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. Reality

    What if a government acted with enough honesty and integrity that it should be proud?

    What if the best spies only prove your honesty and integrity? What if you have nothing to hide?

    Why not embrace open media as a platform for the honest politician? If you’re gay I don’t care. Just act with integrity.

    October 30, 2013 at 8:17 pm | Reply
    • jc

      One word: Biology.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:25 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        Intellect and reason rises above base biology. No one is perfect, but we all can aspire to be decent.

        October 30, 2013 at 8:56 pm |
      • jc

        “Be not intimidated...nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice.”
        ― John Adams

        October 30, 2013 at 9:28 pm |
  2. reasonableguyca

    "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."

    So I take it we are talking about these costing about $10,000,000,000 / each. Without including the costs of staffing them, and running them.

    Guess this is one kind of job stimulus that the Republicans support.

    October 30, 2013 at 8:07 pm | Reply
  3. Reality

    Does anyone here understand why smart, educated people should be admired no matter their opinions. Does anyone here understand why arrogant ignorance is offensive to me?

    No one needs to agree with me, just educate yourself enough to know something, anything, please….

    October 30, 2013 at 7:19 pm | Reply
    • jc

      Could not post a new comment so I am picking the top comment to respond to...even though it's noy aimed particularly at you. This has got to be one of the pot-smokingest threads I have ever read. I can't tell the Hatfields from the McCoys. Talk about sidebars!

      October 30, 2013 at 7:34 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        Hey jc, I’ve never touched pot or any illegal drug. You can flog all the straw men you like, I’ll be here when you’re ready to man up.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:22 pm |
      • jc

        As stated, I could not get a new comment posted, so I just hit reply on yours. I didn't even look at your comment. Now go unbunch your panties. I stand by comment on the thread though.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:32 pm |
    • George patton

      I did Reality and I agree with you. This arrogance and self righteousness practiced by both Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama truly make me sick. Unfortunately, most people are ignorant enough to believe everything this government tells them, including the magnificence of these ungodly killing machines which in the long run will not make this country any safer than it is now! Like I said before, this money could be far better spent on things like medical research and education.

      October 30, 2013 at 7:35 pm | Reply
  4. Reality

    @Jason Ruffner

    How many boots on the ground were at Hiroshima or Nagasaki? As much as I despise the military industrial complex, it’s still a fact that they can destroy any region of the planet or the entire planet at will with a whim.

    October 30, 2013 at 6:19 pm | Reply
  5. v1cious

    We can build powerful new weapons, but we can't even get our healthcare and Education in order. God bless Amurica.

    October 30, 2013 at 6:01 pm | Reply
    • sly

      Republicans happily fund the Military Industrial Complex.

      Many of these same Republicans do not want 50 million Americans to be eligible for Health Care. They don't contribute enough to their campaigns, and most are poor, or veterans, or have a pre-existing condition – so let them die.

      Most Republicans would also vote to eliminate public education if they could get Big Insurance to charge $20,000/yr per child for Elementary school.

      October 30, 2013 at 6:13 pm | Reply
      • USNavyAllTheWay

        Governor Mitt Romney passed a healthcare law in Massachusetts way before Obama ever took office. However, Romney did it in a way that talked to employers, covered pre-existing conditions, and gave affordable healthcare to those that are uninsured. So don't preach that Republicans aren't for healthcare and are against people having health insurance. It simply is not true.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:20 pm |
  6. sperry23

    It would be interesting to see how she handles in rough seas. I suspect there may be some adjustments the bridge crew will have to make to their usual ship-handling techniques.

    October 30, 2013 at 5:48 pm | Reply
    • Reality

      If this photo is accurate, she will be fine in pitch but roll will be obscenely unstable without active countermeasures.

      October 30, 2013 at 5:55 pm | Reply
      • jc

        Partially submersible?

        October 30, 2013 at 7:23 pm |
      • Jerry

        If I remember correctly, she is to have podded thrusters in place of conventional screws for main propulsion and active bow-thrusters to give increased maneuverability and dampen roll.

        October 30, 2013 at 7:55 pm |
  7. Reality

    I also interviewed US servicemen, including William stationed at the Army base in Honolulu. William is called “Billy” by those that know him and he spent weeks in a row boat picking up “the floaters” that popped up without flags or fanfare.

    Billy still hates with a white hot anger while the young girl in the foot hills of Hiroshima that watched her family and her friends die, easily understands and lives a loving and giving life.

    October 30, 2013 at 5:24 pm | Reply
  8. Reality

    "Jason Ruffner
    (USN AUG98-OCT05) Chuck,Chuck,Chuck... No “WAR” was ever won without boots on the ground”

    Keep telling yourself that as I am forced to live with the memories of interviewing survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Do you have any concept of humanity or history? Do you even conceptualize the reality of then and now?

    October 30, 2013 at 5:07 pm | Reply
  9. Reality


    I have no idea who you are. I’ve no idea why “reply” appears on each of my own comments, while none of your comments has a “reply” option for me. I’ve wanted to respond to you many times, yet the option has not been there.

    I find consistent censorship fascinating.

    October 30, 2013 at 4:54 pm | Reply
    • sly

      Reality – not sure, but I guarantee I am way too liberal for a slightly right-of-center site like CNN to do me any favors.

      Don't think because I accept our military experts wisdom in building this expensive ship that I support our continued increase in military spending. Of that $700b, likely 25% is waste, and we should be working to reduce that number. Republicans should also, since they apparently like to shut down government over such spending.

      Nah, I'm just a wise ol' hippie who thinks that Obama, and Clinton, are both just slighly left of center (say around '45%'), and that Bush was just slightly right of center (say around 60%). I ain't no Occupy Anarchy America radical, but I'm likely around the 15% far left.

      Feel free to either trash my comments, or offer your usual clever responses – hopefully the folks upstairs here at CNN will give you a chance!

      October 30, 2013 at 5:30 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        Well said even though I don’t 100% agree. I’d wanted to respond in favor of your comments. While you and I disagree on some small points, I think you and I agree that honest, educated, sourced discourse is a beautiful thing.

        Kudos to you for standing up. More of us need to stand up and speak out, right?

        The puppet masters can’t have power if the populace is educated and vocal.

        October 30, 2013 at 5:39 pm |
      • Reality

        You voiced trust in “military experts” as if the words of experts will never be misquoted or misused.

        I never worked at Los Alamos, but I’ve shared alcohol and laughs with some of the greatest minds on this planet.

        The scientists don’t worry about the outcome of their work. They just passionately learn and listen as they unlock the truth.

        Never trust the government nor the military. Why do you think the current government defunds science and education?

        October 30, 2013 at 6:41 pm |
      • jc

        It's comforting to see a liberal admitting to 25% government waste. Even if it's a low number.

        October 30, 2013 at 7:27 pm |
      • Reality

        You said:

        “Feel free to either trash my comments, or offer your usual clever responses – hopefully the folks upstairs here at CNN will give you a chance!”

        That’s the true spirit of an honest person. You’re unafraid of anything I may say. You’re ready to stand up for what you believe.

        I still disagree with you, but if you and I where locked in a room we are too honest to not find one truth eventually.

        Much sincere respect!

        October 30, 2013 at 11:46 pm |
  10. Reality

    A nation founded upon truth, education, knowledge and integrity has now become this intellectually and morally barren landscape that thirsts for and thrives upon empty vessels like Sarah Palin and Fox News.

    The empire is falling and starving…

    October 30, 2013 at 4:42 pm | Reply
    • worldlypatriotusaveteran

      Hasty generalizations are easy to write, but they are usually false, and they rarely represent reality.

      The truth is, only a small minority of Americans thirst for and thrive on Ms. Palin and FOX News.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:46 pm | Reply
      • jc

        That holds for Palin only.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:24 pm |
      • Reality

        Facts disagree with you. Fox news is ranked what in viewers? Sarah Palin’s word diarrhea is not instantly international news?

        What planet do you live on?

        October 30, 2013 at 9:32 pm |
      • Reality

        People like you make my head hurt, yet you do help me accept and even look forward to your self imposed ignorant destruction as anthropogenic climate change is just a myth. Keep on keepin’ on…

        October 30, 2013 at 9:37 pm |
  11. Joe

    the LCS on steroids.

    October 30, 2013 at 4:39 pm | Reply
  12. Don

    The US is virtually bankrupt. Borrowing money from the Chinese to pay the interest on existing debt. How long do you think this can go on before the world smartens up and cuts your credit? Americans spend hundreds of billions on defense but can't even subdue a third world country. Pretty sad. This destroyer is just another high priced lemon, that has no practical value. I'm sure the Russians and Chinese can see it quite well..Somalis and Taliban not so much...lol.

    October 30, 2013 at 4:14 pm | Reply
    • Reality

      How could we engage the third world country as they clearly did not openly display their bar code?

      October 30, 2013 at 4:27 pm | Reply
    • MarylandBill

      Well, up until this point, nobody has ever managed to subdue the people of Afghanistan. Not Russia, not Great Britain, not even Alexander the Great.

      As for the ship, it is rather impressive, but I do wonder if the need for it and its enhanced capabilities compared to the Arleigh Burkes justify the cost of it.

      October 30, 2013 at 4:45 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        No one has ever and no one will ever subdue the people of Afghanistan. Not because of their religion, not because of their ideology, but because they are mountain people. Mountain people know how to survive no matter what, we learn from the rocks surrounding us. We listen and we survive, we outlast the valley people.

        We are kind and friendly if you please stop murdering us.

        October 30, 2013 at 6:09 pm |
    • worldlypatriotusaveteran

      For your education, the ship was not built to be invisible. Please try to educate yourself on the advantages and disadvantages of low-observable technology before commenting.

      Obviously, you know nothing about the difficulty and challenges of target detection and engagement on the high seas.

      Are you certain the rust-bucket Russian Navy, and the Chinese fleet that has never sailed past the South China Sea, and has no modern combat experience, will be able to successfully target and engage the Zumwalt?

      October 30, 2013 at 9:00 pm | Reply
  13. burbanktj

    what a waste, do you have any idea how many bayonets we could've made instead?

    October 30, 2013 at 3:52 pm | Reply
    • Reality

      Bayonets? Sure, but don’t forget the catapults… right?

      October 30, 2013 at 3:57 pm | Reply
      • Bob

        I'm fond of shields and mace can we get that number too?

        October 30, 2013 at 5:13 pm |
    • Reality

      Iron chariots anyone?

      Judges 1:19

      October 30, 2013 at 5:32 pm | Reply
      • CNNReader

        I'll take whips, chains, handcuffs for $400 Alex.

        October 30, 2013 at 8:01 pm |
  14. retired&Navy

    Looks a lot like the CSS Virginia ( 1862 ) to me....hope that it does better in a fight and lasts longer.... 9 Billion is a lot for a destroyer– even a really big destroyer.

    October 30, 2013 at 3:36 pm | Reply
  15. sly

    Ah, the hamburger flippers must be at break, so they all became military defense and nautical experts.

    So we don't need any more military spending because a bunch of burger flippers gained access to the internet?

    This here liberal says congratulations to the Pentagon for continuing to keep our military technology up to date. Sounds like the burger crowd thinks our Navy should be using rowboats and canoes, cause of course, burger flippers are so smart.

    Oh, and NASA should just stick to launching paper airplanes – they are bound to get to Mars somehow after enough throws.

    October 30, 2013 at 3:07 pm | Reply
    • Joseph

      Paper airplanes would only embolden the aliens. I think the issue here is more that any military development program has ever come close to making budget. The navy obviously saw a need for 7 ships but they won't get them. Somebody messed up big...again.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:12 pm | Reply
      • sly

        Yes, we should reduce our military budget, likely by about 25%. Military spending creates far less jobs than spending in other industries. And the Defense Contractors have the Republican politicians in their pockets – and are granted huge profits, just like the oil industry, who we subsidize, and the farming industry, which we subsidize.

