pm | Reply
    • NNN

      Hahaha- you called it, a stimulus package for Bath.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:28 pm | Reply
  94. Matt

    I don't really understand the whole stealth component since it will be operating with ships without such technology, giving it away. And it sounds like that composite superstructure won't be able to take any punishment. Lastly, less sailors isn't a good thing. Sounds like the zumwalt class is just a bunch of bad ideas

    October 29, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Reply
    • Anonymous

      LOL Matt – good point. But that was the idea – all the shells and rounds from enemy ships will just fly through that fiber canopy without exploding. Sailors just have one guy with duct tape to seal the holes so cold air doesn't blow in.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:31 pm | Reply
    • Tiredofyouall

      you are both MORONS!! It might not be a bad idea to remember the adage, 'it is better ti be silent and thought a fool than to speak (in this case write) and remove all doubt!'

      October 29, 2013 at 7:57 pm | Reply
      • ok....

        Or to write (in this case) and exclaim complete ignorance of sea combat. Good try though.

        October 29, 2013 at 8:19 pm |
  95. Joe Plumber

    I want one!

    October 29, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Reply
  96. Lol

    People are complaining about defence spending which keeps the west's top military status which directly and indirectly keeps them safe? Ignorant kids

    October 29, 2013 at 7:20 pm | Reply
    • wllmshwn

      Please explain how this keeps us safe. All the money on this project could have brought us more servicemembers. Not ships from the cold war era.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:24 pm | Reply
      • Jeff

        What is it about this ship that is cold war era?

        October 29, 2013 at 7:43 pm |
      • joe

        Yes, we need more servicemen....Start the draft so everyone has their skin in the game!

        October 29, 2013 at 7:57 pm |
    • Chris

      Don't expect many people to understand the importance of displaying strength and remaining a dominant force. Even our conservatives are liberal.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:55 pm | Reply
  97. Big Muskie

    My, my, what a beautiful color. You'd think they could come up with something a little bit classy... like the Guard Guard has.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:19 pm | Reply
    • Neal Peart

      It's a war ship not a rescue ship, hence the dull grey vs. bright white and red.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:28 pm | Reply
      • LivnnTX

        Tisk, tisk... The correct color of a US Navy warship is not, Dull gray, but rather its second cousin, the one that is a little brighter, Haze gray... and is always underway. Shame, shame, shame on you for not knowing this, sir... Lol....

        October 30, 2013 at 4:23 am |
    • Jorge

      What the hell is the Guard Guard? Are you French?

      October 29, 2013 at 7:51 pm | Reply
  98. Alex

    I am glad to know that my taxes which I generate with very hard work and sacrifice, even though I hate war and with which I would like to alleviate poverty with, goes to build and maintain a boat, which at the end of the day only creates more misery death and disparity. My dear government, thank you for being the vilest mechanism on the face of this earth.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:12 pm | Reply
    • Jack Hollis

      Thank you, Alex. You nailed it good! Yes, the right-wing politicians in Washington are totally unprincipled people who are devoid of any feelings for the average American except to get their vote!

      October 29, 2013 at 7:17 pm | Reply
    • Sasha


      October 29, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Reply
    • Greg

      Your simple-mindedness is truly impressive. Thankfully you work very hard in the fast-food industry instead of making realistic decisions in a complex, and often messy world that isn't black and white.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:22 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        Your supposition that we care about your medieval views are naive. There are some of us that care more about people that are starving than adding one more ship to the most powerful navy in the world. Greg, you and others like you are simply a fossil in a paradigm change. The old guard is simply becoming more irrelevant day by day. To us, an egalitarian society is more important than any ship or weapon used to suppress economic rivalries and to impose our economic interests around the world.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:27 pm |
    • Jason

      Honestly Alex how much of your taxes do you really pay?... 90% of Americans actually pay little to nothing into taxes and to think your taxes are actually going into this is hilarious.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:23 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        I pay what the law dictates, nothing less and nothing more. Nevertheless, whatever the amount, no one should bear the burden of paying for something in the future which they cannot pay today. To your claim that no one pays taxes; I think you are referring to income taxes because last time I checked sales taxes are paid by all if not most of Americans.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:33 pm |
    • Yakobi

      I suspect you've never done a real hard day's work in your life, Alex. You certainly take for granted the freedom you use to disparage the military–a freedom paid for in blood, thanks to brave Americans who gave their lives so you could write drivel.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:35 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        There is nothing more basic and retrograde man killing another for land or for the colors on a piece of fabric. If that is what defines you as a human being I will not try to dissuade you, but there are humans among you who have another ideal destination for the human race.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:44 pm |
      • ok....

        dude seriously shut up. You're making yourself look dumb at this point. Im one of those people that nearly bled to death and died for your freedom to try and oppress someones view for your BS garbaged up ego. My sacrifice is that I no longer get to enjoy my life in any normal capacity so that you can sit in your momma's basement pretending to be someone who means something. I've heard no valid point from you whatsoever. The point he is trying to make is that we should we working towards a better future for all mankind; not simply blowing up the parts of it we disagree with (unless it's a true perversion of humanity). Now in my eyes this vessel was out-dated even before its conception and design. The only seafaring vessel capable of true stealth is a submarine, which this is not, and concordantly a waste of taxpayer money if it's sole purpose was to stealth. Go ahead and rebuttal...but those are just simple facts.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:56 pm |
    • Jeff

      Just because everyone doesn't have an iPhone doesn't mean they are suffering from poverty.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:45 pm | Reply
    • Jorge

      Nobody in this country is starving.... If they were it would be all over the news.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:52 pm | Reply
      • Alex

        Who says it would be destined to feed us?

        October 29, 2013 at 8:00 pm |
  99. Joe

    the purpose of the navy is not to provide jobs but defend the nation. The zumwalt will not be able to do so. Therefore it is not a good buy for the nation.

    More arleigh burke destroyers will.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:11 pm | Reply
  100. James

    To all you folks are all complaining about the price of the boat, I live in the town that it is being built in. Bath Iron Works is one of the largest employers in the state of Maine. We NEED these projects. It keeps working people in our state working. I work in a restaurant in the town and we fully depend on the workers from the Iron works to come in. We are always nervous about lay-offs... Keep the jobs coming.

    October 29, 2013 at 7:06 pm | Reply
    • usa4ever

      Well said

      October 29, 2013 at 7:10 pm | Reply
    • Alex

      To be complicit in the deaths that it will be a part of would weigh on me far more than not creating a job.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:14 pm | Reply
      • thenuge

        Move to Switzerland you sanctimonious turd.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:21 pm |
      • Mark

        Alex, you would prefer that we eliminate the defense complex of this nation? You Sir are touched. I don't want our nation to go to war any more than you do; however, not staying up to date with our military's technology and not maintaining our nations defense is idiotic.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:29 pm |
      • Jason


        Please…for all our sake…move to a different country. As a former Marine I've been to several that would love to hear your point of view regarding how terrible it is to live in the USA and then promptly cut off your head and post it online. Go to the airport today…hurry up now.


        October 29, 2013 at 7:29 pm |
      • Yakobi

        If deployed properly, my naive little Alex, it won't need to fire a shot. Gunboat diplomacy has always been useful.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:31 pm |
      • Jones

        well said.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:55 pm |
      • courser01

        I happen to be as granola-crunchy-liberal as they come, but even I am not naive enough not to appreciate the importance of maintaining a strong, up to date military. I deeply appreciate the sacrifices made by every single military family and their service members deserve the very best equipment we can supply.

        Also, as James mentioned above, we desperately need these jobs.

        I fully appreciate that some intelligent, rational people might disagree with my sentiment and I'm okay with that. Agreeing to disagree is an integral part of our nation's diversity and strength. On the other hand, I have no time or energy to spend on uninformed trolls who just lob insults and unfounded junk to hear themselves talk.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:48 am |
      • Cynthia Avishegnath

        I simply admire thenuge having said what I would wish to say but never would have said.

        October 30, 2013 at 3:34 am |
    • wllmshwn

      And that is why we will loose our next war. It isn't your fault. It is because we try to keep the military industrial complex alive with cold war projects. It is not praticle. Our next war will begin with high speed technology, but will end in a trench. Hopefully, that trench line isn't in California.

      October 29, 2013 at 7:17 pm | Reply
      • Mark

        And don't we even more keep the Medical-Industrial complex humming along with all the federal spending? IT Must all stop and be accounting for. The end is near and lean & mean will be the only way on ALL programs. Send issues like Social security, welfare, abortion, education, EPA and many other to the states in a responsible transfer over a decade or so!
        Get this nation back to lean and MEAN!

        October 30, 2013 at 3:43 am |
    • Jack Hollis

      It appears James, that you are thinking only of yourself and your greedy townspeople. Don't you care about what these monster machines do? Evidently not as long as you and your fellow townspeople can make a profit out of this ignominy! This is disgusting!

      October 29, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Reply
      • Sasha


        October 29, 2013 at 7:22 pm |
      • Mark

        Being capable of defending our nation is one of the most patriotic things we as Americans can do. I care what these "monster machines" can do, and it damn well better be able to keep me and my family safe. By the way, on behalf of all the veterans, you are welcome for insuring you and yours are kept safe and free to display your stupidity.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:35 pm |
      • Alex

        I agree Jack, James and others like him have been conditioned to say, act and speak without any sense of critical thinking about what is happening around them. They seem to believe that this country is the best thing since the invention of the wheel. Frankly, the only choice we have as a people is to wait until they dwindle into oblivion and their thoughts about the world with them. These are the same bunglers that think the debt ceiling is something that’s really being negotiated.

        October 29, 2013 at 7:49 pm |
    • FromCAinTheSouth

      That is part of the issue with the military-related funding. Your point is well taken, but we are in a situation where reducing the military funding is imperative, but the politicians fight it so because doing so would kill jobs in their districts which are so dependant on the military-industrial complex. So we keep spending on the military because so many jobs depend on it, not necessarily because it is the best use of the money.

      October 29, 2013 at 9:02 pm | Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Leave a Reply to Henry Ricley


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.