why is it that the Russian ship/s are so cluttered - say as compared to the French?
Why is it that the American ship/s are so cluttered - say as compared to the Russians?http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 72-267.jpg
American ships's suffer from fungal infection with bridge and superstructure looking infected and cluttered with spores and mushrooms? Why so many wires all around that can electrocute sailors?
That mast looks ugly.
http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/120524-N-MZ309-035.jpg This mast is uglier. This rickety and ramshackle mast looks shabbier than my village electricity distribution pole.
Could we expect the Russians to do a "better job" (I know it is a biased statement) in the next three?
Could we expect the Americans to do a "better job" (I know it is an honest statement, given Zumwalt, LHD8, LCS failures) in the next class of ships?
But wait, isnt the next Zumwalt class terminated at 3 ships and are building more fungally infected ships of the Burke class.
Stupid Americans cant even design next class of ships!
Their new fancy frigates carry 57 mm gun and no missiles and are outgunned by Pakistani F22Ps.
Or for that matter even the Indian designed ships to do better?
Why are American ships so top heavy and roll in rough weather http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1 ... 06,3134104
and are cracking worse than my village potter’s earthen pots http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/12/n ... s-120910w/
unlike the Indian ship with excellent seakeeping here http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Gall ... CN4713.JPG
and here http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Gall ... SKochi.jpg
More than 3,000 cracks have been found so far across the entire Ticonderoga class, which originally numbered 27 ships. Twenty-two of the ships remain in service, and Port Royal, commissioned in 1994, is the newest.
Oh, wait, they build ships out of aluminum that Below Poverty Line people in India use pots and pans made of.
Get real, ships are designed for function and not "looks".
^ You get what you pay for Krivak 3 where mainly designed to cheap mass produced frigates, the mast is simply a steel stand compare that with Steregushchiy. IN is happy with the design, I don't really expect any changes.
What has cost got anything to do with it? Its all about function. If the so called steel stand suffices, then why make something more complex? FWIW, the US invented ugly looking lattice mast http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_mast
to reduce top weight
The purpose of the lattice structure was to make the posts less vulnerable to shells from enemy ships, and to better absorb the recoil shock associated with firing main guns, isolating the delicate fire control equipment (rangefinders, etc) mounted on the mast tops. The masts are a type of hyperboloid structure, whose weight-saving design was first used by the Russian engineer Vladimir Shukhov.
Cheater Americans copying Russian technology. No wonder Chinese steal their's.