Battlecruiser 2000 ... Arsenal ship wordt de toekomst ?

[Lynxian]

Wel makkelijk mikken, kijkend vanuit je periscoop.

[Huzaar1]

Ik hoop zo dat ze beginnen met de bouw van 10 tegelijk.dit wordt natuurlijk een groot succes.

[Harald]

https://marineschepen.nl/nieuws/Amerikaanse-analisten-kosten-slagschepen-kunnen-oplopen-tot-19-miljard-euro-per-stuk-190126.html

'Kosten Trump-slagschepen kunnen oplopen tot 19 miljard euro per stuk'

Volgens analisten van het Amerikaanse congres kunnen de kosten van de in december aangekondigde slagschepen van de Trumpklasse oplopen tot maar liefst 19 miljard euro per stuk. Trump wil dat de nieuwe 'Golden Fleet' schepen de grootste ter wereld worden in zijn soort, maar er bestaan vraagtekens over hoe goed het BBG(X) project doordacht is.

[Harald]

Dit is weer typisch een interpretatie van een Amerikaanse kleuter van de situatie. "Rockets and lasers firing everywhere"

      net als Trumop zelf, geen gerichte actie, maar gewoon wild om zich heen slaan met beide armen en benen. Dat is ook het beeld op het "schilderij" van de Trump klasse, wild schietend om zich heen met alle wapens in zijn arsenaal.   

[Huzaar1]

Dit is weer typisch een interpretatie van een Amerikaanse kleuter van de situatie. "Rockets and lasers firing everywhere"

[Harald]

GA Examining Role of Railguns on Trump-class Battleships

ARLINGTON, Va. — General Atomics is holding discussions with the U.S. government regarding the role of railguns on the Trump-class guided-missile battleships.

"You know, we didn't really give up on it," Nick Bucci, Vice President, Defense Systems & Technologies at General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems told Naval News on the company's railgun efforts at the 38th Surface Navy Association (SNA) national symposium.

Last month's debut of the Trump-class revealed an expansive arsenal of cutting-edge weaponry and munitions, including what the U.S. Navy detailed as a 32 megajoule railgun at the warship's fore. While work on American programs ceased in 2021, Bucci highlighted that General Atomics has been working "behind the scenes" to develop railguns.

"We've been working kind of behind the scenes with some of those other companies and countries to keep the technology moving forward to some level, some of it we kind of have put on the back shelf, but it's ready to be pulled back out. We've used some of that technology in other areas of our portfolio, and so we can easily pull some of that back," Bucci said.

While Bucci did not specify the companies and countries that were involved with General Atomics' railgun work, American allies such as Japan, Germany and France have been working on their own systems in recent years. Tokyo's efforts saw its first at-sea firing trial last summer.

Bucci also claimed that problems seen during the initial development of the railgun have been addressed.

"Depending on what their skepticism is, we probably have already solved that problem. And frankly, in many ways, with the advances that we've made in some of the inherent technologies, those challenges don't exist any longer because we've tackled them for a different product. Whether it was from EMALS and AAG. Whether it was for our long-range maneuvering projectile with some of the electronics and things like that."



Despite the Trump-class' development and anticipated loadout indicating a renewed look at railguns by the Navy, Bucci stated that the company required further clarification on what the service wanted to do with the battleship's railgun armament.

General Atomics previously told Naval Newsthat their railgun work could provide air and missile defense capabilities – including terminal defense – for Golden Dome as well as the defense of Guam. Bucci also noted that the company's previous work was in support of U.S. Army air defense efforts.

"With the U.S. Army, we were talking about a smaller launcher that was doing primarily air defense missions," Bucci said. "Whereas the Navy program was concentrating on the larger railgun for a different type of mission. And so our goal is to understand, really, what the requirements will be for Defiant and the Trump-class, so that we can get the right configuration to put forward for that new ship."

For the U.S. Navy, the new class of battleship could provide enhanced loitering times, firepower and long-range hypersonic strike capabilities via its complement of missiles and guns. At SNA, U.S. Marine Corps Brigadier General Lee Meyers, Director of Expeditionary Warfare, remarked that the service was interested in how the battleship would "support future ship-to-shore movements given the evolution of the threat."

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2026/01/ga-examining-role-of-railguns-on-trump-class-battleships/

[Lynxian]

The fuck stoppen ze in die Amerikaanse schepen? Is de scheepshuid van goud, de kussens op de bedden gevuld met geslepen diamanten? Wat is dit voor een onzin?

[Huzaar1]

Wat een enorme dapen daar. Ik denk dat de Chinezen de instellingen van hun voor carrier bedoelde main deep strike wapens zullen bijstellen voor dit achterlijke project.


Kelder 1 van dergelijke achterlijke dure schepen en je zorgt voor een onverwerkbaar verlies voor de US navy. 15 miljard dat drijft. Bizar. Daar kun je duizenden poseidon's voor maken.

[Harald]

US Navy to set first BBG(X) Trump-class battleship schedule within 60 days.

https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2026/us-navy-to-set-first-bbg-x-trump-class-battleship-schedule-within-60-days

Artikel even vertaald naar het Nederlands, voor het snellere lezen 

De Amerikaanse marine bereidt zich voor om binnen 30 tot 60 dagen het eerste ontwerpschema vast te stellen voor het BBG(X) geleide-raketslagschip, ook wel bekend als het slagschip van de Trump-klasse, aldus Chris Kastner, CEO van Huntington Ingalls Industries.

