New Navy stealth destroyer under construction in Maine

Gestart door jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter), 05/04/2012 | 08:14 uur

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Citaat van: Thomasen op 21/12/2012 | 10:45 uur
Ik vraag me wel eens af waarom het niet de CG1000 of BB1000 is geworden :crazy: Wat een huge ass ding.



Ik zie de CG benaming ooit nog wel eens komen in een air defence variant. (als de dollars niet opdrogen)

dudge

Ik vraag me wel eens af waarom het niet de CG1000 of BB1000 is geworden :crazy: Wat een huge ass ding.


jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Construction Of USS Zumwalt Reaches Milestone
Author:Daniel Goure, Ph.D.
Date:Thursday, December 20, 2012
TagsDDG 1000

A few days ago, construction of the first DDG 1000, the USS Zumwalt, passed a milestone. Seemingly without effort, the skilled workers at Bath Iron Works shipyard raised a 1,000 ton deckhouse 95 feet in the air, slid the ship's hull underneath and lowered this massive structure to its precise position on the Zumwalt's deck. If you want to see what this looks like go to Chris Cavas' piece on the Defense News blog.

The DDG 1000 is a marvel of naval design and U.S. technological ingenuity. 155 feet long and 65 feet high, the integrated deckhouse, built entirely of composites and designed to reduce the ships' radar, infrared and electromagnetic signatures, is just one of the Zumwalt's advanced features. The deckhouse also contains the ship's high tech bridge, and the dual-band radar capable of seeing and tracking dozens of targets from long-range ballistic missiles to fast, sea-skimming cruise missiles. Other state-of-the-art features of the Zumwalt include: an integrated sonar system with advanced towed array and high-frequency active sonar, an electric drive that not only turns the ship's propellers but produces ten times the electric power as is available on current destroyer classes, a total ship computing environment infrastructure that improves overall ship performance and reduces the crew requirement, the advanced gun system with large magazines and the Mk 57 Peripheral Vertical Launching System (PVLS) that distributes a total of 80 missile cells in 20 reinforced launchers along the edges of the ship for safety and has the space to hold future, larger missiles.

If the Navy were to design a surface combatant for the recently announced pivot to the Asia-Pacific region, it would be the DDG 1000. This is the quintessential "full spectrum of missions" region. Zumwalt's reduced signatures, powerful sensors and multi-role weapons systems are exactly what a force planner will want for a region that is witnessing an explosive proliferation of modern weapons, including advanced ballistic and cruise missiles, conventional and nuclear attack submarines, fourth and fifth generation aircraft and new generation sensors. The advanced gun system and PVLS will provide a range of options for responsive, precision attack. The large hangar and aviation deck will permit deployment of both helicopters and unmanned rotary wing vehicles such as the Fire Scout to support both combat and humanitarian assistance missions.

The current plan is to build only three DDG 1000s and complement their capability with production of advanced variants of the venerable Arleigh Burke DDG 51. Given the challenges of the new strategy and despite projected defense budgets reductions, the Obama Administration would be well-advised to consider increasing production of both ship classes.

Daniel Goure, Ph.D.

http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/construction-of-uss-zumwalt-reaches-milestone?a=1&c=1171

En voor diverse foto's (het gaat best snel zo te zien): zie http://blogs.defensenews.com/intercepts/2012/12/biggest-pieces-of-zumwalt-ddg-1000-come-together-in-the-night/

dudge

Tja, het wordt een mooie technologie demonstrater, maar of het echt gaat leveren, betwijfel het..

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Newest Navy warship DDG-1000 destroyer cost a staggering $3.1 billion per unit

The Associated Press is reporting a story concerning a new "Zumwalt" class destroyer being built in Maine called "the most advanced warship in modern history."

The new ship the "DDG-1000 destroyer is being nicknamed the "silver bullet", not only because it sort of resembles a silver metallic beer can in the middle but because it can travel at supposedly "super stealth" speed along an enemies coast line, even in the shallows.

