DD(X) DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyers

[seruriermarshal]

Yeah, it was a real head-scratcher at the time. The interim ATACMS solution required more development effort (Booster integration and canister both needed work to refine) while LASM was almost entirely off the shelf, so that made sense as an interim solution. But not proceeding with LASM at all was weird. They could have recycled old SM-2MR airframes, warheads, and motors -- the only new stuff needed was the guidance package and fuzing (and maybe a new nosecone for better aerodynamics). It should have been amazingly cheap.

There was a bunch of politics at play, as usual. I think there was a feeling that if they could field an interim NSFS capability (LASM + ERGM) on the existing fleet, they might lose the specialized ship (DD-21) and associated systems (ALAM + AGS). Which basically happened anyway...

Or they have a secret missile program in black world .

 

[sferrin]

So how were they planning on accommodating KEI?

In a very large VLS that would replace the Advanced Gun System. You can see it in the attached painting.

And THAT is how they should have done the VLS in the SSGNs. So much wasted space.

 

[seruriermarshal]

So how were they planning on accommodating KEI?

In a very large VLS that would replace the Advanced Gun System. You can see it in the attached painting.

And THAT is how they should have done the VLS in the SSGNs. So much wasted space.

I think steath ship VLS better than SSGN .

 

[sferrin]

So how were they planning on accommodating KEI?

In a very large VLS that would replace the Advanced Gun System. You can see it in the attached painting.

And THAT is how they should have done the VLS in the SSGNs. So much wasted space.

I think steath ship VLS better than SSGN .

Both

 

[marauder2048]

So how were they planning on accommodating KEI?

In a very large VLS that would replace the Advanced Gun System. You can see it in the attached painting.

And THAT is how they should have done the VLS in the SSGNs. So much wasted space.

IIRC, there were some major concerns about the sheer amount of debris that would fall back on the sub from the large
number of sequential Tomahawk launches.

 

[TomS]

There was a bunch of politics at play, as usual. I think there was a feeling that if they could field an interim NSFS capability (LASM + ERGM) on the existing fleet, they might lose the specialized ship (DD-21) and associated systems (ALAM + AGS). Which basically happened anyway...

Or they have a secret missile program in black world .

A black missile program that could field large numbers of cheap land-attack/fire support missiles to fill up VLS cells across the fleet? Seems a bit unlikely. You'd need to tell very low level people about them; folks like ANGLICO forward observers who would be calling in their strikes.

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/weapons/2015/03/10/boeing-saab-small-diameter-bomber-ground-launch/24705183/

Range-wise, the GLSDB can hit targets 150 kilometers

For the experts here at SPF a SDB on a maximum sized solid rocket in VLS would/could give you what range?

 

[seruriermarshal]

There was a bunch of politics at play, as usual. I think there was a feeling that if they could field an interim NSFS capability (LASM + ERGM) on the existing fleet, they might lose the specialized ship (DD-21) and associated systems (ALAM + AGS). Which basically happened anyway...

Or they have a secret missile program in black world .

A black missile program that could field large numbers of cheap land-attack/fire support missiles to fill up VLS cells across the fleet? Seems a bit unlikely. You'd need to tell very low level people about them; folks like ANGLICO forward observers who would be calling in their strikes.

Maybe the black missile used same launch system as SM-6 .

 

[TomS]

I'm not sure you're understanding the mission we're talking about here. Late 1990s, about 20 years ago, long before SM-6 was even considered. A black missile could exist for strategic strike missions (like the CALCM and various special cruise missile warheads) because they would only need to be known to a few folks in a strike planning cell, but fire support assets are different. But the requirement here was for a missile to provide naval surface fire support to Marines doing amphibious assaults and raiding sorts of stuff (This is the era when Operational Maneuver from the Sea was the buzzword). By definition that can't be a black project because the capability has to be widely known to Marine infantry commanders and their assigned fire support coordinators who would be tasking the missiles, and by junior officers on the ships that would be shooting them.

 

[seruriermarshal]

I'm not sure you're understanding the mission we're talking about here. Late 1990s, about 20 years ago, long before SM-6 was even considered. A black missile could exist for strategic strike missions (like the CALCM and various special cruise missile warheads) because they would only need to be known to a few folks in a strike planning cell, but fire support assets are different. But the requirement here was for a missile to provide naval surface fire support to Marines doing amphibious assaults and raiding sorts of stuff (This is the era when Operational Maneuver from the Sea was the buzzword). By definition that can't be a black project because the capability has to be widely known to Marine infantry commanders and their assigned fire support coordinators who would be tasking the missiles, and by junior officers on the ships that would be shooting them.

