At the end of October 2013, at the American shipyard Bath Iron Works, the lead destroyer (destroyer) of the DD (X) project, the DDG-1000 USS Zumwalt (in Russian transcription “Zamvolt” or “Zumvolt”), was launched. The destroyer USS Zumwalt, named after Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, is one of the most unusual and controversial developments in American military shipbuilding. Great hopes are pinned on the ships of this project, the American press has already dubbed them "ships of the future" and "tomorrow of the American Navy." However, the overseas press is supposed to sing praises to the US government and the Pentagon, but many military experts fundamentally disagree with the enthusiastic assessments of both this ship and the project as a whole.
The history of the DD(X) project dates back to the nineties of the 20th century. Then the US Navy announced the requirements for promising ships that were supposed to enter service at the beginning of the 21st century; these programs were designated CG21 (cruiser) and DD21 (destroyer) - later the cruiser and destroyer development programs were renamed CG(X) and DD(X), respectively. The requirements for new ships were very high: cruisers and destroyers had to perform a wide range of combat and support tasks. Depending on the situation, any of the promising CG(X) and DD(X) ships, as conceived by the US Navy command, could attack enemy ships or submarines, protect land and sea formations from air attack, and, if necessary, launch missile strikes against mechanized or well-fortified enemy units, evacuate the population from areas of natural disasters or countries covered by revolutions, etc.
However, estimates at the pre-design stage showed that the cost of such a "universal" ship turns out to be prohibitive. In this regard, the US Congress in 2002 insisted on the closure of one of the programs - based on the results of the analysis, it was decided to abandon the development and construction of CG (X) cruisers and stop at the creation of destroyers. Thus, after the end of the service life of all Ticonderoga-class cruisers in the US Navy, Arleigh Burke and DD(X)-class destroyers were supposed to be used as multi-purpose ships with missile weapons.
Initially, the Navy hoped to receive 32 DD(X) destroyers. Later, this number was reduced to 24, and then only to 7 units due to the high cost of new technologies and solutions that should be applied in the construction of advanced destroyers. The US House of Representatives is still skeptical about this program (mainly for financial reasons) and therefore initially allocated money only for the construction of one (!) DD (X) - DDG-1000, solely for the possibility of "technology demonstration". Nevertheless, under pressure from the Pentagon, another $2.6 billion was allocated in 2007 for the construction of the hulls of two more destroyers, DDG-1001 and DDG-1002. On this, the “epic” with the promising destroyers of the DD (X) project ended, and as a result, the initial figure of 32 ships turned into 3 (!) Pennants, which, as everyone understands, will not make any weather in the fleet.
Preparations for the construction of the lead ship of the DD(X) series began in 2008, and the laying ceremony took place in November 2011. At the end of October 2013, the first destroyer of the new project - DDG-1000 Zumwalt - was launched. Preliminary work for the construction of the hull of the second ship DDG-1001 (USS Michael Monsoor) started in September 2009 at the Ingalls Shipbuilding plant. In 2015, it was supposed to hand over the lead destroyer, Zumwalt, to the customer, as well as continue the construction of the following ships. However, due to a number of shortcomings, the commissioning date for the first ship of the series, the DDG-1000, has been postponed to the end of 2016, and there is no guarantee that it will be met. The deadlines for the rest of the ships are also constantly shifting upwards.
And now the most interesting thing: the cost of each of the three new destroyers of the DD (X) project, taking into account the costs of design and testing, has already overcome the $ 7 billion mark. For comparison, the ships of the Arleigh Burke project cost the US budget about 1.8 billion each, which is almost four times less than the cost of the Zamwalt and its "brothers". The new destroyer ended up costing the Pentagon more than the last American Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77), which caused a storm of indignation in the leadership of the US Navy. At the same time, it should be taken into account that the timing of the construction of the third destroyer, which is planned to be put on the slipway only in 2018, will lead to a further increase in the cost of the ship. What it will be like in the end, one can only guess, but it is already clear that the military budget is not able to pull another “black hole” like the F-35 fifth-generation fighter, which, despite tens of billions of dollars spent on its development, is still has not yet been adopted by the US Army due to serious problems with the propulsion system and avionics.
The first thing that catches your eye in the ships of the DD(X) project is their unusual appearance. In the case of the destroyer Zumwalt, reducing visibility in the radar range became the main task when designing the contours of the hull and superstructure. The American destroyer looks like a long and narrow platform, in the middle of which there is a protruding superstructure complex shape, - somewhat reminiscent of its appearance as an armadillo of the late 19th century. All the contours of the surface of the ship are a system of planes mated to each other at different angles (the same technology was used in the development of the T-14 Armata tank - just look at its complex asymmetrical turret). The hull and superstructure of the ship are covered on the outside with radio-absorbing materials about 2.5 cm thick, the number of protruding antennas and other parts of the hull has been reduced to a minimum.
The armament of the Zumwalt destroyer consists of 20 Mk-57 universal launchers with the ability to install up to 80 missiles, two long-range 155-mm AGS artillery mounts and 30-mm rapid-fire anti-aircraft systems. The destroyer provides for the basing of a helicopter and several unmanned aerial vehicles. The displacement of the ship is approaching the mark of 15 thousand tons, which makes the destroyers of the DD (X) project the largest modern non-aircraft-carrying warships in the world after the Soviet / Russian nuclear missile cruisers of the project 1144 (a series of four cruisers built in the USSR from 1973 to 1989 , at the moment - the only surface ships with a nuclear power plant in the Russian Navy), whose displacement reaches 26 thousand tons. as the main power plant USS Zumwalt uses two Rolls-Royce Marine Trent-30 gas turbine engines with a total capacity of 105,000 hp. The engines are connected to electric generators into a single power system that supplies energy to all ship systems, including two electric motors that rotate the propellers. Such an "architecture" of the power plant made it possible to provide high driving performance - the declared maximum speed destroyer exceeds 30 knots.
It would seem that everything is fine (except for the cost, of course), but as is often the case in recent times with American military developments, there are nuances:
1. Seaworthiness. The destroyers of the DD(X) project used a daring, innovative solution - a sharp, reverse-angled, "ram-type" stem. This shape of the nose is the embodiment of the opposite, compared to the now common, concept of wave flow around the bow and keel of the ship - and, according to American shipbuilders, this should have provided the destroyer with good seaworthiness with a low, for the sake of reducing radar visibility, board. This shape of the bow of the ship should "pierce", "cut" the waves - instead of "climbing" on the wave. However, during sea trials, it was found that even in medium seas, the USS Zumwalt begins to seriously “nod”, which has the most negative effect on its speed and stability. It is not possible to eliminate this problem, since it stems from the existing geometry of the ship's hull; the only thing that can be done is to try to somehow neutralize its negative impact on the seaworthiness of the ship. True, American engineers have not yet figured out exactly how.
2. Armament. Initially, it was assumed that the DDG-1000 destroyer would be able to perform the functions of both fire support and missile defense in any theater of operations, as well as provide air defense cover for sea and land formations. To do this, they planned to equip it with SM-2MR or SM-6 missiles, and for missile defense tasks - with promising modifications of the SM-3 anti-missile. However, at the moment, nothing (!) Of the above has been installed on the already finished Zamvolte, and due to the problems of adapting air defense and missile defense launchers to the hull design, it is not clear when it will be installed - and whether it will be at all!
3. Radar capabilities. In addition to radar stealth, detection means are of great importance for ships of this type - after all, if you are “invisible” to the enemy radar, but you yourself cannot detect the enemy, then all the advantages of stealth technologies immediately come to naught. For destroyers of the DD(X) series, a bunch of two powerful radar systems of different ranges was initially developed: AN / SPY-3 - for working on low-flying / high-altitude targets and targets in near space and AN / SPY-4 - a "volumetric search" radar station. Faced with the fact that the SPY-4, being developed for the "dead in the Bose" cruiser CG (X), does not fit the hull of the DDG1000 project, the Pentagon, without hesitation, simply stopped its development in 2010, and began designing a new AMDR system ( Air Missile Defense Radar) specifically for the DDG-1000 Zumwalt. But then serious problems began with AMDR, and at the moment the Zamwalt is equipped only with the AN / SPY-3 radar system, which meets only half of the stated requirements of the US Navy for this type of ship.
4. Versatility. There is also no other type of weaponry on the Zamvolta, which is mandatory for modern ships if they are declared as independent combat units of the fleet - these are anti-ship missiles. The US Navy has only one type of them - the Harpoon family of subsonic anti-ship missiles. However, the Harpoon could not be adapted to the DDG-1000 mine launchers - since the Harpoon is launched from its own four-container installations, for which, in turn, there was no place in the destroyer's hull. Vicious circle. As a result, “Zamvolt” was left without anti-ship missiles at all! In order to somehow justify this obvious failure of theirs, the Pentagon said “that the new destroyer does not need PC missiles at all, and the easiest way to fight enemy ships is by aircraft from aircraft carriers.” With whom then Zumwalt will fight, they did not specify ...
5. "Technologies of the future". Initially, instead of the 155-caliber artillery system, it was planned to install an electromagnetic gun (EMP) on ships of the DD (X) / GG (X) type, but then they decided to abandon this idea. Including because when firing from an EMF, it would be necessary to temporarily turn off most of the destroyer's electronics, including air defense and missile defense systems, as well as stop the course of the ship and life support systems, otherwise the power system would not be enough to ensure firing. In addition, the resource of the EM gun is extremely small - only a few dozen shots, after which the barrel fails due to huge magnetic and thermal overloads. This problem has not yet been resolved. Research and testing, or rather, “budget development”, under the electromagnetic weapons development program is currently ongoing, but it is unlikely that an EMF with the characteristics that were announced at the start of this program will appear in service with the US Army in the foreseeable future.
Of course, it cannot be said that Zumwalt is completely devoid of merit. He has them: stealth in the radar range, and a new generation hybrid power plant, and high automation of all ship control systems, as a result of which the crew is only 140 people, and the AGS rapid-fire artillery system with a caliber of 155 mm. But given that a number of shortcomings, and quite significant ones, have not yet been eliminated (and some cannot be eliminated in principle), as well as the fact that the cost of one ship has already exceeded $ 7 billion, and will only grow, this nullifies all the advantages of the destroyer.
You can hear the opinion that the futuristic Zumwalt is the prototype of the "ship of the future", but the "ship of the future" is characterized not appearance, but by a combination of stealth and low noise, seaworthiness, survivability and firepower, which makes it possible to equally successfully deal with enemy surface, underwater and air targets. And, most importantly, the “ship of the future”, whether it be an aircraft carrier, destroyer or cruiser, should also be distinguished by a reasonable price, allowing it to be produced and put into service in serial quantities. And Zumwalt does not meet these criteria - at the moment it is just a very expensive "toy", "a showcase of American military-industrial complex technologies," as one of the US senators put it. So what did the Americans end up creating - the destroyer of "tomorrow" and the "thunderstorm of the seas" capable of terrifying the enemy fleet, or the floating "museum" advertising the capabilities (and appetites) of the American military-industrial complex? Considering that only 3 ships of the DD(X) project will be built and put into service, the answer is obvious.
3 × MQ-8 Fire Scout UAVs
Destroyers of the Zamvolt type(English) Zumwalt class guide missile destroyers) is a new type of missile-armed US Navy destroyers (also formerly known as DD(X)), with a focus on attacking coastal and land targets. This type is a smaller version of the ships of the DD-21 program, which have been discontinued. The first Zumwalt-class destroyer, DDG-1000, was launched on October 29, 2013.
The main weapons of the destroyers of this series are 80 Tomahawk cruise missiles and artillery systems, which predetermines the main task of the destroyers to support ground forces by attacking coastal targets.
The ship uses a promising system for controlling all weapons through Raytheon's TSCE-I with the rejection of the concept of local computer systems. The destroyer has stealth tools that reduce its RCS by 50 times.
The program is named after Admiral, Chief of Naval Operations Elmo R. Zumwalt.
History of design and construction
Sketch: launching missiles from the vertical silos of the destroyer Zumwalt
Among US warships under development, the DDG-1000 should precede the Littoral Combat Ship and possibly follow the CG(X) cruiser in competition with the anti-aircraft CVN-21. The DDG-1000 program is the result of a significant reorganization of the DD21 program, the budget of which was cut by more than 50% by Congress (as part of the SC21 program of the 1990s).
Initially, the Navy hoped to build 32 of these destroyers. This number was later reduced to 24 and then to seven due to the high cost of new experimental technologies to be included in the destroyer. The US House of Representatives remains skeptical of this program due to the ship's problems with missile defense systems, as discussed below, as well as the lower stealth and much lower cruise missile loading of the Ohio submarines. Although the old converted Ohio-class submarines are capable of carrying 154 cruise missiles instead of the 80 missiles of the Zamwalt, the cost of converting an old nuclear submarine is more than half that. Therefore, initially, money was allocated only for the construction of one DDG-1000 for "technology demonstration".
Initial funding for the destroyer was included in the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act. In 2007, $2.6 billion was allocated to finance and build two Zumwalt-class destroyers.
On February 14, 2008, Bath Iron Works was selected to build USS Zumwalt, number DDG-1000, and Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding to build DDG-1001, at a cost of $1.4 billion each. According to Defense Industry Daily, the cost could rise to $3.2 billion per ship, plus $4.0 billion in life cycle costs per ship.
July 22, 2008 it was decided to build only two such destroyers. A few weeks later, a decision was made to build a third destroyer of this type.
| Name | Number | Shipyard | Bookmark | Launching | Entry into service |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zamwalt USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000) |
1000 | Bath Iron Works | November 17, 2011 | October 29, 2013 | October 16, 2016 |
| Michael Monsoor USS Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) |
1001 | Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding | May 23, 2013 | June 21, 2016 | April 24, 2018 |
| Lyndon B. Johnson USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002) |
1002 | Bath Iron Works | January 30, 2017 | 2017 (plan) | 2018 (plan) |
After commissioning, the Zamvolt-class destroyers will be operated together with the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
On December 7, 2015, the first of the three destroyers, the Zamwalt, estimated by that time at $4.4 billion, went to sea for sea trials.
The cost of building all three destroyers is estimated at $12.73 billion. The total cost of the program, which includes, in addition to the cost of building ships, research and development costs, is estimated at approximately $22.5 billion.
In November 2017, it became known that the United States was partially reducing project funding by refusing to create some systems for subsequent ships in the series. In particular, they will abandon the general ship computing environment and the Mk57 vertical missile launch system.
Design
The general design scheme of the Zamvolta, where its main parts are visible: a single power plant, a radar, missile launchers, a sonar, and an artillery system
Vessel control system
Zamwalt's command bridge.