The new warship could deploy it as early as 2014 and will be equipped with all the latest in high tech including so called: "electromagnetic rail guns" that with the help of a magnetic field and electric current will run projectiles at speeds several times faster than the speed of sound.

The ships are supposedly equipped with an "electric motor" and the most advanced sonar devices and missiles in the U.S. arsenal.

The one great advantage besides the speed is the fact that it is stealthy and will only give off a reduced radar signature comparable to that of a small fishing vessel a fraction of its real size.

The drawbacks are in terms of the weight – they are much heavier than other ships it terms of its size, meaning it will be harder to propel forward through the water.

Defense News reported this about the new warship, which is rather interesting:
"Nothing like the Zumwalt has ever been built. The 14,500-ton ship's flat, inward-sloping sides and superstructure rise in pyramidal fashion in a form called tumblehome. Its long, angular "wave-piercing" bow lacks the rising, flared profile of most ships, and is intended to slice through waves as much as ride over them...."

"At least eight current and former officers, naval engineers and architects and naval analysts interviewed for this article expressed concerns about the ship's stability. Ken Brower, a civilian naval architect with decades of naval experience was even more blunt: "It will capsize in a following sea at the wrong speed if a wave at an appropriate wavelength hits it at an appropriate angle".... (see 2007 article: Defense News: Will DDG-1000 Destroyers Be Unstable? Defense News: Will DDG-1000 Destroyers Be Unstable? http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/defense-news-will-ddg1000-destroyers... ).

The Navy apparently wanted 32 of the expensive new toys, which cost $3.1 billion a piece to build, but had to settle for 3 because of a lack of Congressional support.

Critics believe that this Pentagon's project is a "money pit" of waste that is sucking cash from the Treasury...

It is also highly dependent on modern electronics...

One critic claims it is not hardened to EMP or "electromagnetic pulse" and could be disabled by the new generation of small "EMP bombs" being developed which are the size of a large suitcase. "Get one on board or inside the ship and set it off it will be a sitting duck in the water", the source said. I should note that we however have no real way of verifying that sort of information.

Pravda.ru is reporting that Chinese Admirals appeared on local TV recently appeared to be openly mocking the new weapon. One is reported to have said that all the talk about the invincibility of the new destroyers is no more than "advertising hype" on the part of the U.S. military, adding that any "high tech" ship of the United States can be easily sunk by a simple fishing boat loaded with explosives.

An apparent reference to the U.S.S. Cole attack in October 2000.

The USS Cole bombing was a suicide attack against the United States Navy destroyer USS Cole, while it was harbored and being refueled in the Yemeni port of Aden. In that sneak attack seventeen American sailors were killed, and 39 were injured. The attack effectively rendered the Cole dead in the water. It was an asymmetric warfare attack was organized and directed by the terrorist organization al-Qaeda using about 400- pounds of explosives put on a small craft that approached the port side of the destroyer.

The explosion caused a 40-by-40-foot gash in the ship's port side, according to reports at the time.

This event was the deadliest attack against a United States Naval vessel since 1987.
The terrorist organization al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the attack, which stunned military officials because it was so low tech.

The new warship has already been compromised is so far as it has been photographed already while in dry dock by various people including one citizen David Long who posted these very interesting online comments on Friday June 8, 2012 on facebook:

"I am just wondering why there are two of these sitting in the Naval yard in dry dock at the Norfolk, VA shipyard? I am wondering why the most advanced starwars looking ships already exist....just go look for yourself, you can see them from the sand spit or over by Rebel Marina. They are huge, have no windows and clearly sport technology that could probably take them to space. I know, I was there anchored out in my sailboat in January (being buzzed 24/7 by the way by helicopters and surveillance planes) because I was accidentally anchored right on the "no pass" line about five miles from the base. I will add that there isn't exactly a red stripe sitting on top of the ocean, so I gave it a pretty good safety factor before I dropped anchor. I learned during the year I was down there that they have an incredible amount of really advanced things in their toy box, and you don't want to mess with those guys. Lie everything the military does...they tell us they are going to build a Stealth bomber after they had ten years of them lying around. No need to wonder about the 2.3 mission trillion went. I have some photos by accident as I took some pictures of my sailboat at anchor and the futuristic ships are in the background. I would probably go to an undisclosed CIA prison if I posted them, so I won't unless I get permission from the Secretary of the Navy or something. I guess you will have to go look. Might even be on Google Earth. There are many other highly advanced ships and helicopters over there as well in plain sight, Makes you wonder. Dl."

