US Navy DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class

S

strehl

Junior Member
Registered Member
Total Program Cost/Units Built = per unit cost. Imagine if they had only built 2% of the first unit and then canceled. Now you have your soundbite $Trillion Dollar ship that was never launched. Similar programs: Seawolf submarine, B-2 bomber, MX missile. Probably others. This is the infamous death spiral. Criticize a program until you can force a reduction of units built. Point to increased cost per unit as evidence of program mismanagement and further reduce unit procurement. Repeat until outright cancellation. The C-17 almost suffered the same fate. In that rare case, a combination of service commitment, design simplification, and political luck enabled the program to survive and build beyond the original unit goal. As long as politics are involved, this situation will never go away. As for the Zumwalts, the question is whether the example of Seawolf vs Virginia will be followed. Will something that looks like Zumwalt replace it? Ship building is distinctly high for the US due to labor costs (not just pay but more so union work rules). I don't see that being fixed without significant re-thinking in how to build/assemble ships. And I don't think 3D printing will work with ships. Well maybe.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
strehl said:
Total Program Cost/Units Built = per unit cost. Imagine if they had only built 2% of the first unit and then canceled. Now you have your soundbite $Trillion Dollar ship that was never launched. ...
Click to expand...

a moment ago I was searching the Internet for what the unit cost would have been if all 32 Zumwalts had been built; the lowest I found was: $3.09b (in the process I saw tragicomic articles about how the unit cost will drop since contracts for two were awarded and research done)
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
plawolf said:
Wait, $22.1bn for 3 ships? That's $7.37bn per ship! o_O

In contrast, the article above mentioned a $6.1bn contract for 9 Burkes, so each Zumwalt costs more than 10 Burkes...
Click to expand...
Very expensive but you don' t get the good price, a Burke Fl II want 1.7 bill and a Zumwalt 3,1 finaly maybe up to 3.3 price of 2 Burke almost.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
This is the US Navy Zumwalt News Thread, not a thread about down playing or comparing US shipbuilding efficiency back to World War II for heaven's sake.

STAY ON TOPIC.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MORDERATION.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Jeff Head said:
Only time will tell, Jura. But the Zumwalt is 98% complete and is going to sea late this year...and the Monsoor is coming right along. ...
Click to expand...

... related (I left just Zumwalts-related parts, put one sentence in boldface):
Analysis: A Shipbuilding Polarity Shift?
...
Recently, however, Bath has experienced more than its share of problems. In the view of its own management, the yard needs numerous improvements and changes to maintain efficiencies: better facilities, enhanced process procedures, more effective allocation of the workforce. Relations with craft unions at Bath are strained. Completion of the large destroyer Zumwalt (DDG 1000), first of a three-ship class of very advanced stealth destroyers, has run into numerous difficulties. All three ships of the class have fallen behind schedule, and delays reportedly are affecting the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers under construction in the yard.
...

Unlike Ingalls, which at times has simultaneously built up to five different ship classes, Bath usually has only two designs in hand. The DDG 1000s, a program that, ironically, was originally won by Ingalls, represent one of the largest challenges in recent US shipbuilding history. Displacing nearly 16,000 tons and more than 600 feet long, the ships are the largest surface combatants built in the US since 1961, and certainly the most complex.

BIW made major improvements to build the ships, particularly construction in 2008 of a huge ultra hall so that major outfitting could be done indoors, protected from the harsh Maine winter. The yard was also reconfigured to install a land-level transfer facility, allowing entire hulls to be more easily moved inside the yard. A new expansion plan was approved by GD and the Navy in 2013.

But Bath also needed to eliminate older, less efficient facilities and streamline labor practices. And in September 2011, it received the first “restart” construction order for a new Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, the Rafael Peralta (DDG 115). More destroyer contracts were received over the next three years.
...

Meanwhile, work to complete the Zumwalt has run into increasing difficulties. A recurring problem is the complexity of the integrated power plant, a design far beyond anything yet installed in a ship. With virtually every system connected to the 78-megawatt plant, sequencing systems tests has proved to be a recurring challenge, often leading to delays to bring on systems ahead of or different from planning schedules.

BIW has surged workers, particularly electrical workers, to the ship, leading to delays in the next two ships, Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001) and Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002).

In March, the Navy announced the problems meant the Zumwalt’s planned delivery date of August 2015 would be delayed at least until November. But by mid-July, that goal was gone, and the Navy acknowledged it was hoping to begin the first sea trials in December. No new delivery date has been announced, but it clearly won’t happen this year.

Neither the Navy nor BIW would respond to queries about exactly how far behind schedule the DDG 51-class destroyers are.

“That’s something we would like to know,” one service official said with a sense of frustration. But it does appear that, like Ingalls a decade ago, every ship under construction in Bath’s yard is falling further behind schedule.

Assigning responsibility for the delays is also problematic. BIW is not solely responsible for the Zumwalt’s propulsion and combat systems, that’s on the Navy and its prime systems contractor, Raytheon. All bear significant responsibility for the delays.
...
Click to expand...
the full article:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Jura said:
... related (I left just Zumwalts-related parts, put one sentence in boldface):
Analysis: A Shipbuilding Polarity Shift?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Well, I was aware of the slippage away from August.

But I believe the latest official word was still December, which this article itself attests to. This analyst apparently believes that will not happen.

That's fine by me. They need to take the time to get it right and this is an all new design, with a LOT of new technology, including the propulsion system.

So, if it slips into next year...that will be okay. What we learn from these three ships is going to influence surface combat vessels for the next several decades.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Scratch said:
... I'm so waiting for an aerial view of that vessel.
Click to expand...

only now I realized I hadn't seen the Zumwalt from top :) so I quickly searched the Internet, the steepest angle (picture, not a chart of course) I found:
0501100044.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top