Boeing Awarded Contract For Next-Generation Harpoon Block III Missile

"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

:In message , Clark
writes
:"Paul J. Adam" wrote in
: Plenty of VLS systems launching Standard that still have no AEGIS
: involved on the ship.
:
:And none of them US. Fine. There are other non-US Standard VLS systems
:without Aegis. Are there are any US VLS systems without Aegis?
:
:Not since the Spruances retired, that I can think of offhand.
:

I believe the 4th ship of the LPD-17 class and subsequent are supposed
to get a 16-cell Mk 41 launcher.

[The first 3 didn't get it due to budgetary constraints and will
probably find it being added when they hit their first major
overhaul.]

--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney

Fred J. McCall ha scritto:

snip of nonsense

::Show me an Aegis that doesn't have VLS.

again snip of nonsense

Easy reply: what I call the "early Tico":

CG-47 USS Ticonderoga
CG-48 USS Yorktown
CG-49 USS Vincennes (aka "robocruiser")
CG-50 USS Valley Forge
CG-51 USS Thomas S. Gates

all five have two Mk26 twin launcher, and was stricken from Aug.30 2004
(USS Valley Forge) to dec.15 2005 (USS Thomas S. Gates)

So instead of wasting time on wording, please stuck to the topic

Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.

Lack of content noted.

Poor Clarkie has been way too stupid for way to long.

Take a 30 day 'time out' sonny.