Zoals Defense Daily op 8 januari 2026 meldde, bereidt de Amerikaanse marine zich voor om binnen 30 tot 60 dagen het eerste ontwerpschema vast te stellen voor het BBG(X) geleide-raketslagschip, ook wel bekend als het slagschip van de Trump-klasse , aldus Chris Kastner, CEO van Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII). Deze verduidelijking zou de eerste concrete tijdsindicatie zijn sinds de aankondiging van het programma door de Amerikaanse president Donald Trump in december 2025.

De kostenramingen die in het kader van het Trump-klasse slagschepenprogramma zijn besproken, variëren van ongeveer 10 miljard dollar per schip voor latere eenheden tot wel 15 miljard dollar voor het eerste schip, dat naar verwachting USS Defiant zal gaan heten.

Chris Kastner, CEO van Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), heeft verklaard dat de Amerikaanse marine naar verwachting binnen 30 tot 60 dagen duidelijkheid zal verschaffen over het initiële ontwerp van het BBG(X) geleide-raket slagschip. Dit is het eerste concrete tijdsindicatie sinds de aankondiging van het programma in december 2025. De BBG(X), ook bekend als het slagschip van de Trump-klasse , vormt een centrale pijler van het Golden Fleet-concept, dat tot doel heeft de oppervlaktevloot van de Amerikaanse marine uit te breiden en de bouw van zeer grote oorlogsschepen nieuw leven in te blazen. Deze verduidelijking komt op een moment dat de marine heroverweegt hoe dit nieuwe slagschip naast de toekomstige DDG(X) torpedobootjager zou kunnen passen, of deze zou kunnen vervangen, terwijl tegelijkertijd de plannen voor de toekomstige FF(X) fregatten worden herzien na de annulering van het gehele Constellation-klasse programma.

Het Trump-klasse slagschip programma werd op 22 december 2025 publiekelijk aangekondigd, met een initiële doelstelling van twee schepen en een ambitie op de langere termijn van 10, 20 tot 25 schepen. De enige tijdschema's die momenteel worden genoemd voor het eerste schip, dat naar verwachting USS Defiant (BBG-1) zal heten, wijzen op een ontwerpfase die ruwweg loopt van 2026 tot 2031-2032, een start van de bouw in de vroege jaren 2030, een tewaterlating in het midden tot eind van de jaren 2030 en een indienststelling in de late jaren 2030 of rond 2040. Er zijn in dit stadium nog geen vaste of formeel geplande data vastgesteld, aangezien het ontwerp van de BBG(X) nog in ontwikkeling is. De Amerikaanse marine heeft ook aangegeven dat dit programma bedoeld is om eerder uitgevoerde werkzaamheden voor de DDG(X) te integreren en te vervangen, waarbij bestaande werkzaamheden aan energieopwekking en systeemintegratie worden gebruikt om de ontwikkeling waar mogelijk te versnellen. Indien voltooid, zou de Trump-klasse de eerste klasse slagschepen van de Amerikaanse marine zijn die sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog is gebouwd, na de uitfasering van het laatste slagschip van de Iowa-klasse in 1992.

Volgens de planningsparameters van de marine voor het programma zullen de BBG(X)-schepen naar verwachting een lengte hebben van 256 tot 268 meter, een breedte van 32 tot 35 meter en een waterverplaatsing van meer dan 35.000 ton bij volledige belading. De verwachte bemanning varieert van 650 tot 850 personen, een aantal dat aanzienlijk hoger ligt dan dat van de huidige Arleigh Burke-klasse torpedobootjagers (300-380 officieren en manschappen) en Ticonderoga-klasse kruisers (ongeveer 330 bemanningsleden per schip), maar veel lager dan de bemanning van de slagschepen van de Iowa-klasse , die tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog en de Koreaanse Oorlog ongeveer 2.700 personen nodig hadden en ongeveer 1.800 personen na de modernisering in de jaren 80. De Trump-klasse zal naar verwachting snelheden van meer dan 30 knopen (55 km/u) bereiken met behulp van een conventioneel geïntegreerd aandrijfsysteem op basis van gasturbines en dieselgeneratoren, dat zowel de voortstuwing als de elektriciteit voor sensoren en wapensystemen levert.

Overigens is het de bedoeling dat de hoofdraketbatterij van de BBG(X)/Trump-klasse 128 verticale lanceercellen van het type Mk 41 omvat, verdeeld over de boeg en de achtersteven. Deze wordt aangevuld met een aparte lanceerinrichting met 12 cellen voor de hypersonische raketten Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS), die al bekend zijn van de Zumwalt-klasse torpedobootjagers. De Amerikaanse marine heeft ook aangegeven dat de slagschepen van de Trump-klasse de SLCM-N kunnen dragen, een nucleair inzetbare kruisraket die vanaf zee wordt gelanceerd en oorspronkelijk is ontwikkeld voor onderzeeërs. Dit zou de oppervlaktevloot een extra nucleaire aanvalsmogelijkheid bieden. Ter vergelijking: de huidige torpedobootjagers van de Arleigh Burke-klasse hebben 96 verticale lanceercellen en de kruisers van de Ticonderoga-klasse 122, wat de potentiële vuurkracht van een veel groter schip illustreert.

De bewapening en nabijheidsverdedigingssystemen die voor het slagschip van de Trump-klasse zijn ontworpen, omvatten twee Mk 45 127 mm scheepskanonnen en een elektromagnetisch railkanon van 32 megajoule, hoewel het railkanon wordt beschreven als een potentieel en niet als een gegarandeerd element. De puntverdediging zal naar verwachting bestaan ��uit twee RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile-lanceerders, vier Mk 38 30 mm wapensystemen, meerdere Optical Dazzling Interdictor-lasers en extra systemen voor de bestrijding van drones. Het BBG(X)-ontwerp omvat ook gerichte energiewapens met een vermogen tussen 300 en 600 kilowatt, wat de intentie van de marine weerspiegelt om een ��mix van gelaagde kinetische en niet-kinetische verdedigingssystemen te gebruiken tegen raketten, vliegtuigen en onbemande systemen.

