DD(X) DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyers

[SpudmanWP]

I've been pushing a Millennium Gun upgrade for the LCS for .. ever.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

There has been some scuttlebutt on military blogs (*cough CDR Salamander cough*) that the 57mm gun is a wholly inadequate weapon. The weight of fire + accuracy is, according to these unverifiable statements, nowhere near comparable to a 76mm rapid fire gun.

If that is true, then it would explain a reason why the USN cut them from the DDG-1000.
A) DDG-1000 is more of a test-bed then a warship expected to continually deploy into hostile areas

The issues with the 57mm Bofors gun and the DDG-1000 are not to do with the conventional performance vs weight and so on of the weapon but to do with the lethality claims of the 3P (aka Mk 295) ammo vs anti ship missiles. So its not an issue of 57mm vs 76mm or whatever. But rather does the 3P live up to the hype? And can it replace a more expensive ASMD capability (RAM + Phalanx) as was claimed to justify its acquisition in the first place.

This is a different issue to the capability of the 57mm gun as a naval surface fire weapon as seen in its installation on LCS and NSC type vessels. Though it was a secondary consideration for DDG-1000. That is the ASMD weapon could also be used to bash boats.

The 76mm gun can compete with the 57mm in bashing boats and ASMD while also providing a useful NGS capability. However to be effective as an ASMD weapon the 76mm relies on its own high tech solution (DART) which could have its issues like 3P.

B) If A is true and the statements about the 57mm gun are also true, then deleting them from the ship represents only a marginal decrease in ship combat power, which doesn't matter anyway.

Even a bad inner layer ASMD system is better than no inner layer ASMD system. The 30mm can bash boats but the DDG-1000 needs RAM and/or Phalanx (or som other ASMD) to be combat deployable.

 

[Moose]

The Zumwalt class has defenses against anti-ship missiles, they're called RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles. Plus the reduced signature that makes targeting more difficult in the first place. If, in the course of testing the class the Navy decides some type of CIWS is needed they'll add it, these hulls have impressive growth margin. Buy it probably won't be a laser for a few years yet.

 

[TomS]

I think people were really confused about the purpose of those small-caliber guns on the DD-21 design. They were never meant to be anti-ship missile defense weapons. As noted, that was ESSM and decoys (made much more effective by the ship's very small RCS).

The Navy refered to the small-caliber guns as Close-In Gun Systems, which is distinct from Close-In Weapon Systems. CIGS is intended for engaging swarming small boats, with helos and UAVs as secondary targets. The 30mm was always considered adequate for this--it was offered on one of the initial DD-21 proposals (the winner offered 40mm Bofors). The 57mm was a late change in the first place, mainly for commonality with LCS, and was never seen as a core capability for the ship.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Asmd is layered: essm stand off kinetic kill, decoys, ecm, sig mngt and finally an inner layer system for when all else fails. Even if you have awesome sig mngt and great essm you need a dinal layer. Why phalanx has been put back on DDG 51 and why the lack of such on DDG 1000 is being an issue. 57mm 3p is designed and purchased to be an asmd weapon. Mk 295 mod 1 is designed to provide asmd with a guided shell with IIR fusing.

 

[Moose]

Asmd is layered: essm stand off kinetic kill, decoys, ecm, sig mngt and finally an inner layer system for when all else fails. Even if you have awesome sig mngt and great essm you need a dinal layer. Why phalanx has been put back on DDG 51 and why the lack of such on DDG 1000 is being an issue. 57mm 3p is designed and purchased to be an asmd weapon. Mk 295 mod 1 is designed to provide asmd with a guided shell with IIR fusing.

I have no objection to the Phalanx mounts being added back to the Flight IIA-onward Burke class, but it was omitted from them for the same reason it was omitted from Zumwalt: the Navy believed it didn't offer enough benefit over the ESSM to justify the cost (in money, weight, crew workload, etc). And if it were just down to missile defense, they wouldn't have added the guns back. It took Raytheon and the program office seriously expanding the guns' utility in other roles to prompt the Navy to that decision.

As I said, if in testing they decide that a gun-based CIWS inner, inner layer is warranted then one will be added. Or they may fit a stealthy RAM turret instead. Or a laser turret. The Mk 110 mounts intended for the Zumwalt never had an air/missile defense role for the class, the ORKA round was not even a concept when the design was being finalized.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

It was never a case of essm or ciws/ ram but rather with essm and a tight budget and no soviet union we can get away without ciws/ram. As to mk 295 mod 1 this development is in response to the lack of lethality in mod 0 ie 3p. As to the 57mm not ever being a part of the ddg 1000 aaw system that would not quite explain why it was going to be part of the aaw cms

 

[bobbymike]

Expensive platform for this mission ;D but 'way to go Navy'

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2015/12/12/new-stealth-destroyer-helps-rescue-maine-fisherman/77205428/

 

[marauder2048]

Expensive platform for this mission ;D but 'way to go Navy'

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2015/12/12/new-stealth-destroyer-helps-rescue-maine-fisherman/77205428/

Sure to be denounced as "predictable requirements creep."