        Reducing spending means identifying strong military areas where we don't need the spending.

        It doesn't mean running away from state of the art technology, such as stealth technology.

        We all spend too much on computers also, but it doesn't mean we all go back to counting with an abacus.

        October 30, 2013 at 3:20 pm |
    • Reality

      Well those burgers better conform to kosher and halal standards. And those canoes should be fitted with the new war tech of sharp things on the end of a stick. Whew, regressive ignorance of progress and reality is so much fun (we call it faith). Join us later as we burn a witch. God gives us loyalty points for each witch burned (fingers crossed).

      October 30, 2013 at 3:22 pm | Reply
    • ivan

      Well this Liberal obviously just got off his shift at Wal-Mart.

      I did my tour in Saigon and Da Nag.
      Those battleships did not help use then.

      These new ships will not help us now except fill the politicians pockets
      The money spent on these ships could be spent better.
      NASA that is another waste of taxpayers money.

      For example to build a new factory to produce a product that could be exported and sold.

      That would create more jobs than this project will.
      How about the millions that it will cost to maintain this ship going forward.

      By the way I’m an Electrical Engineer been working since 73’.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:38 pm | Reply
      • sly

        Let's hear it for the Electrical Engineer who wants to eliminate our military and space programs.

        Yeah, you didn't need guns or bullets or airplanes or bombs while you were over there murdering the women and children of a farming nation just to steal all their mineral wealth. (Richest mineral deposits in SE Asia were the identified goal of that war by 3 consecutive Presidents).

        Why do all those Vietnam movies show soldiers with weapons? Silly TV – everyone knows we don't need weapons to win a war or defend our nation.

        October 30, 2013 at 3:43 pm |
      • Jason

        Sly–are you suggesting it was Ivan's decision to invade Vietnam? Sure sounds like you think that was his 'bad decision'. I find your ignorant attacks on people ironic for one suggesting he used his brain more than the other posters. Just sayin'!

        October 30, 2013 at 4:11 pm |
      • Reality

        Saigon and “Da Nang”? Can’t even spell the place you lost your friends? Forgive me if I call you out as a liar. You think money for education or science is a waste? NASA is a waste?

        The USA spends more money on simply re-painting navy vessels than it spends on the entire NASA budget. If truth, education and knowledge scare you… please crawl in a hole and die there.

        October 30, 2013 at 4:13 pm |
      • sly

        Jason – it was his naive observation that the US didn't need the Navy during Vietnam that prompted my suggestion that maybe we didn't need any weapons either.

        But ... he was wrong – battleships were used in Vietnam, and important:

        "The only active battleship in the world in 1968 was the Iowa class battleship USS New Jersey. She was activated to help reduce jet fighter bomber losses over North Vietnam and at the same time still deliver the ordnance necessary to support the escalation of the war. Approximately 1,000 US jets were destroyed in 1966 alone"

        October 30, 2013 at 4:18 pm |
      • hank

        Sly is too dumb to know what party started and expanded the Vietnam War but he is on the mark that we need to continue to invest in military technologies that give us an edge.

        October 30, 2013 at 4:26 pm |
      • sly

        Yay! Hank if off his shift at McDonalds, and He is here to inform us that the Nixon, Eisenhower, and all the Generals like Westmoreland were really Democrats.

        Or, much more impressively, he'll prove that LBJ, a southern Democrat (like most KKK members) was really what we think of today as a progressive, anti-war, pro-health care, pro-education Democrat.

        Yup – all those progressive 'democratic' southerners ...

        Now ... please also show us how it was the Republican 'hippies' who stopped the war with the million-person marches.

        Whew ... some of y'all need to read once in awhile.

        October 30, 2013 at 4:35 pm |
      • hank

        Like I said, Sly is too dumb to know who started and expanded the Vietnam War. Thanks for proving it!

        October 30, 2013 at 4:52 pm |
      • sly

        – Hank ... let me guess: President Obama started the Vietnam war, right?

        I do know he was responsible for WWI and WWII – Republicans told me that.

        October 30, 2013 at 5:33 pm |
      • hank

        Come on now, Sly. Stop proving you're dumb and just ask for some help.

        Google: "Truman sends MAAG"

        ...and stop denying Johnson was a Democrat. That would be like some fool Republican disclaiming that cackhole Bush. It's historical fact no matter how much you are ashamed and try to spin it: Vietnam belongs to the Democrats.

        I've got to run now so you're welcome in advance for the history lesson.

        Have fun writing comments that will make no difference to anyone else in the world but you!

        October 30, 2013 at 5:40 pm |
      • ivan

        @ Sly I got drafted and did my time so liberals like your father did not have to go.
        I never said to eliminate the military, or guns or planes or bombs.
        We need new age weapons, not 9 billion dollar battleships that serve no purpose.
        If you read before you typed you would have known understood.

        And what mineral deposits did the US get out of Vietnam. Really?
        Name just one. I dare you.

        @ Reality.. That was a typo. I suppose you don’t do typos.
        I was putting my life on the life because I was asked to when you were still in diapers.
        A lair. I point out the facts that this a complete waste of money with no apparent purpose.
        That the money could be better spent.

        The only thing you have presented is liberal rhetoric.
        We should focusing terrorism not focusing on unneeded weapons.
        Just so we could show that our battleship is bigger than theirs
        Please point out for me what we have gained from the NASA program and the Space Station.
        The Space Race was over in the 70’s way before you were born.

        October 30, 2013 at 6:30 pm |
      • education

        Please go away, Ivan.


        October 30, 2013 at 9:48 pm |
      • Reality

        I know people. I know you now, how precious.

        Let me bask in the sunshine please.

        October 31, 2013 at 12:24 am |
      • Reality

        hey, honest and feeling minds find life interesting…

        October 31, 2013 at 12:34 am |
  16. Joseph

    Everyone here (well at least one of you) saw the movei Battleship. It was horrible – old battleships cannot possibly handle an alien invasion. But the message was clear – if we are to survive an alien attack we need advanced stealth destroyers. I feel safer and I bet some aliens out there looking at the ship on radar (if they can FIND it on radar) are going, "Woh, put those invasion plans on hold baby." I understand we don't need them right now, but will WILL in a future where aliens become bolder and for a sequel to Battleship. And in the meantime, we can use them to clear out some of those pesky whales that are taking up so much ocean space...

    October 30, 2013 at 2:58 pm | Reply
    • Iamanalien


      How did we get on the subject of aliens? Were we talking about illegal aliens who are invading our borders which is reality, or are we talking about science fiction?

      October 30, 2013 at 5:30 pm | Reply
    • rayandsue

      Aliens! They had NEver encountered gravity. They landed in Germany and they could not get back out of earths gravity
      Fact, They are on a US base and supply the US with advanced scientific data! Laugh if you must! That precisely what
      Those who have them want you to do

      November 14, 2013 at 2:54 am | Reply
  17. Eddie George

    A strong Navy on both coasts and around our territories;
    A modern Air Force.
    A small but well trained Army.

    Tell the rest of the world to go to Hell !

    October 30, 2013 at 2:39 pm | Reply
    • John in WNY

      Yeah mean like we did back before Dec 7th, 1941?

      October 30, 2013 at 2:51 pm | Reply
    • burbanktj

      can we put a warship on the mississippi river to protect us from the South?

      October 30, 2013 at 3:55 pm | Reply
      • jc

        Now that's a LOL! Born and raised in the deep south – and I could not agree more...with one exception; the ship would protect them from themselves.

        October 31, 2013 at 11:46 am |
  18. kebcarerra

    This ship is a great tool for the interests and protection of world trade , the Somali coast guard might grab another Capt. Phillips and after watching the movie they know what happened. The B1 bomber could also be used to take out the 16' skiffs these pesky pirates ride in.

    October 30, 2013 at 2:28 pm | Reply
    • wrm

      That's an awful lot of money to spend on sneaking up on skinny pirates with AK47s and dingies. Maybe we could just let the crew carry small arms and actually defend itself.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:32 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        Yes, your solution would work easily. Yes, your solution is efficient and effective. But you failed to funnel money to DC and the military industrial complex with your “solution”.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
    • Joseph

      lol the B-1 launches nuclear weapons right? I'm all for it. Of course, I also used a gallon of gasoline and burned a 6 foot square area of my yard to get rid of some fire ants.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:15 pm | Reply
  19. Harvey Henkelmann

    The military is the ONLY thing that keeps America from being conquered, since her civilian population is so weak-willed and only care about themselves and their local Starbucks Coffee house.

    October 30, 2013 at 2:22 pm | Reply
    • ivan

      So tell me who would the USA be conquered by?

      October 30, 2013 at 2:34 pm | Reply
      • Fiftypence

        Oh come on. We all know that without billion dollar stealth ships Venezuela would pose a serious threat to this country.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
      • Reality

        We all know that Natalee Holloway is just the tip of the iceberg. Aruba must not be allowed to exert its geopolitical dominance.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:44 pm |
      • What?

        Those war mongering Canadians. You know how bloodthirsty they are...

        October 30, 2013 at 4:56 pm |
      • As a Canadian

        I must take offense to the bloodthirsty.. more about being beerthirsty

        October 30, 2013 at 6:27 pm |
    • Joseph

      lol, we've already been conquered or don't you know that China owns a large chunk of US Bonds and debt. If they were to cash in our economy would collapse completely. I mean its horrib-oooooohhh, look a Starbucks...I gotta go

      October 30, 2013 at 3:17 pm | Reply
  20. Terry

    Unless CNN rewrote this story, I am amazed by the number of people on this website whom can't read.
    Quoting $90 billion of one ship – NO $9 Billion in research in development costs. Something never created before has to be developed and that costs money.
    Quoting $20 billion for 3 ships – No thats $20 Billion for seven ships, the program was reduced to 3 ships and each ship cost about $3 Billion each.

    Please go back to school and learn to read English.

    October 30, 2013 at 2:21 pm | Reply
    • Larry Lurkster

      I'm amazed at the number of people who can't write... It's "who" not "whom". So there, genius'.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:29 pm | Reply
    • kd

      "whom can't read" seriously?
      "whom" needs to go back to school to learn english?

      October 30, 2013 at 3:01 pm | Reply
      • Somebody

        FYI, the word 'English' should be capitalized.

        Rule number one for grammar Nazis: all ways cheque fore misteaks in you're reply.

        October 30, 2013 at 3:41 pm |
      • kd

        It is appropriate for you to use irony in your post correcting a "grammer nazi" while being inappropriate for me to do likewise?
        You jumped a little too quick on that one. Think the next time.

        October 30, 2013 at 6:00 pm |
    • Joseph

      The grammar in yoru sentence is incorrect. It is "who" not "whom". You have mistaken the ending for a prepositional phrase when it is a reflective subject. Also, it is more than you quoted for each ship since the article sights cost overruns beyond what the navy planned to spend. So you need to read more goodly than that which you had had done.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:03 pm | Reply
    • jc

      Uh, herro prease. You owe us many dolla. Read the bond certificrate. Its in Engrish. Oh yeah, by the ray, the lawnchair you order is on the way.

      October 31, 2013 at 11:51 am | Reply
  21. Matt

    I find it funny that people spending money on designer jeans and Starbucks would complain about others wasting money.....

    October 30, 2013 at 1:54 pm | Reply
    • hank

      People who buy designer jeans and Starbucks are wasting their own money, not someone else's.

      October 30, 2013 at 4:30 pm | Reply
  22. Corey

    How about taking 20 billion dollars and distributing it to the men and women working in the field everyday to protect this country instead of some over glorified pirate ship. Food for Thought

    October 30, 2013 at 1:52 pm | Reply
    • Matt

      I like it!