A black missile can used bigger warhead and hit bigger range .

 

[sferrin]

So how were they planning on accommodating KEI?

In a very large VLS that would replace the Advanced Gun System. You can see it in the attached painting.

And THAT is how they should have done the VLS in the SSGNs. So much wasted space.

IIRC, there were some major concerns about the sheer amount of debris that would fall back on the sub from the large
number of sequential Tomahawk launches.

Not sure what you mean here. SSGNs carry something like 154 Tomahawks. I'd say that's a large number. What my comment was aluding to is that there is a lot of wasted space on the SSGNs. Each former SLBM tube is deep enough they could have stacked two Tomahawks in tandem in each of their cells. Would it have required some thought and work to get it to work? Sure. But they could have doubled the loadout or opened up more tubes for other uses. *cough* IRBMs *cough*

 

[TomS]

A black missile can used bigger warhead and hit bigger range .

Not sure why a black program would translate into a bigger or more powerful missile.

But in any case, the mission was tactical support for ground forces, not strategic strike like Tomahawk. That's not a mission you can do with a black program. Too many people have to know the weapon is available.

 

[Moose]

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/weapons/2015/03/10/boeing-saab-small-diameter-bomber-ground-launch/24705183/

Range-wise, the GLSDB can hit targets 150 kilometers

For the experts here at SPF a SDB on a maximum sized solid rocket in VLS would/could give you what range?

There's no real way to make an accurate forecast without substantially more information that is available, and you're going to run into cost effectiveness issues. But imagine something like an ESSM quad pack with SDBs on top, each sporting a couple hundred kilometers of range and it starts to look interesting for some missions.

 

[marauder2048]

So how were they planning on accommodating KEI?

In a very large VLS that would replace the Advanced Gun System. You can see it in the attached painting.

And THAT is how they should have done the VLS in the SSGNs. So much wasted space.

IIRC, there were some major concerns about the sheer amount of debris that would fall back on the sub from the large
number of sequential Tomahawk launches.

Not sure what you mean here. SSGNs carry something like 154 Tomahawks. I'd say that's a large number. What my comment was aluding to is that there is a lot of wasted space on the SSGNs. Each former SLBM tube is deep enough they could have stacked two Tomahawks in tandem in each of their cells. Would it have required some thought and work to get it to work? Sure. But they could have doubled the loadout or opened up more tubes for other uses. *cough* IRBMs *cough*

Given that the tube fills with seawater after the missile launches I would think a double stack would be tricky and there's very little in the way of margin; they had to redesign the MAC after some of the adjacent TLAMs suffered damage during launch trials.

The real mystery is why the SSGNs aren't provisioned for launching TLAMs from their torpedo tubes. That would solve some of the capacity issues. But I'm with you on the SLIRBM angle.

 

[TomS]

With potentially 154 rounds in the MACs, it's hard to imagine needing a dozen or so more in the torpedo room. But they might want to use the torpedo room for things that can't fit in the MACs, like UUVs or mines.

 

[donnage99]

In a very large VLS that would replace the Advanced Gun System. You can see it in the attached painting.

Didn't northrop propose tilting the axis of the launch cell with a cold launch method to accommodate for a much deeper cell?

 

[TomS]

I think that's a more recent development but it might have been proposed back in the day as well. Here's a handout dated 2011.

 

[sferrin]

Essentially it trades depth for width. (That, and you don't have a missile falling back on the deck, or have to deal with the heat of a large ABM motor.)

 

[TomS]

Judging by the brochure, it's a very shallow angle so the cell is not a lot longer. Probably reducing the fall-back risk is the main reason for the angled tube. With a hot launch, you know that at least the booster is going to light and hopefully get the missile away from the ship (though not always. Ask the folks on USS Gonzalez). With a cold launch, it's possible that the rocket just won't fire and the whole thing will come crashing back on deck unless it's angled to get the missile over the side in the event of a dud..

 

[sferrin]

Judging by the brochure, it's a very shallow angle so the cell is not a lot longer. Probably reducing the fall-back risk is the main reason for the angled tube. With a hot launch, you know that at least the booster is going to light and hopefully get the missile away from the ship (though not always. Ask the folks on USS Gonzalez). With a cold launch, it's possible that the rocket just won't fire and the whole thing will come crashing back on deck unless it's angled to get the missile over the side in the event of a dud..

Big as KEI was, and as high as it was being lofted before motor ignition, that'd have been a painful "oops".

