How stealthy is Navy's new destroyer? It needs reflectors

Discussion in 'U.S. Navy' started by F-22, Apr 11, 2016.

Share This Page

  1. F-22

    F-22 2nd Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2015
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    186
    Location:
    United_States
    [​IMG]


    BATH, Maine — The future USS Zumwalt is so stealthy that it'll go to sea with reflective material that can be hoisted to make it more visible to other ships.

    The Navy destroyer is designed to look like a much smaller vessel on radar, and it lived up to its billing during recent builder trials.

    Lawrence Pye, a lobsterman, told The Associated Press that on his radar screen the 610-foot ship looked like a 40- to 50-foot fishing boat. He watched as the behemoth came within a half-mile while returning to shipbuilder Bath Iron Works.

    "It's pretty mammoth when it's that close to you," Pye said.

    Despite its size, the warship is 50 times harder to detect than current destroyers thanks to its angular shape and other design features, and its stealth could improve even more once testing equipment is removed, said Capt. James Downey, program manager.

    More at the link:

    http://www.navytimes.com/story/mili...avys-new-destroyer-needs-reflectors/82865356/
     
  2. Sven

    Sven Teh Viking dood Industry Professional Ret. Military

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2015
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    418
    Occupation:
    Military Research
    Location:
    United-States
    Hobby:
    Computer stuff
    Something like this then:D.

    [​IMG]

    It's not uncommon to find retro reflectors on small boats either.

    [​IMG]
     
    Pathfinder and Falcon like this.
  3. Falcon

    Falcon Major Staff Member Social Media Team

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Messages:
    984
    Likes Received:
    1,492
    Location:
    United-States
    How do you guys think we plan to deploy this baby? If we send it out to sea along with other non-stealth destroyers then its stealth isn't very useful. Will they sail in exclusively stealth groups?
     
  4. Sven

    Sven Teh Viking dood Industry Professional Ret. Military

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2015
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    418
    Occupation:
    Military Research
    Location:
    United-States
    Hobby:
    Computer stuff
    They'll sail with reflectors at all times. In much the same way the F-22 flies with Luneburg lenses and drop tanks.

    [​IMG]

    The Zumwalt will sail in a maximum visibility configuration during peacetime to prevent their signature from being cataloged by an adversary, and since the three will be deployed to East Asia, this would primarily be China and Russia.

    Operationally, they'll be taking some heat of the Ticonderogas, which are getting a bit old. The Tics act as the command ship for small unit deployments, such as FONOPs in the SCS, Zumwalt will do the same.

    These ships bug me though. They are less capable then originally planned and more costly, limiting their numbers to three. They're a naval version of the B-2. Too expensive to use, too expensive not to use.

    ...

    Side note: the above water signature suppression methods are cool, but I'm more interested in what's happened below.

    [​IMG]



    I can't tell the ship's speed, but the wake here isn't significant for a propeller driven ship. Compared with DDG 110 USS William P. Lawrence.



    In the SCS, above water developments like artificial islands or missile deployments (by both Japan and China) get all the attention - true to their moniker the "Silent Service" - submarines, their development unnoticed by our media (but fortunately not our military) are become the real threat.

    Wake homers and acoustic torpedoes concern me more then any AShM China would deploy. So how's the Zumwalt compare with the Burke's here?
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2016
    Pathfinder, Technofox and Falcon like this.
  5. Technofox

    Technofox That Norwegian girl Staff Member Ret. Military Developer

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2015
    Messages:
    900
    Likes Received:
    3,203
    Occupation:
    Professional "Doer" of "Things"
    Location:
    Norway
    Hobby:
    Being a geek
    Are they going to be used for shore bombardment mostly? Or strictly as an axillary cruiser?

    Their Advanced Gun System and Long Range Land Attack Projectile are key components of the Zumwalt package, it'd be unlikely they'd forgo the use of a weapon that's designed not for ships, but for shores.

    [​IMG]

    I could easily see the AGS supporting special forces in Somalia or Libya.

    Seems like a costly systems though. And I've heard support for dusting off the battleships and using them for battery fire, but aren't they not only inactive, but were stricken from the Navy register? That's hardly a cost effective solution is it? They don't belong to the Navy anymore, have no combat support systems installed and would take months if not years to put back into service, not to mention the ships themselves were costly to maintain.

    Zumwalt might not be a cost effective solution. As you put it, "too expensive to use, too expensive not to use" But at this point they're all the Navy's got in terms of long-range shore bombardment using guns rather than missiles.

    I love the design, but with just three entering service, I'm on the fence too. I'd rather have seen the money go towards arming the LCS or building more Virginias.
     
    Sven, Falcon and Pathfinder like this.
  6. Falcon

    Falcon Major Staff Member Social Media Team

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Messages:
    984
    Likes Received:
    1,492
    Location:
    United-States
    The Zumwalt is a cool platform but I don't think its got what it takes to support WW2 style amphibious landings. Pathfinder opened a thread questioning whether or not there will ever be WW2 style amphibious landings in the future. Perhaps the Navy has decided that there will not be rather there will be smaller landings that need to be supported with accurate fire from a long distance away.If thats the case then the Zumwalt fits the job perfectly.

    Zumwalt + Stealth Antonio Class LPD = surprise beach landing

    Surprise beach landing + highly trained marines + accurate fire support = successful operation

    US_Nav_.jpg

    Thread I was talking about:
    http://www.americanmilitaryforum.co...e-amphibious-assaults-obsolete.940/#post-3797
     
    Pathfinder and Sven like this.
  7. Sven

    Sven Teh Viking dood Industry Professional Ret. Military

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2015
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    418
    Occupation:
    Military Research
    Location:
    United-States
    Hobby:
    Computer stuff
    I think @Technofox - I never get used to that|Rage|, change your name! - is mostly right here. The AGS is being developed as a low cost alternative to missile strikes on coastal or near-inland targets. Currently the US is using aircraft delivered PGMs or cruise missiles to destroy targets. But the AGS, using a 155mm gun and an extended range munition, similar to N5, but with greater range offers the same capability with a fraction of the cost.

    N5 is the naval version of Excalibur


    I too don't think it'll be used to support amphibious landings, unless China invades Japanese held territory like the Senkaku Islands.

    [​IMG]

    Or the US stages an Iraq style feint/attack on a water opening nation. North Korea and Iran come to mind as candidates.

    This is North Korea.
    [​IMG]

    So that's not likely their function, rather they'll be used as an anti-terror weapon for attacks against militant groups like Al-Shabaab in Somalia or ISIS in Libya. Rather then as a support system for amphibious assault, think of these as a modern iteration of the Naval Gunfire Support concept that was revolutionized with the inception of the battleship.

    Anyone remember the time when USS New Jersey shelled Lebanon in 1983 during the Lebanon Civil War?

    [​IMG]

    This is the likely use for the Zumwalt's guns. Not that the AGS isn't equally suited for supporting an amphibious assault.

    ...

    I like the Zumwalt, but not at this cost. It's the same with the Seawolf class. If we had twenty of each they'd have my full support. But we don't:( and I'd rather have seen the money used to build the ships go towards additional submarines or maybe another Ford Class Carrier instead.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2016
    Falcon and Pathfinder like this.
Loading...