AEGIS and AEGIS Like escort combatants of the World

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

1. The drawing is fantastic, nice job

2. I'm thinking about a more stealthy hull. One hugh pyramid like mast, with the surface searching radar on the top, and navigation radar+communication antena+ECM on the middle, then phase array radar at lower part. Put everything in stealthy covers. The funnel uses the design of LPD17 or simiar.

3. I think this design is significantly longer than Burke IIA? Because the 155mm gun is big and there are two main guns instead of 1. So I suggest put fewer VLS in front and more at behind. Change the main gun at behind to an Otto-melary 76mm. I'm worrying about the disturb the main gun might cause to the chopper hanger.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

bigstick61 said:

As it stands now, though, they have had much of their capabilities eliminated by the removal of the Mk 13 launchers. They lost most of their AAW capabilities, and much of their ASuW capabilities, and it really limits utility. A gunboat or corvette could perform many of the same jobs.

Click to expand...

With only a 76mm gun their surface warfare capability is certainly limited. I had forgotten about the ability to fire Harpoon from the Mk13 launcher (IIRC the RAN vessels carry 8 Harpoon and 32 SM-2 in the Mk13 magazine plus 32 ESSMs in the Mk41 VLS).

I just worry at the effect a large expenditure in this area might have on the construction of new AEGIS vessels. What about reinstating the Mk13 just to fire Harpoon (without the SM-2 upgrade) as well as the 8 cell VLS for 32 ESSM as an austere compromise? Alternatively Harpoon could be fired from deck mounted cannisters to provide an anti ship capability.

Cheers

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

re CIWS side-guns: I like the idea of two dual-purpose guns. For self-defence against low level assymetric threats, in wich they also can by used manually.
But with the capability to act as a last line against incoming rounds of all kinds.
This also includes small arms fire like RPGs, motars and rockets. The C-RAM concept comes to my mind here. In that regard, I believe the Oerlikon AHEAD ammo to be very well suited for the task. If you could select different ammo types for different situaitons, this 35mm guns may offer some advantages.

The navy seems to be somewhat strained it it's new ships programm. Maybe you can later evolve a new escort FFG from the LM LCS design. Main task would probably be ASW work, with point defence capabilites and perhaps some anti ship.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Or perhaps both the 8-cell VLS and Harpoon canisters could be added, and the Mk 13 replaced with a 2nd gun. The Mk 13 also gave them the ability to shoot the Standards at other ships, and the only OHP which sunk a warship and is still in commission used the Standard to heavily damage an Iranian warship before finishing it off with its gun. For an OHP, it was a versatileweapon, and I'm not sure why the Navy decided to delete it. Add that to the list of bad choices the Navy has made over the last few years.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Quick question about ESSM. When it's quad-packed, do you have to fire a whole cell (i.e. 4 missiles) if you want to fire at all, or is it possible to fire however many you want (i.e. as little as one)?

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

FuManChu said:

Quick question about ESSM. When it's quad-packed, do you have to fire a whole cell (i.e. 4 missiles) if you want to fire at all, or is it possible to fire however many you want (i.e. as little as one)?

Click to expand...

They can be fired one at a time.

The link will take you to a clip of HMAS Parramatta firing a single ESSM during Rimpac '04.



Cheers

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Tasman said:

With only a 76mm gun their surface warfare capability is certainly limited. I had forgotten about the ability to fire Harpoon from the Mk13 launcher (IIRC the RAN vessels carry 8 Harpoon and 32 SM-2 in the Mk13 magazine plus 32 ESSMs in the Mk41 VLS).

I just worry at the effect a large expenditure in this area might have on the construction of new AEGIS vessels. What about reinstating the Mk13just to fire Harpoon (without the SM-2 upgrade) as well as the 8 cell VLS for 32 ESSM as an austere compromise? Alternatively Harpoon could be fired from deck mounted cannisters to provide an anti ship capability.

Cheers

Click to expand...

as far as i no the deletion of the MK13 was to preserve stocks of SM-1 missiles for the remaining users of the missile

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Right now the USN has 58 Arleigh Burkes and 19 Ticonderogas.


Perhaps there is no real need for a cruiser after all, and the USN might just consider manufacturing 20-some more Arleigh Burkes (Flight IIIs) to replace the Ticos? You now have a fleet of Arleigh Burkes that is perhaps 80-strong and shares commonality.

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Clouded Leopard said:

Right now the USN has 58 Arleigh Burkes and 19 Ticonderogas.


Perhaps there is no real need for a cruiser after all, and the USN might just consider manufacturing 20-some more Arleigh Burkes (Flight IIIs) to replace the Ticos? You now have a fleet of Arleigh Burkes that is perhaps 80-strong and shares commonality.

Click to expand...

They are fine ships that are very capable. However whilst the latest Flight IIA units have gained 2 helos they are not fitted with either CIWS or Harpoon and there seems to be some questions re weight issues. An enlarged, evolved design, able to carry a heavier armament whilst retaining stability, seems to me to be a sensible way to go in order to provide units to work with the Burkes in the way that the Ticonderogas do at present. The South Korean variant demonstrates that the baseline Burke can be enhanced and Jeff's proposed cruiser is a further comparatively low risk development (compared with the DDG-1000 or CG(X)), along these lines.

Cheers

Re: Proposal for a US Navy Ticnoderoga AEGIS CG replacement

Clouded Leopard said:

Right now the USN has 58 Arleigh Burkes and 19 Ticonderogas.


Perhaps there is no real need for a cruiser after all, and the USN might just consider manufacturing 20-some more Arleigh Burkes (Flight IIIs) to replace the Ticos? You now have a fleet of Arleigh Burkes that is perhaps 80-strong and shares commonality.

Click to expand...

Actually, right now there are currently 52 AEGIS destroyers, and 22 AEGIS cruisers.

Ten more AEGIS destroyers are either already under construction (2 I think now) or will be built. The DDG class will have a lot of life left in it...those ten vessels coming online in the next five years serving in the fleet until 2045 or so.


Long before then, starting in 2021 however, the AEGIS cruisers will start to be decommissioned.

This proposal is for a bridge between the decommissioning of those cruisers, and the ultimate introduction of a CGX replacement that incorporates all of the new weapons, power, sensors, and hull design contemplated for it.

Right now, the programs aimed at devloping all of that are languishing in cost issues. If we are not careful, under the current plans, and if those programs run the course of the DDX and now the LCS, the US will not have a cruiser follow-on class ready.

This proposal presents a bridge cruiser, starting in 2012-2015 that will exceed the Tico capabilities, and yet realizable now in terms of cost and manufacture, that will give the US time to develop the more capable vessel within cost and within capability.

Then, sometime in the late 2020s, that new design can then pick up in replacing the cruisers being decommissioned at that point and forward.