Power plant
In Zamvolt, the method of the universal power plant "turbine-generator-electric motor", known from Ohio submarines, was used: the engine rotates only electric generators and then all energy consumers, from radar to ship propulsion - electric, that is, the ship is driven by electric motors. Instead of a nuclear reactor, the Zamvolts use a diesel-gas turbine engine.
However, such a system dramatically increases the cost of the propulsion system, reduces its efficiency and reliability, therefore, in the Ohio submarines, it was used only for movement at low speed in the creep mode in order to reduce acoustic noise on the propeller shaft gearboxes. Stealth tools for Zamvolt were the core concept of the project, so the same design solution was chosen [ clarify] . However, it was not taken into account that such a system proved to be insufficiently reliable and powerful for cruising speed, so the Ohio switched to the traditional direct power supply from the turbine to the propeller shaft gearboxes at cruising speed, bypassing two stages of energy conversion. Zamvolta designers convinced US Navy customers that they had managed to solve the reliability problems of an installation of this class and direct mode through gearboxes was not required. But in practice, when trying to use the Zamvolt at full speed, the power plant broke down in less than 1 month of operation and required the vessel to be towed for repairs without power supply.
Some analysts indicate that perhaps the choice of a single power plant was associated with an experimental gun based on a railgun, which required a lot of electrical energy. But this gun has not yet been tested and not installed on the ship - a traditional cannon was used.
Armament
cruise missiles
Testing of the Zamvolta artillery mount
The main armament of the ship is 20 universal launchers Mk-57 with a total capacity of 80 missiles. The main missile is supposed to be the Tomahawk. The missiles are placed along the sides in PVLS vertical launchers. According to the designers, this increases the survivability of the ship, since in the event of a freelance rocket explosion, it does not occur inside the ship, but on board with the release of the main energy of the explosion overboard. Critics note that, on the other hand, anti-ship missiles will almost always hit the Zamvolt ammunition and the anti-ship missile explosion will be enhanced by the partial detonation of Tomahawks.
Artillery mount "land" caliber
For the destroyer, prototypes of the most exotic artillery system technologies, including a railgun, were discussed, but in the end they settled on 155-mm artillery mounts of an unconventional active-reactive scheme, which provides an increased range of up to 148 km (LRLAP). At such a distance, artillery is only able to accurately hit the target with guided missiles, and the accuracy required is higher than that of cruise missiles, since the mass of the warhead is much less.
To achieve a range of 148 km, it was necessary to lengthen the rocket part of the active-rocket projectile of the artillery system and therefore it does not fit entirely into the cradle of the artillery shutter. The Zamvolt gun for reloading must take a vertical position each time.
But the main reason for criticism from the Pentagon is that the cost of one guided projectile for the gun reached 0.8-1.2 million dollars, and taking into account depreciation and current repairs of the gun, the cost of a shot reached 2 million dollars. In other words, the Zamvolt projectile has become more expensive than the Tomahawk cruise missile, which has an order of magnitude greater range and power (weight) of the delivered ammunition. The command of the US Navy also questioned the LRLAP program and did not include the purchase of shells for the artillery system in the budgets of 2016 and 2017, and only 100 shells fired by the manufacturer for $ 120 million in 2009 are available to all three planned destroyers of the Zamvolt series. In 2016, the US Navy command was considering abandoning the LRLAP guns or changing ammunition, as the current cost of the shells is "unacceptable".
stealth tools
Floating model of Zamwalt, on which the designers proved to the US Navy that the destroyer would not capsize in a strong wave
The ship is made with flat sloping surfaces to reflect radiation from enemy radars into the sky, the bow of the ship is also beveled like a breakwater into the sky, since the sharp edge of the bow of the ship is a strong reflector of radio waves. Many American shipbuilding experts immediately stated that the tumblehome profile makes the Zamvolt dangerous for the crew due to reduced stability and the ship can roll over with strong rolling. Therefore, the uninterrupted operation of the ship's power plant is critical for the "dynamic stability of the ship" due to movement, since if the engine breaks down, a stationary ship can be unstable. In response to this criticism, the ship's designers created a smaller copy of the Zamwalt with an electric motor and demonstrated this model to US Navy customers, proving that the ship was stable.
Add-on "Zamvolt". In the photo, under the outer cladding, cork wood shields are visible for thermal insulation of the structure.
To prevent reflections from small protrusions on the surfaces, the ship is painted with ferrite paint, which has partial properties of a radio absorbing material.
Service
Incidentssee also
Notes
- DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer
- Andrew Tarantola. America's Newest and Deadliest Destroyer Has Finally Set Sail (English) . Gizmodo(October 29, 2013). Retrieved 12 December 2017.
- Losses in Iraq // "Foreign military review": journal. - 2008. - No. 8. - S. 76.
- "Zumwalts" today will be like battleships during the Second World War - US Navy Command // October 16, 2013
- The admiral called the newest destroyer accepted into the US Navy the Batman ship // Lenta.ru
- Third Zumwalt-class destroyer to be named Lyndon B. Johnson
- David Sharp. Largest Destroyer Built for Navy Headed to Sea for Testing . Associated Press (December 7, 2015). Retrieved 9 December 2015.
- Documents were signed on the transfer of the lead destroyer of the DDG-1000 class Zumwalt to the US Navy. Center for Analysis of the World Arms Trade (TSAMTO)(May 23, 2016). Retrieved May 23, 2016.
- Navy Requires $450 Million More to Complete Zumwalt-Class Due to Shipyard Performance. USNI News (April 6, 2016). Retrieved November 27, 2016.
Text: Sergey Balakin
Recently, the first entry into the sea of the American "shipbuilding miracle" - the "dreadnought of the XXI century" DDG-1000 "Zumwalt" ("Zumwalt"). Much has already been said about this extravagant ship, we will not repeat it. But we will try to answer the question that involuntarily arises in any person who is more or less familiar with the fleet: why on earth is this floating monster with a displacement of more than 14 thousand tons classified as a destroyer? Why is it not a cruiser - after all, in terms of size and tactical purpose, the Zamvolt is closest to this particular class?
But here is the paradox: according to the author, it was not specifications and not tactics, but features of English terminology. One might even say that linguistics is to blame. I'll try to explain.
The founders of the class of destroyers appeared in England in the first half of the 90s of the XIX century. They were enlarged destroyers with reinforced artillery weapons. As planned, their main task is to fight the enemy (then it was understood - French) destroyers. Therefore, they were called “torpedoboat destroyers” - “destroyers” or “fighters” of destroyers (I remind you that in Russia a torpedo was called a self-propelled mine for a long time, hence the destroyers, not torpedo bombers). In practice, these fast ships have proven to be more versatile than their original specialty. Therefore, the word "torpedoboat" from the name of their class disappeared, and they began to be called simply "destroyers" - literally "destroyers". This word was borrowed by other fleets, and it has spread widely around the world in various variations. For example, the Poles called ships of this class "destroyers" (niszczycieli), and the Yugoslavs - "destroyers" (razaraci).
"Conflict" - one of the first destroyers of the British fleet, 1894
In the Russian Imperial Navy, analogues of British destroyers appeared at the end of the 19th century, and by the beginning of the Russo-Japanese War, there were already dozens of units. Officially, they belonged to the class of destroyers, but since they were still more capital ships, they were usually called fighters, and sometimes destroyers, but with the addition of the word "squadron". The official class destroyers, abbreviated as destroyers, appeared in our fleet in 1907. Ships of this class, both here and abroad, developed rapidly and became an increasingly important part of the world's fleets. There are destroyers in the Russian Navy today, although this is already exclusively a tribute to traditions. After all, modern multi-purpose rocket ships for a long time and not squadrons, and not destroyers at all ...
It should be noted that in modern fleets the division of surface ships into classes is generally very arbitrary. Since warships are multi-purpose, corvettes, frigates, destroyers and cruisers differ from each other only in size, and a look at the range of these sizes is very subjective. Almost the same type of ships in Italy are listed as destroyers, and in France as frigates. Or American destroyers of the Arleigh Burke type and cruisers of the Ticonderoga type: they are approximately the same in terms of displacement and armament, but the former are destroyers, and the latter are cruisers. But why then "Zamvolt" - not a cruiser?
Cruiser CG-71 Cape St. George" - one of the ships of the "Ticonderoga" class
Yes, because the class of cruisers today is dying out. With the exception of one relic model in the Peruvian fleet, launched more than 70 years ago, only two countries remained owners of cruisers in the world - Russia and the United States. Moreover, in the United States, cruisers are represented only by ships of the Ticonderoga type, which are already being withdrawn from service and will be decommissioned in the near future. Thus, cruisers - the recent beauty and pride of the fleet - will remain in the past. From what? And everything is simple: the reason for this is the cruise boom that began a quarter of a century ago. The cruiser in English is cruiser, and cruising is cruise. Cruise liner - cruise liner or cruise ship. A clear lack of English terminology: they began to confuse a cruiser with a passenger ship! A typical example: on a site with the world's largest selection of photographs of ships (I will not give its name, so as not to be considered an advertisement), moderators almost daily have to transfer photographs of liners to the appropriate section. Since the authors regularly put them in the "Cruisers" directory - "Cruisers".
Nowadays the word "cruiser" is often associated with a cruise ship...
Returning to the Zamwalt, it becomes clear why American sailors like destroyers more than cruisers. Agree: to serve on a "cruiser" or on a "destroyer" - it sounds completely different. So the word “destroyer” coined more than a century ago (some attribute its authorship to the reformist admiral and “father of the Dreadnought” Jackie Fisher) turned out to be extremely successful. The versatility of its interpretation makes it possible to call any strike ship a destroyer. Even such a monster as Zamwalt.
While all "progressive humanity ™" is celebrating the launch of the American miracle of technology of the DDG-1000 destroyer of the Zumwalt class ... and the "quilted jackets" sneer contemptuously - "I drank this..." I, looking at these "aah-sighs", decided to figure out whether this "iron" is worth 4 kopecks of a billion dollars.