Daarnaast zijn er sensoren en besturingssystemen aanwezig ter ondersteuning van luchtverdediging, raketvolging en commandovoering. De Trump-klasse zou kunnen beschikken over de AN/SPY-6 lucht- en raketverdedigingsradar en de AN/SLQ-32(V)7 elektronische oorlogsvoering suite, geïntegreerd in een command-and-control architectuur die geschikt is voor operaties op vlootniveau. De luchtvaartfaciliteiten aan de achterzijde omvatten een vliegdek en een afgesloten hangar die groot genoeg is voor MH-60 Seahawk-helikopters, CMV-22B Osprey en Bell MV-75 kantelrotorvliegtuigen, evenals toekomstige verticale-lift vliegtuigen, zowel bemand als onbemand, zoals de Bell V-247 Vigilant. Deze luchtmachteenheid is bedoeld ter ondersteuning van langeafstandsbewaking, doelbepaling, logistiek en coördinatie, ongeacht of het slagschip alleen opereert, binnen een carrier strike group of als leidende eenheid van een surface action group.

Vanuit industrieel en financieel oogpunt is de Amerikaanse marine van plan het ontwerp van de BBG(X)/Trump-klasse te leiden, met ondersteuning van grote Amerikaanse scheepsbouwers gedurende een ontwerpfase van naar schatting 72 maanden (of zes jaar). De eerste werkzaamheden worden uitgevoerd door Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) en General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, met aanvullende ontwerpsteun van gespecialiseerde scheepsarchitecten. De officiële aanschaf van het eerste slagschip van de Trump-klasse, de USS Defiant (BBG-1), zou daarom begin jaren 2030 kunnen plaatsvinden, wat suggereert dat het schip eind jaren 2030 of rond 2040 in dienst zal treden na de bouw, proefvaarten en indienststelling. De kostenramingen die in het kader van het programma zijn besproken, variëren van ongeveer 10 miljard dollar per schip voor latere eenheden tot wel 15 miljard dollar voor het eerste schip.

Dit is aanzienlijk hoger dan de kosten van de Arleigh Burke-klasse torpedobootjagers, die doorgaans tussen de 2 en 2,5 miljard dollar per stuk kosten, de Constellation-klasse (FFG-62) fregatten, waarvan de kosten per romp naar verwachting tussen de 1,1 en 1,4 miljard dollar zouden liggen, of de Zumwalt-klasse torpedobootjagers, die gemiddeld zo'n 7,5 miljard dollar per schip kostten. De Ticonderoga-klasse kruisers kostten in de jaren negentig historisch gezien ongeveer 1 miljard dollar per schip. Dit betekent dat de kosten van een slagschip van de Trump-klasse de prijs van een vliegdekschip van de Ford-klasse, die meer dan 10 miljard dollar per stuk kan kosten, zouden kunnen benaderen of zelfs overtreffen. Dit ligt ruim boven de verwachte kosten voor de DDG(X) torpedobootjager van de volgende generatie, die volgens recente planningsramingen tussen de 3,3 en 4,4 miljard dollar per schip liggen. Voorlopig is de volgende mijlpaal de door de marine beloofde verduidelijking van de eisen en de planning, die zal bepalen of de BBG(X)/Trump-klasse verder ontwikkeld wordt als een afgeleid ontwerp of een langer, volledig nieuw ontwikkelingstraject volgt.

[Ace1]

[Huzaar1]

Amerikanen gaan op dit vlak helemaal nergens naartoe. Hun visie op ontwerp, productie en constructie is echt totaal achterhaald. Ik neem een algemene 'decline' waar die niet gekeerd kan worden, ook niet met 'golden battleships'. Zelfs niet als het wordt goedgepraat door een MAGA professor.

[Harald]

Toch een soort van Arsenal-ship ?

What it would take to build Trump's Golden Fleet 'battleships'

"The interesting part of this is it's not just a kind of fleeting presidential idea, but this is, in fact, something that does kind of resonate with what the Navy's finding it probably needs to do with the fleet through its own work," one analyst said.

When President Donald Trump told a group of high-ranking military officers in September that he was "seriously considering" building "battleships" for the US Navy, it raised eyebrows in the naval community.

True American battleships were heavily armored to fight gun battles with a peer navy and have been consigned to history since the 1990s. In their place, modern destroyers are kitted out with state-of-the-art radars and interceptors that protect the aircraft carrier and its all-important air wing, as demonstrated by the numerous engagements against the Houthis in the Red Sea.

But now, the White House and Navy are reportedly in early discussions to design a new class of ships, as part of a concept the administration dubbed "Golden Fleet." These "battleships" would displace between 15,000 and 20,000 tons — much larger than current destroyers — and be equipped with premiere offensive strike capabilities such as hypersonic weapons, according to a recent report by The Wall Street Journal, which cited unnamed current and former officials. The broader "Golden Fleet" concept would pair these offensive "battleships" with a myriad of smaller unmanned vessels and corvettes.

Despite the concept ostensibly coming from the White House, the administration's ideas align with a theory that has arisen from recent wargames and other analyses, according to Bryan Clark, a retired Navy officer and fellow at the Hudson Institute, who frequently works with the Pentagon as an outside consultant. At least from a strategic standpoint, the Navy's envisioned future destroyer, DDG(X), lacks the space for the offensive firepower it may need in a future fight, he said.