      October 30, 2013 at 2:10 pm | Reply
    • Keith

      Not sure if you were able to find the tag on this ship but it says made in USA- Food For Thought

      How about all the jobs created from the making of this vessel? The jobs created to develop and test the stealth technology, the jobs that will be needed sustain this vessel. You think its a waste but I beg to differ. When the governement spends money like this it keeps people employed. There are so many contracted jobs and work force funded by government spending. I fail to see how you don't recognize this.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:21 pm | Reply
      • Fiftypence

        You are absolutely right. Government spending does create jobs. So how about instead of doing it with ships we have no use for, they do it with roads, bridges, tunnels, and rails that will benefit us all and create even more jobs than these ships?

        October 30, 2013 at 2:44 pm |
  23. mbane

    This is great. Now we can fight Saudi terrorists by destroying Iraqi fishing boats.

    October 30, 2013 at 1:34 pm | Reply
    • Reality

      According to Halliburton, those Iraqi fishing boats are made of WMD’s, so as patriots we have no other choice.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:17 pm | Reply
  24. Sdrtyjbfhj Ertyhdtyu


    October 30, 2013 at 1:23 pm | Reply
    • Ex-Navy

      Clearly you've never manned a CIC...

      October 30, 2013 at 2:55 pm | Reply
    • charleschapmantest

      Oh yeah? Well, so does your mom

      October 30, 2013 at 4:29 pm | Reply
      • jc

        Can never get enough mom jokes.

        October 31, 2013 at 11:52 am |
  25. personal109@hotmail.com

    "One reason is the AGS is practically self-firing. It needs no sailors to load the shells or remove the spent rounds. "

    Anyone see that Star Trek episode, the Ultimate Computer, which is about a computer that takes over the Enterprise and end up destroying or disabling a number of other Star Ships with the loss of hundreds of crewmen.

    October 30, 2013 at 1:20 pm | Reply
  26. Sdrtyjbfhj Ertyhdtyu

    The ships are old yet Iran still uses these junk ships from WWII as their Navy sold to Iran for a dollar outside of any input from the American zero I mean people I mean military I mean ex-military I mean Vets (dog doctors) I mean NOTHING FROM NOTHING IS STILL NOTHING...HOW MUCH IS YOUR ZERO WORTH...

    October 30, 2013 at 1:17 pm | Reply
    • What?

      You go girl!

      Do you mind sharing whatever it is you've been smoking?

      October 30, 2013 at 5:01 pm | Reply
  27. ivan

    So can someone tell me what enemy we really need this Stealth Destroyer for?
    China? Russia? Somalia Pirates?

    The Cold War is over the USSR is no more.
    We are in debt to China and other counties.

    The rest of the world is scaling back on this but yet we build more.

    I say scrap the Monroe Doctrine and the Marshall Plan.
    We do not need to be the Police Force of the World any longer.

    We need jobs in the US and actually make a product in the US.

    We are broke.
    Our government is on the brink of shutting down.

    And yet they find money to fund this?

    We need a real change in our country and government.
    Not the same corrupt officials year after year.
    Who line their pockets and get rich off us.

    We need this Destroyer Seriously??

    October 30, 2013 at 1:11 pm | Reply
    • Reality

      Well said!

      October 30, 2013 at 1:17 pm | Reply
    • Tom

      How about the Chinese who are spending trillions and trillions developing a blue water navy including their first aircraft carrier. Doing it with our money no less. Why are they spending all that money, to challenge Taiwan? How about the Russians who are doing the same with their submarine force? Why don't you study things before making stupid comments!

      October 30, 2013 at 1:24 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        We spend trillions to fight invisible dragons just to line the pockets of DC and the military industrial complex. The other countries spend fractions less to partially insulate them from the paranoid bully. And yes, we (the good old USA) are the paranoid bully that others rightly fear.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:33 pm |
      • ivan

        OK so let’s see.

        China is building all kind of things with our money.
        Since everything is made in China now. Thanks to our corrupt politicians Which allow that to happen.
        The same politicians that sold the destroyer to China.

        The Russians are trying to rebuild their Military that has slowly deteriorated due to lack of money.
        Every since the USSR broke up and the Soviets lost their powerbase.
        However Putin is starting to quietly rebuilt it.
        They are starting to be better capitalists then we are.

        However so do you see those countries starting unnecessary wars?

        No it is only the USA that is doing this.
        Just when ever our friend in the Middle East cry.
        Or actually gives the order.
        The US goes to war on their behalf.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:38 pm |
      • Tony Manero

        Trillions ? How about Gazillions ? After that, what you say has no credibility.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:41 pm |
      • Fiftypence

        Trillions of dollars? And all they got was a single used Soviet air-craft carrier? Either their money isn't very well spent or your numbers are a bit off.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:36 pm |
      • MadeinChina

        doing it with 'your' money? So if you sell me sth and then you take the proceeds to pay your kids' school lunch, all of sudden I am raising your kids? give me a break. I like Americans, and I don't believe you represent their collective IQs

        October 30, 2013 at 3:24 pm |
      • Tom

        WOW, either a lot of disgruntled foreigners that need to mind there own business, or a bunch of pinko Americans that should just leave. All I have to say is we are the bully until those that call Americans bully need someone to spend American blood and treasure to free them or provide aid. So keep crying.....

        October 30, 2013 at 6:16 pm |
      • Tom

        Gotta start somewhere fiftypence! Soviets had a few of those "garbage" carriers and everyone was scared of them...

        October 30, 2013 at 6:18 pm |
    • Chuck

      First of all, this ship and the next 6 will be built right herte in the USA creating jobs for Americans.

      Second, for all of you who believe we don't have any enemies to defend ourselves against, "have you watched the news lately. To keep our citizens safe here and abroad we need to maintain a strong modern military. This ship will prevent young American soldiers from having to set foot on foreign enemy soil. This technology will help us to detire any enemy without haveing to put our young men and women in harms way!

      October 30, 2013 at 1:35 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        We don’t have any serious enemies other than those reflexively defending themselves from our blatantly arrogant aggression. Pull out each and every US military asset from foreign soil, stop drone strikes and NSA surveillance and you will learn why Canada does not waste trillions to antagonize and kill people.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:43 pm |
      • ivan

        So the real enemy we have now the terrorists.
        They are attacking us on Ships?
        Do you watch the news.

        Has any ship so far prevented our soldiers form setting foot on foreign soil.

        This is just a way to spend the money we do not have.

        This technology will soon end up in foreign hands.

        Just like the Stealth Fighter that they left behind after the so called Osama raid.

        Great job and keeping us safe.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:00 pm |
      • Jason Ruffner

        (USN AUG98-OCT05) Chuck,Chuck,Chuck... No "WAR" was ever won without boots on the ground buddy. You can not simply win a war with aircraft or ships... It requires the lives of the brave to put foot to soil to take over and even than it is not certain.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
      • Tom

        Chuck. I agree with you but bring up one issue, this DDX / DD1000 is so expensive, they already cut production to three. Thats not worth the expense because you cannot truly support a three ocean navy with that. Better spend would have been to upgrade the Burke class with much of the new technology used here – mee thinks...

        October 30, 2013 at 6:20 pm |
    • Mike

      We aren't a police force we are a mercenary force. We use our military force as a bargaining chip.

      Perfect example is Qatar. We are literally there because of Natural Gas pockets they are extracted along the Iranian and Qatari borders. Iran was threatening to take the Natural Gas. So the US made a deal that we keep Iran at bay and you export Natural gas to us at a discount...

      October 30, 2013 at 1:38 pm | Reply
      • ivan

        So we send our Military there at our cost and we still have to pay for the gas.??

        May Sound like a great deal to you but we are still having to pay no matter what.

        I do not see any benefit there.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:53 pm |
      • ivan

        Also get your Geography straight
        Qatar is on the other side of the Persian Gulf IRAN.

        It is boarded by Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:13 pm |
    • Owl96

      After The Great War, I doubt anyone would have imagined what we needed to keep battleships for. After WWII, why would we have needed carriers? Once war starts, its too late to start building a modern Navy.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:05 pm | Reply
    • Keith

      How about all the jobs created from the making of this vessel? The jobs created to develop and test the stealth technology, the jobs that will be needed sustain this vessel. You think its a waste but I beg to differ. When the governement spends money like this it keeps people employed. There are so many contracted jobs and work force funded by government spending. I fail to see how you don't recognize this.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:12 pm | Reply
      • ivan

        Questions to ask yourself.

        Who do you think actually worked on this technology?
        Engineers from the US or contractors?

        Where did the materials that were used to manufacture this ship come from ?
        Made in the US or imported?

        How many actual new jobs were actual created as a result?

        The 9 Billion used could be better spent else where makeing a product that could be made in th US and exported.

        Oh wait we don' t make anything anymore for export. That is China.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
      • owstarr

        We could just as easily create those jobs building other things besides weapons of war. Look at just about anything you own and you'll see "made in China"... what about a return to building high quality products right here at home that don't require war or defense to be put into service?

        October 30, 2013 at 2:47 pm |
      • John in WNY

        The problem is that the American consumer has shown that they will not pay a premium for US made products and instead flocked to lower cost foreign made goods, which is really what started the whole movement offshore of our manufacturing base.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:56 pm |
    • KingofCalif

      Sounds like a call to arms.......where do I sign up?

      October 30, 2013 at 3:42 pm | Reply
  28. MadeinChina

    Though the picture is intentionally blurry, you can still see SPMC – Shanghai Port Machinery Co. US does not even have a comparable cargo ship that can hold ship like DDG 1000. I am surprised that US viewers are not making a fuss on this one. I am also surprised that China would allow military use of what is meant to be a civilian purpose only export. I'd suggest China learn from US and stop exporting similar heavy equipment, where they are being used to build up weaponry

    October 30, 2013 at 1:09 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      Because there is no such thing. SPMC does not stand for Shanghai Port Machinery that company is actually ZPMC...which is not in the picture...

      October 30, 2013 at 1:47 pm | Reply
      • Mike

        Additionally its in a submerged dry dock which are common around the US.

        Your comment is erroneous

        October 30, 2013 at 1:50 pm |
      • MadeinChina

        see for yourself, Mike.


        October 30, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
      • MadeinChina

        does this look like a dry dock to you? LOL

        October 30, 2013 at 3:29 pm |
      • MadeinChina

        don't really want to troll, but as a suggestion – please do some research before you comment. I've seen too many idiots on CNN forums and sincerely hope you're not one of them.

        October 30, 2013 at 3:30 pm |
  29. greg

    You can always tell all the wussified Libs on here. If we didn't develop top Military
    planes, guns, tanks, ships, then we'd be run over just like all other countries. Put your head in the sand
    some more and just settle on being nothing.

    October 30, 2013 at 1:01 pm | Reply
    • Reality

      You are paranoid. How many times has Canada been “run over”?

      October 30, 2013 at 1:11 pm | Reply
    • Neil

      Yeah, seriously. Eventually countries like Russia and China will develop similar ships, look, they're already making answers to the F-22 with the SU-47 and J-20. Keep us on top.

      October 30, 2013 at 1:13 pm | Reply
      • MadeinChina

        who launched most wars in the world in the last two or three decades? With all those killings of innocent people abroad, I'd agree US should have something to fear. But not from Russia or China, however.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
    • Tony Manero

      Another brave, armchair general trained by EA games with the maturity of an adolescent; patriot behind a PC screen who's favorite holiday is day the draft ended.

      October 30, 2013 at 1:36 pm | Reply
  30. Jerry Okamura

    What is the purpose of defense spending? Who can take over a country with the nuclear strike capability the US has?