(Source: David Long, of Glenwood Springs, Colorado: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003787914050).

Robert Tilford

http://www.examiner.com/article/newest-navy-warship-ddg-1000-destroyer-cost-a-staggering-3-1-billion-per-unit

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Railgun and Stealth Technology Make Navy DDG-1000 Super Ship the Weapon of the Future

The Navy has given more publicity to its new Zumwalt-class destroyer, the DDG-1000, in the hope that, as the world's most advanced floating piece of technology, it will provide a deterrent and an answer to the rising Chinese influence in the Pacific.

The ship boasts sci-fi-like capacities that anybody could be in awe over: "cloaking" technology and a super-powerful "railgun" weapon. 

Designed to engage its adversaries in coastal waters, this ship's primary role is to maintain access to the shores of a competitor. However, the high $3 billion per-unit cost and the technological challenges that are yet unsolved or deemed ineffective in light of more conventional solutions are the main stumbling blocks for the realization of the vessel. At this point being little more than a conceptual technology demonstrator, the redeeming quality of this project is that it offers the best alternative to the need for providing new ships to the Navy after 2030, when the resources of most current vessels will expire.

Its large price tag and limited numbers in an age of austerity make it a dubious investment now — but not in the long term.

The context of this development comes from the birth of China's aircraft carrier fleet with the ex-Soviet Varyag, along with its rapidly swelling military budget on the one hand, and Washington's Asia pivot, along with Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta's recent announcement that 60% of American naval capacities will be concentrated in the Pacific, on the other hand.

For Washington, China is something like a simultaneous friend and enemy. The hope is that Beijing will keep crediting America so that the two can continue to play strategic competition. In light of its fiscal difficulties, it seems ill-advised for the U.S. to enter into direct military competition with China. From the first link, the orders of this new vessel went from 32 to 3, or a reduction by 90%. It is not altogether unexpected, as the hefty price tag of $3 billion a pop makes the vessel a forbidding investment. With an expected strength of 300 U.S. vessels, a 1% production scope will make the evaluation of the Zumwalt destroyers in practical conditions a challenge. Their application and effects are constrained by virtue of their small numbers.

On the positive side, as a test bed for new technologies, the DDG-1000 allows for effective planning on what the Navy will look like in the span of the next 50-70 years. American maritime doctrine is based on the principle of universal accessibility, achieved through 11 aircraft carriers and their battle groups. An aircraft carrier is operable between 40-60 years before needing replacement, and the current generation of Nimitz-class carriers are nearing the halfway point of their useful life. The plans are calling for the introduction of the Gerald Ford-class of carriers, which will begin to roll out mid-decade and be fully implemented by the mid-2030s. In this respect, these ships will be the center of U.S. naval doctrine until the beginning of the 22nd century and will probably include many of the technological developments in the Zumwalt class.

The geopolitical shifts in the Pacific show that the priority has shifted to preserving America's influential naval capacity, rather than its leading strategic role in the world during the course of this century, which will be ceded to China in due time. The introduction of advanced platforms that do more with less, albeit costing more, is indicative of this trend.

While the Zumwalt class will most likely be matched and outperformed by Chinese money and technology in the short to medium term, it is the long-game perspective we must recognize in seeing the value of this ship. It can be said that it is not very applicable to today's maritime strategic environment, but more so to its future.   

http://www.policymic.com/articles/9327/railgun-and-stealth-technology-make-navy-ddg-1000-super-ship-the-weapon-of-the-future

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Stealth destroyer, at over $3 billion apiece, is US Navy's latest answer to rising China

By Associated Press, Updated: Monday, June 4, 11:10 AM

SINGAPORE — A super-stealthy warship that could underpin the U.S. navy's China strategy will be able to sneak up on coastlines virtually undetected and pound targets with electromagnetic "railguns" right out of a sci-fi movie.

