DD(X) DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyers

[sferrin]

Adding either would have consequences for the ship's signature. Potentially serious ones -- a CIWS is nice a corner reflector right in ASuM seeker frequencies. A RAM launcher isn't that much better.

Would they have less of a signature if you dropped them onto a Burke? Exactly. That said, there's nothing preventing them from making a low RCS RAM Block II launcher. Where it doesn't need to fly it needn't bust the bank.

P.S. Agreed, the Phalanx is about two decades past its prime.

 

[TomS]

Adding either would have consequences for the ship's signature. Potentially serious ones -- a CIWS is nice a corner reflector right in ASuM seeker frequencies. A RAM launcher isn't that much better.

Would they have less of a signature if you dropped them onto a Burke?

Relative to the signature of the platform they're fitted on, yes!

That said, there's nothing preventing them from making a low RCS RAM Block II launcher. Where it doesn't need to fly it needn't bust the bank.

Nothing preventing it, no. But if you're going to spend the money, why not spend it on ExLS, which is simple and has literally zero signature impact on the ship? Even a stealthy Mk 49 (presumably a standard launcher with a shelter to cover the flat ends when stowed) will have some signature when stowed, and it will get much worse when the launcher is trained out to fire. Al ExLS does is pop open a VLS hatch and then close it as soon as the missile is gone. ExLS also doesn't require a ton of maintenance, unlike anything with moving parts and hydraulics like a Mk 49, stealthy or not. The only downside is that ExLS eats up a couple of VLS cells, but I suspect you could nine-pack RAM into a Mk57 cell, which means you only need a couple of cells.

 

[sferrin]

Nothing preventing it, no. But if you're going to spend the money, why not spend it on ExLS, which is simple and has literally zero signature impact on the ship? Even a stealthy Mk 49 (presumably a standard launcher with a shelter to cover the flat ends when stowed) will have some signature when stowed, and it will get much worse when the launcher is trained out to fire. Al ExLS does is pop open a VLS hatch and then close it as soon as the missile is gone. ExLS also doesn't require a ton of maintenance, unlike anything with moving parts and hydraulics like a Mk 49, stealthy or not. The only downside is that ExLS eats up a couple of VLS cells, but I suspect you could nine-pack RAM into a Mk57 cell, which means you only need a couple of cells.

You're right, that's a better idea. So between RAM Block II and ESSM, there goes the CIWS problem. (And by then SSLs should be getting enough power to become viable CIWS in their own right anyway - if one has the power generation capability.)

 

[Airplane]

Adding either would have consequences for the ship's signature.

Seriously? We are going to pretend that this ship is akin to a B2 of the seas? No way. Like our carriers, I am sure the Chinese and Russians know where its at all times.

It would have been an easy engineering feet to mount dozens of 116s on it without giving up an ounce of rcs.

I am really tired of every new weapon being a wonder weapon and only getting a token production run if it even makes it that far... F22, seawolf, b2... While our legacy systems age and age and age.

 

[TomS]

Not so stealthy tha opponents don't know where it is in general terms. But yes, signatures are reduced to the point that active countermeasures are much more effective and lots of AShMs are going to struggle to see the ship next to a Nulka decoy. Dirtying up a DDG-1000 with Phalanx would compromise its terminal defenses.

 

[marauder2048]

And with more AGS tubes in the fleet, you might have developed a shell with counter-ASCM capability a la HVP.

 

[Airplane]

Not so stealthy tha opponents don't know where it is in general terms. But yes, signatures are reduced to the point that active countermeasures are much more effective and lots of AShMs are going to struggle to see the ship next to a Nulka decoy. Dirtying up a DDG-1000 with Phalanx would compromise its terminal defenses.

Yeah, I get it that phalanx is very old and limited. But the lack of 116s? If you can add missiles to raptors and lightnings internally, certainly a ship is a piece of cake.Those could be added without selling out rcs. But congress has limited the production run to 3, so I am sure it will be sailing at all times with other aegis boats.

I am not a naval man... How many were supposed to be built? What is taking its place?

 

[sferrin]

I am not a naval man... How many were supposed to be built?

32 of the Zumwalts and then the hull was to form the basis of the Ticonderoga replacement. Basically what they did with the Spruance/Tico classes.