"To get a ship that's able to do some offense as well as defense, you need something even bigger [than a destroyer] to have enough missile capacity or to have long-range missiles that don't fit in the [Vertical Launching System] cell," he said. "So, either one of those drives you to a new ship design that's bigger than even DDG(X) was envisioned as being."

But designing and building an entirely new class of Navy ships is a prolonged and expensive exercise.

If the administration follows through on the idea, analysts told Breaking Defense this new ship could cost upwards of $4 billion per copy — a big ask of the Navy's already strained shipbuilding budget. Further, these experts said, the United States' options for building this new ship are likely limited to two firms: HII or General Dynamics.

"The interesting part of this is it's not just a kind of fleeting presidential idea, but this is, in fact, something that does kind of resonate with what the Navy's finding it probably needs to do with the fleet through its own work," said Clark. "It's an interesting juxtaposition of presidential gut [instinct] with [the] Navy's analysis."

Spokespeople for the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Navy deferred comment for this report to the White House. In response to questions for this story, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said, "President Trump has done more than anyone to bolster America's maritime dominance — including by securing a $43 billion investment in the Working Families Tax Cut, establishing a White House Office of Shipbuilding, negotiating a historic deal with Finland to construct 11 new arctic cutters, and more. We have no further announcements at this time — stay tuned!"

.../...

Jonathan Page, a professor at the University of Michigan's school for naval architecture and marine engineering, who has previously worked on various Navy shipbuilding programs, estimated the new battleship would cost between $4 to $4.5 billion.

.../...

https://breakingdefense.com/2025/11/what-it-would-take-to-build-trumps-golden-fleet-battleships/

[Harald]

Zuid-Korea wil schip volgepakt met raketten; een 'arsenaalschip'

Zuid-Korea plant de bouw van drie nieuwe schepen ter aanvulling van haar marine. Opvallend is het feit dat Zuid-Korea niet voor een traditioneel ontwerp kiest, maar haar zinnen heeft gezet in de bouw van zogenaamde arsenaalschepen, hoewel Zuid-Korea de schepen zelf omschrijft als een "Joint Firepower Ship".

.../...

https://marineschepen.nl/nieuws/Zuid-Korea-wil-schip-volgepakt-met-raketten-een-arsenaalschip-200423.html

[Harald]

South Korea plans to build three ?arsenal ships? capable of carrying 80 ballistic missiles by end of 2020s

Republic of Korea Navy has reportedly selected Daewoo Shipbuilding & Engineering (DSME) to design its future arsenal ships on 11 April 2023.

Locally known as ?Joint Firepower Vessel (합동화력함),? three arsenal ships are expected to enter service with the ROKN by late 2020s. They?re expected to displace around 5~8,000 tons and armed with up to 80 ballistic missiles, CIWS, torpedos, and other defensive armaments.

ROKN?s future arsenal ships are similar in deign to US Navy concept devised in the 90s, though its operating concept will be and operational environment will be quite different from what USN envisioned. Designed solely for land attack mission,arsenal ships are a practical solution that will address current shortcomings faced by South Korean kill chain and massive retaliation networks.

Despite possessing a large inventory of Hyunmoo-series conventional land-attack ballistic and cruise missiles, South Korea reportedly possesses only around 60+ transporter erector launchers (TEL). These specialized launch vehicles are expensive, maintenance & manpower heavy, require lengthy reload period, and vulnerable to North Korean attacks. With current TEL inventory, it is impossible to launch mass missile salvo that is required in the initial stage of the war against North Korea.

The arsenal ship will address this shortcoming by providing a relatively low-cost, mobile, and survivable launch platform capable of mass salvo fire at a moment?s notice. South Korea is currently undertaking a massive effort to consolidate its strategic strike & missile defense assets under a single umbrella of the ROK Strategic Command slated to become online in 2024. These arsenal ships will likely fall under its operational control.

Although these arsenal ships are extremely vulnerable against modern anti-ship threats posed by adversaries like China, they are being designed exclusively for a North Korean contingency. They will operate far from reaches of North Korean coastal defense cruise missiles and submarines, likely in relative safety of South Korea?s southern coastline or far off the Easter coastline.

The ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff initially identified arsenal ships as part of its long-term procurement plan in 2018. Once DSME completes conceptual design this year, arsenal ships will become part of next year?s mid-term procurement plan and undergo necessary procurement procedures.

[Harald]

The Navy?s Stealth Destroyers Are Getting a Serious Upgrade: 12 Hypersonic Missiles Each

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a42098276/zumwalt-class-destroyers-hypersonic-missiles/

[Harald]

US Navy Details Hypersonic Missile Plan For Zumwalt Destroyers


https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/11/us-navy-details-hypersonic-missile-plan-for-zumwalt-destroyers-virginia-submarines/#prettyPhoto/0/
The upgrade will give the Zumwalt Class an impressive new weapons capability. The CPS hypersonic missiles are expected to replace one or both of the main guns.

The trio of Zumwalt-class guided-missile destroyers could each field up to a dozen hypersonic missiles, with the first ship ready for testing in 2025, USNI News has learned.

The service has determined that the hull can accommodate four 87-inch missile tubes that can each hold multiple missiles, Vice Adm. Johnny Wolfe the head of the Navy?s strategic systems programs, told reporters on Tuesday at the Naval Submarine League?s annual symposium.

