Next Generation Destroyer thread (after 055, 052D)

[ACuriousPLAFan]

what about the possibility of a tethered UAV for sensors and comms, to give the maximum possible radar horizon? some other navies are already looking at this.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

With reactors, you can have a rotary drone that carries the surface/low altitude search radar array and follows the ship, staying aloft with a battery and reserve fuel tank, but electricity topped off with wire or wireless charging. Data can be sent by RF, laser or fiber optics.

This allows for a huge radar horizon vs low altitude targets. The ship itself can carry the big high altitude air defense radars, where such a high radar horizon is less advantageous.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A 15 m high radar vs. a 50 m target has 15 km radar horizon and 45 km target visibility.

A 1000 m high radar on a tethered drone vs the same target has 130 km radar horizon and 130 km target visibility.

Certainly able to bring massive capability uplift in detecting low-flying enemy warplanes and enemy missiles, should this be viable to implement.

However, in order to do what is basically installing an additional - But floating - radar set above a moving warship, how big can the hovering radar drone get in terms of dimension and weight? Since, you know, more powerful radar set tends to get larger, heavier and bulkier.

Another concern would be whether the hovering radar drone can increase the risk of exposing the position of the tethered warship itself to detection by enemy AEW&C aircraft and/or enemy warships as the hovering radar drone grows larger in size.

 

[dxq4412]

For a next generation warship, I would imagine it with minimal superstructure. The radar mast and mostly nothing else. With camera systems, a bridge is superflu and just make a bigger target. No need for a smokestack with a nuclear powerplant. You create a ship with a sleek lower silhouette. a bit like that concept but with an even smaller superstructure.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506526011881496579

You’ve brought to mind the late Academician

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and his work on a new type of ship capable of rapidly transitioning between ‘surface and underwater.’ I remember that after his passing, the authorities wrote a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in his honor. The revelation of the semi-submersible ship within it sparked great excitement among military enthusiasts.

Given his excellence, I don’t think his legacy will be shelved.

 

[Atomicfrog]

You’ve brought to mind the late Academician

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and his work on a new type of ship capable of rapidly transitioning between ‘surface and underwater.’ I remember that after his passing, the authorities wrote a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in his honor. The revelation of the semi-submersible ship within it sparked great excitement among military enthusiasts.
View attachment 113273
Given his excellence, I don’t think his legacy will be shelved.

Just that underwater capacity bring a lot more structural constraints. I think the design was more for a SEALION stealth boat class

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But study on the concept can be helpfull for some subsystems like retractable weapons and mast.

On new ground vehicules, we see reduction of crew footprint in turrets and integration of 360 degree vision from sensors. These kind of subsystems will be even more easy to establish on a large ship. A stealth mast design with appropriate system and helicopters hangar/elevator could be the only parts going above the hull beside maybe CIWS. Main guns are mostly things of the past.

We can say that composite superstructure could diminish radar reflection but DDG1000 superstructure is huge like an Iceberg.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Certainly able to bring massive capability uplift in detecting low-flying enemy warplanes and enemy missiles, should this be viable to implement.

However, in order to do what is basically installing an additional - But floating - radar set above a moving warship, how big can the hovering radar drone get in terms of dimension and weight? Since, you know, more powerful radar set tends to get larger, heavier and bulkier.

Another concern would be whether the hovering radar drone can increase the risk of exposing the position of the tethered warship itself to detection by enemy AEW&C aircraft and/or enemy warships as the hovering radar drone grows larger in size.

Surface search radars are pretty small compared to air defense radars, and surface search radars are what benefit the most from being lofted.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Primary Function: Short-range, two-dimensional, surface-search/navigation radar system that provides contact range and bearing information.

Contractor: Raytheon Portsmouth, Rhode Island (Original Equipment Manufacturer).

Unit Cost: $421,000.

Weight: Above Deck: AS-4472/SPS-73(V) - 18.5 lbs., AS-4473/SPS-73(V) - 21.8 lbs., AB-1399/SPS-73(V) - 63.9 lbs., AB-1399(A)/SPS-73(V) - 68.9 lbs., 7614132. Antenna Safety Switch - 2.0 lbs

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

USN is still using mechanically rotating Doppler radar for surface search, a s even that is just in the 30 kg range. The mechanical Doppler radar has 100 km surface search range. I believe an AESA could be lighter for the same range or longer ranged for the same weight.

Such a radar could detect sea skimmer missiles, speed boats, sub snorkels, etc that only CIWS radars or offboard radars could today. The large air defense AESA

A drone would also have a much smaller RCS than any manned aircraft. If it is optionally tethered (can be released) then you have even more flexibility.

I really think drones and large VLS combo is the future.

 

[tankphobia]

A drone would also have a much smaller RCS than any manned aircraft. If it is optionally tethered (can be released) then you have even more flexibility.

I really think drones and large VLS combo is the future.

How about... a balloon?

 

[Atomicfrog]

How about... a balloon?
View attachment 113280

Some submarines use balloon, I think it's for long range communication antenna, I have an old fuzzy picture but don't know the source anymore...

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

How about... a balloon?
View attachment 113280

Maybe for lift assist, but pure balloon would be vulnerable to wind drift and even with a tether can't follow the fleet effectively at speed, scout ahead, or retract on demand.

 

[tankphobia]

Maybe for lift assist, but pure balloon would be vulnerable to wind drift and even with a tether can't follow the fleet effectively at speed, scout ahead, or retract on demand.

It was made somewhat in jest, but potentially it could be something to consider for a USV as a flying radar anchor that can be dropped off by the destroyer. Even if detected the destroyer will not be at risk.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

It was made somewhat in jest, but potentially it could be something to consider for a USV as a flying radar anchor that can be dropped off by the destroyer. Even if detected the destroyer will not be at risk.

So a UUV that tows a UAV... That's like drone inception...

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

A drone would also have a much smaller RCS than any manned aircraft. If it is optionally tethered (can be released) then you have even more flexibility.

Or if the drone can be wirelessly charged, i.e. keeping the drone hovering by continuously beaming a laser beam at it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Might be slightly far-fetched at present, though.