What is taking its place?

More Burkes. Yes, we will regret it.

 

[TomS]

Yeah, I get it that phalanx is very old and limited. But the lack of 116s? If you can add missiles to raptors and lightnings internally, certainly a ship is a piece of cake.Those could be added without selling out rcs. But congress has limited the production run to 3, so I am sure it will be sailing at all times with other aegis boats.

Could be, sure. But developing brand new launcher designs is a pain. And anything that you have to point requires maintenance, which DD-100 tries to minimize. That's why I'm a fan on ExLS for this -- it's basically a way to incorporate terminal defense systems (RAM anti-missile missiles, Nulka decoys, NLOS anti-boat missiles, etc.) into a standard VLS cell.

 

[TomS]

And with more AGS tubes in the fleet, you might have developed a shell with counter-ASCM capability a la HVP.

Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds and of the ability of the slow-firing AGS to deliver enough of them to be effective.

 

[sferrin]

Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds

Why? KKVs have been shown to work time after time.

 

[TomS]

Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds

Why? KKVs have been shown to work time after time.

I don't doubt that an HPV round can kill a cruise missile, but it seems like a harder solution than just using a conventional SAM.

 

[sferrin]

Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds

Why? KKVs have been shown to work time after time.

I don't doubt that an HPV round can kill a cruise missile, but it seems like a harder solution than just using a conventional SAM.

Except you can keep 1500 of those rounds below deck. Can't do that with missiles, not enough space and too expensive. Or you can carry half the rounds, still have far more kills in the magazine than a ship using missiles, and use the extra space for larger land attack missiles.

 

[marauder2048]

Yeah, I get it that phalanx is very old and limited. But the lack of 116s?

They were also vertically launching the AIM-9X over a decade ago so I don't think there's been
any great concern over the lack of RIM-116; the MFR on the Zumwalt would be
uniquely placed to exploit the new data link on the AIM-9X Blk II.

 

[sferrin]

the MFR on the Zumwalt would be
uniquely placed to exploit the new data link on the AIM-9X Blk II.

IIRC RAM Block II has more oomph than AIM-9X. AIM-9X and RAM Block I share the same motor. RAM Block II has a bigger one.

 

[marauder2048]

the MFR on the Zumwalt would be
uniquely placed to exploit the new data link on the AIM-9X Blk II.

IIRC RAM Block II has more oomph than AIM-9X. AIM-9X and RAM Block I share the same motor. RAM Block II has a bigger one.

That's all true and with ExLS there's nothing preventing RAM Block II integration into VLS.
Just pointing out there's a viable alternative that was available years before DDG-1000 was laid down.

 

[marauder2048]

Alt-LRLAP (Lockheed 2017 Supplier Conference)

 

[bobbymike]

https://news.usni.org/2017/12/04/navy-refocus-ddg-1000-surface-strike

 

[fredymac]

DDG 1001 starts sea trials
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siBcUVu8Dcw

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/12/11/2nd_zumwalt-class_destroyer_suffers_failure_during_sea_trials_112761.html?utm_source=RC+Defense+Morning+Recon&utm_campaign=0bb631c457-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_12_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_694f73a8dc-0bb631c457-81812733

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Back in the days when we were going to build 32 DD(X) and follow that with a new guided missile cruiser were they any plans for new missiles that would take advantage of the greater VLS cell width of the Mark 57 VLS? I imagine that extra width would have been useful for ballistic missile defense weaponry for CG(X), back before that was cancelled at least.

 

[marauder2048]

Back in the days when we were going to build 32 DD(X) and follow that with a new guided missile cruiser were they any plans for new missiles that would take advantage of the greater VLS cell width of the Mark 57 VLS? I imagine that extra width would have been useful for ballistic missile defense weaponry for CG(X), back before that was cancelled at least.

Standard Missile 27. I think it's covered over in the Standard Missile topics section.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/surface-navy-association/2018/01/11/navy-has-no-plan-to-introduce-new-ammo-for-ddg-1000/

 

[sferrin]

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/surface-navy-association/2018/01/11/navy-has-no-plan-to-introduce-new-ammo-for-ddg-1000/

Yep. Yet another testimony to the Keystone Cops method of management in action when it comes to the Zumwalt program.