?We?re talking about deploying this system on DDG-1000 in 2025, that?s three years from now,? Wolfe said.
?We got to get on with getting all of the design for the Zumwalt, getting all of those tubes in there, as we pulled out the forward gun mounts. We?ve gotten to put these large diameter tubes in there, and then finish the integration work into the combat system.?

USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000) is set to arrive at Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Miss., late next year to start a modernization period to install the missile tubes that will replace the two existing 155mm gun mounts on the 16,000-ton guided-missile destroyer, USNI News first reported in August.

USNI News understands the Navy has determined in previous studies that three Common Hypersonic Glide Bodies (C-HGB) and their boosters could fit in each 87-inch tube ? or 12 missiles per Zumwalt.

USS Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) will follow Zumwalt to Ingalls for its own modernization period that will include installing the missile tubes. It?s unclear if the third Zumwalt-class ship, Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002) ?currently at Ingalls ? will also have the missiles installed as part of its combat systems activation period.

The inclusion of hypersonics on the ship followed a 2017 decision to make the three-ship Zumwalt class blue water combatants.

?Zumwalt gave us an opportunity to get [hypersonics] out faster and to be honest with you, I need a solid mission for Zumwalt,? Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Gilday told USNI News during an interview earlier this year.

The weapon?s dimensions are common across the Navy and Army and have been developed as part of a joint program between both services.

?You need to have the same lethality no matter where you?re at. And that?s what this weapon does. It?s all the same with the lethality to get after all these targets. It just depends on who?s launching it, right, whether it?s the Army, from a [transporter erector launcher], or whether it?s a Zumwalt, or whether it?s a Virginia-class submarine,? Wolfe said.

The weapons are designed to fill the Pentagon?s longstanding prompt global strike mission that calls for the ability to launch a conventional strike almost anywhere in the world at ranges of thousands of miles.

The Pentagon over the last several years has accelerated its development of hypersonic weapons, or those traveling faster than five times the speed of sound. In 2018, the Defense Department tasked the Navy with developing a weapon for itself and the Army.

?On these high-end systems, it is no longer affordable for a single service to do that. We?re working with the [Office the Secretary of Defense], we?re working with the Army and with what our resource sponsor is doing to figure out how we build this capability once and get out to multiple platforms,? Wolfe said.

The Navy is pairing a glide body launched from a booster system to create an ?all-up round? that would be in use by both services. In June, the first flight test proved the viability of the booster but the glide body didn?t hit the target.

Wolfe said the Navy found and corrected the flaw within two months.

While hypersonics are considered a conventional weapon, Wolfe is still overseeing the portfolio, which the Pentagon is treating as a strategic weapon, he told USNI News. Wolfe is also responsible for the Navy?s submarine-launched nuclear weapons.

?It?s strategic, but it?s not nuclear. If you look at the numbers, particularly with what we?re going to with the ranges, it is very much a strategic asset. You can hold very high-value targets at risk ? and you can do that with all these various platforms,? Wolfe told USNI News.

The Zumwalt destroyers will be the first Navy platform to field the missiles. The Army is set to get its first operational, truck-launched weapons next year. In 2029, the weapons will be deployed on the first attack submarine with the Virginia Payload Module that is currently under construction at General Dynamics Electric Boat and HII?s Newport News Shipbuilding.

The Navy is currently building a test facility to launch the new weapon underwater from a similar tube as those installed on the Zumwalt ships and the Virginia boats, Wolfe said.

?Our first challenge was: Can we develop an air launch? Basically pressurized air to get that weapon out of a Zumwalt, right up in the air, so it lights off and we don?t have all those hot gases [to deal with]. We?ve actually proven that we?ve done that testing ? That?s the next challenge is build the underwater launch,? he said.
?We?re starting to build a facility to do underwater launch testing, so that we understand what that weapon will do, even before we get to the first Virginia.?

In terms of fielding the weapons, Wolfe said progress has been on track to meet the tight deadlines on the Navy platforms, but margins were thin.

?I think we?re on a pretty good path right now, but time is not our friend,? he said.

https://news.usni.org/2022/11/03/navy-details-hypersonic-missiles-on-zumwalt-destroyers-virginia-submarines

[Parera]

( wordt dit een soort Arsenaal schip ? 20.000 ton, hoeveel VLS systemen ? )

Nee, het wordt een veel meer civiel georiënteerd schip. Met een lengte van 210 m en slechts 110 koppen. Iedereen krijgt een eigen hut, dat is civiele standaard.
Een lpd is logischer als basis ontwerp.

Toevoeging :

Marineschepen.nl heeft inmiddels een artikel geschreven rondom deze bijzondere plannen van de Japanners.

https://marineschepen.nl/nieuws/Japan-wil-gigantische-kruisers-voor-raketverdediging-120922.html

[Harald]

New Details On Japan's Future BMD Vessels Revealed  ( wordt dit een soort Arsenaal schip ? 20.000 ton, hoeveel VLS systemen ? )

Here are the latest details on the Aegis system-equipped vessels (ASEVs), Japan's future ballistic missile defense (BMD) ships.



On August 31, 2022, Japan's Ministry of Defense (MOD) released its budget request for FY2023, which included a line item on Aegis system-equipped vessels (ASEVs). However, no specific budget amount was given for this, as its details have not yet been finalized. The Japanese government intends to revise its national security-related policies, including the National Security Strategy, by the end of this year, which is why budget amounts for many items were not indicated as of the end of August.

As Naval News previously reported, the ASEV is a vessel that has been decided to be built as an asset to defend Japan from the threat of ballistic missile attacks, mainly by North Korea, as an alternative to the Aegis Ashore, which has been canceled its deployment in 2020. In Japan, especially since 2016, the threat of ballistic missiles by North Korea has been widely recognized, and since then, Aegis destroyers of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) have been deployed in the Sea of Japan at all times to be on the alert for ballistic missile launches by North Korea.

