DD(X) DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyers

Firefinder said:
TomS said:
Firefinder said:
The Guntube in the turret is fine, it actually can shot standard 155 shells.
Click to expand...

Can it? I've heard several times that the rifling and chamber are not compatible with Army 155mm ammo. It's definitely not a Quadrilateral Ballistics MOU gun.
Click to expand...
the Test one they have on the M110 chassis out in White Sands apparently shots Excalibur and PGK munitions just fine in tests.

So they either can and the loader fuck or the change up the bore design between the test piece and the ship mounting.
Click to expand...
news.usni.org

Raytheon Excalibur Round Set to Replace LRLAP on Zumwalts

The Navy is looking to Raytheon’s Excalibur guided artillery round to replace the effective but expensive Long Range Land Attack Projectile for the Zumwalt-class of guided missile destroyers, defense officials confirmed to USNI News.
news.usni.org news.usni.org

The quote crosses up Excalibur and HVP but the basic point remains. The AGS tube cannot readily accept other ammo besides LRLAP.


What remains now is how much additional engineering work it will take to modify the existing AGS to accommodate the Excalibur. The AGS barrel and the accompanying automatic ammunition handling system were specifically designed to handle the LRLAP.

“It’s a unique barrel for this ammunition. It’s a six-inch round designed with the turnings to allow the LRLAP to fly out of that barrel. There’s been some studies over the year that [indicate] that you could but you’d have to undertake a modification of the system,” then DDG-1000 program manager Rear Adm. Jim Downey told USNI News in May.
Click to expand...
“It’s not impossible but you can’t directly fire [hyper velocity projectiles] out of that barrel without modifications.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
For the barrel itself they "just" need a sabot, the White Sands AGS test used a sabot from what I understand. Potentially a long sabot could "fool" the ammo handling system into thinking it was moving LRAPs around rather than HVPs without a redesign. The big challenge to me is one of software. Writing the TSCE code to get Z's AGS firing HVP accurately is going to take time and money which the Navy seems disinterested in spending on 3 hulls.
 
Navy autoloaders are designed for abuse because the guns are used on the move during most all weather and during anything but calm sea conditions. While Excaliber may be superior in army conditions, only testing will solve the hurdles found under a swath of sea conditions.
 
navy probably retain 1 gun to see how the upcoming ramjet rounds and hypervelocity rounds turn out with the army. its about cost per shell that killed the gun. buyin with the army might solve that
 
donnage99 said:
navy probably retain 1 gun to see how the upcoming ramjet rounds and hypervelocity rounds turn out with the army. its about cost per shell that killed the gun. buyin with the army might solve that
Click to expand...
No it won't, because the navy ain't putting any shells aboard warships that haven't been thoroughly vetted for naval use. This goes double for the propellant charges. The Navy VERY MUCH prefers those to be in canisters/cartridges, and not as bagged charges.

Naval rounds have to tick a lot more (safety) boxes than Army rounds. So unless the army is willing to pay extra so that the navy can get super rounds, you'll end up with two different rounds anyway.

This is the very thing that killed the AGS the first time.

Dual-use sounds great, but it ran straight into the Navy's munitions safety boner, and got fucked as a result.
 
MihoshiK said:
No it won't, because the navy ain't putting any shells aboard warships that haven't been thoroughly vetted for naval use. This goes double for the propellant charges. The Navy VERY MUCH prefers those to be in canisters/cartridges, and not as bagged charges.
Click to expand...

This is very true.

OTOH, the Army is moving away from strictly bagged charges to rigid (combustible) charges, like this one:

1663675227237.png

A naval gun firing nothing but ERCA super-charge is probably an easier problem than it used to be -- you could probably engineer a charge handling system that only exposes the combustible charge when it's ready to ram. The resulting gun isn't AGS, of course -- the charge handling would be totally different. But I feel like it's getting closer to feasible.

