AEGIS and AEGIS Like escort combatants of the World

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Well, I think she would be more than just a mere escort. Such a ship could conduct independent offensive operations or at the center of a surface action group. It would be capable of performing traditional cruier functions, which is a good capability to have.


The CGX definitely needs to have its hull design thought out better. I do not like the tumblehome design, particularly for a warship. I also do not like the current emphasis on having electric propulsion, not on a combat vessel. As for railguns, I've never been that fond of the concept, although it is an interesting one. While it would have range and the ability to punch through stuff, it would lack versatility, and capabilities would diminish. It would be incapable of attacking reverse slope targets or firing projectiles which could be used in a variety of ways, such as ICM projectiles, WP projectiles, air burst projectiles, AA projectiles, and such. It would fire bolts instead. It also uses alot of power and would likely be more costly than any gun system available, and would also weigh alot and tax the ship for power. I think it would be good of we ever got out to space though, and there would be limited applications where the technology would be useful.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

bigstick61 said:

Well, I think she would be more than just a mere escort. Such a ship could conduct independent offensive operations or at the center of a surface action group. It would be capable of performing traditional cruier functions, which is a good capability to have.

Click to expand...

Oh...no doubt, like the Ticos, they would have flag capability and would undoubtedly lead many a SAG. Their fiore support role when with Phibrons can not be understated either...or alone or in a SAG just taking on fire missions on targets of opportunity.

But they would also clearly be at the center of large carrier or phibron task forces as the principle escort vessel too. One of these, one Tico, and three Burkes, along with a couple of SSN's would make many a sailor on Amphibs and Carriers rest a lot easier.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

bd popeye said:

Good idea BUT the US Congress is not going spend any money on a new CG when the USN can't even get their s**t together in reguards to the LCS, DDX and CGX program.

Click to expand...

I think it is precisely because things are so screwed up with those programs that a program like this...as a "bridge" to the future, could be sold and pushed through.

Here's a couple of good links and reads for you.

The first is a Proposal by a former Marine officer who is now in a strategic think tank trying to advise the Navy. I like the way he thinks:



The second is the original study for placing the new AGS on one of the remaining Spruance destroyers as a test bed. All interesting stuff.



Happy reading!

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

I was thinking, the gun doesn't necessarily have to be the AGS. The advantages of using the AGS are that it is currently undergoing R&D, so there would be no additional costs on this matter, and by the time the Ticos are replaced, at least a couple of ships would be in service which utilize the weapon. Although it wouldn't normally do this, it can use military 6.1" ammunition as well as the naval variety intended to be used with it.

However, let's say weight does become an issue, or you wish to reserve more for improvements. There is another option, and I occasionally hear this as a suggestion every now and then. That is to use the Mk 71 8"/55-cal. lightweight automatic gun, modified so that there is enough room for the gun to recoil while using AP ammo. The gun, mount, reloading facilities, and the ammo combined weigh about 173 tons. The improvement I mentioned could increase weight a bit, but not by much. So it weighs a bit more than half the amount of AGS. While some additional R&D would have to be undertaken, most of it has already been done, and a prototype mount already exists. Most of the R&D would be for extended-range projectiles, and research was done on this as well, and it was promising. The gun using conventional ammunition has considerable range, well beyond 32,000 yards, and extended range projectiles would likely perform at least as well as those being designed for the AGS. A newer HC projectile was also designed which would increase the range of the gun using conventional ammo. The 8" projectile is also more powerful and can penetrate more armor or concrete. The gun can fire at a rate of 12 rpm, while the AGS can fire at a rate of 10 rpm.

So for a bit more than the weight of one AGS unit, you get two MCLWG units, which fire 2 rpms faster, have a heavier projectile, have at least as great potential for ER rounds, probably more, and can fire conventional ammunition to a good range. Just a thought, although AGS works as well. I think the MCLWG would require a bit more strengthening around the mount, as it is a larger gun. It would be interesting to have a closer comparison of the two systems, and also how they would each have an impact on your CG design. Also, for ammunition capacity, I don't think that your design would allow for the very large magazines intended for the DDX, and would probably hold less ammunition, probably a bit over 500 rounds, maybe a bit more. It is possible that you could have weight savings here due to that, as the ER or enhanced ballistic projectiles (as opposed to standard ones) are not light. They weigh more than twice as much as conventional 6.1" ammunition.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Jeff Head said:

The second is the original study for placing the new AGS on one of the remaining Spruance destroyers as a test bed. All interesting stuff.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Interesting link Jeff.

It is good to see a proposal to make use of another Spruance hull with Thorn (ex DD988) joining her sister Paul F. Foster (ex DD 964) which is serving as the navy's Self Defense Test Ship. I note from the comments in the article that even though Thorn will be a test bed for the AGS it will be capable of an operational role in an emergency.

If the AGS proves successful it seems like an ideal cruiser gun and for an old naval history enthusiast like me it is will be a bit nostalgic to see a 6" gun back in the fleet (well, 6.1" anyway). I think that the 8" lightweight gun mentioned by bigstick61 is also worth continued development as a cruiser weapon, especially if the AGS fails to live up to expectations.

Cheers

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

A very nice concept Jeff, such a vessel could pretty much deliver a significant blow on any opponent.

Now were to start ...

With 12.000t these CGs will not be any heavier than the DDG-1000s, but still 20% heavier than the Sejongs. Probably bringing the hull to it's limits? I'm not an expert in that. But it will really need a powerfull propulsion to reach the desired speeds with that weight. As a cruiser, I think it should be able to keep up with latest CVNs at flank speed. 33+ kts?

Especially with such "super vessels", wich make prime targets for any enemy, I'm probably obsessed with an (extreme?) overkill in self defence capabilities.
Your mix is pretty impressing and latest RAMs are really capable. However, I too, would like to see two of the guns (the 20mm) remotely controlled capable and at least opticaly (perhaps LADAR) controlled to intercept AShM.
But maybe I'm just too paranoid here.

The SM-6 will further enhance the already impressing multiple engagement capabilities of this future AEGIS vessel.

As for radar. I think the SPY-2 HPDR is an x-band radar adjucant to the ships search radar. So, are you going to use the SPY-1B(V) for tracking and horizon searching, or SPY-3? Could in that contect the SPY-2, as an X-band radar be used for terminal missile guidance and illuination against all kinds of treats? Then the SPG-62 wouldn't be needed any more. Otherwise they'd have to illuminate for the ESSMs.
On DDG-1000 I think the USN has decided for a sole S-, X-band radar mix.
However, on such a cruiser, is there room for an L-band volume search radar.
I think it might offer advantages in long range detection of (V)LO aircraft.
The AN/SPS-49 already is in service. But it's only 2D in contrast to the Selex S-1850M wich is a 3D, if that offers significant advantages in volume search ...

One weak point in these AEGIS radar configurations is said to be the low mounting on the superstructure, wich narrows horizon range, therefore limiting reaction time against sea skimmers.
Maybe the experiance with the Daraings' (and other european ships') high mast-mounted SAMPSON / EMPAR and similar radars in that regard will give an answer.

I'm not sure about the AShM thing.
An enhanced Harpoon III that is VLS capable with a 200nm range and 250kg warhead should do pretty good.
The TASM comes into play in a full scale war scenario were you want to support an ASh airstrike from a CVN against an enemy SAG or CSG, wich you want to engage out of it's on weapons range.
Maybe there is room for some improvements, too. Most probably those that imporve terminal survivability and therefore leathelty. Higher terminal speed and some evasive maneuvers.

The gun ... AGS should also do a pretty good job, I don't think that on a cruiser with that missile armament a heavier gun is really necessary. Though it is an option if the AGS doesn't work properly.
Only one seems a little less, redundancy is also a point.
But with the hight mount of the aft gun (top weight), I'm thinking if you don't want only one AGS on the bow and a 5" gun aft. Or perhaps a two-barraled one ...?

I guess two LAMPS III helos? Perhaps one helo and two UAVs, maybe one of it a tilt-rotor. Wich could perfrom medium-long endurance over-the-horizon ISR if the CG operates in a SAG without carrier support.


Well now, I'm really wondring when the debate over how the success the Ticos will gain momentum. Or if they really will be major upgraded to enhance service life. But as far as I am aware, such upgrades are not really much cheaper than building new vessels. CG(X) pretty sure won't come in larger numbers anyway, and a further reduction in escort ships may become critical to the navy. You also have the risk of loosing engeneering skill with workers lost in times when there are no vessels designed.

Maybe you should try some TV-spots to get some publicy on this issue

regards

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Jeff, I don't think the placement of the 115mm gun over the hanger will work. Because isn't the ammo magazine usally just below the gun? Other wise great design!

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

bd popeye said:

Jeff, I don't think the placement of the 115mm gun over the hanger will work. Because isn't the ammo magazine usally just below the gun? Other wise great design!

Click to expand...

The gun is meant to be moved back far enough so as to allow for its placement there while not being over the hangar spaces. When adding that gun, the hull length was exteneded 25 ft to come up with the 575 ft length and allow sufficient room for the helos to be hangared and not impacted by the gun placemenrt.

As Scratch stated, at this point it will be about the extents of the Burke hull design.

It's really a concept design and real naval engineers will have to take it to completion, doing all of the indepth stability studies and detailed feasability.

PS: Unless you have done a refresh on the thread you may not see the latest pic for the plan and profile views. The artist conception pic really doesn't show it as well and I need to do some work on that to move the gun further forward in that pic.

...and, OBTW, it's a 155mm gun. I just add that in because it is substantially bigger and heavier...as is the ammo. But, punching that ammo out 100 nm is

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Tasman said:

Interesting link Jeff.

It is good to see a proposal to make use of another Spruance hull with Thorn (ex DD988) joining her sister Paul F. Foster (ex DD 964) which is serving as the navy's Self Defense Test Ship. I note from the comments in the article that even though Thorn will be a test bed for the AGS it will be capable of an operational role in an emergency.

If the AGS proves successful it seems like an ideal cruiser gun and for an old naval history enthusiast like me it is will be a bit nostalgic to see a 6" gun back in the fleet (well, 6.1" anyway). I think that the 8" lightweight gun mentioned by bigstick61 is also worth continued development as a cruiser weapon, especially if the AGS fails to live up to expectations.

Cheers

Click to expand...

Here's another one you may find of interest.



I also hope you had a chance tor ead some or Work's paper on the "Know when to hold 'em and Know when to fold 'em" paper about the Plan for the Navy.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

and, OBTW, it's a 155mm gun. I just add that in because it is substantially bigger and heavier...as is the ammo. But, punching that ammo out 100 nm is

Click to expand...

That was a typo on my part.. I have now seen the updated picture and better understand what your proposal si....Good job Jeff.