Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DDG-1000 News

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
    To think Sir, the USN now has a Destroyer thats actually longer then the Arizona herself.
    It's really freaking ridiculous. I predict that it won't stay a Commander command for very long, and a redesignation as a CG will be shortly in the works as well.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by desertswo View Post
      It's really freaking ridiculous. I predict that it won't stay a Commander command for very long, and a redesignation as a CG will be shortly in the works as well.
      Agreed, what is this DDG bullshyt?? Of course, the USN used to call its CG's "Frigates" so there's that I guess.
      “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

      Comment


      • #93
        To be honest, in the USN at the time, "Frigate" was considered more of a Destroyer Leader than the Destroyer Escort type ship of today.

        The definition was changed to conform more with other navies.

        Ed-

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by desertswo View Post
          It's really freaking ridiculous. I predict that it won't stay a Commander command for very long, and a redesignation as a CG will be shortly in the works as well.
          Interesting.

          You would know far better than I would.

          My admittedly limted understanding is that PCU Zumwalt (DDG-1000) is what resulted from DDX/DD-21 development efforts, and that DDX destroyer and CGX cruiser platforms were to share much in common, that the now-cancelled CGX development was to follow DDX development, that CGX would be longer with increased displacement, would include increased C2 capability, increased VLS/PVL capacity, improvements in radar, etc.

          DDX/DD-21 and CVN-21 were both supposed to get DBR Dual Band Radar (see Raytheon's marketing info for DBR below). CVN-21 development evolved into PCU Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) which is still getting DBR. PCU Zumwalt is no longer getting DBR, is only getting a portion of that system, since cost reductions in 2010 deleted the S-band VSR Volume Search Radar portion of DBR on the Zumwalts after a program review triggered by the Nunn-McCurdy process.

          Remains to be seen if they later fit AMDR, or some portion of that.

          Raytheon
          Naval Radars: Dual Band Radar (DBR)


          The Dual Band Radar (DBR) is the first radar system in the U.S. Navy fleet capable of simultaneously operating over two frequency ranges (S-band and X-band), coordinated by a single resource manager. It combines the functionality of the X-band AN/SPY-3 Multifunction Radar and the S-band Volume Surveillance Radar (VSR) to provide an unprecedented level of performance and capability to detect and track hostile targets.

          AN/SPY-3, operating at X-band with high-accuracy, narrow beam width and wide frequency bandwidth, provides superior coverage and effective discrimination of low-altitude targets. It also provides target illumination and uplink/downlink capabilities for SM-2 and Evolved SeaSparrow missiles. Using S-band, VSR delivers effective, all-weather search capabilities via its high-power aperture, and narrow beam width, enabling it to accurately resolve and track targets.

          Frequency Diversity and Resource Sharing
          Many search and track functions, such as cued acquisition and precision track (providing high update rate, fire control quality data) can be allocated to either or both frequencies, automatically or through command and control direction.

          Environmental phenomena diversely affect the SPY-3 andVSR radars, and the DBR’s ability to utilize a multitude of frequencies in the two different operating bands dramatically mitigates these effects. The separate band radar arrays provide extensive search, track and multiple missile illumination capacity, which is essential in support of multi-target raid engagements.

          Improved Reliability
          Active, electronically steered, phased-array radar systems eliminate rotating antennas, which enhances reliability. DBR further enhances reliability via multilevel redundancy to ensure continuous operation in the event of component failure. DBR can operate 24 hours a day, seven days week during extended missions with an operational availability of greater than 95 percent.

          Ease of Maintenance
          With a robust fault detection/fault isolation system, DBR automatically determines the need for maintenance. The design is highly modular, facilitating repair with minimum downtime. Rear access is provided to all antenna components, facilitating servicing from inside the ship. The complete six-face DBR was designed to minimize the amount of corrective and preventative maintenance with minimal mean time to repair in support of the high system operational availability.

          Unmanned Operation
          DBR requires no dedicated operator or manned display consoles, eliminating reaction time and potential human errors associated with manual operation. Its tactical operations are directed by command and control-level personnel through the Ship Self Defense System (SSDS), an open-architecture solution that integrates all of the ship’s systems through a single enterprise network.

