CLEARANCE: Top Secret
- Jul 4, 2010
- Reaction score
Yeah I imagine larger SPY-6 panel is among the higher priorities as requirements are being hammered out. And I agree it should be in the Navy's planning to mount SPY-6 on the 3 Zs, but right now they're not talking much about their roadmap for upgrading the class beyond the immediate future.marauder2048 said:For the radar/hull study they did investigate a DDG-1000 variant that incorporated AMDR-S and replaced the DDG 1000'sMoose said:Along the same lines, what is meant when he says "DDG Flight III Combat System" might mean "the same hardware again" or the next baseline in its
continued evolution of Aegis in the OA/VM direction.
TSCE combat system with the core of the Aegis combat system. My hope is that, at the very least, the SPY-4 apertures
get filled with something useful.
The relationship between TSCE, Aegis, and the future of combatant software architecture is something interesting that there's not enough current, good reporting on. The Navy loves Aegis, for obvious reasons, but some of the decisions which led to TSCE probably still hold up on a new, integrated combatant. So are we likely to see fully a virtual baseline of Aegis that can run in a TSCE-style network? And if so, can we use the 3 Z's to develop that architecture?