The ears of the DDG-1000 are growing out of the "promising destroyer of the 21st century" program DD21(later - DD(X)), which was conceived simultaneously with the program "aircraft carrier of the XXI century" CVN-21(CVN(X)), missile cruiser CG(X) and the Littoral Combat Ship program ( LCS). All programs are wonderful and worthy of separate stories. But later. And I will definitely return to the littoral ship (LCS) and the new aircraft carrier later. :) In the meantime, we are talking about Zumwalt.
DD21 program recognized oily even the American congressmen ... and reduced it by 50% ("well, well," the guys from Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding apparently grunted at that moment, "we'll sleep on you ... later"), somewhat cutting the "sturgeon" and reducing the number of ships.
Initially, the military was counting on 32 new destroyers. Then the program was successively cut down to 24, seven, and at the end - three pieces.
About the builders of the miracle ship
Apart from building the ship itself General Dynamics(the second one is building at another shipyard Northrop Grumman) in the project were also noted Raytheon(designers of the AN / SPY-3 radar) and lockheed martin(designed the second radar AN / SPY-4).
Remember them?
Yes, yes - these are the ones who have a child without an eye (c). Only Raytheon was not there, but Boeing was instead.
Do you have a bad feeling?
It doesn't let you down. Here, too, it did not turn out very "smoothly". :)
So, about the radar - a revolutionary dual-band radar was planned on Zumwalt DBR"Dual Band Radar" (AN/SPY-3 + AN/SPY-4).
The same one should have previously been installed on the newest aircraft carrier Gerald Ford (the aforementioned CVN-21 program), launched 2 years ago, but ...
The stone flower from Danila the master did not come out. (c) It will not seem to be dual-band.
AN / SPY-4 - hacked to death. AN / SPY-3 - not yet completed.
Yes, the attentive reader noticed correctly - the aircraft carrier Gerald Ford, already launched in 2013, is still blind and deaf without a radar, and it is not clear when it will begin to see clearly.
So there is still no such aircraft carrier (otherwise some already brazenly consider it in the layouts) in the United States. And optimists say that it is unlikely to be completed before 2018.
Armament and design features
The ship is armed ... in my opinion - strange.
1. Two automatic 155 mm gun mounts AGS(Advanced Gun System). The total ammunition load of two guns is 600 rounds.
The guns were created for special ammunition and can not use conventional 155 mm artillery shells.
The fantastic indicator of the firing range (they promised up to 100 miles, in fact they received 67 miles - 117 km) is due to the fact that the so-called. corrected (guided by GPS) active-rocket projectiles are essentially two-meter rockets with 10 kg of explosives (the mass of the projectile itself is 100 kg).
I wonder how much one such "shell" will cost? Considering prices for much more simple .
2. 20 four-cell UVP Mk-57 with a total capacity of 80 missiles.
With these, everything is clear - the younger brother of the UVP Mk.41 to accommodate Tomahawks, ASROC, ESSM and other missiles.
They are located along the sides of the ship before and after the superstructure, being the "additional protection" of the ship.
By the way - with the "Standards" a misunderstanding came out.
It was precisely stated about the near-field missiles (ESSM), anti-submarine ASROC and about Tomahawks. It is not clear with the "Standards" - since
On July 31, 2008, at a House Armed Services Committee hearing, (Vice Admiral Barry McCullough, Deputy Commander of the US Navy and Allison Stiller, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Shipbuilding Programs) reported: “The URO destroyer of the DDG-1000 type is not capable of carrying out air defense in the theater of operations, including the ability to effectively use Standard anti-aircraft guided missiles of the SM-2, SM-3 or SM-6 types, and even more so cannot solve the tasks of anti-missile defense from ballistic missiles".
This is strange.
But judging by the fact that even in our pedwiki, the SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6 missiles are not in the weapons nomenclature (and the wiki is usually about American weapons - on the contrary, it exaggerates, giving rise to by strat bomber B-1B)
Something is really wrong with them. Maybe they are "not friendly" with the new radar?
3.
Two single-barreled 57 mm anti-aircraft gun mounts Bofors Mk110(ammunition - 480 rounds for each gun mount).
But what about the good old six-barreled "Vulcan-Phalanx"?
Two single-barreled 30 mm anti-aircraft guns from Bushmaster.
And why did the promoted super accurate and powerful 57-mm, planned until 2012, turn out to be bad?
Well, it’s better for us - now the Zumwalt will not be able to meet anti-ship missiles with powerful 57-mm shells from a range of 15 (!) Kilometers, as it could.
:)
4. Two helicopters (SH-60 LAMPS Seahawk or MH-60R Seahawk) or one helicopter and three drones aircraft helicopter type MQ-8 "Fire Scout".
With a displacement of 14,500 tons, the Zumwalt will become the world's largest destroyer, displacing even the American Ticonderoga-class missile cruisers.
Only our nuclear missile cruiser "Peter the Great" of project 1144 is larger than it.