 

[donnage99]

For some reason reminds me of a certain politician who in an paid effort to save the f-22 production line at the time, suggested that we should use f-22 to catch pirates on fishing boats.

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Raytheon_wins_255_million_contract_for_USS_Lyndon_B_Johnson_999.html

 

[TomS]

According to the Navy, the new class of destroyers will be able to triple naval surface fire coverage, while also tripling anti-ship cruise missile capabilities.

This is badly written. What the Navy'd DDG-1000 fact sheet says is "tripling capability against anti-ship cruise missiles," which is a different matter altogether.

 

[Grey Havoc]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KAWbwttAoI&feature=player_embedded
https://gcaptain.com/2016/01/06/watch-u-s-navys-new-zumwalt-destroyer-entering-portland-harbor​

 

[marauder2048]

DDG 1000 On Track For Delivery In April

01/14/2016

The Navy’s first Zumwalt-class destroyer (DDG-1000) will return to the seas for builder’s trials in about a month’s time, and the General Dynamics [GD] Bath Iron Works ship is on schedule for delivery on April 25, a program official said Jan. 14.

Rear Adm. David Gale, the Navy’s program executive officer for ships, said the Zumwalt “performed exquisitely” in its first trip out to sea during December, a weeklong event that culminated in the rescue of a Maine fisherman who was having health problems.
The first of the Zumwalt class of destroyers, the DDG-1000. Photo: Dana Rene, special to Defense Daily.The first of the Zumwalt class of destroyers, the DDG-1000. Photo: Dana Rene, special to Defense Daily.

“There were some lessons learned,” he said in a speech at the Surface Navy Association’s national symposium. “There were some things we need to go work on, but nothing that we can't overcome will prevent us from delivering that ship by 25 April of this year. We've got work to do, a lot of coordination, a lot of teamwork to get that done."

After delivery, the Zumwalt will be turned over to Capt. James Kirk and his crew for training and qualification, Gale said. The commissioning of the ship is tentatively scheduled for October in Baltimore, Md.

The DDG 1000 is the Navy’s largest destroyer ever built and contains a host of advanced technologies. The design features a radar cross section more akin to a fishing boat, and its integrated power system allows operators to shift energy from one part of the ship to another. The latter capability could become critical if technologies such as the rail gun, which consumes vast amounts of power, become prevalent on ships.

During its week at sea, the crew demonstrated a variety of the Zumwalt’s shipboard systems, including its anchors, electric steering system and power handling and conditioning system, Rear Adm. Jim Downey, the Navy’s DDG-1000 program manager, said during a briefing Thursday afternoon. Its integrated power system ran 33 knots at full power, and its power generators met its goals for the sea trials. The ship also successfully deployed and recovered 11 mm rigid inflatable boats (RIB).

"We saw eight to 10 foot seas,” he said. "The ship performed extremely well. We ran up full power and full rudder swings, 35 degree of rudder swings in each direction."

Though unexpected, the rescue effort provided a showcase for the ship’s handling capabilities, he said.

"We steamed over there at full plant, got some good data on an unplanned two-hour power ride, and we launched our RIB,” he said. “It was 12 minutes from the launch of the RIB until they got to the vessel, got the person aboard and got back."

Kirk, who was present for the briefing, said the ship “handled marvelously,” comparing the difference in steering a DDG-1000 and DDG-51 as being similar to driving a smaller sedan versus a larger one.

Tests of the ship’s Advanced Gun System, built by BAE Systems, will start after the DDG-1000 has arrived in San Diego, Downey said. There, the ship will also be upgraded with the eighth release of software.

Radar modifications on AN/SPY-3 X band radar, manufactured by Raytheon [RTN], have continued to progress. The radar will move onto the Self Defense Test ship soon, he said.

The USS Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) is 84 percent complete. All mission systems have been installed, and it is scheduled to be launched in June, he said. The third ship in the class, USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002) 43 percent complete.

http://www.defensedaily.com/ddg-1000-on-track-for-delivery-in-april/?fullview=1

"The ship also successfully deployed and recovered 11 mm rigid inflatable boats (RIB)." -> I guess they were rescuing ants.

