Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 38

Thread: Zumwalt class destroyer

  1. #1
    Regular Dark Sorrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Aug 08
    Posts
    60

    Zumwalt class destroyer

    The Zumwalt-class destroyer (DDG-1000, previously known as the DD(X) program) is a planned class of United States Navy destroyers, designed as multi-mission ships with a focus on land attack.

    Type: Multimission destroyer, emphasis on land attack
    Displacement: 14,564 tons
    Length: 600 ft (182.9 m)
    Beam: 80.7 ft (24.6 m)
    Draft: 27.6 ft (8.4 m)
    Propulsion: 2 Rolls-Royce Marine Trent-30 gas turbines Emergency : Diesel generators, 78 MW
    Speed: 30.3 kn (56 km/h)
    Complement: 140
    Sensors and
    processing systems: AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar (MFR) (X-band) s
    Volume Search Radar (VSR) (S-band, scanned array)
    Armament: 20 MK 57 VLS modules, comprising a total of 80 missiles
    Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM)
    Tactical Tomahawk Vertical Launch Anti-Submarine Rocket (ASROC)
    2 155 mm Advanced Gun System
    920 155 mm total; 600 in automated store + Auxiliary store room with up to 320 rounds (non-automatic) as of April 2005
    70-100 LRLAP rounds planned as of 2005 of total
    2 Mk 110 57 mm gun (CIWS)
    Aircraft carried: 2 SH-60 LAMPS helicopters or 1 MH-60R helicopter
    3 MQ-8 Fire Scout VTUAV

    Design Enements :-

    1 Stealth
    2 Tumblehome wave piercing hull
    3 Advanced Gun System (AGS)
    4 Peripheral Vertical Launch System (PVLS)
    5 Boat and Helicopter arrangements
    6 Dual-band radar
    7 Sonar
    8 Propulsion
    9 Integrated Power System (IPS)
    10 Automated replenishment
    11 Manning reductions
    12 Automated fire suppression system
    13 Computer network

    Truly a class apart ship which would preveal over any conventional surface-ship.

    The DDG-1000 is planned to feature the following:
    (1) A low radar profile
    (2) An integrated power system, which can send electricity to the electric drive motors or weapons, which may someday include railguns, a total ship computing environment infrastructure, serving as the ship's primary LAN and as the hardware-independent platform for all of the ship's software ensembles
    (3) Automated fire-fighting systems and automated piping rupture isolation. (4) The destroyer is being designed to require a smaller crew and be less expensive to operate than comparable warships.
    (5) It will have a wave-piercing "tumblehome" hull form whose sides slope inward above the waterline. This will reduce the radar cross-section, returning much less energy than a more hard-angled hull form.

    What do you ?think about the ship
    Here comes the silent killer

  2. #2
    Contributor Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Jul 06
    Posts
    651
    Obviously its going to bring alot of changes to the way we look at providing fire support, depending on how well the technology goes.

    But the information you have copied and pasted in here isnt the way to start a discussion.

    Point out an area you feel is floored, or talk about the role its going to fill or hopes to fill.

    I think the US got it right when they limited this class and went back to building Burkes if im honest.

    The USA has such an advantage numerically and technologically over every one else that they dont really have much to worry about.

    With the development of new submarines from china and russia , I would be more concerned with this area of things and I would be looking at what ships I have that are geared up to this threat and be looking at the Hunter subs I have ready - again an area that the US is lacking.

    The new Littoral ships are looking fantastic and their ability to add different modules based on missions is excellent. 3 Zumwalt should be enough for what the Navy wants to do.

    I dont know how they will break it down but I would imagine 2 in the Pacific and 1 atlantic fleet. although with refits and the like could end up with 1 in each.

    It will be interesting to see the final product
    Naval Warfare Discussion is dying on WAB

  3. #3
    Regular Super Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Jun 08
    Posts
    86
    Well i really hoped they would make more then three, but hey more we have the better. I like the design of the ship. A demanding and powerful look. Was it 19 or 20 the original amount the USN wanted right?