    October 30, 2013 at 1:01 pm | Reply
  31. greg

    Try topping that China with all your fake crap. You and Russia can do whatever, but you can't
    hang with the U.S. when it comes to Military.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:59 pm | Reply
    • Reality

      Have you ever traveled to Russia or China? There are real human beings there, with hopes, dreams, children and a raw sense of humor. We could cut 95% of our military/NSA budget and we’ll be fine so long as we stop bullying.

      October 30, 2013 at 1:09 pm | Reply
      • Perseus109

        Wow, Peace in our time! Thanks Mr. Chamberlain. Glad we had that war to end all wars so we don't need a military.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:15 pm |
      • Reality

        Comparing me to Neville is the epitome of ignorance. Mr. Chamberlain caved and appeased the xenophobic, nationalist bullies. I am the opposite of Neville if you care to reflect.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
    • T. Bagger

      Our Israeli "friends" have already stolen the technology for these ships and sold it to the Chinese.

      October 30, 2013 at 1:16 pm | Reply
      • ivan

        And they are the ones having the US go to war an their behalf.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:41 pm |
    • MadeinChina

      it's ironic – in this story, it's a super-load cargo ship made in China that is hauling the DDG 1000. I know the cargo ship is genuine, as it's in the water and holding DDG 1000. DDG 1000 on the other hand... I am not sure if it's another trick to fleece US tax payers. If you're into the development of this ship, you should do some research and look into its hull materials – changed from composite back to good & old steel.

      October 30, 2013 at 1:22 pm | Reply
  32. Aezel

    This would be great if there were any reason whatsoever to have destroyers in our fleet anymore. Virtually nothing a destroyer can do is best accomplished by an actual destroyer any longer. What a joke and a waste of money.

    We spend more on our military than the next 30 industrialized nations combined. Complete waste like this is why. We may as well take a pile of money out and burn it.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:53 pm | Reply
    • B.

      Amen, when are we going to start rebuilding This country and stop this never ending madness to policing the planet!
      This country is on the decline in Infrastructure, education, healthcare, Government co-operation with itself, voting rights, women’s rights, on and on..
      Enough of the tough guy mentality telling other people what to do from a position of obvious hypocrisy !
      Eisenhower warned us about this a long time ago!

      October 30, 2013 at 1:44 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        I agree with everything you said other than your “policing the planet” phrase. We’re not policing the planet at all; we are strong-armed bullying the planet into submission like a sociopathic rapist whilst waving the flag of nationalism.

        Can we stop this xenophobic, nationalistic, dogmatic insanity and try to consider being a decent, morally rational and considerate neighbor?

        Do unto others… is that so hard to fathom?

        October 30, 2013 at 2:10 pm |
      • Reality

        It’s sad that the USA is becoming more and more like the Taliban everyday. Fear of facts and science, controlling women’s bodies, dogmatic faith in ancient religious texts…

        October 30, 2013 at 3:14 pm |
  33. Valkyrie

    Paint a giant shark mouth on the bow.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:44 pm | Reply
  34. mike

    What enemy is this designed for?! What purpose does it serve that isn't better served by a submarine? PORK.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:38 pm | Reply
    • Fiftypence

      It is designed to protect the fleet against Soviet aircraft.


      October 30, 2013 at 12:41 pm | Reply
      • Andrew

        and Russian, Chinese, Iranian, North Korean, Syrian, Libyan, Pakistani aircraft too.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:56 pm |
    • Reality

      You’re so right, this is pure PORK. This is obviously a high tech solution to old school warfare that doesn’t even exist anymore. It’s like spending billions of dollars to fit horses with x-ray vision and kevlar vests so that our Calvary Mounted Regiment may triumph.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:46 pm | Reply
      • Fiftypence

        Exactly!! And thanks for the laugh.

        It's like the F35 project. We are building a fifth generation fighter, which may cost a trillion dollars by the time it is finished, when the F18 etc. are perfectly capable of defending us for years to come. By the time the F35 is ready to go at full strength we should have been relying almost completely on combat drones anyway.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:52 pm |
      • Eliquin

        Agreed. This was a massive waste of money, similar to the F-35 having a different version for each branch it will be given to. Not against the money we spend on military equipment but we could at least be using it to research more practical things.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:52 pm |
      • Landru

        The reason this "old school warfare" doesn't exist is "because" we have weapons like this. Retire the entire fleet and watch what happens at sea.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:56 pm |
    • Landru

      Any enemy Mike. This is a natural progression using stealth technology. It's radar print is that of a fishing boat. Less likely to be attacked at random and far superior fire power. Our current fleet is old so they built this. It does remind one of the Merrimack though.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:51 pm | Reply
      • mike hunt

        You're old enough to remember the Merimack? My history books in school 40 years ago didn't have a picture of it, so it was left to our imagination, but I did imagine it looking something like this.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:25 pm |
      • Reality

        Hey Landru,

        I’m highly trained in the use of tactical radar. Would you like to place billions of dollars and hundreds of lives at risk by putting them in a slow moving and easily identifiable target given current radar tech? Let alone the new advances emerging weekly?

        Shooting fish in a barrel would be funny if it wasn’t true for servicemen.

        October 30, 2013 at 10:37 pm |
      • Reality

        To be honest, boats are boring. Easy to find and easy to even predict their snail like path. Boats are so slow and so un-manuverable. Cruise missiles with active target seeking depth charges don’t exist.


        October 30, 2013 at 10:48 pm |
      • Reality

        The initial drop of the active torpedo may or may not hit as it discharges. The multiple sensors fanned out around the target instantly identify the target signature through blast data reconstruction.

        You can be as quiet as you please, but when I shout, I hear your echo.

        The following cruise missiles now know exactly where you are… good luck with that whole billion dollar submersible boat thing.

        October 30, 2013 at 10:59 pm |
      • Reality

        I’m self correcting, so I must admit that the multiple sensors reconstruct the blast data primarily on shadows rather than echoes. The uploaded data from the sensors is sent raw to multiple pattern recognizing super computers. It’s the DCU’s that identify the target. The DCU’s take all of the super computer’s reconstructions and “learn” by democracy whom to trust. You can try to hide, but you can never hide your shadow.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:12 pm |
      • Reality

        Billions of dollars wasted, thousands of lives in jeopardy. That’s what you get when you listen to politicians that mistrust scientists.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:22 pm |
    • Mike

      The best target for this ship will be a pirate-operated fishing boat somewhere near the Somalian coast. But be cautious – they are vicious lot and may even scratch the paint on your new toy. This would be a disaster :)))))

      October 30, 2013 at 1:17 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        Mike, it’s not called paint anymore. It’s a nano-tech chromatic-adhesive coating at a cost of $2850 per square inch.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:27 pm |
  35. Muffdiver

    You know when you pull the belly button lint out of your navel then drop it in the toilet and it spins 'round and 'round?, that's call ESD, electro static dishcharge.......

    October 30, 2013 at 12:38 pm | Reply
  36. Sdrtyjbfhj Ertyhdtyu

    The US Navy and the commader in chief don't actualy do ANYTHING...AND VOTERS DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE IN THIS...HA HA HA work harder slaves change your face not your content ENSLAVE ENSLAVE ENSLAVE ENSLAVE...nice work way too go your the best of the worst...ZERO FROM ZERO IS STILL ZERO...

    October 30, 2013 at 12:30 pm | Reply
  37. Reality

    The paranoid man spends all of his money on guns, weapons, a fence and surveillance equipment as he forgets to feed or take care of his family. His entire family dies of malnutrition and lack of medical attention leaving the paranoid man alone in his compound. His neighbors all hate him because of his treachery and his aggressively paranoid tendencies. The paranoid man eventually dies alone and hated to the delight of those outside the fence.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:09 pm | Reply
    • Third Eagle of the Apocalypse

      Eventually is the key word. A long life, lived on his terms.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:15 pm | Reply
    • Bimbo the Birthday Clown

      Very well stated, Reality. Too bad that most of these war loving idiots here just don't get it!

      October 30, 2013 at 12:26 pm | Reply
      • Real Check

        Bimbo, I think you and the Neville Chamberlain's of the world are the ones who "don't get it". You tout "Peace in our time" only to have you're grand Utopian vision blow up in your face Appeasers like you never seem to realize the resolve of the aggressors you seek to placate. The world will always suffer dictators who seek to advance their extreme agenda through any force necessary. Military advancements like the DDG 1000 and the soldiers who serve on them are the only reason you and the "Peacenik" crowd have a right to freely express your naive idealism.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:55 pm |
    • You Are Wrong

      Tell that to the fat and happy preper kids that have their own doctor as a parent instead of Obamacare and a BMG 50 just in case they find you a threat.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:44 pm | Reply
      • Reality

        You use words, yet you say nothing. Please focus and try again.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:51 pm |
  38. Bob

    I'm waiting for the hybrid to be designed and built. It will be a cross over between a sub and a destroyer. Most of the ship will be underwater so it will be less visible and therefore less likely to be seen. The weapons will be raised from the deck, fired and lowered. I would also be capable for firing long range torpedoes that have the same tracking capabilities of some of our missiles.

    October 30, 2013 at 12:08 pm | Reply
    • Bimbo the Birthday Clown

      Now another right-wing idiot bragging about the "next generation" of killer ships! Now we can kill more people than we ever could before! Hip, hip, hurray or should I yell SIEG HEIL, Bob? All this idiotic, right-wing bravado here really turns my stomach upside down!

      October 30, 2013 at 12:23 pm | Reply
      • Anonymouse

        Yell whatever you want... Just rememebr that ships like this, and the people that man them, are the reason you can.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
    • Reality

      As someone professionally trained in engineering, physics and advanced fluid dynamics… I can assure you that sea born platforms are a thing of the past. They are similar to an Amish buggy or any other romantic relic that is cute yet obsolete.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:46 pm | Reply
  39. Lou Perry

    I was in the Navy, during the Vietnam era. I was in communications in CA. then caught sea duty in New London CT. I was on a Sub tender for two years and saw all kinds of changes in warfare vessels. But this...simply amazing! I can only imagine what is not being said about this destroyer and understandably so. In closing, I was actually waiting for the author to tell us that this thing doubles as a submarine. After all, it has the lines of a sub. Maybe next time.

    October 30, 2013 at 11:53 am | Reply
    • George patton

      Good grief Lou, have you any idea of just how much damage these monster ships can do? No one in their right mind should take any pride in these killing machines. Besides, just who are we planning to use these damn things against? This kind of bravado needs to do!!! Furthermore, they're only being built to further enrich the already wealthy on Capitol Hill!

      October 30, 2013 at 12:05 pm | Reply
      • Third Eagle of the Apocalypse

        Killing machines… really? Lol. Please sir educate yourself on history and the concept of deterrence. I’m sorry but the world is not a peace-nik utopia no matter how much you want it to be.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:18 pm |
  40. Jack 2

    Ya team! We should always stay miles and years ahead of the rest of the world. We are after all all humans and humans are the most dangerous animals on the planet.

    October 30, 2013 at 11:34 am | Reply
    • George patton

      You seem to have forgotten Jack2, that the most dangerous animals on our planet are none other than the right-wing thugs in Washington who get us into all these obscene wars overseas!!! Please, Jack, wise up, will you?

      October 30, 2013 at 12:08 pm | Reply
  41. JOE B

    Like all ships, it's easy to sink this one with a missile or torpedo.

    October 30, 2013 at 11:11 am | Reply
    • Jack 2

      I'm sure they have considered that. don't be naive, they have countermeasures

      October 30, 2013 at 11:32 am | Reply
    • Chris

      Ok than buddy answer this, how do you A) Find this ship so you can sink it and B) How do you find this ship and than keep it from destroying you first?

      October 30, 2013 at 11:43 am | Reply
    • jamessavik

      This ship is built out of carbon composites. It's armor is its stealth.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:01 pm | Reply
    • sly

      Thank you JoeB, we value the opinions of burger flippers on here who moonlight as military stealth technology experts in between milkshakes.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:35 pm | Reply
  42. Ralph_in_FL

    On its sea trials, it will probably have more bugs than a Third World boarding house.

    October 30, 2013 at 11:10 am | Reply
    • The Jackdaw

      Maybe they should have named it the USS Obamacare.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:12 am | Reply
      • JJ

        You should change your name to The Jackwagon, nimrod.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:16 am |
      • The Jackdaw

        I don’t have a problem with free healthcare. I just think that the nation that developed the internet should have the ability to make a website that works.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:28 am |
      • Kal rippy

        Boy,you clowns are all time irrelevant. What does our President have to do with this? Just profound buffoons

        October 30, 2013 at 11:33 am |
      • The Jackdaw

        So our government is not responsible for its initiatives? The last I checked, the president was at the helm of the government.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:37 am |
      • Lou Perry

        Obama had nothing to do with this and I'm not a supporter of his. Maybe some day this vessel will be responsible for saving your simple ass.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:59 am |
      • sly

        Hmmm ... love the insights of Republicans. This ship was funded in 2001 – was Obama President then?

        Somehow I think allowing 50 MILLION Americans access to health care is a bit more relevant than a poorly designed web site being built with reduced funding due to Republicans cuts.

        Reminds me of how the Republicans specifically vetoed a security funding increase for the Libyan embassy, even though President Obama stated: "Our embassy in Libya needs more money for security".

        Fools. No wonder they've become the party that "87% of Americans won't vote for no matter what".

        October 30, 2013 at 3:39 pm |
  43. jamessavik

    The DDG-1000 concept is not without controversy. A destroyer that is as big as a WWII battleship? One that costs so much when you could have bought a fleet of Arleigh Burke's for the same price? I question the wisdom of building this class of ships for the pricetag and only coming up with three of them.

    Not to mention that the ugliest ship I've ever seen.

    October 30, 2013 at 11:07 am | Reply
    • JJ

      And who are you? Who exactly gives a flying intercourse about your farm animal noises?

      October 30, 2013 at 11:17 am | Reply
      • jamessavik

        ah... a troll.

        Sorry but you don't get my resume. Suffice it to say I have been in and around the navy for many years and work as a master electrician at Ingalls shipyard.

        As for what you do with animals, I really don't care.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:00 pm |
      • Socrates

        After reading your comment I can see you are a very educated person.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:39 pm |
    • Al

      This ship costs about $2.5 billion per ship at the beginning of it's production (that number would go down significantly if many more ships were made because Bath Iron Works would get more efficient once they know the ship better). Each ship of the next flight of Arleigh Burke class destroyers will cost approximately $1.5-2 billion. That is not very different considering that the Zumwalt is a much more advanced ship.

      November 6, 2013 at 1:15 am | Reply
  44. Roger Beck

    Since this ship hasn't been commissioned yet, it is NOT U.S.S. Zumwalt but P.C.U. (Pre-Commissioning Unit) Zumwalt.

    October 30, 2013 at 11:06 am | Reply
    • Bill

      That's news to me... thanks for sharing.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:12 am | Reply
    • Fiftypence

      It's still a ridiculous name for a warship.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:22 pm | Reply
  45. The Jackdaw

    $20 Billion for 1 war machine, nobody has a problem with that. $16.6 Billion for all of NASA in 2014 and people gripe. America. Funding paranoia and cutting progress. Isn't this how Rome fell?




    October 30, 2013 at 11:04 am | Reply
    • jamessavik

      I agree. That doesn't make much sense..

      October 30, 2013 at 11:08 am | Reply
    • Bill

      Sad... but a hardly surprising. Over the last couple of decades America has become much better at killing than it is at exploring.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:14 am | Reply
      • The Jackdaw

        Exactly right.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:14 am |
    • Stannis Baratheon

      Actually Rome fell because its politicians began a bloody struggle for power raising armies to use against their betters. Pretty much sounds like the US today only our idiot politicians aren't raising armies yet. Just out of curiosity, what are you expecting to find from the NASA side that would justify their budget? I would personally rather have a strong military than know "life may or may not have existed on X planet 10 million years ago".

      October 30, 2013 at 11:16 am | Reply
      • The Jackdaw

        Discovery aside, NASA’s return on every dollar has been more than 2:1 just based on the technology that has been developed. Our military wouldn’t be where it is today if it were not for the developments by NASA. Same goes for our aviation, auto, communication and countless other industries our country desperately tries to survive on. Our country has a larger military budget than the next 26 largest countries; 25 of whom are allies. While Roman politicians were corrupt, the rest of the empire went insane trying to defeat barbarians….sounds familiar. Also, if you don’t’ think politicians are funding private armies; you better take another look at Dick Chaney.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:27 am |
    • pj

      maybe you misread, $20B for the delievry or 7 ships!

      October 30, 2013 at 11:16 am | Reply
      • The Jackdaw

        3. 7 is 4 more than three.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:21 am |
      • Bobby

        Actually it says they only get three for that price. Seven were planned.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:28 am |
    • Will

      If i'm not mistakened it says "$20 billion to design and deliver seven ships". That would be approximately 2.9 billion a ship.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:18 am | Reply
      • The Jackdaw

        But they cut it back to 3. Thats $6.66 Billion per ship.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:31 am |
      • Richard L Smith

        I believe the article said that they (USN) planned to spend $9B on R&D and $20B on 7 ships, which (say it with me now) is $29B. Using the same figures to go from 7 to 3 ships are some SERIOUS cost overruns. Defense contractors (Corporate America) at it again? But, of course. They are well aware of the fact that Uncle Sam is used to cost overruns, but these are asinine. Let's see (CEO thinking), I need to design and build 7 tin cans for $29B? Let me think, Hmmm, I got it! I'll use the old cost overrun thingy and only have to spend enough to build 3 of 'em for the same price. God bless the sheeple. Boy, am I brilliant or what!

        October 30, 2013 at 11:57 am |
      • Richard L Smith

        Please see my latest comment and recalculate. I believe the figure is $9.666B each.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:02 pm |
    • jrdedonato

      Tripped on a pasta peel...

      October 30, 2013 at 11:56 am | Reply
    • Picard

      $20 billion for three of that class of warships but it is still a very high pricetag.

      October 30, 2013 at 2:08 pm | Reply
  46. johm

    What the author left out since it would seem less sensational is that this program started in like 2001. Since then it has been whittled down from 32 to 3 ships. Production began in 2009, 4 years ago, since it takes a while to build such a huge vessel. Everyone complaining about "today's economy!?" needs to remember this was underway years ago.

    October 30, 2013 at 11:03 am | Reply
    • Richard L Smith

      And, your point is?

      October 30, 2013 at 1:12 pm | Reply
  47. Whombatt

    Smacks of the lunacy surrounding the LCS (littoral combat ship), another out of cost control vessel without a mission.

    The LCS could have been built by simply using the WWII PT boat design with new, modern materials (FRP), lightweight turbo diesel engines and lightweight auto-cannon and chain-gun armament.

    In a statement bordering on the insane, one military supporter of the LCS noted that it "could destroy pirate boats by swamping them with its wake." Hello? If I am close enough to swamp a boat with my wake, I am close enough to pop it with a couple of bursts of 20mm cannon fire which will surely destroy the pirate boat.

    I fail to see what mission the new destroyer is really designed for. I do not think that we will ever again see surface sea battles that call for long-range ship-to-ship gunnery. Taking on targets 60 miles distant means you are likely dependent upon drone or satellite surveillance. If by drone, then just arm the drones (we already know how to do this and it doesn't cost billions)!

    Historically, one of the destroyer's missions was close support during combat landings. Their ability to operate in shallower and restricted waters let them provide covering fire and take on hardened shore batteries during the landing. The other was as a screen for the capital ships in a task force, protecting against submarine and airborne attacks. Lastly, destroyers (and their smaller brethren, destroyer escorts) protected convoys of cargo ships , a situation that is not likely to be required ever again.

    Three oversized, uber-costly magic boats are hardly going to make our navy significantly better able to protect our interests at sea..

    October 30, 2013 at 11:02 am | Reply
    • JJ

      And why should we be paying attention to the farm animal noises of someone who isn't even aware that the total number of ships in this program was reduced from 32 to 3?

      October 30, 2013 at 11:18 am | Reply
      • GG

        You need to start getting more creative with your rebuttals Farmer John.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:30 am |
    • Roland

      I think it really depends on what kind of war will be fought. It is never that one war is waged like the previous one. The enemy will look for weak spots and attack where the enemy is weakest. Like the Iraqi's using IED's or the Vietnamese building massive underground tunnel and bunker complexes to defeat U.S. firepower and air power superiority.People find ways where they are in the advantage.In a war with the U.S. what China really needs to do is send in 10-20,000 "insurgents" into the U.S. and make them go crazy shooting up the place.The U.S. would have to divert so many resources to capture these 10-20k insurgents that it wouldn't be able to spend resources on war.This destroyer will be cruising off China's coast being targetted by Chinese submarines that are the ultimate stealth vessels.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:45 am | Reply
    • Richard L Smith

      Hmmm.... Building 21st century ships to fight 20th century war thinking. Makes sense to me. NOT!

      October 30, 2013 at 1:20 pm | Reply
    • P

      It is designed to be protected from ship killers at long range. Thats the point. If you can't tell the difference between a fishing boat and this ship you wont fire the missle. Lets use china as an example. They have armies of fishing trawlers. If i had a fleet of these ships (lets say 5) and had them wandering aroudn internation waters, they look like fishing boats trawling. Not death machines that can incapacitate targets from 60 miles away.

      Thats the ultimate point. It's asymetrical guerrilla ocean warfare. Its the reason why afgahnistan and iraq were so damn hard to fight in. Only now it's to our advantage.

      October 30, 2013 at 1:42 pm | Reply
  48. ruducky2

    $20 Billion is a lot of money for three ships. Nevertheless, staying on top of everybody technologically is priceless.

    Americans seem to underestimate the advantage of superior technology on the battlefield. We've been ahead for so long that too many are forgetting what it was like when we were relatively even (or even behind) in technology. Ask yourself, if we were at war with China would you want your kid on a $0.8 billion destroyer that can be easily seen by radar and easily locked onto by enemy missiles or would you rather have them on the $6.6 billion dollar stealth destroyer?

    The issue isn't how much we spend on the new technology. The issue is how much General Dynamics is allowed to charge us. Especially when new designs are created, companies like General Dynamics need to have solid oversight so they don't run up the costs unnecessarily. Instead, the government seems content to allow companies to run up costs and justify it as stimulating local economies....