 

[fredymac]

RHIB bay on Zumwalt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjsBYhs42pw

 

[fightingirish]

Obamaphones Zumwaltphones for NCOs onboard the PCU Zumwalt
https://youtu.be/JctbO8-MrC0

 

[RP1]

The real mystery is why the SSGNs aren't provisioned for launching TLAMs from their torpedo tubes.

I believe that this is because Block IV is designed for vertical launch only. Certainly those in UK service had to have some modification to enable horizontal launch. I suspect this increases the unit cost.

 

[sferrin]

The real mystery is why the SSGNs aren't provisioned for launching TLAMs from their torpedo tubes.

I believe that this is because Block IV is designed for vertical launch only.

This.

 

[fredymac]

I'm just bookmarking this video because the last 30 seconds show the Advanced Gun System in operation during tests. AGS test videos used to be easy to find but I think they got pulled. Too bad the audio got dumped for the annoying background music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY4MuxTGRDE

 

[flateric]

AGS test videos used to be easy to find but I think they got pulled.

https://youtu.be/Y2Qryg6AibU
https://youtu.be/3si2fQVbJ-w
https://youtu.be/hx57dk4KCmY

 

[fredymac]

Much better. I wonder why BAE Systems removed these from their Youtube Channel.

 

[bobbymike]

Did the last video say "16 to 50" projectiles in the air at one time?? Now that's a fireworks display.

Just like I complain about not watching the 400th F-22 roll off the assembly line we should be building the original numbers of DDG-1000s (32??)

 

[TomS]

Did the last video say "16 to 50" projectiles in the air at one time?? Now that's a fireworks display.

Sounds right --10 rounds per minute with a 5-minute time of flight would put 50 rounds in flight if it was firing continuously.

 

[marauder2048]

Did the last video say "16 to 50" projectiles in the air at one time?? Now that's a fireworks display.

Sounds right --10 rounds per minute with a 5-minute time of flight would put 50 rounds in flight if it was firing continuously.

Not trying to be Debbie Downer here but that's a huge volume of airspace to deconflict.

 

[Moose]

Did the last video say "16 to 50" projectiles in the air at one time?? Now that's a fireworks display.

Just like I complain about not watching the 400th F-22 roll off the assembly line we should be building the original numbers of DDG-1000s (32??)

32 "Land Attack Destroyers" is questionable in a limited budget, even ardent NSFs advocates will admit that much. Now if the hull were to be adapted to host the Air and Missile Defense radar and next-gen (electrical power-intensive) weapons, it might become a lot more of a workable decision...

 

[TomS]

Calling DD-21 a Land-attack Destroyer was a terrible marketing choice. The ship was always a general-purpose destroyer with top of the line ASW capability. Land-attack was the flavor of the month, so it was overemphasized in the marketing, which backfired badly when land attack stopped being cool.

 

[sferrin]

Calling DD-21 a Land-attack Destroyer was a terrible marketing choice. The ship was always a general-purpose destroyer with top of the line ASW capability. Land-attack was the flavor of the month, so it was overemphasized in the marketing, which backfired badly when land attack stopped being cool.

Yep, and now here we are, with the cruiser hull we actually need and we're what? That's right. We're killing it so we can build more of another class of of ships which had already been deemed inadequate. Keystone Cops at it again.

 

[RyanC]

They tried to do too much in a single hull at one time:

1.) 155mm AGS (it's actually more like super 155mm+++ it weighs as much as a 203mm round IIRC.

2.) Stealthy tumblehome hull.

3.) Integrated Electric Drive Systems

4.) Lots and lots of networking

 

[Jeb]

I get tickled by the "positive ejection" for shell casings when the AGS cycles. Those suckers fly.

 

[sferrin]

They tried to do too much in a single hull at one time:

1.) 155mm AGS (it's actually more like super 155mm+++ it weighs as much as a 203mm round IIRC.

2.) Stealthy tumblehome hull.

3.) Integrated Electric Drive Systems

4.) Lots and lots of networking

Be that as it may, the work is getting close to done. And now after all the effort and money we're going to toss it away - and then complain that we don't have a hull up to the task of the cruiser/missile defense mission. Flight III Burke is already under fire, justifiably so. It's a great ship, just not for the mission we need. And it will only get worse if we intend to bring rail guns and DEWs online.

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1671585

Getting ready for weapons tests.

 

[fredymac]

Navy crewed Zumwalt passes by Monsoor en route to home port in San Diego.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpXmXnC6QfI

 

[sferrin]

Video of it at sea seems to show a smaller wake than you'd see from a Burke.

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

 

[fredymac]

Here is an extended video of Zumwalt sea trials showing high speed maneuvers and reverse direction. The "wave piercing" front end does seem to reduce the bow wave quite a bit.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO8x8434ftc