But at more than $3 billion a pop, critics say the new DDG-1000 destroyer sucks away funds that could be better used to bolster a thinly stretched conventional fleet. One outspoken admiral in China has scoffed that all it would take to sink the high-tech American ship is an armada of explosive-laden fishing boats.

With the first of the new ships set to be delivered in 2014, the stealth destroyer is being heavily promoted by the Pentagon as the most advanced destroyer in history — a silver bullet of stealth. It has been called a perfect fit for what Washington now considers the most strategically important region in the world — Asia and the Pacific.

Though it could come in handy elsewhere, like in the Gulf region, its ability to carry out missions both on the high seas and in shallows closer to shore is especially important in Asia because of the region's many island nations and China's long Pacific coast.

"With its stealth, incredibly capable sonar system, strike capability and lower manning requirements — this is our future," Adm. Jonathan Greenert, chief of naval operations, said in April after visiting the shipyard in Maine where they are being built.

On a visit to a major regional security conference in Singapore that ended Sunday, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the Navy will be deploying 60 percent of its fleet worldwide to the Pacific by 2020, and though he didn't cite the stealth destroyers he said new high-tech ships will be a big part of its shift.

The DDG-1000 and other stealth destroyers of the Zumwalt class feature a wave-piercing hull that leaves almost no wake, electric drive propulsion and advanced sonar and missiles. They are longer and heavier than existing destroyers — but will have half the crew because of automated systems and appear to be little more than a small fishing boat on enemy radar.

Down the road, the ship is to be equipped with an electromagnetic railgun, which uses a magnetic field and electric current to fire a projectile at several times the speed of sound.

But cost overruns and technical delays have left many defense experts wondering if the whole endeavor was too focused on futuristic technologies for its own good.

They point to the problem-ridden F-22 stealth jet fighter, which was hailed as the most advanced fighter ever built but was cut short because of prohibitive costs. Its successor, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, has swelled up into the most expensive procurement program in Defense Department history.

"Whether the Navy can afford to buy many DDG-1000s must be balanced against the need for over 300 surface ships to fulfill the various missions that confront it," said Dean Cheng, a China expert with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research institute in Washington. "Buying hyperexpensive ships hurts that ability, but buying ships that can't do the job, or worse can't survive in the face of the enemy, is even more irresponsible."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/stealth-destroyer-at-over-3-billion-apiece-is-us-navys-latest-answer-to-rising-china/2012/06/04/gJQAtizlCV_story.html

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Navy Names Zumwalt Class Destroyer USS Lyndon B. Johnson


            Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced today the next Zumwalt-class destroyer will be named the USS Lyndon B. Johnson.

            The selection of Lyndon B. Johnson, designated DDG 1002, continues the Navy tradition of naming ships after presidents and honors the nation's 36th president.

            The USS Lyndon B. Johnson is the 34th ship named by the Navy after a U.S. president.

            "I am pleased to honor President Johnson with the naming of this ship," Mabus said.  "His dedication to a life of public service included bravely stepping forward to fight for his country during our entry into World War II."

            A Texas congressman, Johnson was the first member of Congress to enlist in the military following the start of World War II.  After his naval service, Johnson was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1948, where he served as both minority and majority leader before being elected vice president Nov. 8, 1960.

            Following President Kennedy's assassination Nov. 22 1963, Johnson succeeded to the presidency, finished the remaining term, and was reelected for a full term as president, by the greatest percentage of total popular vote (61 percent) ever attained by a presidential candidate.