However, this was a heavy burden on the JMSDF's Aegis destroyers, which also had to deal with the Chinese Navy's increased activities in the East China Sea. Therefore, the deployment of Aegis Ashore was planned to take the place of this role. However, since the deployment of Aegis Ashore was forced to be cancelled due to MOD's mismanagement and opposition from local residents, the decision was made to build an ASEV with Aegis Ashore components to take its place.

According to local newspaper reports, initial details of the ASEV point towards a massive ship: 210 meters long and 40 meters wide, with a standard displacement of 20,000 tons and a crew of about 110 people. Crew comfort onboard will be a priority as all crew members will be provided with private cabins. In terms of length and displacement, it is equivalent to the Izumo class DDH (248 meters long, standard displacement 19,500 tons), the largest vessel in the JMSDF, but it is more like a civilian vessel than a warship in that all crew members are given private cabins and the crew complement is quite low for a vessel of this size.

Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada explained explained during a press conference held on September 2 the reasons for such a large vessel, as well as the rationale behind high crew comfort standards:

"The reason is to ensure seaworthiness, to be able to operate in rough weather, to improve the crew's living environment for long-term offshore missions, and to be expandable to deal with hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs) in the future."

However, in addition to the reasons given by the Defense Minister, some believe that the hull was enlarged to solve the problem of the size and weight of the SPY-7, a radar manufactured by Lockheed Martin that will be installed on the ASEV. The Defense Minister also commented that the ASEVs are expected to be commissioned around March 2028 for the first vessel and March 2029 for the second vessel.

The primary role assigned to the ASEV is to free the JMSDF's Aegis destroyers from their North Korea watch duties and to enable them to respond to China's maritime expansion. Therefore, the ASEV does not inherently require air defense or anti-submarine warfare capabilities, its sole main focus being BMD. This is because North Korea does not currently possess such weapons to attack the ASEV.

However, according to press reports, the ASEV will be equipped with SM-6 missiles to deal with cruise missiles and anti-ship missiles, as well as an improved version of the Type 12 ship-to-ship missile that can attack surface targets as well as naval vessels and has a range of approximately 1,000 km. Therefore, the ASEV could become an asset that could respond not only to North Korean ballistic missiles, but also to attacks by Chinese ballistic missiles, HGVs, and cruise missiles. The question then would be how would the ASEV respond to the threat of Chinese submarines and anti-ship missiles. Above all, in this case, the ASEVs should probably be planned as a completely new type of warship, since it cannot be positioned as a mere alternative to the Aegis Ashore.

https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/index.php?action=post;topic=28886.0;last_msg=478635

[Harald]

Latest Details on South Korea's Arsenal Ship Project

On October 6, the ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) officially announced a plan to develop 'customized deterrente' in response to North Korea's growing nuclear weapons and missile capabilities. To fulfill this goal, the JCS confirmed plans to procure arsenal ships as a long-term project to counter North Korea, along with the light aircraft carrier project known as CVX. 

South Korea's plans for an Arsenal Ship first emerged in August 2019 at the same time as the light aircraft carrier project (then known as LPX-II project). However, virtually no information on the arsenal ship was published ever since, to the point where its funding was a question mark as CVX took center stage earlier this year. This was until this fall and the JCS announcement.

The ROK JCS explained during the National Assembly's administrative inspection that it is planning to expedite the introduction of Korean arsenal ships through research and requirement verification, based on serious consideration of the necessity of arsenal ships.

At the National Defense Committee of the National Assembly, the JCS added that "the Korean Armed Forces will publish the ROK-US joint 4D Operational Guidelines and modify its couteractive strategy paper on weapons of mass destruction (WMD)." According to local media, 4D operational concept includes the overall improvement in detecting, destroying, and defending from North Korean nuclear and missile threats.

The Korean military plans to deploy three 5,000 tons arsenal ships by the late 2020s, equipped with over 80 land attack cruise missiles to strike land-based targets as a "sailing missile base". However, critics of the concept argue that such ships are relatively vulnerable, difficult to defend and easily detectable by the enemy.

Arsenal Ship or SSG(N) ?

The arsenal ship project was abandoned by the US Navy due to its security strategic risk of carrying too many costly missiles in one ship. Despite the precedent of the United States, the ROK Navy has been considering the option of arsenal ships as a strategic asset by dividing the number of missiles that the Korean military already possesses on its soil, and maneuvering at sea as a means of massive retaliation against North Korea. The operational efficiency is still in question as the public sees that missile-loaded submarines (SSG or SSGN) are more strategically efficient and lethal.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/12/latest-details-on-south-koreas-arsenal-ship-project/?nowprocket=1

[Harald]

Op-Ed: LUSV as an Anti-Air and Anti-Ship Missiles Platform

Part 2: LUSV as an Anti-Air and Anti-Ship Missiles Platform

For purely hypothetical and speculative analysis discussion purposes, Naval News will explore the possibility of other armed and functional roles for the Large Unmanned Surface Vessel (LUSV) according to the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps current and future desires, challenges, and to counter peer nations' threats.  The author is not an Engineer or a navy ship designer so this story is a work of plausible naval fiction based on a real vessel, the LUSV (the LUSV isn't actually field in numbers and armed yet), and real armament options.

