USN Burke Class - News, Reports, Data, etc.

S

Scratch

Captain
Jeff Head said:
... sometime in the mid-2020s I bet something like the CGX (whatever they may call it) will be revisitied. until then, the Burke IIIs will be built in some numbers to bridge the gap.

Will they completely replace the Ticos and become the de facto CG? Who knows? We will have to wait and see how they do, and what comes of other emerging technologies over the next 10-15 years.

[...]

The BMD ship is a proposal and I believe if adopted it would carry more than just BMD missiles. it would be, in essence IMHO, an AAW arsenal ship and carry the bif AMDR and probably have one for each CSG.
Click to expand...

C, thanks so far. The San Antonio seems to be a hull indeed offering itself nicely for several future applications.

On the other hand, I must admit I'm actually a bit sceptical about that whole arsenal ship concept. That was tried and rejected in the past already. And perhaps with good reason?
I have a feeling that on the BMD front the prime missions right now is to find a hull / ship design that is large enough to accept / support the 20' AMDR arrays. The size that has come out as being required to meet the desired performance. With no usable conventional combat ship (DDG / CG) in service or in production, the eyes turn to other large alternatives to mount the arrays. Then, the rest of the ship is just filled up with missiles.
With that in mind, to shield the carriers from ASBMs, I'd say put the AMDR on the Ford (and perhaps America) and maybe put an additional Burke with SM-3 into the CSG / PHIBRON. So in my mind a dedicated BMD ship would be a stand-alone asset (to be secured by Burkes / LCS / Virginias of course) that would be stationed (more or less) in the littorals guarding a land area of interest from BM attack of a hostile contender.

I also think there won't be two concurrent design for BMD ship and CG(X). I'm sure if realized, that concept would be one vessel. Whatever it will be called.
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Jeff Head said:
The BMD ship is a proposal and I believe if adopted it would carry more than just BMD missiles. it would be, in essence IMHO, an AAW arsenal ship and carry the bigger AMDR and probably have one for each CSG.
Click to expand...

Is the BMD ship the Cobra Judy concept? There was some discussion as an alternative to host a more powerful AMDR but I did not get the impression it was getting much traction. One of the downside like any dedicated vessel is that such a vessel will itself be a prime target and would need protection from submarines threats.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Scratch said:
C, thanks so far. The San Antonio seems to be a hull indeed offering itself nicely for several future applications.

On the other hand, I must admit I'm actually a bit sceptical about that whole arsenal ship concept. That was tried and rejected in the past already. And perhaps with good reason?
I have a feeling that on the BMD front the prime missions right now is to find a hull / ship design that is large enough to accept / support the 20' AMDR arrays. The size that has come out as being required to meet the desired performance. With no usable conventional combat ship (DDG / CG) in service or in production, the eyes turn to other large alternatives to mount the arrays. Then, the rest of the ship is just filled up with missiles.
Click to expand...

The Ship being proposed by Ingalls is NOT an arsenal ship as conceived earlier.

That's why I said Anti-air arsenal ship.

It would be just what you say. A good hull that can house the larger AMDR, and can have significant VLS capacity for air defense.

As to a CG...the Anti-air ship is too slow and single functioned enough to be a full blown CGX.

If there is a CGX, it will be a 12,000+ ton multi-mission, large surface combatant very capable in AAW, ASW, and ASuW...and capable of escorting any carrier, ARG, or being the center piece of any SAG. My own preference for such a vessel would be one 127mm gun forward capable of LR projectiles, one 155mm-size rail gun aft, two RAM missile launchers, two CIWS guns, two helos, the larger AMDR, and 128 VLS.

But, if the Burke III proves capable enough, they may decide that a 10,000+ ton Burke with 96 VLS tubes and the AMDR is enough.

We will have to wait and see.
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Jeff Head said:
But, if the Burke III proves capable enough, they may decide that a 10,000+ ton Burke with 96 VLS tubes and the AMDR is enough.

We will have to wait and see.
Click to expand...

