| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4149 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Cruel2BEkind [ April 7th, 2013, 8:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
I just wanted a opinion on what your guy's viewpoint on this is... Also I had a discussion on it with my roommate. (What im discussing) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Bu ... _destroyer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guided_missile_destroyer Ive noticed that the Arleigh Burke destroyer has 62 active ships at the moment, but I saw the new successor of the destroyer (Zumwalt) only has 3 planned. I wanted to know if its a bad choice to just create that many? I know costs are hard and everything but isn't having 62 men with pistols guarding you than just 3 men with assault rifles? (Im also aware they will still have some Arleigh Burke class destroyers mixed in later) Or are we just being stupid(er)? |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ April 7th, 2013, 8:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
the reason is simple: the zumwalts are not replacements to the burkes, but in effect to the spruances. they just serve different roles, it is is not that one is that much better. |
|
| Author: | Cruel2BEkind [ April 7th, 2013, 8:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
Aren't they both Guided Missile Destroyers? Or is the Zumwalt more of a ground attack... If that is so why would they list it as a successor of the Burke? |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ April 7th, 2013, 8:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
burke --> DDG-51 zumwalt --> DD-1000 they are not listed as successor of the burke, nor as guided missile destroyer. |
|
| Author: | erik_t [ April 7th, 2013, 8:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
That's not correct; they do in fact carry DDG hull numbers. The most accurate answer to the OP's question is probably that we're not really sure what we're doing with this class. The Zumwalts are new and wacky and different and challenging and exciting in a way that no ships have been since the immediate postwar era, when technology and mission requirements were changing at a similarly rapid pace. As such, there were a number of two- and three-off classes at the time (Norfolk, Mitscher, Claud Jones, etc.). These ships served with varying distinction in the postwar USN, but in most cases there was never really any intention of replacing the massive numbers of Gearings and Sumners with these designs. They were service-ready investigations of new technology and new concepts. This is probably an appropriate forecast of DDG-1000's future. |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ April 7th, 2013, 8:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
ah, my memory was flawed on the DD/DDG then..... it is a bit confusing (DDX--> DDG-1000) they carry the DDG designation but an DD hull number, to make it even more confusing xD and I think you nailed it there, Erik. in addition, friedman notes that these ships were (as designed) basically spruance replacements with some more land attack capability and drastically lower manning. DD-21 (as the project was then known) was also meant to have some systems (VSR and SPY-3 was especially named) being researched and developed for use on later ships (for example the ford class carrier) |
|
| Author: | deankal55 [ April 9th, 2013, 1:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
This is an interesting question. The Zumwalt class will not replace the ASW-role Spurances. Also at almost 15,000 tons they are as big as WWII heavy cruisers and they carry 6” (actually 155mm) guns. They seem to be intended for a surface warfare/land bombardment role this is currently missing from the fleet. I think they should be more appropriately classed as guided missile cruisers. They don’t seem to be intended to fulfill the AAW/ASW role of traditional post-WWII destroyers. With the unlimited flow of funds to the Defense Department being turned off, it will be interesting to see if the trend towards bigger and bigger surface vessels will continue. |
|
| Author: | klagldsf [ April 9th, 2013, 8:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
A lot of it also boils down to cost. DDG-51 Flight III is a lot more friendly to a post-sequestration budge. |
|
| Author: | Bullfrog [ April 10th, 2013, 3:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
The problem with comparisons with WWII is that destroyers have a far different role now, Destroyers in most NATO countries are no-longer used as ASW escorts having been superseded by frigates in that role. Yet America still seems to try to use them for ASW and has a surprising lack of dedicated ASW ships. The same is also true with MCM vessels, I could understand this in a cash strapped smaller European navy but why does the largest and best funded navy in the world rely on the secondary capabilities of warships unsuited to the role? |
|
| Author: | heuhen [ April 10th, 2013, 3:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Future Of The DDG's of United States Navy |
frigates In Norway the Fridtjof Nansen frigates was original designed as ASW escots, but was later redesigned as a multi role frigate where weapons came from the top shelf. And on a Norwegian Military forum they are talking about that she is ready for but not with weapons, and among those weapons is the Standard missiles. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|