    October 30, 2013 at 11:01 am | Reply
    • Bill

      Your thoughts have merit. But sometimes I think our leaders build a sledgehammer, when a tack hammer can get the job done.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:16 am | Reply
      • Richard L Smith


        October 30, 2013 at 1:22 pm |
    • Ka Kin

      China don't really have a navy... not one that can operate beyond its coastlines.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:25 am | Reply
    • Jim R

      I am really conflicted about htis. First, I fully expect the actual spending on this item by GD is a fraction of what they tell us. They have to fund the various skunk works operations somehow. And really, until we're ready to abandon the world's sea transport to whomever whats to assert control, we have to be able to project force while limiting the risk to our armed personnel. We are currently the only country spnding money protecting international waters and commerce from piracy and thievery by other nations (e.g., the South China Seam, where China is trying to seize islands far from their shore so they can control their resources
      Nonetheless, big picture we HAVE TO stop throwing huge money at defense the way we did in the Cold war, which itself almost bankrupted us. Every American taxpayer put up about $500 for these three ships, money forced out their wallets and money we needed for education, transportation, etc. Not sustainable. We are not economically in the postwar "catbird's seat" anymore for a myriad of reasons. Over the useful life of these ships the current model of international commerce is going to have to dramatically change. We can't pay to protect it anymore.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:17 pm | Reply
    • sempervigilens

      The problem isn't defense contractors. I will readily accept that they are not always well run, but their margins are actually very reasonable for what they do. The problem is how congress and to a lesser extent the DoD manages the programs. $9 billion of the cost of the project was completely fixed because it was for R+D. The original requirement was for 32 ships. When you need to make completely new machinery that is specific to building this vessel, the infrastructure cost is huge. Making 30 ships isn't 10 times as expensive as making 3 it is more like 5 times as expensive. Then you have another massive problem. Congress love reduce project budgets by a percentage for a year. Reducing expenditure for one year by 5% on a project can RAISE total project cost by 10%, because it delays the program and because the contractors need to hold their employees longer. In conclusion, the problem with defense contracts is that the government doesn't stick with the original agreements. If the government kept its side of the agreement the companies would keep their side and if not the government could take legal action. We do underestimate the threats to our national security even inside the DoD at times and we need to make investments to defend our nation from future threats.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:48 pm | Reply
  49. Bill

    Looks a lot like an ironclad. Our tax dollars working hard to bring back 1860's technology.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:58 am | Reply
    • kyser13th

      Sometimes the oldies are the goodies. The good old "if it ain't broke don't fix it.". Just like putting a gun on Fighter Aircraft, remember when the "Wiz" kids decided that the F-4 Phantom would solely be armed with AA missles?

      October 30, 2013 at 11:23 am | Reply
  50. ITC Gee

    Nice Ship can't wait to see if it lives up to its boasted specifications... Meanwhile, 30 billion dollars is waaay too much money to keep doing this...

    October 30, 2013 at 10:57 am | Reply
  51. John

    I know this is a major shock to most liberals but the reason why the President is called the commander and chief is because the #1 job of the federal Government is to protect this nation. Not to be community organizers in charge of hand outs.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:52 am | Reply
    • Steve In SD

      I'm still waiting for the military to be privatized and removed from the 'big government' spenders. I don't care enough about my neighbors to pay for their health care so why would I care enough about them to pay for their defense?

      October 30, 2013 at 11:33 am | Reply
  52. John M

    This is an awesome and beautiful ship. I remember seeing an artist rendition of it almost 25 years ago. I'm so glad to see it a reality.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:50 am | Reply
  53. alex

    yo folks, you realise this looks like the sub from the movie " league of extraordinary gentlemen" same basic design. Now i know where the ideas come from Hollyweird

    October 30, 2013 at 10:49 am | Reply
  54. tigerrook

    wow 20 billion for 3 ships that is 6.666 billion per ship. what a waste. We spend more on defense spending than the next 26 countries combine 25 of which are ALLIES. What if we used that 20 billion to pay back our national debt.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:41 am | Reply
    • Will

      Could you please tell me where you are getting your stats on what other countries are spending on defense?

      October 30, 2013 at 10:46 am | Reply
      • Paul

        That's a pretty commonly-cited figure. You can find it many places, including the CIA World Fact Book, etc. The US Defense budget is many times over the largest in the world. Kind of like our pharmaceutical industry, we spend all our money on the research and development of technologies that ultimately benefit the rest of the world at a much reduced cost.

        October 30, 2013 at 10:50 am |
      • Jim R

        Paul is right, I think. The numbers are correct, and also the numbers on pharmaceuticals and all kinds of other original research and commercialization our :leaders" convince us we must do. And I'm not just talking about Congress... scientists tell us "we can't afford to fall behind, so fund my lavish salary and research facilities so I can play. I'm curious if there were ever bacterial on Mars, so give me $20 Billion to spend my lifetime speculating, or the French or ### might find out first." Meantime, other countries limit the price of the pharmaceuticals we paid to develop and we fund all the costs through high prices. We pay taxpayer dollars to develop new technologies and they are commercialized and sold back to us by whomever can get the labor the cheapest.
        We are truly world-class chumps.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:25 pm |
  55. Sdrtyjbfhj Ertyhdtyu


    October 30, 2013 at 10:36 am | Reply
    • Richard L Smith


      October 30, 2013 at 11:20 am | Reply
    • Jim R

      Huh? Did that screaming make sense to anyone?

      October 30, 2013 at 12:27 pm | Reply
      • sly

        Yes, he said instead of building weapons, we should use homeless people to throw shoes at our enemies.

        October 30, 2013 at 4:01 pm |

    Another billion dollar weapons system. With all the moaning and wailing we hear about governmental austerity WHY are we now being treated to the sight of yet another means to kill and destroy enemies that hide in deserts and mountains? Can this ship climb a hill? Can it sail into the desert? A barge full of missile launchers can do the same thing without all the hi tech hoopla. The greatest enemy of the American people isn't a bunch of camel jockies, it's the Pentagon and the perfect example of their disdain for the US economic situation is this perversion. The thing looks more like a Darth Vader nightmare than a ship.
    and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

    October 30, 2013 at 10:35 am | Reply
    • Will

      You have never been in the military huh, well the capabilities of this ship could allow for Naval support to ground assualt forces as well as a launching platform. Typically if America wants to do any operations and launch attacks they have to pay the country where they are stagging troops before the assualt. Sea Basing and ships of this nature allow us to launch attacks without the need to liason with host countries. Saves money and lives in the long run.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:50 am | Reply
    • Suq Madiq

      Ummm sorry ... the government was set up to protect the nation ... not give hand outs ... how many shoes have you given?

      October 30, 2013 at 11:12 am | Reply
      • Ka Kin

        yep, we are planning the invasion of another country next, after Iraq. this time, it will be a coastal country. Obama's pivot to asia.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:27 am |
  57. Dave

    Seriously I think we need it in a Black Sea and its gonna be good idea to build a Naval Base in Odessa Ukraine To protect our partners and friends from the new Russian oppression

    October 30, 2013 at 10:33 am | Reply
    • SCBAMA

      Why can't they protect themselves? Why do we have to pay to do this? We have enough issues here that need addressing.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:42 am | Reply
    • Bobby

      Russian oppression? What about American aggression and oppression? You forget we're the only superpower invading other countries around the world... for quite a while now.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:32 am | Reply
      • Scot B

        Don't forget about the Russian invasion of Georgia a few years ago...

        October 30, 2013 at 12:41 pm |
  58. Sdrtyjbfhj Ertyhdtyu

    I say keith said: cut all military spending and all VA Benifits hence forth...lets see how much keith is really worth with and without his imaginary hard work...ie slave labor...wall street belongs too whom exactly...it aint Americans mother fer...

    October 30, 2013 at 10:31 am | Reply
    • Richard L Smith

      At least you stopped yelling.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:21 am | Reply
  59. The Dude

    Um, er, I can see the ship.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:29 am | Reply
  60. steve

    to test it please go to or close to Somalia and see if the pirates can do any thing to it!?

    October 30, 2013 at 10:27 am | Reply
  61. MrEngineer

    People, with every government program please think about where the money is going. When they spend 29 billion, that money is going to American engineers like me. I then send 36% right back to the government in taxes. I take the rest and shop at Lowes, McDonalds, Dell, and local shops (aka where you work). Those companies and people pay taxes and spend more at different places. The government gets the money right back. When the government spends money on American products it is like they are giving money and jobs directly to the American people. Don’t get upset about that. Get much more upset when you fill your car with gas. Most of that money goes to the middle east and we don’t get that money back.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:25 am | Reply
    • Volunteer57

      What's amazing is the " massive cost overruns" on ANY and EVERY government project!!!! Instead of 7 destroyers @ 4.2 billion, we may get 3 at 9.7 billion$..........Someone please tell me why that is????? Who's gouging the tax payers? Ship builders, Engineers, Suppliers?
      Look at the affordable health care web site........how much "MORE" taxpayer money are we going to shell out to fix it??? When do US vendors step up and pay for some of their mistakes and overruns????

      October 30, 2013 at 10:54 am | Reply
      • nhguy

        with a comment like that its clear you have never worked for a client that changes specs more often then they change their underwear. most contractors have an incentive to do the work on time and on budget – it's called repeat business you dumb a#$.

        October 30, 2013 at 11:10 am |
      • Al

        The per ship cost of the Zumwalt class destroyers is about $2.5-3 Billion. The total cost of the program is more than that because of the R&D costs. That cost was originally supposed to be spread over many more ships, but the cuts to the ship (due to Lockheed Martin's lobbying and concerns over ballistic missile defense) made more of that money get allocated to each ship (even though this is not the way costs are supposed to be accounted, they should publish the $2.5 Billion number). The technologies funded through the Zumwalt project will also be extremely useful for other projects.

        October 30, 2013 at 5:48 pm |
    • NNN

      Like you "claim," you're an engineer and not an economist. Most of the money goes into corporate coffers and not to pay simp_letons like you.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:56 am | Reply
    • Jsmith

      So as$holes like you thinking that your family is worthy of food and entertainment drive up our tax bill.. that's what I get from that.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:58 am | Reply
  62. Sdrtyjbfhj Ertyhdtyu

    "@ Keith
    October 30th, 2013 8:30 am ET" you don't make any money you only cost money...actualy people who are in the service will never ever even remotly come close to having enough money in their single lifetime to pay for 1 year of the cost of service to "thier" Country...as far as shoes...shoes cost 200 dollars because shoes cost 200 dollars or for some other reason...GEE I WONDER WHY THE HELL SHOES IN THE US COST ALMOST AS MUCH AS A BOX OF CEREAL ONE TO ONE LIKE A F-35 DOES NOT COST 200 DOLLARS...IF YOU ARE HUNGRY WHICH DO PEOPLE WANT TO BE STOLLEN FROM TO PAY FOR THE CEREAL THE SHOES OR THE F-35...BY YOUR LOGIC WE SHOULD STARVE THOSE WHO ARE NOT ALLOWED BY THEIR GOV. INJURE THEIR FEET SO YOU CAN FEEL GOOD ABOUT YOURSELF AND THE TRILLIONS AND TRILLIONS OF IMAGINARY DOLLARS GET SPENT ON YOUR LIFE STYLE...

    October 30, 2013 at 10:24 am | Reply
    • Fiftypence

      Come again?

      October 30, 2013 at 10:30 am | Reply
    • Richard L Smith


      October 30, 2013 at 11:19 am | Reply
    • sly

      I preferred your earlier suggestion that we use the homeless to throw their shoes at our enemies.

      But, keep up the suggestions ... you really do know how to 'think outside the box' (no, not your cereal box...).

      October 30, 2013 at 4:06 pm | Reply
  63. dajowi

    Hopefully this turns out better than the Navy stealth ship Sea Shadow which was built for $172 million and sold for scrap for $2.5 million.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:19 am | Reply
  64. Joanie Yves

    We made the edges super thin & the whole thing is so light. It's.... revolutionary.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:18 am | Reply
  65. dutspup

    YAY another wastful POS to deploy to somalia or some other country that has no chance against us. When will we stoop it with thje blank checks to create new garbage we dont need.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:18 am | Reply
  66. Lynn

    Who hid the halibut on the poop deck ?

    October 30, 2013 at 10:17 am | Reply
  67. jorge washinsen

    Did anyone notice how close the ship resembles one of the Civil War Iron clads? I just hope it works if we ever need it.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:14 am | Reply
  68. jon wilson

    So she's pretty and she's bad, but can you say billions? I'm all for a strong Navy, but whose paying for these ships?

