News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Darpa invests $100M in a silicon compiler. Parent comment

Re:Darpa invests $100M in a silicon compiler by jandrese on Saturday June 30, 2018 @12:42AM (#17429513)
I don't think the Zumwalt was ever meant to be a mass production ship. I think it was built the prove the concept of lower signature vessels. Notably it's too small and lightly armed to accomplish most Navy objectives. The stealth technology makes it hard to modify for specific objectives.

Basically, what are you going to do with a Zumwalt that you couldn't do with a submarine? Is it better at any of those tasks than a conventional destroyer?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Darpa invests $100M in a silicon compiler by hollerith on Sunday July 01, 2018 @08:09PM (#17438470)
>>I don't think the Zumwalt was ever meant to be a mass production ship

You think wrong.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Darpa invests $100M in a silicon compiler by jandrese on Monday July 02, 2018 @03:52PM (#17444823)
Maybe I should have clarified that the Navy never considered it to be a real ship, for the aforementioned lack of a role in the fleet. Bath Iron Works probably wanted to build hundreds of them but that was little more than a hopeful fantasy on their part.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Darpa invests $100M in a silicon compiler by hollerith on Wednesday July 04, 2018 @06:20PM (#17459722)
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/business/09defense.html states that 10 "were originally planned" though the intro to the wikipedia article says that "the class was intended to take the place of battleships in meeting a congressional mandate for naval fire support," so I'm not going to dispute your clarification because I know that Congress sometimes forces the Navy to buy things the Navy does not want.
[ Parent | on HN ]