For the sake of this Op-Ed, we'll use a Seacor Marine's Amy Clemons McCall® LUSV as an example. The Amy Clemons McCall® is 202 feet long (within the U.S. Navy's LUSV's 200 to 300-feet dimensions, but falls well short of the 1,000 to 2,000-ton displacement at 529 U.S. tons (479,901 kilograms), meaning that the LUSV will be longer and much heavier). Nonetheless, it is the open cargo deck that is the focus of this Op-Ed and the Amy Clemons McCall® example has an open cargo deck of 132 feet (40 meters) long and 26.9 feet (8.2 meters) wide and carries 400 tons.  Note that Searcor Marine® FSV models come in many sizes and speeds so the U.S. Navy can select to build LUSVs of multiple sizes to suit their requirements and that the Amy Clemons McCall® is not a military vessel.

Mid-Range Anti-Air and Anti-Ship Role with Mark 56 VLS and Harpoon Missile Launchers

The U.S. Marine Corps' Commandant, General David H. Berger, said at the USNI/CSIS webinar on 1 September 2021 that a U.S. Navy nuclear-powered aircraft carrier won't deter all those numerous vessels in a foreign militia fishing fleet.  Thus, the U.S. Navy needs to learn to deter that problem and General Berger doesn't see most U.S. warships as the appropriate tool for that task, so he concludes that the U.S. must become much more adaptable and match these asymmetrical kinds of threats with a proper tool and response.  Naval News will speculatively explore a few U.S. Navy options to deter numerous "non-combatant ships" that have armed crews with possible future conflict add-on impromptu deck weapons.

The LUSV can be equipped with the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) and Harpoon Anti-Ship missiles for medium-range tactical armament.  With custom removable platforms as decking installed for "plug-and-play" options, the U.S. Navy can use the Mark 56 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile launcher, a launcher it doesn't field but is readily available commercial-off-the-shelf for purchase. (The U.S. Navy currently uses the Mark 29 eight-cell Missile Launching System in which 32 ESSMs can be carried in a Mark 29 as each cell is quad-packed with four ESSMs). 

The ESSM has a range of approximately 27 nautical miles (31 miles/50 kilometers) and flies at Mach 4+ for the Anti-Air and Anti-Missile defense role.  The ESSM MK56 launcher footprint is very small and narrow as shown in the following photos showing vertical MK56 launchers with red caps, meaning a LUSV can carry a lot of these rectangular ESSM tubes into a battlespace.

The Harpoon Block II+ Anti-Ship missile has a range of over 100+ nautical miles (115+ miles/185+ kilometers), and the U.S. Navy reports on its official website that Block II+ is capable of attacking land-based targets on shore such as surface-to-air missile (SAM) sites, bunkers, hangars, radars, stationary aircraft, installations, and potentially armored vehicles and Transporter Erector Launchers.

...../.....

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/11/op-ed-lusv-as-an-anti-air-and-anti-ship-missiles-platform/?nowprocket=1

[Harald]

Latest Details on Hypersonic Missile Integration Aboard Zumwalt-class Destroyers

The U.S. Navy plans to field the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) Hypersonic missile aboard its three Zumwalt-class destroyers. The missiles are set to take the place of the inactivated 155mm Advanced Gun Turrets aboard USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000), USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001) and USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002). Naval News asked the U.S. Navy for additional information on this substitution process.

Each Zumwalt-class destroyer has two stealthy triangular 155mm Advanced Gun Turrets (AGS) in the forward hull.  When stored, the AGS's metal gun barrel is nestled inside the angled turret housing with the turret's doors closed for maximum stealth profile.  For firing shells, the turret doors open and the gun barrel elevates outward as the turret rotates.  The AGSs were originally intended to provide Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF) shore bombardment of approximately 37 to 62 miles (60 to100 kilometers) in support of amphibious assaulting U.S. Marines; however, the AGSs never lived up to their intended roles because the extended-range GPS-guided shells cost anywhere from $800,000 to $1 million each, an exorbitant cost that the U.S. Navy found too hard to justify. Thus, the 155mm AGSs never fired a shot and all were deemed "Inactive Status" by the U.S. Navy's Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) as the Navy and NAVSEA contemplated what to do with them.  Discussions ran from exploring cheaper 155mm shells to fielding Hypervelocity Projectile (HVP) to removing the gun turrets for more Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells.  The naval media, defense blogs, think tanks, and public comment forums were abuzz with suggestions, recommendations, rumors, and speculation for years as how best to use or replace the AGSs.

In FY2021, the U.S. Navy decided on replacing all of these 155mm AGS turrets with Hypersonic missile VLS tubes for the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) Hypersonic missile.

The CPS Hypersonic missile is a joint program collaboration between the U.S. Army and the U.S. Navy.  The first limited U.S. Navy CPS Hypersonic missile use and deployment will be aboard the Ohio-class guided-missile submarines (SSGNs) around FY2025. The U.S. Army will be the first service branch to receive the Hypersonic missiles (termed the "Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW)" for the U.S. Army), slated for Army service around the 2023 timeframe.  The CPS uses a Common Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB) that separates from the missile body and flies down on the target at five times greater than the speed of sound (Mach 5+), destroying the target with massive kinetic force. The CPS missile will reportedly have a range of more than 1,724 miles (2,775 kilometers), and two CPS missile canisters can fit on an U.S. Army M870A3 trailer that is approximately 45.5 feet (1,385.1cm) long and 8.6 feet (259.2cm) wide.  The CPS Hypersonic missile to too large to fit inside the standard MK 41 VLS cell aboard U.S. Navy AEGIS warships and the MK 57 Vertical Launch System aboard the three Zumwalt-class destroyers.