  4. #4
    Regular
    Join Date
    04 Nov 08
    Posts
    130
    I think whoever designed this ship well and truly through common sense out of the window, they've tried to cram every piece of new technology they could into the same hull.

    Multi mission? It's a 14,000 ton monitor with Tomahawks.

  5. #5
    Zumwalt is a wicked cool concept. Stealth and multifunction capability will be two decisive factors in future naval battles.

  6. #6
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    What the hell do we need this expensive ship for? Evolve the Burkes will be more cost effective.

    If we want to bombard the coastline, why not bring back the monitor concept?
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  7. #7
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728
    If we want to bombard the coastline, why not bring back the monitor concept?


    Shhh! Gun you can't say that. Lord knows the airdales and politicians would have a fit with you using such language. Especially the word "bombardment"
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

  8. #8
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    If we want to bombard the coastline, why not bring back the monitor concept?


    Shhh! Gun you can't say that. Lord knows the airdales and politicians would have a fit with you using such language. Especially the word "bombardment"
    Oh...I'm sorry.

    How about:

    Neutralizing the threat axis from stand-off range using sea-based forward-deployed artilery platform?
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  9. #9
    Regular
    Join Date
    04 Nov 08
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Oh...I'm sorry.

    How about:

    Neutralizing the threat axis from stand-off range using sea-based forward-deployed artilery platform?
    I think they have
    Last edited by Kev 99; 17 Jan 09, at 00:49.

  10. #10
    Military Professional maximusslade's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 08
    Location
    New England, USA
    Posts
    801
    Personally speaking, I think this is a case of NAVSEA trying to pack tooo many bells and whistles into a single package. To me, it is impractical. How much have they spent on this project and one doesnt even exist yet?

    In my experience in the navy, anything that has bells and whistles is a maintenance nightmare.

    And 14,000 tons!?!?!?!?! Do any of you realize that is about the same displacement as a WWI dreadnaught (look at USS Texas). What are you getting for that expendature in displacement? Two 155mm guns and some VLS on a platform that is a little hard to track on radar? Reduced manning? All well and good until someone cant stand watch, or until there is a major repair that is needed, then you are undermanned.

    I think there are much better ways for the navy to spend it's money.
    Hit Hard, Hit Fast, Hit Often...

  11. #11
    Regular
    Join Date
    09 Nov 07
    Posts
    99
    I think the Zumwalt will go down as a pathfinder class that paves the way for applying the multitude of new technologies to future classes and maybe even the new Arleigh Burkes. All that R&D is going to go into more than just three ships, that's for sure.

  12. #12
    Military Professional dundonrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    23 Mar 07
    Posts
    698
    what I liked, was a Burke that was lengenthed and a nuke power plant installed.. that would be a bad ass cruiser..

  13. #13
    Military Professional maximusslade's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 08
    Location
    New England, USA
    Posts
    801
    I am looking forward to the day when the USN has a 'real' cruiser class, not these modified "Sprucans" known as the Ticondarogas...
    Hit Hard, Hit Fast, Hit Often...

  14. #14
    Regular BBwarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Dec 07
    Location
    Wonderfully Sunny Juneau, Alaska
    Posts
    116
    I like the concept of the Zums (AGS, Stealth) but I am concerned about their ability to 'take a hit' and stay in the fight. If their primary purpose is land attack, that means they will operate in the littoral. If they are seen (MK I Eyeball), how well will their stealth aspects perform in protecting the ship from being struck? What happens if she gets hit by an ASM?

  15. #15
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Oct 06
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by BBwarrior View Post
    I like the concept of the Zums (AGS, Stealth) but I am concerned about their ability to 'take a hit' and stay in the fight. If their primary purpose is land attack, that means they will operate in the littoral. If they are seen (MK I Eyeball), how well will their stealth aspects perform in protecting the ship from being struck? What happens if she gets hit by an ASM?
    if there primary purpose is land attack, what about the airforce and naval air/cruise missles?

    seems like a waste in that regard.

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
  •