plonk


Clark wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote in
:
:
: Clark wrote:
:
::Fred J. McCall wrote in
:
::
:: Clark wrote:
::
:::Fred J. McCall wrote in
om:
:::
::: Clark wrote:
:::
::::On 09 Feb 2008, you wrote in rec.aviation.military.naval:
::::
:::: In message , Clark
:::: writes
::::Show me a VLS system other than submarine that isn't used with
::::Aegis.
::::
:::: GWS26 Sea Wolf. PAAMS (Sylver launchers plus ASTER missiles).
:::: SA-N-6 and SA-N-9, for the Russians. At least one Chinese system
:::: whose designation I can't recall offhand. Barak, for Israeli kit.
:::: Vertically Launched Sea Sparrow.
::::
:::: There may be more but that's a starting point. Plenty of users
:::: like vertical launch without ever getting near AEGIS.
::::
::::
::::In other words, for the point of this exchange there aren't any. We
::::were typing about Standard missiles.
::::
:::
::: No, we weren't. You insisted that "AEGIS" was identically "VLS".
:::
:::Read it again dimwit. I noted that Aegis and vls went together and
:::they do.
:::
::
:: Read it again, dumbass. You insisted that "AEGIS" and "VLS" meant the
:: same thing. They don't. They also don't always go together. There
:: have been AEGIS ships without VLS and VLS ships without AEGIS.
::
:::
:::
::: You're wrong. It's not.
:::
:::Show me an Aegis that doesn't have VLS.
:::
::: That's not even true for Standard-capable launchers (Mk 41 VLS),
::: since the new LPDs will have Mk 41 launchers and no AEGIS system.
::: Some of the Spruance class (all those currently left in commission)
::: have Mk 41 VLS and no AEGIS system.
:::
:::There are no Sprucans left in commission. Last one was decommissioned
:::in 05.
:::
::
:: So what? You claimed there was no VLS without AEGIS. You then
:: revised to there being no VLS firing Standard without AEGIS (and vice
:: versa).
::
::And you tried to use Sprucans as an example of VLS w/o Aegis. So sorry
::that they don't exist.
::
:
: Except they do exist. You're just now trying to further revise your
: original remark to achieve some form of correctness. So far:
:
: 1) You claimed there was no VLS without AEGIS and vice versa, saying
: that saying AEGIS when you meant VLS was the same statement.
:
: 2) You then revised to there being no VLS capable of firing Standard
: without AEGIS (and vice versa).
:
: 3) You then revised to there being no *US* VLS capable of firing
: Standard without AEGIS (and vice versa).
:
: 4) You're now at there being no *US* VLS on ships currently in
: commission capable of firing Standard without AEGIS (and vice versa).
:
: And you're still wrong.
:
:Nope. You've got it wrong boy. You try to twist the words but they just
:don't work. Sorry 'bout that.
:
::
::
:: You're still wrong. There have been AEGIS ships without VLS and there
:: have been VLS ships, firing both Standard and other missiles, without
:: AEGIS.
::
::That wasn't what I stated. Go back and read it again. Get someone to
::help you understand.
::
:
: That was precisely what you stated and your ill-mannered behaviour at
: this point doesn't erase it. Let us once again enumerate the
: evolution of your claim:
:
: 1) You claimed there was no VLS without AEGIS and vice versa, saying
: that saying AEGIS when you meant VLS was the same statement.
:
:Nope. Sure didn't. Go back and read it again. Get some help to understand
:the big words. Try hard.
:
: 2) You then revised to there being no VLS capable of firing Standard
: without AEGIS (and vice versa).
:
: 3) You then revised to there being no *US* VLS capable of firing
: Standard without AEGIS (and vice versa).
:
: 4) You're now at there being no *US* VLS on ships currently in
: commission capable of firing Standard without AEGIS (and vice versa).
:
: And you're still wrong.
:
:Nope. You've got it wrong boy. You try to twist the words but they just
:don't work. Sorry 'bout that.
:
::
::
:::
::: Now, would you like to wriggle some more, or shall you just admit
::: you didn't know what you were talking about and move on?
:::
:::Get real. You are the arrogant clueless one here. You really need a
:::reality check...and some parental guidance.
:::
::
:: Both my parents are dead, you stupid ****e. My mother just died a few
:: weeks ago.
::
:: And you're not only ignorant and stupid, you're apparently also
:: ill-mannered and insensitive.
::
::And I'm insensitive because of....what? Now, if you had previously
:ublished that your mother had passed on and it was known to all then
:erhaps I would be insensitive.
::
:
: Uh, I don't know how to break it to you, dumbass, but that's precisely
: what happened. Ask around.
:
:Nope. Didn't happen. You're making more false claims just like your
:reference to Spruances. Sorry boy but you're busted on this one. Move on.
:
: As we've seen from your other expositions in ignorance, YOU not
: knowing is not the same as "not known to all".
:
::
::Your bull**** on the other hand is highly
::suspect because you've already made other *documented* false statements
:see Sprucans).
::
:
: And just what did I say that was false? Have you now moved to "the
: Spruance class never existed" in your litany of idiocy?
:
:Have you forgotten that you used the Sprucans as a reference even though
:they are long gone?
:
::
::In other words, your mother didn't just pass and you are
::trying for the sympathy play. Good luck with that.
::
:
: Why would anyone want 'sympathy' from a gormless twit like you? And
: do you seriously think anyone would bother to tell such a lie just to
: 'win' a point? Unlikely. After all, most people aren't like you.
:
::
::
:: Sort of a Renaissance ****head.
::
::Well, the ****head part describes you perfectly. Try real hard to deal
::with the world as it exists rather than the one you want to spin. Good
::luck!
::
:
: Yeah. Now that's you've achieved maximal stupidity, you should
: probably run away.
:
:Any you shouldn't even have posted in the first place parrot boy. It's time
:for you to admit your errors Freddie. Give up now and perhaps you will be
:forgiven. Otherwise, drown in you own bull****. HTH & HAND.
:
s. maybe his grandmother will die next...

On Feb 1, 11:54 pm, wrote:
See:

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Boei..._For_Next_Gene...

How much longer will the Navy keep upgrading Harpoon before
switching to a newer, possibly supersonic, weapon?


Russia already has supersonic anti-ship missiles, so why not leapfrog
them by developing hypersonic weapons?