yes and no
the real flexibility is that without changing the seeker, they can insert modified code and its profile changes.
an SM6 at TV is going to very much hurt any vessel, and in the right spot it will be terminal in more ways than one.....
US Navy News and updates
- Thread starter AegisFC
- Start date
the real flexibility is that without changing the seeker, they can insert modified code and its profile changes.
an SM6 at TV is going to very much hurt any vessel, and in the right spot it will be terminal in more ways than one.....
IIRC on one EM test, a cubic inch polymer round did as much damage as a 5" naval shell
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Very likely indeed! I saw read a report mentioning a 23 pound projectile reaching a speed of 5000 mph. This is a massive amount of KE placed on target, without the need of explosives. No wonder this is exciting for the USN. The safety advantage alone is huge let alone the bang power. If it is perfected and reliable it's a game changer.
Thank You,
Perhaps one of the larger benefits as far as a load out standpoint will be the SM6's ability to potentially target surface as well as aerial targets. Especially until the LRASM VLS version reaches IOC
This was also the idea behind the old Rods From the Gods idea. Also somewhat actualized under with Lazy Dog.
Am a lifetime member of the USNI - as such I get a regular subscription to its Proceedings mag.
An article on DDG 1000 (Zumwalt) is worth looking at as it describes some of the capability.
Proceedings Magazine | U.S. Naval Institute
An article on DDG 1000 (Zumwalt) is worth looking at as it describes some of the capability.
Proceedings Magazine | U.S. Naval Institute
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
A quite negative article about the DDG-1000 Zumwalt, but it tells us about the cureent status of this ship.
The Navy's New $4.4 Billion Ship Is A Big, Shiny Waste Of Money
Whatever they say, its an impressive ship, looking to the displacement, size and weaponry more being a cruiser than a destroyer.
The Navy's New $4.4 Billion Ship Is A Big, Shiny Waste Of Money
Whatever they say, its an impressive ship, looking to the displacement, size and weaponry more being a cruiser than a destroyer.
I'd love to know how much has been learnt from the design, development and trials though (and the future operation). I'd be amazed if some of the tech and concepts did not find their way into other, more conventional designs to some extent.
Whether that's worth the cost though, who really knows - one would assume that it could've been treated as a research project and a whole lot saved with similar learnings.
Whether that's worth the cost though, who really knows - one would assume that it could've been treated as a research project and a whole lot saved with similar learnings.
Cost is neither here nor there seeing as the program ended up being shafted, What was meant to be something like 30 ships became 3.. Most of the cost in each ship would be R&D, Spread that out across a fleet of 30 and any cost increase over conventional ships is marginal.
AFAIK the Navy intends to use the 3 DDG-1000s as operational testbeds. Lessons learned in integrating new technologies will no doubt be reflected in the Future Surface Combatant. One imediate spinoff from the Zumwalt program is the more powerful RR electrical generators which are being adopted by the Flight 3 Burkes.
the induction engines are a game changer for many many reasons...
although not much traction in the open press, one of the future opportunities is directional EMP weapons
I worked in the US a number of years ago and had the privilege to visit LAPD R&D labs (it is huge). They had already successfully developed a small scale directional EMP weapon mounted on the back of an F150 sized vehicle to be able to stop a fleeing vehicle. It had some problems (width of charge stopping nearby vehicles etc,,,) but the proof of concept demonstrator was a working viable platform. I have no doubt that this POC has advanced to larger scale tests.
an induction engine powering a directional EMP would enhance an extraordinary weapon with huge possibilities - and its not as "star wars" and that far away as many would assume. the ROF problems start to fade away
I wouldn't place any relevance to that article, it's a light weight opinion piece of no substance.
To make the assumption that the ships stability has not been tested before design completion ( it might roll over in heavy seas) is plain bs. To report that is ignorant.
See these pics:
https://turkishnavy.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/muave21.jpg
https://turkishnavy.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/muave1.jpg
Stray U.S. Missile Hits Turkish Ship
October 02, 1992
Stray U.S. Missile Hits Turkish Ship - latimes
https://turkishnavy.net/?s=muavenet
Just to get an idea what 2x Sea Sparrow accidentally did to the bridge of Turkish TGC Muavenet in 1992
Very interesting links, thanks for that.
While I had heard of this incident and the sad loss of life I had not been aware that the root cause had been the organisational structure of the USN, where aircraft carriers were managed, not as surface ships but aviation assets. This led to the situation where carriers were not held to the same level, and did not follow the same procedures, of ship based weapons training safety as the surface fleet.
Also the performance of the Turkish crew was exemplary. I had not realised how quickly the fire had been contained, nor how close they had come to secondary munitions cooking of and destroying the ship.
Thank goodness the USAF wasn't involved. Think back to 1968 when some trigger happy jet jocks shot up HMAS Hobart and USS Boston with Sparrows and sank a small patrol craft. 2 killed on Hobart and another 4 or so killed on the patrol craft.
There's some good reports and pics to be found on Gunplot.
USN drone Swarming Research
I ran across this when I was looking into shipboard swarm defense practices
Interesting use of drone swarms to fly through A2D2 environments to attack. Payloads to include ISR, EW and explosives.
Navy researchers developing swarms of cooperating air drones for overwhelming land and sea attacks
DARPA and the USAF also working on the LOCUST program to achieve similar results. The USAF plans to deploy and recover swarms from C-130s
I ran across this when I was looking into shipboard swarm defense practices
Interesting use of drone swarms to fly through A2D2 environments to attack. Payloads to include ISR, EW and explosives.
Navy researchers developing swarms of cooperating air drones for overwhelming land and sea attacks
DARPA and the USAF also working on the LOCUST program to achieve similar results. The USAF plans to deploy and recover swarms from C-130s
there's also derivatives of UFP and CRACUNS to consider as future systems
there's a lot of chat (esp by the idiot journo section of the australian press) that UUV's will replace manned subs and that we shouldn't bother with a new generation of subs to replace Collins etc....
what they miss with spectacular and consistent regularity is that UFP and CRACUNS type solutions are seen as companion systems - not replacement systems.
sure things like UFP can be autonomous - but the platform multiplier is in having them as companion systems - think of the mothership/swarm concept - or similar parallels to how the BAMS manned/unmanned combos work.
the advantage of these systems is as multipliers and enablers to a host
add in conformal dismountable autonomous weapons and sensor packs and the benefits become pretty clear....
just to add as an aside, UFP and CRACUNS can trace their development concepts from a capability developed for the RAN 15 years ago and which was sold to the USN (and various other allies). I had some association with the developer in Australia
I couldn't find anything on UFP (United Forest Products)? But the references to CRACUNS developed by the APL at Johns Hopkins University gave no credit for any Oz connection/derivative?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,840