What you are referring to I believe is the Burke IV which has since been cancelled. The issue as a command ship is that flight III doesn't have the command and control facilities, Cruiser communication suites and the build in redundancies necessary for a command ship. The Tico extension program will buy some time but with the Ohio replacement program it will require considerable juggling and strategic thinking to balance against fiscal reality.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Brumby said:
What you are referring to I believe is the Burke IV which has since been cancelled. The issue as a command ship is that flight III doesn't have the command and control facilities.
Click to expand...

I know this...but I am referring to the Burke III.

If that platform performs well enough, they may elect to now replace the Cruisers, and go with the vessel's significant capabilities as they are in conjunction with the carrier, or large amphibs they escort.

I believe personally that that would be a mistake and that another cruiser is needed, with the additional comm and command capabilities that you refer to.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Brumby said:
Is the BMD ship the Cobra Judy concept?
Click to expand...

No, the Cobra Judy is the name of the AN/SPQ-11 radar that the US Navy uses to monitor foreign ballistic missile launches from great distance.

The USNS Observation Island ultimately housed this radar.

That ship was originally the E-AG-154, Empire State Mariner, a Mariner Class merchant ship, launched in 1953 and then acquired by the US Navy in 1956 and refit as a fleet ballistic missile test ship and commissioned in 1958. The first sea launch Poaris missile from the USS George Washington, SSBN-598, was monitored by the Observation Island on July 20, 1960. The ship itself launched the first Poseidon Fleet Ballistic Missile in 1969. It was decommissioned in 1972 and put in reserve.

Then, in 1972 it was acquired and again refit and in 1978 and reclassified as T-AGM 23, missile range instrumentation ship. The AN/SPQ-11 radar was introduced to the ship in 1983.


observation-island-m2.jpg
USNS Observation Island
​

In 2008, the Observation Island was part of a program attempting to use an anti-satellite missiles to shoot down satellites by tracking the satellite before and after the missile launch. It used its strong radar to help test this.

The Observation Island was finally decommissioned and stricken for the last time in 2014.

It is being replaced by the USNS Howard Lorensen, T-AGM-25, a brand new ship that was launched in 2010 as a US Air Force instrumentation ship, but then, delivered to the US Navy in January 2012 to be outfitted as a replacement for the Observation Island.

In March 2014, the Cobra Judy Replacement program, which has been since named Cobra King, achieved initial Operation Capability with the Howard Lorensen. She was declared fully operational in August 2014.
.

Howard_O__Lorenzen_on_the_Columbia_River_(140516-Z-PL933-055).jpg
USNS Howard Lorensen
​

The Howard Lorensen displaces almost 13,000 tons, is over 530 feet long and has a beam of 89 feet. The Observation Island displaced 17,200 tons, was over 560 feet long, and had a beam of 76 feet.
 
Last edited:
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Jeff Head said:
No, the Cobra Judy is the name of the AN/SPQ-11 radar that the US Navy uses to monitor foreign ballistic missile launches from great distance.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the Cobra Judy (lite) being used as an adjunct radar ship as an alternative as mentioned in the CRS report dated 31/07/2014 (page 18) on Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress.

Relevant extracts :
“DDG-51s reportedly in part on the grounds that the Flight III destroyer would use data from offboard sensors to augment data collected by its AMDR.27 If those off-board sensors turn out to be less capable than the Navy assumed when it decided to cancel the CG(X) in favor of the Flight III DDG-51, the Navy may need to seek other means for augmenting the data collected by the Flight III DDG-51’s AMDR.

One option for doing this would be to procure an adjunct radar ship—a non-combat ship equipped with a large radar that would be considerably more powerful than the Flight III DDG-51’s AMDR. The presence in the fleet of a ship equipped with such a radar could significantly improve the fleet’s AAW and BMD capabilities. The ship might be broadly similar to (but perhaps less complex and less expensive than) the new Cobra Judy Replacement missile range instrumentation ship which is equipped with two large and powerful radars”
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Okay, mate... I see what you are talking about.

The Ingalls proposal may in fact be an answer to this type of discussion...but I believe Ingalls is proposing something that is something more capable than what was discussed, a ship also capable of actively shooting from its own VLS at targets its powerful radar finds, whereas (at least as I read it) this report was postulating a purely radar ship.
 