 

[TomS]

It almost makes me cry how badly this whole program has been handled. There's no excuse for AGS to not be able to at least fire Army 155mm ammunition, which would be saving the Navy so much pain right now.

 

[_Del_]

Are there concerns about the environment (corrosion?) that might make them shy away from the Army standard rounds? Or just normal Navy acquisition issues?

 

[Moose]

Are there concerns about the environment (corrosion?) that might make them shy away from the Army standard rounds? Or just normal Navy acquisition issues?

The barrel rifling and ammunition handling system were tailored to the LRLAP. One of the drivers for the DD-21 program to switch from VGAS to AGS was the ability to fire unguided rounds, I believe they were looking at both a Navy-specific round and something cross-compatible with the Army's. But my understanding is that when the program was reorganized as DD(X) the cross-compatability was ditched and the Navy "dumb" round was subsequently cancelled. Anything you want to fire through AGS now has to be designed for it or fit in a sabot that has been designed for it, which is why the sub-caliber Vulcano and HVP have been mooted as options.

 

[donnage99]

This is tragic. So much money went into this. And it's not like the prime contractor didn't deliver. Considering by today's standard, the contractor did a quite competent job delivering something with so much new technology.

 

[marauder2048]

Are there concerns about the environment (corrosion?) that might make them shy away from the Army standard rounds? Or just normal Navy acquisition issues?

None of them can really meet the Navy's IM requirements particularly the hot gun barrel requirements.

 

[bring_it_on]

DDG 1000 Program Manager's Presentation from SNA18.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2018/02/04/2nd_zumwalt-class_stealth_destroyer_passes_sea_test_113011.html?utm_source=RC+Defense+Morning+Recon&utm_campaign=34652d2709-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_04&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_694f73a8dc-34652d2709-81812733

 

[seruriermarshal]

DDG-1001 ;D

 

[Foo Fighter]

From the article at https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2018/02/04/2nd_zumwalt-class_stealth_destroyer_passes_sea_test_113011.html?utm_source=RC+Defense+Morning+Recon&utm_campaign=34652d2709-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_04&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_694f73a8dc-34652d2709-81812733

"As a porter of a perfected rail gun, it would be fearsome. Steel spikes launched at 4,000 mph at a target on land or at sea. If you fired a rail gun almost straight up 3 miles, the projectiles would come racing back down and steel arrows would pierce an enemy warship's hull vertically" !

Only if the enemy warship remains in the same place, rather unlikely that an enemy combatant will sit still waiting for that.

 

[TomS]

At 60+ nm, time of flight would be only a minute or two at most. All you have to do is catch the target between zigs. A small pattern could cover the likely possible locations effectively. And you might be able to do some mid-course guidance if the rounds have a datalink.

 

[sferrin]

Only if the enemy warship remains in the same place, rather unlikely that an enemy combatant will sit still waiting for that.

Which is why the rounds would be guided.

 

[Foo Fighter]

How? Laser, data link? Radio, self guided terminal guidance? All of which can be interrupted. Nice idea though but it does explain the very high cost per ammunition round.

 

[sferrin]

How? Laser, data link? Radio, self guided terminal guidance? All of which can be interrupted.

Same could be said about any antiship missile on the planet. I guess none of them can hit anything either.

 

[bobbymike]

https://blog.usni.org/posts/2018/02/06/uss-zumwalt-the-need-for-innovation-and-maintaining-naval-superiority

 

[Colonial-Marine]

So regarding the 155mm AGS, just what the hell happened? Wasn't this gun designed from the start to be more "friendly" to guided munitions and thus bring down the costs per round? Of course cutting the number down to a mere 6 guns on 3 hulls didn't help. Yet still shouldn't some of LRLAP's development cost been reduced by all of the work done for the 5" ERGM and other artillery PGMs? Then there is the matter of the unguided ballistic ammunition they were evidently planning earlier. Why did something so relatively simple get cut and why can't we start there at least so the guns are worth something?

 

[stealthflanker]

The question is of course whether we can build IR or Radar seeker that can withstand over thousands of G's so our railgun can have application against moving target. Accelerating rounds at 0.0015 sec in railgun barrel to mach 7 can exert over 161,000 of G force.