 

[bobbymike]

Sorry couldn't help myself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ffj8SHrbk0

The DDG-1000 has to be at least three times bigger than this

 

[sferrin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KAWbwttAoI&feature=player_embedded
https://gcaptain.com/2016/01/06/watch-u-s-navys-new-zumwalt-destroyer-entering-portland-harbor​

Looks like they still haven't installed the VLS systems up front. (Looks like a pretty smooth surface on the two raised areas where the cells go.)

 

[TomS]

I'm sure I've seen pictures of the modules installed but I can't find them now. I think there might be a plate over the hatch covers (maybe for RCS reduction?)

 

[Moose]

The Mk 57 modules are already in place, the clean look was an effort to reduce RCS.

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/tech/2016/02/14/navy-considers-railgun-zumwalt-class-destroyer/80374120/

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://news.usni.org/2016/03/03/new-external-ddg-1000-mast-reduces-ships-stealth-from-original-design

This could go very badly indeed.

 

[sferrin]

http://news.usni.org/2016/03/03/new-external-ddg-1000-mast-reduces-ships-stealth-from-original-design

This could go very badly indeed.

Why? While reduced RCS is a feature it wasn't ever relying on it. (Maybe that means they'll put some actual CIWS on it, but more likely they'll just let it remain a white elephant. Such a shame. The class could have been the backbone of the fleet going forward.)

 

[TomS]

If they're still hitting the Threshold requirement, the signature reduction is still rather dramatic compared to previous surface combatants.

 

[Avimimus]

For some reason reminds me of a certain politician who in an paid effort to save the f-22 production line at the time, suggested that we should use f-22 to catch pirates on fishing boats.

See the M61A2 almost paid off!

Seriously though - in Canada the F-35 was pitched as a Search and Rescue aircraft (as well as a maritime patrol aircraft). It is amazing what politicians will sometimes suggest!

The DDG-1000 can actually fulfil these missions quite well though (and a lot of other more impressive missions)!

 

[Tony Williams]

For some reason reminds me of a certain politician who in an paid effort to save the f-22 production line at the time, suggested that we should use f-22 to catch pirates on fishing boats.

Seriously though - in Canada the F-35 was pitched as a Search and Rescue aircraft (as well as a maritime patrol aircraft). It is amazing what politicians will sometimes suggest!

The opposite approach was taken by the British government when they scrapped the Nimrod MRP in 2010: they claimed that it could be replaced by a Hercules transport manned by men with binoculars....

 

[sferrin]

In the meantime we kill the Zumwalts and their cruiser derivative. Brilliant. Who wants to bet that 10 years down the road they change their minds, reach to the Zumwalt hull (because it's the only one remotely close) and then complain that they cost so much?

 

[Moose]

The question of what to do with the Zumwalt hull is a complex one. The stability (possibly overblown), cost (possibly overblown), and manpower (possibly overblown) issues are what scare the Navy. But it's entirely possible the 3rd hull won't be the last, even if a true CG(X) based on it never happens. But whatever path taken, it's not the Type 052D driving the decision.

 

[Arian]

In the meantime we kill the Zumwalts and their cruiser derivative. Brilliant. Who wants to bet that 10 years down the road they change their minds, reach to the Zumwalt hull (because it's the only one remotely close) and then complain that they cost so much?

10 years down the road there will be about 90 Aegis equipped ships in the USN. Plus about 20 Aegis destroyers in other Pacific navies. All with comparable to double the firepower of these Chinese ships (on paper, in reality a lot more since the systems and weapons are a lot more capable than Chinese knock-offs of S-300).

 

[NeilChapman]

In the meantime we kill the Zumwalts and their cruiser derivative. Brilliant. Who wants to bet that 10 years down the road they change their minds, reach to the Zumwalt hull (because it's the only one remotely close) and then complain that they cost so much?

10 years down the road there will be about 90 Aegis equipped ships in the USN. Plus about 20 Aegis destroyers in other Pacific navies. All with comparable to double the firepower of these Chinese ships (on paper, in reality a lot more since the systems and weapons are a lot more capable than Chinese knock-offs of S-300).

Perhaps. But it's very likely that the US 90 will be all over the world and the Chinese ships overwhelmingly within the first and possibly second island chain.

 

[bobbymike]

In the meantime we kill the Zumwalts and their cruiser derivative. Brilliant. Who wants to bet that 10 years down the road they change their minds, reach to the Zumwalt hull (because it's the only one remotely close) and then complain that they cost so much?

10 years down the road there will be about 90 Aegis equipped ships in the USN. Plus about 20 Aegis destroyers in other Pacific navies. All with comparable to double the firepower of these Chinese ships (on paper, in reality a lot more since the systems and weapons are a lot more capable than Chinese knock-offs of S-300).

Perhaps. But it's very likely that the US 90 will be all over the world and the Chinese ships overwhelmingly within the first and possibly second island chain.

