Italian Navy DDX

[Regio Ammiraglio]

Some news from RID:
- The full displacement was apparently increased (now we are from 14000 to 14500 tons)
- Apparently Leonardo is developing a new X and S band radar based on the experinece of the KRONOS DBR for the PPA's (this new S band radar will not only do early warning and detection, but it will be also able to guide missiles) .
-it is very likely that the ships will be equipped with an unspecified number of A70 NG cells, wich will be able to use the new RJ10 anty ship missile (the anty ship supersonic version of the FC-SW) and the new Aquila hypersonic missiles interceptor.
( no new renders are avaible unfortunatly ; (
Here's the full article

RID Rivista Italiana Difesa - Nuovi dettagli sugli incrociatori pesanti DDX

Nuovi dettagli sugli incrociatori pesanti DDX

www.rid.it

 

[Phoenix_jz]

A very interesting piece of news.

The Sylver A70 NG has been long-rumored, but this may be the first confirmation that there are serious studies underway for the system. From what RID is describing, it would actually be the first truly universal version of Sylver, firing both Aster SAMs, but also the future Aquila and the missiles that come out of the FC/ASW program.

The radar portion is also interesting. Given what they've achieved in other radar systems this shouldn't be an issue for them, but it is worth noting they haven't really developed any S-band systems for this kind of role before.

They say that the S-band 'will also do missile guidance' in addition to early warning and detection given the 'significant size and power of the antennas'. This is interesting, given that within the architecture of Kronos Dual Band, Kronos Quad did do this already - detection, tracking, engagement, and the uplink to Aster for MCU. An S-band system will require more power, but will have greater long-range performance versus a C-band - although at cost to resolution.

My thoughts are this might be something that is being done with an eye towards the future anti-ballistic and hypersonic interceptor, Aquila, which will operate at longer ranges and altitudes than Aster 30 B1NT. RID does note that these developments are based on experience with the radar systems on the PPA... which makes me wonder if this is most specifically based on experiences in the ballistic missile exercises Raimondo Montecuccoli (P 432) took part in earlier this year at PACIFIC DRAGON 2024.

 

[Marcellogo]

Are you saying that the U.S Navy, should forego their DDG(X) and instead tag onto the Italian DDX. Or should the Italians forego their DDX and instead sign onto the U.S Navies DDG(X) Program. The U.S DDG(X) prpgram seems to be moving at a fast pace and will produce both a destroyer and a Cruiser replacement to succeed both the DDG-51 and CG-47 class. Latest specs for the DDG(X) has it with 4×32 Mk41 modules + large VLS for Hyphersonic weapons and a displacement of 13, 500 + Long Tons.

It would be a total absurdity given that if there are two completely different fleet in all NATO , there are USN and MMI.
The first one is conceived as a totally Blue Water navy and the other as a pluri-decennnal doctrine (called the Mediterraneo Allargato/Enlarged Mediterranean Sea) that purposely avoid any possible involvement into anything that involves oceanic routes.
Also now that our possible intervention zone would go as far as Nigeria (due to huge investment in their oil fields) they would still reach it making a sort of island hopping through all Macaronesia instead of making a single huge turnaround.
The only involvement we had with Trans Atlantic convoy routes was when we tried to sink them in WWII.
So, the operational requirements of the two navies are also completely opposite.
A 57mm Main Gun on a MMI vessel could be conceivable only on less than 50 metric tons displacement patrol boat...

 

[Cordy]

FactChecker90803 said:.
The U.S DDG(X) prpgram seems to be moving at a fast pace and will produce both a destroyer and a Cruiser replacement to succeed both the DDG-51 and CG-47 class.

One thing you can say with certainty about the DDG(X) program is that it's not "moving at a fast pace".

In August 2018 Adm. Ron Boxall director of surface warfare (OPNAV N96) told USNI News it would buy the first of its Future Surface Combatants in 2023, now the Navy wants to procure the first DDG(X) in FY2032, though the date for procuring the first ship has been delayed several times before and might again.

What consider to be a relatively fast paced program is when In 2020 Japan announced plans to build 2 Aegis destroyers after it scrapped its two planned Aegis Ashore sites and in Dec 2023 approved construction funding for two 16,000t ASEV destroyers to be commissioned in 2027 and 2028 respectively.

 

[MihoshiK]

FactChecker90803 said:.
The U.S DDG(X) prpgram seems to be moving at a fast pace and will produce both a destroyer and a Cruiser replacement to succeed both the DDG-51 and CG-47 class.

One thing you can say with certainty about the DDG(X) program is that it's not "moving at a fast pace".

In August 2018 Adm. Ron Boxall director of surface warfare (OPNAV N96) told USNI News it would buy the first of its Future Surface Combatants in 2023, now the Navy wants to procure the first DDG(X) in FY2032, though the date for procuring the first ship has been delayed several times before and might again.

What consider to be a relatively fast paced program is when In 2020 Japan announced plans to build 2 Aegis destroyers after it scrapped its two planned Aegis Ashore sites and in Dec 2023 approved construction funding for two 16,000t ASEV destroyers to be commissioned in 2027 and 2028 respectively.

I think it's fair to say by now that USN procurement is "Special".