    October 30, 2013 at 10:14 am | Reply
  69. Howard

    My brother in law has a garage and going on google earth I can read the license plate on a car parked in his lot. Don't really believe there is such a thing as a stealth ship 600 ft long.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:13 am | Reply
    • Golly Winkies

      Those all-seeing eyes in the sky can be blinded, disabled or destroyed. One important rule of war to remember: every measure has a counter-measure... it's the primary reason a country must not become so complacent that its ever-eager adversaries gain an advantage.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:25 am | Reply
    • Jorge

      Hard to find when you don't have an address to locae the ship. Yep, you're a moron.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:30 pm | Reply
    • sly

      Gee Howard – they've been able to read the writing on a golf ball from outer space since the late 1950'!

      (Of course, Americans apparently think that no nations ever spy ... but that's another story).

      So you think that in the past 50+ years no military expert knew about your revelation? Uh, I think you may want to look up the definition of 'stealth technology' on the internet prior to further embarrassing yourself.

      October 30, 2013 at 4:10 pm | Reply
  70. jorge washinsen

    Lets hope its electronics work better than Obama Care,it would be possible to really lose something that big .especially if no one can see it.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:12 am | Reply
  71. Unveilievable

    I guess it was a bargain. Looks like a sub, but without all the expensive components for being submerged.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:10 am | Reply
  72. Logic

    30 billion, but the good news is the toilet seats only cost $4.50 a peace.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:07 am | Reply
    • sly

      Doubt the toilet seats cost $4.50.

      "public reports about the Department of Defense paying for $600 toilet seats and $400 ham­mers, prompted President Ronald Reagan to estab­lish the Packard Commission in 1985 to help reduce inefficiencies in the defense procurement system. "

      October 30, 2013 at 4:11 pm | Reply
  73. SEAL Team Alpha and Omega

    Out-fricking-standing!! This is why America is the best in the world and will always stay the best.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:03 am | Reply
  74. riversomme

    Great Britain's Royal Navy has ships named HMS Invincible, Lion, Price of Wales, Dreadnought, Vindictive, Orion, Iron Duke.....
    The U.S. has the USS "Zumwalt". Scary.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:03 am | Reply
    • prybars

      how do they separate the men from the boys in the British navy?

      October 30, 2013 at 10:16 am | Reply
      • sleazy_dreamin

        ummm... prybars?

        October 30, 2013 at 10:27 am |
    • bob

      the Invincible was decommed in 2005

      October 30, 2013 at 11:58 am | Reply
    • Al

      What happens when your ship called the USS Invincible gets sunk? What would that mean for the rest of your ships. I do agree, however that there are better names for US ships than what they use currently, but putting a name on the ship can help get congressional support (if they are a local hero or something like that). The USS Dauntless would be a cool name that is also borrowed from the British.

      October 30, 2013 at 7:03 pm | Reply
  75. Christian

    So much money going to waste and so many people dying of hunger and then the people that say are the government don't do nothing about it. Instead allow such weapon of destruction to be built for what, so called protection or intimidation. Why don't we wake up and smell the coffee.

    October 30, 2013 at 10:02 am | Reply
    • Never A Free Ride

      The first priority of any government is defense of the realm. Today's latest technology is needed to defend the rights of all within this country, including the "nay-sayers" who haven't a clue what the term defense of the realm means. Without our military, you would be unable to make you comments without fear of reprisal!

      October 30, 2013 at 10:16 am | Reply
      • Fiftypence

        I hate to break it to you but the US doesn't have a "realm." You'd need a sovereign to have one of those.

        October 30, 2013 at 10:32 am |
  76. maya

    so very nice ship.... i love the design...

    October 30, 2013 at 10:00 am | Reply
  77. riversomme


    October 30, 2013 at 9:55 am | Reply
  78. Fiftypence

    What in God's name is the point of this ship I ask you? It doesn't have an enemy. The US Navy could already destroy the rest of the world's navies, combined, several times over. And yet there's no money for health care or a decent rail system.

    October 30, 2013 at 9:48 am | Reply
    • riversomme

      I hear you on that.
      But take solace in the fact that this destroyer is cool as sh!t! Yeah, baby!

      October 30, 2013 at 9:55 am | Reply
    • shirodx

      Uhh, you saw the movie "Battleship" right?

      October 30, 2013 at 9:56 am | Reply
    • Point Noted

      Ships like these are needed to:
      Keep the military employed without calling it unemployment
      Hunt for Weapons of Mass Destruction
      Keep the budget unbalanced so Senators and Congressmen have something useful to debate
      Hunt for Mr. Seldon who is going to give it all away...
      Save us from our Allies who don't like to be spied on.
      I am sure there are more. It takes getting used to to read between the lines...

      October 30, 2013 at 9:56 am | Reply
      • Point Noted

        Snowden, not Seldon... sorry.

        October 30, 2013 at 10:14 am |
    • cnnlicksit

      What color is the sky in your world? If the rest of the world teamed up to destroy the US we wouldnt stand a chance.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:58 am | Reply
      • teresaphan

        Sure it is a technological marvel, but as many have already stated, it is an astoundingly expensive weapon unlikely ever to be used. When was the U.S. last involved in naval battles invovling surface ships? WWII? I'd much rather see this money go into basic science and infrastructure (and not food stamps).

        October 30, 2013 at 11:34 am |
    • Kevin

      Rail is so 19th century.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:01 am | Reply
      • Fiftypence

        And building capital ships to defeat the Soviets is so 20th....

        October 30, 2013 at 10:03 am |
    • bob

      A "decent" rail system is one that is non-existant. Cannot stand the concept of public transportation.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:00 pm | Reply
    • Prof. Joe

      Go Google a picture of the Russian Guards Missle Cruiser "Moscova." This vessel is billed by the Russians as an
      "aircraft carrier killer." This is why we need this new vessel.

      October 30, 2013 at 3:49 pm | Reply
  79. Grinning Libber

    Worried about the budget. Start with idiocy like this.
    The military budget could be cut by 50% and we would ALL be safer.

    October 30, 2013 at 9:47 am | Reply
    • not a republican bible thumper

      if you cut the militarys budget by 50 do you realize what that will do to unemployment?

      October 30, 2013 at 11:57 am | Reply
    • George patton

      Good posting, Grinning Libber. Thank you.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:11 pm | Reply
  80. Paul Deemer

    The latest Greatest Stealth Destroyer. Well here is a way to test how stealthy it is. Send it over to sit off the Russian Coast and launch a missile to take out Eric Snowden!

    October 30, 2013 at 9:41 am | Reply
    • Jimmy Joe Jim Bob

      How does a person as stupid as yourself survive?

      Government assistance.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:49 am | Reply
      • riversomme

        What makes Jimmy Joe such a fan of this Snowden guy? You have a problem with the US wanting to take him out? Or are you just a sympathizer of all enemies of our country?

        October 30, 2013 at 10:06 am |
  81. Daistaar

    30 BILLION dollars for 3 ships employing 150 Seamen per ship. So we the American Taxpayer have spent 30 BILLION dollars employing 450 crewmen... When our kids spend inappropriately we cut off funding until they learn. I wonder if we can do the same with the government?

    October 30, 2013 at 9:37 am | Reply
    • SullivanC

      I suppose you are assuming that 30 billion dollar bought a ship that wasnt made by shipbuilders or designed by engineers? Something of this caliber would employ up to 1000 people for several years to take it from idea to blueprints to a ship floating in a river in Bath, Maine. No offense but military spending employs more than just sailors on a ship and to assume so is just plain silly!

      October 30, 2013 at 10:08 am | Reply
      • Fiftypence

        Yeah well, $30 billion could also provide $45,000each to 250,000 people for three years if you simply gave it to them.

        What's your point?

        October 30, 2013 at 10:12 am |
      • Point Noted

        Stimulus funds for the economy? We could also build bridges, hospitals, spend on education and get some jobs back for main street. Now there is wall street and the military spending out money and a bunch of elected idiots who are out there looking for campaign funds and a cause.

        October 30, 2013 at 10:19 am |
    • ChaosB4Order

      That is like saying we build an F-22 Raptor to employ a pilot, or an M1-Abrams to employ 5 tank jockeys. It is expensive because our government is not built to conserve money (different subject, different day). Build enough of them and the price per unit comes down, but we won’t get there with these tin cans. And the Chinese just rolled out a new fleet of nuclear subs. We might start with those as targets, because I guarantee there is some anti-sub capability onboard. Let’s keep in mind it was not the Army or Air Force that won the Cold war. It was the Navy and the willingness of the U.S. to outspend the Soviets. Now the Chinese are coming up. I don’t know if we can borrow enough from them to outspend them. With ships like this we can out fight them though. As a tin can sailor, I would be proud to sail one of these.

      October 30, 2013 at 12:58 pm | Reply
  82. jbird68

    Ha! The hull looks upside down!

    October 30, 2013 at 9:27 am | Reply
  83. John Smith

    The biggest and most expensive paperweight you'll ever see. When people ask why we're in debt, look no further than the military's over bloated budget. The most advanced submarine ever built to fight an enemy that isn't there.

    October 30, 2013 at 9:27 am | Reply
    • worrytron

      I can tell you're an expert because you just called this ship a submarine.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:29 am | Reply
    • Norm

      Defense spending equals jobs, knucklehead. Rather have my money go to a bunch of engineers and shipbuilders than a bunch of potheads who can't keep their legs together.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:26 am | Reply
  84. eric

    will this stop the kaiju?

    October 30, 2013 at 9:23 am | Reply
    • shirodx

      I sure hope so. That's money well spent.
      Plus I'm sure it's gonna have that cool rail gun just ready for the Decepticons when they arrive.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:02 am | Reply
  85. cnn1

    Half the weight of the USS Arizona? So one hand grenade should disable the entire ship.

    October 30, 2013 at 9:05 am | Reply
  86. Jerry

    Looks and sounds bad-ass, but it does not look the same as I remember destroyers.

    October 30, 2013 at 9:04 am | Reply
    • joe

      it looks like a civil war ship,theDOD peoople watch to much SCI_FI.,

      October 30, 2013 at 9:19 am | Reply
  87. ThankUAmerica

    Again, People's Republic of China thanks you America for nice great research on stealthy destroyer ship. But you forgot to mention laser gun to kill oncoming planes.

    October 30, 2013 at 8:58 am | Reply
  88. rad666

    "But cost overruns cut production to three ships."

    How is it that everything the government does has "cost overruns?"

    October 30, 2013 at 8:56 am | Reply
    • dave

      But yet somehow people believed that government designed PPACA would bring equal healthcare insurance premiums down on average $2500 per year, and then stunned when they learn that on average similar coverage is increasing drastically.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:36 am | Reply
    • Xzanthius

      I know it was a rhetorical question but I believe that the answer to that is corruption.

      October 30, 2013 at 9:41 am | Reply
    • Paul

      It's not the government that has the cost overruns, it's the *contractors*, who once they've been selected to deliver a product have zero incentive to keep costs down. They spend and spend frivolously to increase their bottom-line at the expense of the taxpayers, and we have no option but to let them do it; because what's the alternative, stop the project in the middle and pay even more to *another* company who will do the same thing?

      What's worse is that a lot of these contractors knowingly deliver shoddy products so they're secure in their years-long contracts to provide service to fix and upgrade the original crappy thing they deliver to our troops.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:01 am | Reply
    • Yodude777

      You ever heard of "If you want 3 then order 7 and you'll atleast get what you want...."

      October 30, 2013 at 10:03 am | Reply
    • Steve

      I suspect that contractors' cost overruns are directly related to the Feds' misguided low-bid policy. In order to get a contract one must have ridiculously low numbers, tons of assumptions to justify later upscopes, and still somehow meet the Feds inflated prevailing wage rates for employees.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:32 am | Reply
  89. alex beauchamp

    Enlist in the Navy and "Try" to pick a ship to ride into a war. I choose one of these 1000's class ships.