TARKR "Peter the Great" (project 1144)
The strange shape of the Zumwalt hull - the sides inclined inside the hull, the barrels of gun mounts hiding in the turret, the faceted superstructure ... are due to following the fashionable "Stealth" technology and the desire to hide from enemy radars.
I don’t know about you, but I immediately remember by a miracle (and by a computer) another Stealth iron floating in the air - :)
Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk
True, remembering the aviation programs "Stealth" I have a question - what is the thickness radio absorbent coating?
Pedivikia says it's an inch, but I don't believe her.
We remember that the thickness of the RPM should be not less half wavelength.
And what about the resistance of the coating / RMP (radar absorbing materials)?
Will it climb after each flight, like the most expensive F-22 fighter in the world?
How resistant is it to the aggressive marine environment?
Why is this all?
The main purpose of the Zumwalt is to attack coastal and ground targets, as well as to combat aircraft and provide fire support to troops from the sea.
It is not clear about the fight against aviation (given the above about the "Standards"). Although a lot could have changed since 2008, I admit.
Everything else is clear. A ship to bring democracy from the sea to all Papuans.
Why Papuans?
Yes, because the main "trick" - cunning 155-mm guns do not allow to work with impunity living on the coast. For the ship will fall into the zone of action of coastal anti-ship missiles (I remind you that both the Bastion with the P-800 Onyx and the Caliber with its various anti-ship missiles have a firing range of at least 300 km). And even anti-ship missiles of a lower class - for example, the not modernized X-35 (range 130 km) will get it.
One of early versions DDG-1000
The second moment - hitting a point target from a cannon even from a distance of 100 kilometers - is unrealistic (which is why "cunning" GPS-guided projectiles with a CEP of 50 meters are used). But we remember the electronic warfare systems to protect just the same from such "high-precision" weapons (HTO) - from bombs, missiles and GPS-guided projectiles.
So the price of such shooters will be high, and the result (on a normal enemy, and not on the Papuans) is doubtful.
And will a projectile (with a CEP of 50 meters and an explosive mass of only 10 kg) replace expensive high-precision weapons?
IMHO - it clearly does not pull to replace adjustable bombs. We'll have to do it the old fashioned way - to carry GBUs and JDAMs with Hornets from an aircraft carrier.
And "Tomahawks" can also be launched from cheaper "Arly Burks", which have already been set up with a wagon and a small cart.
Comparative sizes of Zumwalt and Ticonderoga
Another point is the lack of anti-ship weapons in the current configuration.
"Harpoons" were not given to Zumwalt, and shooting at ships from miracle cannons is a rotten undertaking, in my opinion.
And what is this destroyer without the possibility of attacking enemy ships?
Turns out big "gunboat".
Well, the last - about the notorious "stealth".
Leaving even an inch-thick RPM alone (what will we do with meter and decimeter range locators?), let's think about how the Zumwalt will mask the headlights of the radar from the enemy? You can't close them with a RPM, and a corner reflector from them - be healthy!
Mystery.
How much does it cost?
And didn't you drink it? The question is legitimate.
For the initial cost of the DDG-1000 from $0.75 billion has already reached $4.4 billion.
The nuclear aircraft carrier of the Nimitz class of the latest series cost, EMNIP, $ 4.5 billion. Aircraft carrier, Carl!
Nimitz-class nuclear aircraft carrier
For Zumwalt, the figure of 4.4 billion does not seem to be the limit.
Let's see how much the finished ship will cost, and two other sisterships under construction, for the completion of which money was squeezed out.
By the way, I came across the news (I’ll find it - I’ll add a link) that Raytheon received a contract to develop additional software for promising Zumwalt-class destroyers worth ... don’t fall - 241.3 million dollars!
"What kind of software is this?" - ask. And software is a graphical interface for destroyer engine control programs, as well as for damage control systems.
If additional software costs as much as you paid for the main one? :)
Results
The DDG-1000 is being positioned more and more not as a wunderwaffe, but as a technology demonstrator. And it is right.
Because as a "super destroyer" Zumwalt does not look very convincing. Especially when you consider the lack of anti-ship missiles and the "ambiguity" of the main caliber artillery. If the "Aegis standards" SM-2/3/6 are not included in the composition of his weapons (which there is reason to suspect), then the matter is generally a pipe.
Yes, and the "promising radar" must first be brought to mind. And then there’s another question - will there be a “dual-band” there, or maybe you’ll have to put on the good old AN / SPY-1D once again.
In the bottom line, we can summarize that so far, in addition to a technology demonstrator ... "Destroyer of the XXI century" is the most expensive gunboat on the planet.
Write it down as pluses or minuses - it's up to you.
Enchanting comment, could not pass by:
In any case, a $3 billion ship is not serious.
anti-ship weapons worth at least $500 million in development and $1 million worth of the product itself will sink these ships in batches with a graphical interface for engine damage.
P.P.S.
I've come here to scold the "expert" corrects me. Thanks a lot to him for his attention to my modest person. :)
He caught me in two inaccuracies!
And he tried to flog, but it was not there ... the expert of "All Russia" (with a bunch of regalia).
Zumwalt is not a destroyer, but a wildly expensive gunboat.
The floating pyramid of Cheops, as if arrived from another dimension. What era does this ship belong to? Who and why created this outlandish design? Perhaps everything is much simpler. The appearance reflects the essence - a grandiose financial pyramid that absorbed over 7 billion dollars at a time.
Definitely, "Zamvolt" has something to be proud of: the largest and most expensive destroyer in the entire history of the existence of this class of ships. And this record will remain at least until the beginning of the 2030s. Its sinister silhouette leaves no one indifferent. But what secrets lurk inside this "starship"?
Stealth? Railgun? linux?
Rocket-artillery stealth ship is being built using the latest technologies, many of which were first introduced in the navy. The key direction was chosen to reduce visibility in the radio wave range of the EM spectrum, in which most detection tools operate. In the architecture and appearance of the Zamvolt, the features of stealth technology aggressively appear.
Pyramidal superstructure. Powerful obstruction of the sides - due to which radio waves are reflected towards the sky, which excludes their repeated reflection from the surface of the water. Stealth housings for artillery pieces. The complete absence of masts, radiocontrast mechanisms and equipment on the upper deck. A breakwater nose that allows you not to “climb the wave”, as ordinary ships do, but, on the contrary, hide from enemy radars among the crests of the waves. Finally, the entire body of the Zamvolta is finished with ferromagnetic paints and radio-absorbing coatings.
These techniques are well known among shipbuilders around the world. Russian corvettes and frigates of a new generation (for example, the Guardian), the French ships Lafayette, the Swedish stealth corvettes of the Visby type ... But in the case of the Zamvolt, the situation is special: for the first time in the history of the fleet, all elements of the stealth technology ”were implemented in such a grandiose, all-encompassing volume on such a large ship.
14.5 thousand tons - another cruiser will envy the size of the destroyer "Zamvolt"(as a comparison: the full displacement of the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, missile cruiser"Moscow" is "only" 11 thousand tons)
There is no doubt about the effectiveness of techniques to reduce visibility for enemy radars: stealth technology is widely used in the creation of naval and aviation equipment around the world.
Much more interesting is the very concept of "Zamvolt". A missile and artillery destroyer with the dimensions of a cruiser is not a 600-ton Swedish corvette. How to hide such an "elephant" in the middle of an open area?
The creators of Zamvolt explain that this is not about complete invisibility, but only about reducing visibility - as a result, Zamvolt will be able to detect the enemy before he notices the stealth destroyer. In official press releases, it is noted that the effective dispersion area (ESR) of a 180-meter destroyer corresponds to the ESR of a small fishing felucca.
Artillery
For the first time in 50 years, an artillery gunship was built. "Zamvolt" - the first and so far the only one of modern cruisers and destroyers that are armed with guns over 5 inches in caliber. The destroyer's bow is fitted with a pair of 155 mm (6.1 in) Advanced Gun System (AGS) automated mounts that fire precision-guided munitions at a range of 160 km. The total ammunition load of the installations is 920 shells.
The revival of naval artillery is a direct consequence of the discussion about providing fire support to amphibious assault forces and delivering strikes on the enemy's coast (more relevant than ever in the era of counter-terrorist operations and local wars).
An artillery shell has a number of important advantages over an aerial bomb or a cruise missile.:
- all-weather application;
- quick response to calls - in a couple of minutes the indicated place will be razed to the ground;
- invulnerability to enemy air defense systems;
- no need for a super-expensive carrier (4/5 generation multirole fighter and a trained pilot) - as well as no risk of losing the carrier on the way to the target;
- a much lower cost of shells compared to the Tomahawk cruise missile - with the same capabilities in providing fire support to the marines.
Moreover, the accuracy of modern artillery shells with a GPS or laser beam guidance system is in no way inferior to similar aircraft and missile ammunition.
It is noteworthy that a system with an unusually large caliber was again chosen as an auxiliary artillery system for the self-defense of the destroyer - the automatic 57 mm Bofors SAK-57 Mk.3 installation (a pair of such guns is installed in the stern of the Zamvolta superstructure).
Unlike traditional rapid fire , SAK-57 fires only 3-4 shots per second, but at the same time it fires special "smart" ammunition, whose fuses are initiated when flying close to the target. And the power of its shells is sufficient not only for self-defense in the near zone, but also for use in naval combat against boats and other enemy weapons at a distance of up to 18 km.
Radars
Initially, a “fancy” DBR radar complex was created for Zamvolt with six AFARs operating in the centimeter and decimeter ranges. This provided unprecedented range and accuracy in detecting any type of air, sea or exoatmospheric targets in Earth orbit - within the DBR radar's field of view.
By 2010, when it became clear that the Zamvolts were too expensive and could not replace existing destroyers, the DBR radar concept was drastically reduced. As part of the Zamvolta detection tools, only the AN / SPY-3 multifunctional centimeter-range radar with three flat active headlights, located on the walls of the destroyer's superstructure, remained.