America's Zumwalt-Class Destroyer: Too Few, Too Advanced and Too Late?

[Penguin]

Criticism: too few
Hilarious, given how the class was cut back from the intended number.
Morons

 

[Khafee]

Criticism: too few
Hilarious, given how the class was cut back from the intended number.
Morons

Military procurement, is very susceptible to politics and budget cuts, unfortunately instead of realizing this, people criticize the program / product.

 

[Penguin]

Originally the navy hoped to build 32 of these destroyers. That number was reduced to 24, then to 7, then 3 (of which 1 may still be cancelled!), due to the high cost of new and experimental technologies

41 m Test object

Bayview, Idaho (Aug. 24, 2005) - Chief of Naval Research, Rear Adm. Jay Cohen, explains the underwater discharge water jet prior to the christening of the Advanced Electric Ship Demonstrator (AESD), Sea Jet, during ceremonies at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division, Acoustic Research Detachment (ARD) in Bayview, Idaho. Sea Jet will operate on Lake Pend Oreille, where it will be used for test and demonstration of various technologies. Among the first technologies tested will be an underwater discharge water jet from Rolls-Royce Naval Marine, Inc., called AWJ-21, a propulsion concept with the goals of providing increased propulsive efficiency, reduced acoustic signature, and improved maneuverability over previous Destroyer Class combatants. U.S. Navy photo by John F. Williams (RELEASED)

 

[LeGenD]

Criticism aside, it is a futuristic vessel and it have the potential to revolutionize naval doctrines in years to come.

Ambitious projects are [never] cost-effective during research and development phase.

 

[Itachi]

Do you people realize that, radar / RCS has been surpassed by other technologies, which with pin point accuracy can tell where a boat is, forget a ship?

Please do explain these "other technologies", otherwise the US didn't have to built the Z-ship. Check post # 12 too, @gambit 's.

@gambit thanks for the explanation. It cleared up a lot. BUT, what about radar detection by underwater? By subs or sonobuoys? What kind of evasive maneuvers does this ship have against them?

 

[gambit]

@gambit thanks for the explanation. It cleared up a lot. BUT, what about radar detection by underwater? By subs or sonobuoys? What kind of evasive maneuvers does this ship have against them?

Radar do penetrate water surface to some depth, but never enough to make clear sub-surface structures, such as a ship or coral or bottom.

Surface vessels are always vulnerable to sonar detection. There is no avoiding it. A surface vessel can remain still and hopefully will not produce any significant noise, but when there is water slapping against the hull, a keen sonarman can pick up the surface vessel.

 

[Penguin]

Radar do penetrate water surface to some depth, but never enough to make clear sub-surface structures, such as a ship or coral or bottom.

Surface vessels are always vulnerable to sonar detection. There is no avoiding it. A surface vessel can remain still and hopefully will not produce any significant noise, but when there is water slapping against the hull, a keen sonarman can pick up the surface vessel.

How do modern designs change this equation, if at all. E.g. comparing LCS 1 Freedom and 2 Independence class designs among eachother and with DDG51. Swath? Wavepiercing cat?

Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress
Ronald O'Rourke
Specialist in Naval Affairs
November 6, 2015

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf

THE B-2 BOMBER OF THE SEAS: THOUGHTS ON THE ZUMWALT CLASS DESTROYER AND THE NAVY’S BROKEN PROCUREMENT STRATEGY | AviationIntel.com