            Johnson's time as president was marked by the passage of programs that greatly influenced and impacted education, healthcare and civil rights for generations to come.   He signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 into law, enacting comprehensive provisions protecting the right to vote and guarding against racial discrimination.  His work on civil rights continued with the passage of the Voting Rights Act, which guaranteed voting rights for all people, regardless of race. 

            Johnson signed legislation establishing Medicare, which allowed millions of elderly Americans access to cheaper medical services.  He also launched the Head Start Program, which provided preschool children from low-income families with classes, medical care, and other services.

            As a naval officer, Johnson requested a combat assignment after the attack on Pearl Harbor and served in the Pacific theater during World War II.  After returning from active duty service, Johnson reported back to Navy leaders and Congress on what he believed were deplorable conditions for the warfighters, and continued to fight for better standards for all military members.

            USS Lyndon B. Johnson will be the third Zumwalt-class (DDG 1000) destroyer. Construction began on the ship at General Dynamics-Bath Iron Works April 4 and is expected to deliver to the Navy in fiscal 2018.  The multimission DDG 1000 class destroyers are designed for sustained operations in the littorals and land attack and will provide independent forward presence and deterrence, support special operations forces, and operate as an integral part of joint and combined expeditionary forces.  This warship integrates numerous critical technologies, systems, and principles into a complete warfighting system.  Zumwalt ships will be 600 feet in length, have a beam of 80.7 feet, displace approximately 15,000 tons, and capable of making 30 knots speed.  Each ship will have a crew size of 148 officers and Sailors.

            Media may direct queries to the Navy Office of Information at 703-697-5342.  For more news from secretary of the Navy public affairs, visit www.navy.mil/SECNAV .

            Additional information about the Zumwalt-class destroyer is available online at http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=900&ct=4 .

http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=15190

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Cutting edge warship a 'silver bullet'

5:45 AM Saturday Apr 14, 2012
The DDG-1000 Zumwalt. Photo / AP

An enormous, expensive and technology-laden warship that some navy leaders once tried to kill because of its cost is now viewed as an important part of the Obama Administration's Asia-Pacific strategy, with advanced capabilities that the navy's top officer says represent the navy's future.

The stealthy, guided missile-armed Zumwalt taking shape at Bath Iron Works is the biggest destroyer ever built for the United States Navy.

The low-to-the-water warship will feature a wave-piercing hull, composite deckhouse, electric drive propulsion, advanced sonar, missiles and powerful guns that fire rocket-propelled warheads as far as 160km.

It's longer and heavier than existing destroyers but will have half the crew because of automated systems.

"With its stealth, incredibly capable sonar system, strike capability and lower manning requirements, this is our future," concluded Admiral Jonathan Greenert, chief of naval operations, who gave the warship his endorsement on a visit last week to Bath Iron Works, where the ships are being built.

It wasn't always this way.

The General Accounting Office expressed concerns that the Navy was trying to incorporate too much new technology.

Some Navy officials pointed out that it's less capable than existing destroyers when it comes to missile defence, and a defence analyst warned that it would be vulnerable while operating close to shore for fire support.

Even its "tumblehome" hull was criticised as potentially unstable in certain situations.

The 182m-long ships are so big that the General Dynamics-owned shipyard spent US$40 million to construct a 32m-tall building to assemble the giant hull segments.

And then there's the cost, roughly US$3.8 billion ($4.6 billion) apiece, the Navy's proposed budget says.

Including research and development, the cost grows to US$7 billion apiece, said Winslow Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Centre for Defence Information in Washington.

Because of the cost, the originally envisioned 32 ships dipped to 24 and then seven. Eventually, the programme was truncated to just three. The first, the Zumwalt, will be christened next year and delivered in 2014.

But Greenert said the ship fits perfectly into the new emphasis on bolstering the US military presence in the Pacific in response to Asia's growing economic importance and China's rise as a military power.

Greenert didn't go into detail on how the new ship could be used. But the Defence Department has expressed concerns that China is modernising its Navy with a near-term goal of stopping or delaying US intervention in a conflict involving Taiwan.

China considers the self-governing island a renegade province. Defence officials also see a potential flashpoint in the South China Sea, where China's territorial claims overlap with those of Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia.

The Zumwalt's new technology will allow the warship to deter and defeat aggression and to maintain operations in areas where an enemy seeks to deny access, both on the open ocean and in operations closer to shore, the Navy says.

Jay Korman, industry analyst with The Avascent Group, said the warship uses so much new technology that it's viewed by the Navy as a "silver bullet" answer to threats. The only problem is the cost.

"They were looking to introduce so many new technologies at once, and the cost ballooned," he said. "I don't think people have changed their minds that it's a capable ship. It's just too expensive."

The Zumwalt's 155mm deck guns were built to pound the shore with guided projectiles to pave the way for the Marines to arrive in landing craft, and they're far more cost-effective in certain situations than cruise missiles, said Eric Wertheim, author of the Naval Institute's Guide to Combat Fleets of the World.

The smaller crew also represents a substantial cost saving, he added.

The ship could one day be equipped with an electromagnetic railgun, a powerful weapon that fires a projectile at several times the speed of sound.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10798682

dudge

Citaat van: Oorlogsvis op 05/04/2012 | 12:16 uur
Een type schip als de Zumwalt is toch om een bombardement op de kust/ver- landinwaards te doen ? , zo'n type destroyer vaart er nu nog niet eens rond ..een schip van dat kaliber. Ik zie wel wat in zo'n type schip met een overmacht aan fire-power met veel verschillende wapensystemen. Voor onze Marine, zou je kunnen denken aan fregatten/destroyers type LCF met 155mm geschut en tomahawks. Van zo'n schip gaat natuurlijk al een grote dreiging uit, veel meer dan van een normaal fregat met een veel lichtere bewapening en vaak ook niet geschikt om echt wat uit te halen op het land.

Zo'n schip bestaat wel. In principe kun je met een Ticonderoga Kruiser een flink bombardement diep land inwaards uitvoeren, dat ding neemt maximaal 120 Tomahawks mee. De Zumwalt is een destroyer en kent wat andere oplossingen voor de gestelde uitdagingen. 

Oorlogsvis

Een type schip als de Zumwalt is toch om een bombardement op de kust/ver- landinwaards te doen ? , zo'n type destroyer vaart er nu nog niet eens rond ..een schip van dat kaliber. Ik zie wel wat in zo'n type schip met een overmacht aan fire-power met veel verschillende wapensystemen. Voor onze Marine, zou je kunnen denken aan fregatten/destroyers type LCF met 155mm geschut en tomahawks. Van zo'n schip gaat natuurlijk al een grote dreiging uit, veel meer dan van een normaal fregat met een veel lichtere bewapening en vaak ook niet geschikt om echt wat uit te halen op het land.

ARM-WAP

Citaat van: dudge op 05/04/2012 | 10:06 uur
... Het hoeft ook niet zo moeilijk te zijn, gewoon een modern schip, gebaseerd op moderne technologie, niet perse helemaal van de grond af opgebouwd. Het LCF kostte maar 10% van wat de Zumwalt kost, een veel kleiner schip ook, maar het zet je wel aan het denken...
Men kan inderdaad wat 'te ver gaan' met ontwikkeling en technologie: het moet nog steeds betaalbaar blijven.
Persoonlijk vind ik de Burkes best wel goed en ik ben er zeker van dat die ook met minder bemanningsleden ook nog effectief uitgebaat kunnen worden.

Uit persoonlijke ervaring weet ik dat men bij de Amerikanen veel meer crew heeft voor het uitbaten van bv wapensystemen ivm het personeel dat wij op fregatten hebben.
Een 5" gun crew op een Tico bestond al uit bijna 20 (!) man.
Met twee zulke torens per schip kwam je dus al op 35-40 man (de CPOs waren verantwoordelijk voor de twee torens).
Ze zijn ook veel te "gespecialiseerd": Gun mechanic, Gun Electrician, Gun Hydraulic Technician enz.
Wij doen al die functies samen.
Misschien niet zo "hoog opgeleid" of "gespecialiseerd" echter nog steeds effectief en veel goedkoper...
Zij hebben dan weer het voordeel minder "rollen" te hebben per bemanningslid/functie.

dudge

Citaat van: heraldnetWhile it's technologically sophisticated, it's also a symbol of defense programs that exceeded budget projections. The Navy had to truncate the program to just three ships because of spiraling costs, now estimated to be more than $3 billion per ship, compared to about $1.2 billion for the current class of ships.

Vraag me af hoe lang ze nog door willen met de Arleigh Burke. Het schip is inmiddels 20 jaar in productie, en met een crew van bijna 400 best zwaar bemand. Nu dus weer terug naar dat 'oude model', maar vraag me toch af wanneer er een echte opvolger komt. Het hoeft ook niet zo moeilijk te zijn, gewoon een modern schip, gebaseerd op moderne technologie, niet perse helemaal van de grond af opgebouwd. Het LCF kostte maar 10% van wat de Zumwalt kost, een veel kleiner schip ook, maar het zet je wel aan het denken...

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

New Navy stealth destroyer under construction in Maine

BATH, Maine — Even though the Navy reduced its goal for overall number of ships, Bath Iron Works should stay busy over the coming years because the number of large warships like those built there would increase by 30 percent under the proposal, Sen. Susan Collins said Wednesday.

The 30-year plan unveiled last week would increase the number of "large surface combatants" — destroyers and cruisers — by a total of 16 ships, even as the total fleet size would be reduced from 313 to 300, Collins said. The Navy currently has about 285 ships.

"It's a good start — a very good start," said Collins, who joined Adm. Jonathan Greenert on his first visit to Bath Iron Works since becoming chief of naval operations.

Greenert viewed assembled hull segments of the future USS Zumwalt after participating in a ceremony marking the start of construction of the third and final warship in the line.

Once maligned for its high cost, the stealthy Zumwalt is now viewed as well suited to the Navy's new focus on the Asia and the Pacific, where the U.S. intends to bolster its military presence in response to Asia's growing economic importance and China's rise as a military power.

The 600-foot-long warships are the largest destroyers to be built in Bath but will have an element of stealth because of their low-to-the-water profile. They feature 155 mm deck guns with rocket-propelled warheads that can hit targets 100 miles away.

They have electric-drive propulsion, an unconventional wave-piercing hull, new sonar system and the ability to launch multiple aerial drones, in addition to new strike capabilities. They'll also require half the number of sailors to operate as existing Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

"The DDG-1000 fits in perfectly with our strategy. It's perfect for the Asia-Pacific," said Greenert, who declared the futuristic warship to be "a marvel of engineering."

While it's technologically sophisticated, it's also a symbol of defense programs that exceeded budget projections. The Navy had to truncate the program to just three ships because of spiraling costs, now estimated to be more than $3 billion per ship, compared to about $1.2 billion for the current class of ships.

After the three destroyers are built, the Navy will shift back to construction of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, which are cheaper and have ballistic defense capabilities.

Collins, who serves on the Armed Services Committee and invited Greenert to tour the shipyard, said she's seeking to have a 10th ship added to a nine-ship purchase for fiscal years 2013 through 2017. That could be more good news for Bath Iron Works, a General Dynamics subsidiary, and its 5,400 shipbuilders.

In general, the new focus on Asia could mean more dollars for the Navy, which has seen funding reductions during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at the Lexington Institute.

"The Obama administration's shift to an Asia-Pacific strategy is very good news for the Navy. That probably means good news for Bath Iron Works, too," he said.

While meeting with reporters, Greenert was asked about prospects that another Navy shipyard, the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard on the Maine-New Hampshire border, could be on the chopping block if there's another round of base closings.

"Portsmouth fills a critical need for overhaul of our submarines and provides other things as well. I don't see that need diminishing at all in the future," he said.

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20120404/NEWS02/120409920