Register here

Author Topic: DDG-1000  (Read 97520 times)

Offline Demon Lord Razgriz

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 188
DDG-1000
« on: September 03, 2009, 09:44:42 pm »
I've been reading up on the DDG-1000 for a project I'm doing for Shipbucket and throughout everything, I keep getting a quote that says the Zumwalt-Class can't operate the SM series missiles. Can someone please explain to me how that's possible? The primary anti-defense missiles of the USN can't work on the next generation of ships?

Someone has dropped the ball somewhere in planning if they forgot to add one of the most basic things a ship needs. Can the Mk 57 PLVS even fire the Tomahawk? Or did they drop the ball there too?

Offline GAU-8 Avenger

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 151
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2009, 11:45:48 pm »
There have been many contradicting claims, but it seems that the DDG-1000 will have the capability to fire the Block III SM2MR, Block IV SM2ER, and the SM6 once that enters service. It may lack SM3 capability however, which is a concern for some.

I imagine it will have the capability for ESSM too but firm details are hard to come by. I imagine it can fire Tomahawks due to the designs focused on naval fire support. Way back during the DD-221 program I believe, it was said that the ship would carry some sort of supersonic land attack missile.

Offline Demon Lord Razgriz

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 188
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #2 on: September 07, 2009, 01:27:29 am »
That Supersonic Land Attack Missile currently is the RATTLRS Cruise missile in development.

Anywho, since you say it's just the SM-3 that it can't fire, then why the hell is it such a big deal? The Ticos & Burkes can fire it IIRC, so bother putting it on the Zumwalt right from the start? Maybe after the Zumwalt is build and hopefully put into production with most of the bugs worked out, then put it in.

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 13244
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #3 on: September 07, 2009, 02:26:28 am »
Is the RATTLRS missile the one that looks like one of the Blackbird's engines flying solo?

Offline donnage99

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 951
  • "Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2009, 12:33:08 am »
Some said that they were envisioned to be covered by the next generation cruiser.  Anyway, the whole issue about canceling ddg-1000 and the way the navy is dealing with it is very questionable.  Too bad all Congress need is jobs while cutting expensive programs, so when Navy said they would cut zumwalt and build legacy destroyers, instead of asking why the navy revert back and contradict their previous statements, they happily accepted it.  I think a team should be set to analyze what the Navy said about the zumwalt not meeting evolving threats, and would it be more efficiently tactically and economically to add these capabilities into the zumwalt's design or not.  There are alot of question marks raised by contractors and even individuals within the navy that should be confronted.

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8560
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2009, 03:16:20 am »
Is the RATTLRS missile the one that looks like one of the Blackbird's engines flying solo?

yep
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline Matej

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 2617
  • Multiuniversal creator
    • Hitechweb - bizare aviation
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #6 on: September 08, 2009, 03:18:18 am »
 :D Funny and somehow accurate description. I like it!

Bizarre aviation expert.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10944
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2009, 05:30:51 am »
That Supersonic Land Attack Missile currently is the RATTLRS Cruise missile in development.

RATTLRS is pure research along the lines of X-51 and HyFly.  Would love to be wrong but fairly certain I'm not.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Firefly 2

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 461
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2009, 10:47:11 am »
That Supersonic Land Attack Missile currently is the RATTLRS Cruise missile in development.

RATTLRS is pure research along the lines of X-51 and HyFly.  Would love to be wrong but fairly certain I'm not.

It depends on your (online) source. Serious sites say it's a technology demonstrator, whilst the more popular state that it's an actual weapons program. The former usually get it right.

Offline F-14D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1726
  • I really did change my personal text
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2009, 01:31:26 pm »
Some said that they were envisioned to be covered by the next generation cruiser.  Anyway, the whole issue about canceling ddg-1000 and the way the navy is dealing with it is very questionable.  Too bad all Congress need is jobs while cutting expensive programs, so when Navy said they would cut zumwalt and build legacy destroyers, instead of asking why the navy revert back and contradict their previous statements, they happily accepted it.  I think a team should be set to analyze what the Navy said about the zumwalt not meeting evolving threats, and would it be more efficiently tactically and economically to add these capabilities into the zumwalt's design or not.  There are alot of question marks raised by contractors and even individuals within the navy that should be confronted.


Keep in mind that when you have a particularly powerful SecDef that enjoys strong support from the President, opinions change  so as to be in line with what he wants.  In early April 2009 Gates said that among other things, the Zumwalt program would be capped at three (down from the original 32).   So, the official navy postion became that.   A similar example happend with the F-22.  The people at USAF top were reshuffled so that people who agreed with his F-22 decision would be the ones giving hi=m the USAF position.  Therefore he could truthfully announce that, "..."all the military advice," including from the Air Force, s indicated that,  "...there is no requirement for more than 187". 

Similarly in the early 1990s, NAVAIR made it very clear that they wanted the F-14D, not the Hornet E/F that Cheney wanted.  A reshuffling, and presto! Navy fully supports the Super Hornet.

This is the way the world is

Offline aim9xray

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2009, 05:21:00 pm »
"The F/A-18E/F is the future of Naval Aviation".  So say we all.

And so it became.

And - in just a few short years, PMA-265 will discover the joys of maintaining an aging out-of-production airframe out of OMN funding while the F-35C enjoys its day at the trough...

Offline donnage99

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 951
  • "Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #11 on: October 05, 2009, 05:17:19 pm »

Keep in mind that when you have a particularly powerful SecDef that enjoys strong support from the President, opinions change  so as to be in line with what he wants.  In early April 2009 Gates said that among other things, the Zumwalt program would be capped at three (down from the original 32).   So, the official navy postion became that.   

I thought that the navy wanted to cap at 2.

Offline F-14D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1726
  • I really did change my personal text
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #12 on: October 05, 2009, 06:28:41 pm »

Keep in mind that when you have a particularly powerful SecDef that enjoys strong support from the President, opinions change  so as to be in line with what he wants.  In early April 2009 Gates said that among other things, the Zumwalt program would be capped at three (down from the original 32).   So, the official navy postion became that.  

I thought that the navy wanted to cap at 2.

They did, but then when investigating what that would do to the shipbuilding industrial base decided it would be better to build one more while transitioning back to the Burkes.  A similar thing happened to the third Seawolf.  Clinton would have been perfectly happy to cancel it, but was shown that would leave too big a gap between it and the start of the NSSN/Virginia class.  He didn't want to go down in history as the President that took the US out of the SSN game, so approved the third and last Seawolf.  

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #13 on: October 05, 2009, 07:41:06 pm »
The 3rd DDG-1000 (DDG-1002?) will also have a lot of new technology especially in its propulsion system with High Temperature Superconductors (HTS). So keeping this ship in the program will enable it to operationally test and prove the new technology.

http://content.yudu.com/A15e3n/WTMar09/resources/33.htm
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline seruriermarshal

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 851
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #14 on: October 08, 2009, 01:49:46 am »
Any photo of they building DDG-1000 ?