          Open Architecture Solution for Naval Radar
          DBR uses commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) technology for signal and data processing. All DBR software has been designed using object-oriented techniques for long-term software maintainability. DBR is also fully inter-operable with the SSDS. Its open-architecture and COTS technology provide a DBR solution that is both affordable and readily upgradeable as new technologies or operational needs arise.

          .
          .
          .
          .

          Comment


          • #95
            Here's an update from AOL news. I'm a little concerned though about one of the paragraphs mentioning that a "prominant Naval Architect " thought the tumblehome design would increase its chances of rolling over in high seas.

            Hope it wasn't me they were referring to as I wrote up something like that on another forum a few years ago. But I also mentioned that fin stabilizers could counteract that problem as long as the ship was moving.

            I think.

            Anyway, this seems to be one of the cases where I'm glad I was wrong.

            Capt. Kirk Takes Command Of Hot New Ship – Really! USS Zumwalt Sails « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary
            Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
              I'll disagree. 6.1in= 155mm.

              The standard direct support field artillery round in NATO. It works just fine breaking stuff and killing people.
              and against well fortified targets, it's useless.. like I said earlier, harassment fire fine, you can use small caliber gunfire, but you need heavy shells moving at high velocity to destroy those well fortified targets (look at the command bunkers Iraq had in Kuwait, that were impervious to any bombs and gunfire we had, EXCEPT the 16" shells from the Missouri and Wisky)

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by dundonrl View Post
                (look at the command bunkers Iraq had in Kuwait, that were impervious to any bombs and gunfire we had, EXCEPT the 16" shells from the Missouri and Wisky)
                You mean like the ones taken out with BLU-109s by USAF F-111s?

                The Navy doesn't fight alone. With the advent of guided munitions, the need for a big gun on a navy ship is pretty low.
                Last edited by Gun Grape; 03 Nov 13,, 06:18.

                Comment


                • #98
                  true, but the bunkers that Iraq had in place in Kuwait were MUCH thicker than the BLU-109 could penetrate, I believe I've read about 20 ft of reinforced concrete. The BLU-109 is designed to penetrate 6' of reinforced concrete. This is why, the Air Force took old 8" gun barrels, welded nose caps on them, guidance fins on the back end and turned them into bunker busters, the 109's just cound't do the job. The 2700 lb AP shells fired by the Iowa's is capable of penetrating over 30 ft of reinforced concrete.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    A video of the float off.
                    ZUMWALT (DDG 1000) TRANSFER & FLOAT OFF 90 SECONDS - YouTube

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by surfgun View Post
                      A video of the float off.
                      very cool looking vessel. Against rogue regimes, its overkill in my opinion. At 3 vessels, its probably too expensive and risky to send into battle.

                      Comment


                      • An article, no interior pictures.

                        Inside the Secret Interior of the Navy’s First Stealth Destroyer

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by winton View Post
                          ...its probably too expensive and risky to send into battle.
                          Would you make the same assertion about DDG-113 (first post restart A-B flight IIa) or DDG-123 (presumed to be the first A-B flight III)?

                          If not, why not?
                          .
                          .
                          .

                          Comment


                          • I was Just going through Article on Worlds Biggest Destroyers in My News Feed , Before reading the article i was much sure that DDG 1000 will be on the top..

                            Interesting List I Didn't Know about 2-3 from this Earlier

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by ramakrishna View Post
                              I was Just going through Article on Worlds Biggest Destroyers in My News Feed , Before reading the article i was much sure that DDG 1000 will be on the top..

                              Interesting List I Didn't Know about 2-3 from this Earlier
                              Nations are of course free to call their ships whatever they want. However, in my mind, and more importantly in my 25 years of experience as a naval officer, everything above the Arleigh Burke-class is a cruiser. The Burkes are the first true destroyers in that list.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by winton View Post
                                very cool looking vessel. Against rogue regimes, its overkill in my opinion. At 3 vessels, its probably too expensive and risky to send into battle.
                                More fanboy crap.

                                When the US goes to war, we use EVERYTHING in the arsenal.

                                Hell we used B-2s in Afghanistan for cripes sake.

                                NOTHING is too expensive to be placed in the battle line if needed.
                                Last edited by TopHatter; 18 Dec 13,, 17:00.
                                “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                                Mark Twain

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X