Exactly, China first looking for local superiority in the region which IMHO is attainable in the next ten years if the US keeps on the same path.

 

[sferrin]

The question of what to do with the Zumwalt hull is a complex one. The stability (possibly overblown), cost (possibly overblown), and manpower (possibly overblown) issues are what scare the Navy. But it's entirely possible the 3rd hull won't be the last, even if a true CG(X) based on it never happens. But whatever path taken, it's not the Type 052D driving the decision.

I am 100% certain that the appearance of a 12,000 - 15,000 ton Chinese cruiser would light a fire under the USN to get on with their CG-21 (or whatever place holder they're calling it these days). The appearance of the Kirovs prompted the reactivation of the Iowas as well as gave impetus to the Strike Cruiser concept of the day. Logical or not, that's just how it often goes.

 

[Arian]

In the meantime we kill the Zumwalts and their cruiser derivative. Brilliant. Who wants to bet that 10 years down the road they change their minds, reach to the Zumwalt hull (because it's the only one remotely close) and then complain that they cost so much?

10 years down the road there will be about 90 Aegis equipped ships in the USN. Plus about 20 Aegis destroyers in other Pacific navies. All with comparable to double the firepower of these Chinese ships (on paper, in reality a lot more since the systems and weapons are a lot more capable than Chinese knock-offs of S-300).

Perhaps. But it's very likely that the US 90 will be all over the world and the Chinese ships overwhelmingly within the first and possibly second island chain.

And in case of a serious conflict, what would most of the 90 USN Aegis ships and 20 other Pacific country's ships be doing, other than hanging out in the Pacific?

The appearance of the Kirovs prompted the reactivation of the Iowas as well as gave impetus to the Strike Cruiser concept of the day.

Which was little more than a propaganda ploy by the US, as none of those assets were meant to deal with the Kirovs.

 

[fredymac]

Heading out again for sea trials.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VgUv9H_E3w

 

[sferrin]

Which was little more than a propaganda ploy by the US, as none of those assets were meant to deal with the Kirovs.

Which doesn't change the fact that one led to the other.

 

[Moose]

The question of what to do with the Zumwalt hull is a complex one. The stability (possibly overblown), cost (possibly overblown), and manpower (possibly overblown) issues are what scare the Navy. But it's entirely possible the 3rd hull won't be the last, even if a true CG(X) based on it never happens. But whatever path taken, it's not the Type 052D driving the decision.

I am 100% certain that the appearance of a 12,000 - 15,000 ton Chinese cruiser would light a fire under the USN to get on with their CG-21 (or whatever place holder they're calling it these days). The appearance of the Kirovs prompted the reactivation of the Iowas as well as gave impetus to the Strike Cruiser concept of the day. Logical or not, that's just how it often goes.

The Kirovs were woven into the politics of the force structure debate, just as happened a decade earlier with the Slavas during the "Cruiser Gap" fracas. So yes, a 15,000t PLAN Cruiser that looked sufficiently impressive would probably be used by the Navy's advocates to promote the need for the new cruiser funding. But the design of said cruiser and how many we build is still going to be driven primarily by the Air and Missile Defense mission and the ability to host an Alpha Whiskey+command staff. We're not going to design and build a Yankee-Kirov ASuW cruiser to go sink the Chinese ships.

 

[sferrin]

Never said we would. I implied we need a real Ticonderoga replacement. Block III Burkes are band-aids.

 

[Arian]

Never said we would. I implied we need a real Ticonderoga replacement. Block III Burkes are band-aids.

Well, they already have that in mind. Besides, DDG-1000 hull would be the last thing the USN would go for. If the idea is that more space and power is needed to accommodate future sensors and weapons, the LPD hull approach makes more sense technically, but also economically. The technology is already developed and in production. Nothing new here in concept, or that the Navy isn't already considering or working towards. In fact, they announced it a couple of months ago that they were discussing with the San Antonio class manufacturers about this (and we've seen concepts from them for several years now)

But a Chinese cruiser threat is just as hollow as a Soviet cruiser threat was.

 

[fredymac]

You may want to turn off the audio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDiN3tB3YLk

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/2016/03/31/zumwalt-sea-trials-bath-iron-works-ddg1000-navy-navsea/82456618/

 

[TomS]

"All ahead one third on the starboard shaft.” The order was called out by the Bath Iron Works (BIW) conning officer

God, I hope not. "All ahead" means both shafts. The proper order is "Starboard ahead one third. "

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.defensenews.com/videos/defense-news/tv/2016/04/03/defense-news-tv-inside-the-destroyer-zumwalt/82585250/

Exclusive first pictures from the inside, what a beautiful ship.