And Army projectiles are starting to need Navy-like HERO safety anyway -- the land battlefield is getting electronically dense thanks to things like widespread counter-battery radar and jammers.
 
It would be interesting to see if they use the Zumwalts for experimental gun and other systems going forward. With the volume and stability, they have you would think they would be ideal for trying out different options.
 

Attachments

  • USS_Enterprise__28alternate_reality_29_under_construction.png
    USS_Enterprise__28alternate_reality_29_under_construction.png
    725 KB · Views: 42
sferrin said:
Looks like 6 missiles per AGS and they're ditching both:

news.usni.org

Navy Details Hypersonic Missile Plan for Zumwalt Destroyers, Virginia Submarines - USNI News

ARLINGTON, Va. – The trio of Zumwalt-class guided-missile destroyers could each field up to a dozen hypersonic missiles, with the first ship ready for testing in 2025, USNI News has learned. The service has determined that the hull can accommodate four 87-inch missile tubes that can each hold...
news.usni.org news.usni.org
Click to expand...

SO, 12 CPS per ship. Probably the best outcome at this point. Now let's hope CPS actually works. (OTOH, if it doesn't, as someone at the USNI site pointed out, you could slot in a more conventional MACS and get 28 more Tomahawks.)
 
Relevant excerpt:
The service has determined that the hull can accommodate four 87-inch missile tubes that can each hold multiple missiles, Vice Adm. Johnny Wolfe the head of the Navy’s strategic systems programs, told reporters on Tuesday at the Naval Submarine League’s annual symposium.

USNI News understands the Navy has determined in previous studies that three Common Hypersonic Glide Bodies (C-HGB) and their boosters could fit in each 87-inch tube – or 12 missiles per Zumwalt.
Click to expand...
 

As understand the 87" VLS cells used to launch the Navy hypersonic Conventional Prompt Strike, CPS, for the Zumwalt class of three ships will use a new pressurized air system to soft launch the missile so as not to damage the ship on launch with its very powerful booster (the Army variant the Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon ,LRHW. will use standard hot launch) and as far as know the new 87" VLS cell has yet to be tested with the CPS booster (the submarines 87" VLS cells uses high pressure steam to soft launch its Trident missiles and presume the future CPS).

The CPS/LRHW recent budgets for RDT&E FY2022 & 2023 funding total $3.8 billion and don't expect includes the cost of converting the Zumwalts by taking out their AGS 155mm guns and large magazines and installing the CPS VLS cells, as yet not a DoD program of record so might yet be cancelled if business case cannot be made to justify its high cost for a total of 36 CPS missiles ($3.8 billion would have funded approximately additional 2,500 Tomahawks), also the complete missile with its gliding body has yet to complete a successful test flight. The deployment of the CPS on Zumwalt by 2025 looks very ambitious.
 
The "as yet not dod program of record" has absolutely no bearing on whether investments, or conversions are made to equip either the submarine fleet, or the Zumwalt class ships for accepting and operating with the CPS/LRHW system. Or for those investments to begin awarding contracts and doing the actual work (which is being done now to prepare for this capability). Same legal reason why it is not a barrier for the Army to beginning planning for, investing in, and fielding its LRHW battery force structure as part of the MDTF and including future force structure demands in the TAA (even though LRHW has not yet transitioned to the PEO and become an official PoR).
 
Last edited:
NavalNews shows image of the planned conversion of Zumalt to fit the four CPS VLS cells for the 12 hypersonic CPS missiles, only the f'wd AGS155 mm gun and magazine removed to make room for the VLS cells, the second AGS remains which seems an odd decision as AGS non-operational as Navy has no ammo that will fit the AGS, maybe Navy has thoughts to eventually modify the AGS to fire 155 Vulcano or other projectiles, otherwise why leave it on ship. No mention of budgeted cost of the conversion.

Other points of interest iimage shows how large is the AGS magazine for the remaining second AGS, the Mk 57 VLS cells and Tomahawk and ESSM, no mention of SM-2.

www.navalnews.com

US Navy Details Hypersonic Missile Plan for Zumwalt Destroyers, Virginia Submarines - Naval News

The trio of Zumwalt-class guided-missile destroyers could each field up to a dozen hypersonic missiles, with the first ship ready for testing in 2025
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
 
Cordy said:
NavalNews shows image of the planned conversion of Zumalt to fit the four CPS VLS cells for the 12 hypersonic CPS missiles, only the f'wd AGS155 mm gun and magazine removed to make room for the VLS cells, the second AGS remains which seems an odd decision as AGS non-operational as Navy has no ammo that will fit the AGS, maybe Navy has thoughts to eventually modify the AGS to fire 155 Vulcano or other projectiles, otherwise why leave it on ship. No mention of budgeted cost of the conversion.

Other points of interest iimage shows how large is the AGS magazine for the remaining second AGS, the Mk 57 VLS cells and Tomahawk and ESSM, no mention of SM-2.

www.navalnews.com

US Navy Details Hypersonic Missile Plan for Zumwalt Destroyers, Virginia Submarines - Naval News

The trio of Zumwalt-class guided-missile destroyers could each field up to a dozen hypersonic missiles, with the first ship ready for testing in 2025
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
Click to expand...

It's based on an old image. The Navy has now made it clear that they are pulling both guns. See the USNI News item that Naval News is working from.


news.usni.org

Navy Details Hypersonic Missile Plan for Zumwalt Destroyers, Virginia Submarines - USNI News

ARLINGTON, Va. – The trio of Zumwalt-class guided-missile destroyers could each field up to a dozen hypersonic missiles, with the first ship ready for testing in 2025, USNI News has learned. The service has determined that the hull can accommodate four 87-inch missile tubes that can each hold...
news.usni.org news.usni.org

The omission of SM-2 in the drawing is, I'm sure, just an oversight by @covertshores. Zumwalt has fired SM-2 Block IIIA and there is a dedicated Block IIIAZ version in production to take advantage of SPY-3 and Interrupted CW illumination.


www.navalnews.com

Raytheon Wins Contract to Produce 269 SM-2 Missiles - Naval News

Raytheon Missiles & Defense, a Raytheon Technologies business, was awarded a $578 million contract to produce 54 SM-2 Block IIIAZ all up round upgrades for the United States and 215 Standard Missile-2 all up rounds for seven partner nations.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
 
Last edited:
Moose said:
TWZ on "ZEUS."
www.thedrive.com

Navy's Stealth Destroyers Could Get Massive Upgrades Beyond Hypersonic Missiles

Days after returning from its first deployment, the Navy is lauding an intriguing future and the possibility of big upgrades for DDG-1000.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com
Click to expand...
Any thoughts as to why the Navy ripping out the new radar specifically developed for the Zumwalt class the Raytheon AESA X-band SPY-3 MFR radar and planning to replace it with the Raytheon S-band SPY-6(V)3 under the ZEUS upgrade program. The Navy had claimed Zumwalt to have successfully conducted live firing trials with its radar and special to class missiles (plus Ford which also fits the SPY-3) with the semi-active ESSM Block 1 and its Joint Universal Weapon Link (JUWL) in development for many years by Raytheon and the SM-2 Block IIIAZ also with its JUWL (the new JUWL required as SPY-3 a X-band whereas the semi-active ESSMs and SM-2s fired by Burkes and Ticos use the S-band SPY-1 and the continuous wave fire control terminal target illumination I/J band radars AN/SPG-62)

The DOT&E did report problems with the Zumwalt system in testing on the Self-Defense Test Ship and in determining the root cause .

If Navy is taking this option in replacing the SPY-3 radar were they falsifying the report of Zumwalt's successful tests of its AAW defense system, otherwise why bother, no doubt at a large cost?
 
Essentially, they hate having an orphan system with a unique support and training pipeline, its own unique weapon inventory, and no obvious upgrade path.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom