AEGIS and AEGIS Like escort combatants of the World

TerraN_EmpirE said:

The Final package for Burke Block 3 has yet to be set so Expect Changes to continue for all we know neither model is accurate. we really won't have a clue as to the true form of Block III until DDG 123 the last of the Block IIA and DDG 124 the first of the Block III.


Blitz you need a 900 number on your phone man, Cause You must be Psychic


Military.com

Click to expand...

It will be interesting to imagine what a 2030 destroyer will look like. From now until the mid to late 2020s, the USN seems committed to flight iii burkes as the mainstay of new destroyer production, while the PLAN is investing into 052Ds (initially) and later 055s for the long haul. And by all accounts 055 may end up shaping to be a better (or at least more future proof) ship than flight iii burke (to be expected given the latter is based on an existing, if slightly dated, hull).

So an interesting competition will be how both navies may end up designing a "2030" DDG that is "post flight iii burke/post 052D-055". I expect new technologies like rail guns, DEWs, hypersonic missiles, and exotic materials will feature heavily, along with massive power generation capability with mature IEPS tech for both navies.

My hope is Something like these.

Bltizo said:

I doubt if the flight iii burkes will be able to accommodate a rail gun, especially if they want retain present missile load and the flight iii's radars. Not enough space, not enough power IMHO. But I think flight iii burke gives the USN some time to recapitalise their fleet as a gap filler while they work on a true next gen surface combatant for production post 2020, to build a ship is larger and can affordably and practically field some of DDG-1000s technologies (which would be mature by then), including addition of a possible first generation operational rail gun.

Click to expand...

General Atomics mentioned in 2012 or 2013 that they were already working with the Navy planning the initial rail gun deployments on the Burke vessels.

Whether the Flight III will receive it or not, I cannot say, but I have to imagine that if a Flight IIA can, then a III can too.

Also have read now where the Navy is planning a serious upgrade for least eleven Ticos to modernize them to serve on for another decade or so.

I believe what was said was that the USS arleigh burke (the ship, not the class) could become a test vessel for a rail gun. I imagine that would mean stripping out a variety of other systems for additional power generation, and possibly significant structural modification or add on modules perhaps on the helipad.

So it would be similar to the USN testing a laser weapon on the burke class DDG USS Dewey, in that the destroyer itself is highly modified to test the weapon, but it requires changing the ship's function from a frontline standard warship to a test ship unsuitable for combat. In the USS Dewey's case they took up the entirety of the helipad and then some for the laser weapon — clearly it isn't a tenable refit for standard burkes, that is to say, testing a custom built rig which displaces other critical functions on a destroyer is vastly different to having a combat capable, non displacing refit option for all ships of the same class. I imagine it will be a similar case with USS arleigh burke testing a railgun. Even if they replace the Mk-45 with a rail gun, the power, structural modification, and relative immaturity of a test gun will make any fleet wide refit of a test gun a poor decision.


Flight iii burke with its extra power generation might be able to support a production version rail gun, if it is relatively small calibre meaning the bow can accommodate the weight of it. But I will be very surprised if non flight iii burkes are refit with production rail guns of any type, not only because of their relative lack of power to support such a weapon, but also the relative uselessness for putting such a "good plated" capability on a fleet of aging ships when the USN is already strapped for cash.

But I can see them eventually modifying DDG-1000s with first generation production rail guns, while a 2030 DDG is fitted with a more mature version of the same weapon.


---

I can see the ticos serving for another decade. Most of those upgrades will be small scale software and hardware upgrades, sort of like a mid life refit. Nothing like adding a weapon like a railgun.

Bltizo said:

I believe what was said was that the USS arleigh burke (the ship, not the class) could become a test vessel for a rail gun. I imagine that would mean stripping out a variety of other systems for additional power generation, and possibly significant structural modification or add on modules perhaps on the helipad.

Even if they replace the Mk-45 with a rail gun, the power, structural modification, and relative immaturity of a test gun will make any fleet wide refit of a test gun a poor decision.


Flight iii burke with its extra power generation might be able to support a production version rail gun, if it is relatively small calibre meaning the bow can accommodate the weight of it. But I will be very surprised if non flight iii burkes are refit with production rail guns of any type, not only because of their relative lack of power to support such a weapon, but also the relative uselessness for putting such a "good plated" capability on a fleet of aging ships when the USN is already strapped for cash.

But I can see them eventually modifying DDG-1000s with first generation production rail guns, while a 2030 DDG is fitted with a more mature version of the same weapon.

---

I can see the ticos serving for another decade. Most of those upgrades will be small scale software and hardware upgrades, sort of like a mid life refit. Nothing like adding a weapon like a railgun.

Click to expand...

General Atomics is designing a production rail gun for the Burkes. What they are proposing is for a test at sea on the JHSV in 2016-2017, and then potential actual deployment (not test) on the first warship in the 2018-2020 time frame.

The Flight IIA Burkes are not aged. The oldest Flight IIA Burke, the Oscar Austin, is only 13 years old and will be around for another 20-25 years. The others will all be around longer than that, and there are a number of them yet to be built. If it proves possible, most of the Flight IIa Burkes, particularly those built in the last 10 years, would be ideal to receive rail guns.

The Ticos are not meant for rail guns at all to my knowledge.

I expect the Zumwalts will...all three of them...probably replacing one of the AGS in the 2020s.

The next gen surface combatant will be designed from the outset to carry them.

I've read that they are planning to fit a railgun prototype on JHSV -- I believe that is a fairly recent development -- but could you provide a source for General Atomics proposing production railguns on warships (non flight iii burkes specifically) in the 2018-2020 timeframe?


And by "aged," I meant that flight i and most flight iia burkes are probably "old enough" to not warrant the extensive and costly modification to fit them with a railgun in the USN's current and forseeable budget climate. Of course, flight i and flight iia burkes will serve for decades to come, that is guaranteed.
But unless a production rail gun is small enough to fit in place of a mk-45 gun without much modification and doesn't have any adverse power supply difficulties (and is affordable), I just can't see non flight iii burkes equipped with them, especially observing how much difficulty the USN already has had with trying to find space for more power generation to supply the new AMDR on flight iii burkes. A rail gun on top of that will only place a greater demand for power.


Of course, if there's any definitive statement by either GA or the USN on installing rail guns on burkes, do provide it

Bltizo said:

...of course, if there's any definitive statement by either GA or the USN on installing rail guns on burkes, do provide it

Click to expand...

In the summer of 2013, one of the Program Managers for the General Atomic's Rail Gun project, Tom Hurn, indicated during testing that the company was working with the Navy and could do a full up test at sea in the next 3-4 years, and then do production installations three years after that on the DDG-51 platform...the Burkes. There was a Press Release about it, but you can see him say it himself in the following video:


That all lines up real well with the recent announcement about putting either the BAE or General Atomic's weapon on the JHSV in 2016, followed by installation on a warship in the 2018-2020 time frame.

Thanks for the source.

However he says "DDG-51" rather than "arleigh burke class destroyers" or "DDG-51 class" making it sound like he is talking about the specific ship USS arleigh burke. (However he might have said "DDG-51s" instead — it is rather difficult to tell)
The Wikipedia page for DDG-51 also seems to interpret the statement that DDG-51 may receive a rail gun, but not the entire class. Could you perhaps link to the press statement, that may provide clarity? I've tried googling for any reference that arleigh burke class DDGs are planned to mount production rail guns but the closest I've seen is the video above and statements saying DDG-51 may mount a rail gun for trials, nothing about all burkes receiving such a weapon. If anything most defence sites that mention rail guns and the burke class DDG caution that the burkes are either too small or lack the power for a rail gun..

Sorry if I'm being pedantic about this, but I think if this General Atomics proposal is true then it may have a large impact on USN NGFS and overall combat capability of a wide variety of their ships post 2020, so it is worth having 20/20 clarity IMO.

Of course, even if it is technically feasible for all burkes to be refit with rail guns without too much hassle, whether the USN ends up going for it is another matter. Depends on price I suppose.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

My hope is Something like these.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

I like to see a two-gun turret!

Bltizo said:

Thanks for the source.

However he says "DDG-51" rather than "arleigh burke class destroyers" or "DDG-51 class" making it sound like he is talking about the specific ship USS arleigh burke. (However he might have said "DDG-51s" instead — it is rather difficult to tell)
The Wikipedia page for DDG-51 also seems to interpret the statement that DDG-51 may receive a rail gun, but not the entire class. Could you perhaps link to the press statement, that may provide clarity? I've tried googling for any reference that arleigh burke class DDGs are planned to mount production rail guns but the closest I've seen is the video above and statements saying DDG-51 may mount a rail gun for trials, nothing about all burkes receiving such a weapon. If anything most defence sites that mention rail guns and the burke class DDG caution that the burkes are either too small or lack the power for a rail gun..

Click to expand...

If you listen closely he stated he wants to place it on the DDG-51 for testing and after three years they can move to mass production stage in which they can start installing it on the "platform", meaning they want to install it on the whole class. Of course he is on the industry side and not the procurement side so he is not on the deciding side.

Another point I would like to make is looks can be deceiving. The US Navy had already concluded test on High Temperature Superconductor (HTS) electric motors that can generate 36.5MW.()

The advantage of HTS motors is that they can reduce size by 1/3 while maintaining same level of power output. Japan is also doing various research on this theme. The best platform for this technology by the way is SSKs.