Last edited:
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Three-DDG-51-Vessels-Reach-Upgrade-Milestones.jpg​

Naval Today said:
The Navy’s DDG 51 modernization program has met two key milestones Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) announced Dec. 22.

The milestones involve the successful installation and testing of the new Aegis baseline 9 combat system on two DDG 51 destroyers, and a hull, mechanical and electrical (HM&E) modernization to a third.

USS Barry (DDG 52) and USS Benfold (DDG 65) successfully executed sea trials following extensive, Extended Selected Restricted Availabilities for combat systems modernizations. Barry completed her availability at Naval Station Norfolk and was the first ship to receive the Aegis baseline 9 installation on the East Coast. Benfold completed the baseline 9 modernization at Naval Station San Diego. The modernizations upgraded all major elements of the ships’ combat systems including radars, weapons, communications suite, sonar, electronic warfare, navigation, and computer capability.

Surface Combatant Modernization Program Manager Capt. Ted Zobel, said:

"By incorporating smarter technologies, we ensure ships are more efficient and able to meet their tasking for years to come."

During sea trials, the ships demonstrated improved warfighting capability that included the Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) embedded in the combat systems upgrade. The new software package, baseline 9C, includes an Aegis Weapon System (AWS) upgrade which introduces an enhanced SPY-1D radar with a multi-mission signal processor for anti-air warfare and ballistic missile defense in support of IAMD.

The AWS is complemented with the addition of cooperative engagement capability (CEC), anti-submarine warfare upgrades and improvements to the MK 45 five-inch gun. Ballistic Missile Defense version 5.0 was also included as a major addition to the combat systems upgrade.

The third ship, USS The Sullivans (DDG 68) conducted an availability to overhaul and modernize its HM&E systems at BAE Systems Ship Repair shipyard in Mayport, Florida. The ship received upgrades to enhance its structural integrity while replacing existing propulsion plant control systems with new machinery and damage control systems. This modernization improves the probability that this 17 year-old ship will meet its expected 35 year service life.

All three ships are expected to return to the fleet by early 2015.
Click to expand...

This illustrates why the US Navy remains so potent. it continually modernizes its vessels, upgrading their sensors, weapons, software, etc.

All of these are Flight I Burke DDGs, commissioned in 1994, 1996, and 1997 respectfully. Even though 20 years old (or nearing) all are still world class destroyers, with up to date AEGIS systems and very capable systems.

The US built 62 of these vessels in three flights by 2012. Three more Flight IIAs are now under construction, another eight Flight IIAs have been awarded contracts, and there will be probably 24 Flight III Burkes which between 2017 and 2031 Contracts for three of those have already been awarded.

This will total 97 Burke destroyers built, but it is likely, because of a 2011 requirement calling for a total of 94 air defense capable destroyers and cruisers by 2025. that the number will be reached only sometime after 2025, and then maintained at 94 as Ticonderogas and older Burkes begin to retire.

The US Navy is either considering a Flight IV Burke, or a new, Future Surface Combatant (FSC) to begin replacing the Ticonderogas. Up to 24 of those vessels are planned as the Ticos retire.

In the end, you will see Flight III Burkes replacing retiring Burkes, and either Flight IV Burkes or the new FSC replacing Ticonderogas.

Remember...you heard it first here from the Headman... because the last part of it will be occurring near the end, or after, my own service life is over.
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
In the end, you will see Flight III Burkes replacing retiring Burkes, and either Flight IV Burkes or the new FSC replacing Ticonderogas
Click to expand...
Important, you think Fl III additionnal then in 2020 USN get about 70 Burke, 3 Zumwalt and 22 Ticonderoga : 95 CG/DDG now 84, a difference !
Ship Force Structure Goal 2013 : 88
Projected Force Levels Resulting from FY2015 30-Year (FY2015-FY2044
Shipbuilding Plan : FY20 : 95

Some years ago 2005 about after withdrawal of Spruance, Ticonderoga without VLS the number should be at the lowest about 22 Tico and about 50 Burke but USN had several tens of Perry without SM-1...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top