    October 30, 2013 at 8:45 am | Reply
  90. RD

    Is China the lien holder?

    October 30, 2013 at 8:37 am | Reply
  91. weezer

    610' X 81' is stealth? "Ooh look, there's a big boat. Shoot a missile at it."

    October 30, 2013 at 8:28 am | Reply
    • jsmalberis

      READ . Any RADAR will see a fishing boat. Yes, visually it is still damn big but if the enemy can see it visually, they are too late to act as there will be a missile on it's way . Dig ?

      October 30, 2013 at 8:31 am | Reply
    • Narg

      Said missile has to acquire the target first. Heck... radar or sonar has to find the ship (or identify it as a warship) before you can even have targeting. Visual isn't a given, especially at night, since deception lights are aways in play. And enemy radar/sonar will probably detect the ship as a fishing boat - not a destroyer. That's what the stealth does. Then when you factor in the ECM, active defense weapons, smaller superstructure, etc... well... it makes the ship that much more effective. Now the real question, is if all these enhancements are worth the cost. I think they are NOT (to expensive to use because it's too expensive to lose)... but the stealth concept of this ship is sound, when combined with other defense system factors.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:33 am | Reply
  92. Anon

    Now Al Qaeda's navy will be toast!!!

    October 30, 2013 at 8:18 am | Reply
    • david e.


      "Now Al Qaeda's navy will be toast!!!"

      Nobody can really be this dumb , can they? Al Qaeda? Navy? LOL

      October 30, 2013 at 8:29 am | Reply
      • sparky

        Sarcasm not detected. Irony overload.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:07 am |
      • Jason

        Dude, that was his point...

        October 30, 2013 at 9:08 am |
      • J.C.

        Yes they can. You are living proof.

        @ Anon: Funny.

        October 30, 2013 at 9:16 am |
      • Paul

        The irony of your statement is one of those Golden moments in life.....

        October 30, 2013 at 9:24 am |
      • Fiftypence

        Oh dear....

        October 30, 2013 at 9:45 am |
    • Point Noted

      Monsanto is working on Genetically Modified camels for them...

      October 30, 2013 at 10:21 am | Reply
  93. Disabled Veteran

    Transformation Gentlemen, Keep up!!!

    October 30, 2013 at 8:06 am | Reply
  94. Jim

    90 Billion ! Stealth Ship are they nuts ! GOA should have pulled the plug on this project when the keel was layed. Low tech will send this ship to Dave Jones locker. While at anchor some towel head in a canoe packed with HE will blow a hole in this the size of a bus! Id rather see a battleship comming out of mothballs-No stealth needed there- Its all business and you know its there to kick ass not play hide & seek.

    October 30, 2013 at 8:03 am | Reply
    • Narg

      Correction #1: Low tech weaponry guided by advanced tech targeting, can hit an advanced ship. Low tech weaponry with low tech targeting won't hit anything without statistical luck. Correction #2: Battleships are obsolete. A modern submarine can sink a modernized Iowa-class with a SINGLE torpedo (the MK-48 comes to mind). It's actually the battleship's own 50,000+ ton weight that makes it so certain. Splits in half so easily...

      October 30, 2013 at 8:27 am | Reply
  95. Narg

    The lack of military science common sense around here staggers me. Let's start off with this: in modern naval warfare, one missile or torpedo has the potential to sink any sized ship. That's right: just one. Even the massive aircraft carriers (some argue it's easier on them because they're so massive). Of course getting that single hit kill requires precision targeting and perfect selection of the warhead. That's what all those advanced computers and powerful targeting systems do. They select the perfect weapon from a ship's inventory and then direct that missile/torpedo to the perfect location for the one-hit one-kill opportunity. It's scary effective what kind of elaborate maneuvers guided weapons can do. Some weapons don't even directly hit the ship for that (look up how modern torpedoes work). All the defense systems on the opposing ship - CWIS, rolling airframes, heated chaff, ECM, ECCM, stealth coating, smaller structure that's harder to target, etc - are designed to prevent the missile or torpedo from hitting that instant kill zone. Not getting hit at all is ideal, but that's not the designed intention: the weapon can hit anywhere else, because the ship can still fight if it hits anywhere else but those instant kill zones (it's called damage control). It's this fact of warfare that all future ships, like this insanely expensive new destroyer, are designed around.

    October 30, 2013 at 8:01 am | Reply
    • jsmalberis

      Thanks. Good post.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:28 am | Reply
    • Kevin

      You make a lot of sense there Narg, I can also see the ignorance running amok amongst the others. The investment in military technology like the DDG-1000 is a good one, without a doubt. National security is one of this nations' top three priorities, easily and it's rather the investment of billions in dollars for safety, or the risk of a breach of barrier by a potential threat to American soil, not losing only dollars, but lives as well. The day an event occurs that is far from what is desired by Americans is when they will thank the individuals who had the part in having the responsibility of sending money towards the defense of this nation.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:39 am | Reply
      • Point Noted

        What are the top three priorities? Make friends, not enemies and there will be no war. Spy on your friends and you get more enemies and more ships and more money down the tube.
        The question is this: Where is the dollar better spent? Private incentives? Government subsidy to the unemployed? Military? National Debt reduction? Its ironic that we borrow from China to spy on China??

        October 30, 2013 at 10:25 am |
    • Norm

      I just think it would be funny if the "one hit/one weapon" spot on a ship just happened to be on the very front of the ship and the weapon was a champagne bottle wielded by a female octogenarian.


      "But Senator, how many Dom Perrion swinging grandma's you think are out on the high seas? It was the perfect plan. Almost...."

      October 30, 2013 at 10:34 am | Reply
    • NNN

      Don't see how a composite superstructure supports that thesis. The ship may stay afloat but it will be functionally disabled and worthless.

      October 30, 2013 at 11:31 am | Reply
      • John in WNY

        The work around is by reducing it's radar cross section, if the enemy ship/aircraft/ground installation can't pick up the ship on radar then it wont fire at it, further the missile's radar needs to be able to lock onto the target, and the smaller the radar cross section is the less likely that will happen.

        October 30, 2013 at 2:45 pm |
    • Dr. C Trosclair

      Great point!

      October 30, 2013 at 12:27 pm | Reply
  96. Dong

    Bigger, lighter, deadlier forget about it we don't need it they are here, just look around you....

    October 30, 2013 at 8:00 am | Reply
  97. finance guy

    Thats not how military finances work. Imagine right now you out a down payment on meal. Then for the next "X" years you keep adding installments. Now that its 2013, you can finally go eat that meal. That 90B isnt a lump sum given when the waiter brings the check. The funds are the sum total of years. Plus seeing a ship is different than is sounds. On a perfectly clear day, a man with binoculars can see about 30 miles. Thats in optimum conditions. With how big the oceans really are, this is more difficult than you'd think. The advanced instruments wont really be able to find this ship. So it can sneak with in 63miles, fire its entire pay load, then get away before they can really retaliate. Missles wont find it. You basically need someone with old fashion artillary (like big battleship style cannons) to see it and actually hit it. We dont like to build pawns and have 1/1 kill ratios. We like to send in brutes who take out 10 before getting taken out. We are the best at conventional war for a reason. I do agree it is sad that peoples' funds are being cut. Here is a real military gripe we can probably both agree on. jet parts that we do not use are still being funded because in order to stop funding, it means the plant loses the contract and jobs in that district will be lost. No senator has the guts to lose jobs in their district because they are afraid they wont be re-elected. So instead we send billions to companys for parts we cant use all so some senator can keep their seat. I dont want jobs to be loss but i dont want money sent where it doesnt need to be.

    October 30, 2013 at 7:19 am | Reply
    • Ray

      Finance Guy, Not sure where you got that 30 miles from. You would need to be a about 240 feet above sea level to that far. From approximately the 04 level on a destroyer you can see about 12 miles, and that is looking through high powered binoculars. Probably won't see anything small on the ocean at that distance, but you will see the superstructure of a tanker from that distance. This is from a guy that was Master Lookout qualified.

      October 30, 2013 at 10:57 am | Reply
  98. James

    It looks like Captain Nemo's sub in the League of Ordinary Gentlkemen

    October 30, 2013 at 7:15 am | Reply
  99. Sdrtyjbfhj Ertyhdtyu

    Where is my backpack full of cash...

    October 30, 2013 at 7:15 am | Reply
  100. bruce

    Avoid Radar??? This thing is so big and slow you can see it on Google Maps. We spend 90 Billion on Three ships while 15 percent of our people had their food stamps reduced to a starvation level.

    It's sick. As far as the military goes, we need to think about 'swarms' of enemy ships with lower tech weapons. Thats what Iran or China or Russia would throw at us.

    October 30, 2013 at 6:44 am | Reply
    • Oliver Perry

      Maybe those people on food stamps should get apply for a job at the shipyard.

      Perhaps you should actually take a look at what those countries are adding to their fleets. The AG will be irrelevant in 30 years, but China will have more carriers and Iran will have more quiet submarines.

      October 30, 2013 at 6:50 am | Reply
      • YouDope

        Yes, that's right Oliver, because everyone's skills are interchangeable and anyone can do any job. Thank goodness we don't have to spend any of that 90 billion training them.

        October 30, 2013 at 7:17 am |
      • Jorge

        People on food stamps have no skills....Makes you wonder how the 50% who don't graduate high school think their lives will turn out.

        October 30, 2013 at 12:28 pm |
    • Benjamin


      October 30, 2013 at 6:54 am | Reply
    • Dominic

      Good point .

      October 30, 2013 at 7:12 am | Reply
    • me

      It said 9 billion NOT 90 billion read & have your facts straight before talking out of your azz. Plus it's 50 times lighter than the normal destroyer which makes it faster you moron!

      October 30, 2013 at 7:58 am | Reply
      • Jerry

        So true, $9 billion. Good catch. Then you go with the 50 times lighter idea. In reality it is about 50% heavier than the Arleigh-Burke class that is the standard destroyer now. 50 times lighter would be amazing though! For note, that would mean it would have a mass of about 200 tons and would have been only about 80% of the mass of the Hindenburg airship! Maybe they could put a big gas bag above it and give the entire ship a dual role as an airship.

        October 30, 2013 at 8:27 am |
    • Yodude666

      Screw you and your food stamps.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:07 am | Reply
      • austin


        October 30, 2013 at 11:45 am |
    • Keith

      Seriously you throw a food stamp argument into this. Stop mooching off the government. Go get a damn job, or go learn the skills to qualify for one. I had the same opportunities or disadvantages as others, I just choose to work hard, go to school, study, and earn a living instead of being provided one by the government. Food stamps should be a short term solution, not a fixed income. I'm tired of seeing people on food stamps walking around in 200 dollar shoes and paying subsidized rent while us who work hard and have to budget have to settle for mediocre things and paying full rent or mortgages. If I wasn't paying for your damn food stamps and welfare programs, maybe I could keep more of my EARNED money instead of giving it to you for no reason other than just pure laziness.

      October 30, 2013 at 8:30 am | Reply
      • Christian

        Have you collected food stamps or any of your love ones

        October 30, 2013 at 10:11 am |
      • Christian

        You reap what you sow

        October 30, 2013 at 10:13 am |
      • reader

        Another fool who thinks the poor are the ones who are somehow influencing our politicians.
        Perhaps if employers would step up and provide a living wage it would be worthwhile for those on welfare to get a job.
        But ignorant people like you refuse to realize that the reason your having a hard time making ends meet is not because our government is paying off the debt each year, but because the 1% have so much of the wealth that they can't possibly spend it back into the system.

        October 30, 2013 at 1:08 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Leave a Reply to Vladtheinhaler


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.