20.01.2022, 22:12
Ehrlich gesagt konnte ich es kaum erwarten, dass es hier endlich Fortschritte gibt und dass man dazu einen Strang eröffnen kann. Beinahe hätte ich mit den Hufen gescharrt und gerufen: "Da ist er endlich!" Fakt ist, dass die Arleigh Burkes nach dem Flight III so langsam an ihre Grenzen stoßen, hervorragende Schiffe, keine Frage, aber es war Zeit, dass es ein Nachfolgekonzept gibt, sind sie doch langsam seit beinahe 40 Jahren im Dienst bzw. im Bau. Interessant in jedem Fall, dass das Tumblehome-Design der Zumwalts hier anscheinend nicht mehr zum Tragen kommt, sondern dass es ein vergleichsweise konservatives Design sein dürfte (mit natürlich all den bekannten Stealth-Aspekten), welches die Fähigkeiten von Arleigh Burkes und der Ticonderoga-Klasse verschmilzt...
Schneemann
Zitat:U.S. Navy Reveals Plans And Ideas For The DDG(X) Next-Gen Destroyerhttps://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/202...destroyer/
Presented at the Surface Navy Association’s 2022 National Symposium (SNA 2022), held LIVE in-person and streamed virtually on the week of January 10, 2022, the U.S. Navy’s Program Executive Office (PEO) Ships briefed reporters on the preliminary details for the next-generation destroyer, the DDG(X), the successor to the Arleigh Burke-class DDG 51 Flight Three destroyers.
Still in pre-design stages, the information and design of the DDG(X) is subject to change over time; however, the U.S. Navy does want an Integrated Power System (IPS) and Baseline Capabilities of evolutionary technologies rather than revolutionary technologies to minimize construction risk. [...]
When compared to the DDG 51 destroyers, these DDG(X) requirements are:
- New flexibility and new margins for the next-generation destroyer. Space reservations to add new systems, sensor growth, high-energy lasers, and to accommodate larger missile cells (such as for hypersonic missiles) than the Mark 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS) for longer-range offensive Anti-surface and strike capabilities.
- Improved reduction in signatures to reduce vulnerability. Acoustic, infrared, and electromagnetic signatures will all be improved by greater than 50%. Two 21-cell RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) launchers will be mounted on DDG(X) and a high-energy laser for close-in self-protection. The arrays will be larger and DDG(X) will have an upgraded X-band radar.
- Increased mobility with a range of greater than 50%, time on station increased to greater than 120%, and efficiency to greater than 25%.
- Destroyer Payload Module (DPM) which is similar in concept to the Virginia-class nuclear attack submarine’s Payload Module “plug-in” section. The DPM can be “plugged into” the DDG(X) hull in the future to permanently increase the length and size of the ship to accommodate future systems such as new sensors, weapons, Mission Modules, storage, machinery and equipment, payloads, rooms, etc.
- Technology maturation and risk reduction by inserting new technology when it is the right time to do it (hence the Destroyer Payload Module option).
- As authorized by Congress, any critical DDG(X) system has to go through land-based testing before start of a detailed design and reaching Milestone B. Critical systems for the DDG(X) are the Integrated Power System (IPS) and the new hull form. [...]
For speculative discussion purposes, the preliminary draft concept design shows a sharply raked new hull form for the DDG(X) with a bulbous bow that might contain a sonar. No mention of a towed sonar array was included in the graphic at this pre-decisional stage. [...]
The DDG(X) appears to have a 5-inch gun turret forward and set further back from the bow than the DDG 51. The VLS cell count starts with a 32-cell VLS bank at the bow that can be upgraded to twelve large missile cell launchers in the future for accommodation of Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) hypersonic missiles or future longer-range missiles that have dimensions larger than the Mark 41 VLS. The exact number of VLS cells so far is undetermined since certain DDG(X)s may be lengthened to accommodate more VLS cells, meaning no two DDG(X)s may be alike. Interestingly, the rear VLS cell bank has moved to amidships similar to the Chinese People Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) Type-055 Renhai-class destroyers. NAVSEA declined to comment to Naval News’ inquiry seeking a reason for this Vertical Launch System (VLS) placement decision. Naval News can speculate that the Destroyer Payload Module (DPM) “plug-in” option can increase the VLS cell count and mix-and-match different types of VLS designs (for larger missiles) if more DPMs were added to that section where the rear VLS cell bank will be located. [...] Also, hypothetically, the FPA can contribute to the Air Warfare Defense Boss role with a DPM acting as a dedicated Air Warfare Combat Information Center (CIC), a role often devoted to the aging Ticonderoga-class cruisers that ride shotgun to the Navy’s nuclear-powered aircraft carriers because the current DDG 51s lack the space and capability for the Air Warfare Boss. DDG(X)s with an Air Warfare Boss CIC DPM installed can remedy this space issue, and the larger 18-foot AN/SPY-6 Aegis radar arrays and DPMs for more VLS cells in the future can make up for the Ticonderoga cruiser’s Air Warfare Boss role.
Schneemann