Naval News asked the U.S. Navy's Office of Information Department (CHINFO) for details on how the Navy plans to integrate the CPS Hypersonic missile into the three Zumwalt-class destroyers, and when construction will start to meet the intended FY2025 goal.  Lt. Lewis Aldridge, CHINFO, replied via email on 28 October, 2021.

Naval News: When will retrofit construction start to meet the FY2025 goal?

U.S. Navy:  "The DDG 1000 Dry-Docking Selected Restricted Availability (DSRA) will begin in FY 2024."

Naval News: Will the Hypersonic missiles occupy only the 155mm AGS turret spaces, or will the entire forward hull half interior be modified for the Hypersonic VLS tubes?

U.S. Navy: "Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) Hypersonic Missiles will only occupy the AGS turret spaces when implemented aboard Zumwalt-class destroyers."

Naval News: How many Conventional Prompt Strike Hypersonic Missile VLS tubes are envisioned for each Zumwalt?  Can the US Navy provide a ballpark goal number of Hypersonic VLS cells to replace the two 155mm AGSs?

U.S. Navy: "The Navy began engineering planning efforts to accommodate integration of CPS on Zumwalt-class destroyers, which includes removal of advanced gun system mounts and installation of Advanced Payload Module (APM) launcher technology."

Naval News: Will any remaining hull spaces be filled with MK 41 or MK 57 VLS cells in one or quad cell layout, or will the Zumwalts still retain the same number of MK57 VLS cells?

U.S. Navy: "There are currently no plans for additional hull space on the Zumwalt-class destroyers to be filled with MK 41 or MK 57 VLS cells."

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/10/latest-details-on-hypersonic-missile-integration-aboard-zumwalt-class-destroyers/?nowprocket=1

[Harald]

Op-Ed: What Future Armament And Role Options For The U.S. Navy's LUSV?

The United States Navy's future build of the Large Unmanned Surface Vessel (LUSV) opens up new possibilities for add-on modular armament options and specialized roles that no other U.S. Navy warship can perform. Granted, the LUSV is not a truly designed combat warship in the strategic and tactical sense, but through the Author's speculative concept imagination and innovation, the LUSV's long open cargo deck can provide the U.S. Navy with LUSV role possibilities unseen of, unheard of, and unfit for any other U.S. naval warship, manned or unmanned. Naval News will explore in four parts possible future roles and armament options for:

Part 1: LUSV as a Deep Strike Platform,
Part 2: LUSV as an Anti-Air and Anti-Ship Platform,
Part 3: LUSV as a Vehicle Transport or an Aviation Platform, and
Part 4: LUSV as a Specialized Roles or a Fighting Vehicles Platform.

These LUSV concepts are based on factual data and Open Source Intelligence information combined with predicated requirements that the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps might need to meet their global demands in the open seas and in the littoral regions.

..../....

het gehele artikel zie onderstaande link

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/10/op-ed-what-future-armament-and-role-options-for-the-u-s-navys-lusv/?nowprocket=1

[Harald]

Battlecruiser 2000 => Arsenal ship ... wordt dit de toekomst ?  ... moeten schepen meer VLS systemen krijgen ?

Arsenal ship
An arsenal ship was a concept for a floating missile platform intended to have as many as five hundred vertical launch bays for mid-sized missiles, most likely cruise missiles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenal_ship

Battlecruiser 2000   ( in 1988 hadden ze hier al ideeën over en zijn eigenlijk niet veranderd )


https://external-preview.redd.it/tRK4Vv8uqDlgNj4-AvKobBRV0flzUesDVNr2yy8Esr8.jpg?auto=webp&s=89a6b86b4f00782fe4535bbfcc48355ca14c4b44


MADEX 2021: South Korea's Arsenal Ship Keeping A Low Profile

Not much is yet known about South Korea's arsenal ship program. During MADEX 2021, the naval defense show which kicked off today in Busan, South Korea, Naval News could not find any official depictions of the ship in the Republic of Korean Navy (ROKN) booth which is almost fully dedicated to the CVX light aircraft carrier project...

According to the ROKN, the ship is currently in the long term conception phase . This means that the design has not been finalized and may change depending on operational requirements in the future.

The limited information available suggests that the ship will have a light displacement of 5,000 tons and carry up to 80 missiles. It will primarily be used for surface strike, but will also carry anti-ship missiles as well as basic air defence systems. It is likely the surface strike element will consist of a mix of the Hyunmoo (현무)-2  ballistic missiles and the Hyunmoo-3 cruise missiles. A total of two to three ships will be built and commissioned in the late 2020s according to a News1 story published last year.

The utility of the arsenal ship for the Republic of Korea Navy has been hotly debated. The debate ultimately comes down to whether or not one views North Korea as the most pressing military threat. Those who do, argue that the South Korean arsenal ship will be an invaluable strategic asset. According to them, the threat posed by a North Korean first strike on land-based missile bases makes it necessary for South Korea to develop a second strike capability. These bases are easier to target with ballistic missiles, artillery, and even special forces operations. Ship based assets, on the other hand, are significantly more secure against a North Korean attack. This is because North Korea has virtually no long range anti-ship missiles that can be fired from shore.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/06/madex-2021-south-koreas-arsenal-ship-keeping-a-low-profile/

Modern battleships: Arsenal ships and next-gen surface long-range maritime strike

While aircraft carriers will continue to serve a pivotal role in the era of increasingly advanced, long-range integrated anti-access/area denial (A2/AD), heavily armed arsenal ships have been floated as complementary platforms that can enhance the lethality of contemporary navies – supporting destroyers, cruisers, frigates and aircraft carriers and amphibious power projection operations.

.../....

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/4334-modern-battleships-arsenal-ships-and-next-gen-long-range-maritime-strike