Register here

Author Topic: DDG-1000  (Read 75102 times)

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9171
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #345 on: August 10, 2017, 01:34:52 pm »
Nothing preventing it, no.  But if you're going to spend the money, why not spend it on ExLS, which is simple and has literally zero signature impact on the ship? Even a stealthy Mk 49 (presumably a standard launcher with a shelter to cover the flat ends when stowed) will have some signature when stowed, and it will get much worse when the launcher is trained out to fire.  Al ExLS does is pop open a VLS hatch and then close it as soon as the missile is gone.  ExLS also doesn't require a ton of maintenance, unlike anything with moving parts and hydraulics like a Mk 49, stealthy or not.  The only downside is that ExLS eats up a couple of VLS cells, but I suspect you could nine-pack RAM into a Mk57 cell, which means you only need a couple of cells.

You're right, that's a better idea.  So between RAM Block II and ESSM, there goes the CIWS problem.  (And by then SSLs should be getting enough power to become viable CIWS in their own right anyway - if one has the power generation capability.)
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Airplane

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #346 on: August 12, 2017, 06:09:29 pm »
Adding either would have consequences for the ship's signature.

Seriously? We are going to pretend that this ship is akin to a B2 of the seas? No way. Like our carriers, I am sure the Chinese and Russians know where its at all times.

It would have been an easy engineering feet to mount dozens of 116s on it without giving up an ounce of rcs.

I am really tired of every new weapon being a wonder weapon and only getting a token production run if it even makes it that far... F22, seawolf, b2... While our legacy systems age and age and age.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2017, 06:11:43 pm by Airplane »
"The test of success is not what you do when your on top. Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.
General George S. Patton

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #347 on: August 12, 2017, 09:37:32 pm »
Not so stealthy tha opponents don't know where it is in general terms.  But yes, signatures are reduced to the point that active countermeasures are much more effective and lots of AShMs are going to struggle to see the ship next to a Nulka decoy. Dirtying up a DDG-1000 with Phalanx would compromise its terminal defenses.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1498
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #348 on: August 13, 2017, 12:13:11 am »
And with more AGS tubes in the fleet, you might have developed a shell with counter-ASCM capability a la HVP.

Offline Airplane

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #349 on: August 13, 2017, 05:40:55 pm »
Not so stealthy tha opponents don't know where it is in general terms.  But yes, signatures are reduced to the point that active countermeasures are much more effective and lots of AShMs are going to struggle to see the ship next to a Nulka decoy. Dirtying up a DDG-1000 with Phalanx would compromise its terminal defenses.

Yeah, I get it that phalanx is very old and limited. But the lack of 116s? If you can add missiles to raptors and lightnings internally, certainly a ship is a piece of cake.Those could be added without selling out rcs. But congress has limited the production run to 3, so I am sure it will be sailing at all times with other aegis boats.

I am not a naval man... How many were supposed to be built? What is taking its place?
"The test of success is not what you do when your on top. Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.
General George S. Patton

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9171
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #350 on: August 13, 2017, 10:40:13 pm »
I am not a naval man... How many were supposed to be built?

32 of the Zumwalts and then the hull was to form the basis of the Ticonderoga replacement.  Basically what they did with the Spruance/Tico classes.

What is taking its place?

More Burkes.  Yes, we will regret it.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #351 on: August 14, 2017, 06:00:07 am »

Yeah, I get it that phalanx is very old and limited. But the lack of 116s? If you can add missiles to raptors and lightnings internally, certainly a ship is a piece of cake.Those could be added without selling out rcs. But congress has limited the production run to 3, so I am sure it will be sailing at all times with other aegis boats.


Could be, sure.  But developing brand new launcher designs is a pain.  And anything that you have to point requires maintenance, which DD-100 tries to minimize.   That's why I'm a fan on ExLS for this -- it's basically a way to incorporate terminal defense systems (RAM anti-missile missiles, Nulka decoys, NLOS anti-boat missiles, etc.) into a standard VLS cell. 


Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #352 on: August 14, 2017, 06:06:42 am »
And with more AGS tubes in the fleet, you might have developed a shell with counter-ASCM capability a la HVP.

Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds and of the ability of the slow-firing AGS to deliver enough of them to be effective.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9171
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #353 on: August 14, 2017, 06:42:59 am »
Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds

Why?  KKVs have been shown to work time after time.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2243
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #354 on: August 14, 2017, 07:10:42 am »
Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds

Why?  KKVs have been shown to work time after time.

I don't doubt that an HPV round can kill a cruise missile, but it seems like a harder solution than just using a conventional SAM.


Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9171
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #355 on: August 14, 2017, 10:05:58 am »
Maybe, but I'm skeptical of both the ASCM creds of HVP-type rounds

Why?  KKVs have been shown to work time after time.

I don't doubt that an HPV round can kill a cruise missile, but it seems like a harder solution than just using a conventional SAM.

Except you can keep 1500 of those rounds below deck.  Can't do that with missiles, not enough space and too expensive.  Or you can carry half the rounds, still have far more kills in the magazine than a ship using missiles, and use the extra space for larger land attack missiles.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1498
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #356 on: August 14, 2017, 07:17:28 pm »
Yeah, I get it that phalanx is very old and limited. But the lack of 116s?

They were also vertically launching the AIM-9X over a decade ago so I don't think there's been
any great concern over the lack of RIM-116; the MFR on the Zumwalt would be
uniquely placed to exploit the new data link on the AIM-9X Blk II.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9171
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #357 on: August 15, 2017, 05:29:59 am »
the MFR on the Zumwalt would be
uniquely placed to exploit the new data link on the AIM-9X Blk II.

IIRC RAM Block II has more oomph than AIM-9X.  AIM-9X and RAM Block I share the same motor.  RAM Block II has a bigger one.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1498
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: DDG-1000
« Reply #358 on: August 15, 2017, 11:03:24 am »
the MFR on the Zumwalt would be
uniquely placed to exploit the new data link on the AIM-9X Blk II.

IIRC RAM Block II has more oomph than AIM-9X.  AIM-9X and RAM Block I share the same motor.  RAM Block II has a bigger one.

That's all true and with ExLS there's nothing preventing RAM Block II integration into VLS.
Just pointing out there's a viable alternative that was available years before DDG-1000 was laid down.