Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 38

Thread: Zumwalt class destroyer

  1. #16
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    It seesm that the hullform and the integrated electrical system are the truly revolutionary aspects of Zumwalts. Other pieces, while interesting, are more evolutionary improvements.

    The IPS should allow for the employment of a variety of directed energy weapons and, along with the hullform, new operating concepts.

    In the end, the ship class seems to be an engineering exercise. I doubt we will ever see Zumwalt doing shore bombardment against anything but very softly defended targets.

  2. #17
    Military Professional maximusslade's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 08
    Location
    New England, USA
    Posts
    801
    It would seem to me that if the Defence Department really wanted to put the issue of gunfire support to bed, they ought to be looking more in the direction of a more conventional gun cruiser or destroyer heavily armed with 155mm AGS and "cheap" land attack missiles.

    Furthermore, looking at its "littoral" role, I again point at the size of this bohemoth. It is 14,000 tons and draws 28+ feet of water. To put things in perspective, a WW2 era Fletcher class DD draws only 18 feet of water.
    Last edited by maximusslade; 17 Jan 09, at 21:34.
    Hit Hard, Hit Fast, Hit Often...

  3. #18
    Contributor Kommunist's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 08
    Location
    Toronto, ON, Canada
    Posts
    599
    Lawmakers and others have questioned whether the Zumwalt class costs too much and whether it provides the capabilities the U.S. military needs. In 2005 the Congressional Budget Office estimated the life-cycle cost of a DD(X) at $3.8-4.0bn in 2007 dollars, $1.1bn more than the Navy's estimate
    The stability of the DDG-1000 hull design in heavy seas has been a matter of controversy. Naval architect Ken Brower said in April 2007 that "as a ship pitches and heaves at sea, if you have tumblehome instead of flare, you have no righting energy to make the ship come back up. On the DDG 1000, with the waves coming at you from behind, when a ship pitches down, it can lose transverse stability as the stern comes out of the water - and basically roll over." The fact that the CG-(X) cruiser will probably not now have a tumblehome hull suggests that there may be problems with the Zumwalt's seakeeping.

    What do the naval experts here think about the tumble-home hull design? Rusty (and others), you listening?

    For those who dont know CG-X
    The CG(X) (or Next Generation Cruiser) is a US Navy program to replace its 22 Ticonderoga class cruisers after 2017. Original plans were for 18-19 ships, based on the 14,500 ton Zumwalt class destroyer but providing ballistic missile defense and area air defense for a carrier group. A reassessment in 2007 means that the CG(X) program may be split into two classes, fourteen Zumwalt-sized "escort cruisers" and five 23,000 ton ballistic missile defense (BMD) ships.
    Everyone has opinions, only some count.

  4. #19
    Regular
    Join Date
    04 Nov 08
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by maximusslade View Post
    It would seem to me that if the Defence Department really wanted to put the issue of gunfire support to bed, they ought to be looking more in the direction of a more conventional gun cruiser or destroyer heavily armed with 155mm AGS and "cheap" land attack missiles.
    I'd say this is more or less spot on for how I view the Zumwalt, I'd go further though and say is the AGS really necessary? Seems to me they could do all they needed to with a couple of twin mount 8" guns, for any targets that need extra range TLAM or air strikes would be appropriate, the AGS just seems to be reinventing the wheel.

  5. #20
    Military Professional maximusslade's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 08
    Location
    New England, USA
    Posts
    801
    There is little "conventional" about the Zumwalt. Looks to me that almost everything about her is experimental. Experimental hull design, experimental guns, a new way of laying out missle armament, experimental propulsion.
    Hit Hard, Hit Fast, Hit Often...

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor BenRoethig's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Jan 04
    Location
    Dubuque, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    1,458
    I hope the tech from the Monitor...err, Zumwalt class get cut off with the ships. The Mk57 VLS with quad packs for SM-2/3/6 and AN/SPY-3 are much better systems than the Mk41 and SPS-49 they replace. With only 32 MK57 cells, a Nimitz class carrier could carry a very similar anti-air capability to a Burke. I also like the idea of a 155mm gun although I would take the BAE 155mm gun over the AGS. Its more versatile with anti-service and anti-air capability in addition to naval gunfire support, can use existing 155mm artillery rounds, and was designed as a drop in replacement for RN 4.5 and US/Allied 5" guns.
    Last edited by BenRoethig; 18 Jan 09, at 23:47.
    F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: The Honda Accord of fighters.

  7. #22
    Patron Michigan_Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Feb 07
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    218
    I thought they canned the Zumwalt after they wasted a ton of money on developing it?
    "If a man does his best, what else is there?"
    -General George Patton Jr.

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,054
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't severall navies tried these hull forms back in the 19th century and abandoned them, due to handling problems?

  9. #24
    Regular Super Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Jun 08
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigan_Guy View Post
    I thought they canned the Zumwalt after they wasted a ton of money on developing it?
    No i read somewhere they will make few like 3 or 2. They wont get the amount they want. I don't think its a waste of money. I think it is good they have tried to make a new style. From this I think naval battles will change. In 10-20 years we will see other nations making stealth ships. I dream there will stealth carriers, but i know that will be a long time from now. I wish my uncle would tell me more bout the ship, but its top secret. :(

    ----

    I read somewhere that they will test rail guns on it. Is it true?

  10. #25
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Put the BAE or the AGS gun in a container format, drop it on a transport (LCS)...done.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  11. #26
    Senior Contributor Stitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Nov 06
    Location
    Patterson, CA
    Posts
    3,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigan_Guy View Post
    I thought they canned the Zumwalt after they wasted a ton of money on developing it?
    That was the original DD-21 ("Destroyer for the 21st Century") program; it was too expensive, so the DD-21 was cancelled, and a cheaper version soon emerged as the DD(X) program, which was renamed the DDG-1000.
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dude View Post
    we will see other nations making stealth ships.
    Severall nations allready have hulls designed with stealth in mind: the UK (with the Type 45), France, who pioneered such ships (supplied as well to Singapore and Taiwan).

  13. #28
    Regular Super Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Jun 08
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Severall nations allready have hulls designed with stealth in mind: the UK (with the Type 45), France, who pioneered such ships (supplied as well to Singapore and Taiwan).
    Yeah i forgot bout the french, but they wont be able to beat this ship. I think the Type 45 looks odd.

  14. #29
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Super Dude View Post
    Yeah i forgot bout the french
    Err... what do you mean "beat"? I thought we were talking about stealth ships... in that area, I think it will be easier to mask a frigate than that monster...

  15. #30
    Contributor Kommunist's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 08
    Location
    Toronto, ON, Canada
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Err... what do you mean "beat"? I thought we were talking about stealth ships... in that area, I think it will be easier to mask a frigate than that monster...
    By your logic, it will be even more easier to mask a rowing boat.
    Everyone has opinions, only some count.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. World Navies Listing (updated 3/29/05)
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 26 Apr 05,, 19:08
  2. World Navies(Completed)
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03 Apr 05,, 06:27
  3. World Navies
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 31 Mar 05,, 23:57
  4. World Navies Edited and Updated
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 26 Mar 05,, 03:02
  5. Greatly Revised Rankings
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 20 Mar 05,, 11:51

Tags for this Thread

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •