US Navy News and updates

[76mmGuns]

The first two ships will essentially be the same CG NSC painted in hazegray.

Whether the VLS will be included is to be seen/determined. The 4923 design does cater for it. If it does, it will be more than what the LCS offers. (Not in the current renders though, which shows no VLS and a 57mm) If not, it will be no more than what the LCS can do, just on a more reliable hull. Almost the same set of equipment (AN/SPS-77(V)3, SeaRam, NSM, likely similar EW).

The 2028 dateline... sounds more to meet the closing of the Trump administration, much like how they want to time NASA's moon landings to 2028.

Basically a LCS but if the ship itself was tested and worked. It's what the USN should have gotten 25 years ago, for the conops of the time.

In contrast, look at the Indonesian Arrowhead 140 variant being named. Looks quite good. Every navy except the USA is moving forward

Indonesia names KRI Balaputradewa, first of their Arrowhead 140-derived frigates - Navy Lookout

Yesterday, in an unusual evening ceremony, the first Merah Putih-class frigate for the Indonesian Navy was formally named. This vessel is based on Babcock’s Arrowhead 140 product (for which the Type 31 frigate is the reference design) but fitted with mainly Turkish and Italian weapon and sensor...

www.navylookout.com

 

[koxinga]

Despite what the USN might have released about a new BBG design, I tend to think it will never actually get built. The current administration will end in three years and one month. I deem it unlikely that the US could have a brand new design built in that sort of timespan, particularly given how large each vessel is supposed to be (likely limited facilities suitable for building such large vessels). This is also ignoring the likely need for multiple design phases to actually have something created which could be built.

Likely more importantly and even more problematic, would be to secure the funding from Congress necessary to develop a new battleship design and then get it built. It is distinctly possible that control over budgeting could be lost in just over a year from now.

All reasonable points. But how long would it take and how much would it cost for them to realise it is a costly mistake or an very expensive white elephant at the best case?

This Administration doesn't seem to be driven by common sense. This came up (not sure of the authenticity) and it seems design have just started

 

[Todjaeger]

More room = you can install more power. Yes, anecdotes. But then, there's a very real demand to install power-hungry systems on the Trumpy CG right off the bat.
You don't need to throw palms at your face. Just understand what's written.

Even making allowances for translation or use of a secondary/tertiary language, what is apparently being alluded to is different from what was written and posted.

A vessel with a larger volume and higher displacement might have the potential for additional power generation to be installed, but that is not at all the same thing asserting that a larger vessel will have more spare capacity. If two different classes of vessel each have a margin of 20% 'spare' generation capacity, how much actual extra generation capacity the vessels will have is dictated by what the generation capacity of the vessel is, not the displacement of the vessel.

It is also distinctly possible that other design features end up requiring significant space and displacement so that there is not as much left to enable significant extra margins. If too much of a design is dedicated towards fitting turbines and generators, that can negatively impact the range and endurance of the design because there is less space and displacement available for bunkerage and victuals and/or fuel consumption is increased because more turbines and generators will be running/higher fuel burn rate.

Similarly, how 'hungry' a ship's systems are for power does not really relate to how the size and displacement of the vessel. A corvette or frigate with capable shipboard electronics and sensors could easily have higher hotel loads and a greater power budget than a much larger vessel like an AO that has much more limited sensors and possibly no CMS installed at all. In the case of something like an AO most of the potential generation capacity is likely going to be dedicated to actually propelling the vessel whilst laden.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Even making allowances for translation or use of a secondary/tertiary language, what is apparently being alluded to is different from what was written and posted.

A vessel with a larger volume and higher displacement might have the potential for additional power generation to be installed, but that is not at all the same thing asserting that a larger vessel will have more spare capacity. If two different classes of vessel each have a margin of 20% 'spare' generation capacity, how much actual extra generation capacity the vessels will have is dictated by what the generation capacity of the vessel is, not the displacement of the vessel.

It is also distinctly possible that other design features end up requiring significant space and displacement so that there is not as much left to enable significant extra margins. If too much of a design is dedicated towards fitting turbines and generators, that can negatively impact the range and endurance of the design because there is less space and displacement available for bunkerage and victuals and/or fuel consumption is increased because more turbines and generators will be running/higher fuel burn rate.

Similarly, how 'hungry' a ship's systems are for power does not really relate to how the size and displacement of the vessel. A corvette or frigate with capable shipboard electronics and sensors could easily have higher hotel loads and a greater power budget than a much larger vessel like an AO that has much more limited sensors and possibly no CMS installed at all. In the case of something like an AO most of the potential generation capacity is likely going to be dedicated to actually propelling the vessel whilst laden.

I didn't say it will have more available power. I said that it's a much larger vessel, so could provide that more easily.
It's easier to build more power generation when your existing powerplants are 10%, not 50% of ship volume (not to be read as X ship having 50% and Y having 10%).
I know that if I buy an electric SUV it doesn't necessarily have more range than a smaller car in base variant. But it's safe to assume there's an option to install a larger battery pack.

 

[SammyC]

The Trump battleship kind of reminds me of The Homer.