Zumwalt class destroyer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article contains information about an as-yet unfinished ship.

It may contain preliminary or speculative information, and may not reflect the final version of the ship.

Class overview
Zumwalt class destroyer model
Builders:	Northrop Grumman General Dynamics
Operators:	United States Navy
Preceded by:	Arleigh Burke class destroyer
Succeeded by:	N/A (latest destroyer class authorized)
Planned:	USS Zumwalt, DDG-1001, five others planned
General characteristics
Displacement:	14,564 tons^[1]
Length:	600 ft (183 m)
Beam:	79.1 ft (24.1 m)
Draft:	27.6 ft (8.4 m)
Propulsion:	2 Rolls-Royce Marine Trent-30 gas turbines and emergency diesel generators, 78 MW
Speed:	30.3 kn (56 km/h)
Complement:	140
Sensors and processing systems:	AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar (MFR) (X-band, scanned array) Volume Search Radar (VSR) (S-band, scanned array)
Armament:	20 × MK 57 VLS modules, comprising a total of 80 missiles Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) Tactical Tomahawk Block IV Standard Missile 2 Block III (SM-2MR) Vertical Launch Anti-Submarine Rocket (ASROC) 2 × 155 mm Advanced Gun System 920 × 155 mm total; 600 in automated store + Auxiliary store room with up to 320 rounds (non-automatic) as of April 2005 70-100 LRLAP rounds planned as of 2005 of total 2 × Mk 110 57 mm gun (CIWS)
Aircraft carried:	2 SH-60 LAMPS helicopters or 1 MH-60R helicopter 3 MQ-8 Fire Scout VTUAV

The Zumwalt-class destroyer (also known either as the DD(X) or DDG-1000) is a planned class of United States Navy destroyers, designed as multi-mission ship with a focus on land attack. The class is a scaled-back project that emerged after funding cuts to the larger DD-21 vessel program. The lead ship is named Zumwalt for Admiral Elmo Zumwalt.

On February 14, 2008, Bath Iron Works was awarded for the construction of the USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000), and Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding was awarded for the construction of the DDG-1001, with price of $1.4 billion each.^[2]

[edit] Proposal

Originally, the Navy had hoped to build 32 of these destroyers. That number was later reduced to 24, then to 7, due to the high cost of new and experimental technologies to be incorporated in the destroyer.^[3] The U.S. House of Representatives remains skeptical of the DDG-1000 destroyer program for financial reasons and has therefore allotted the Navy only enough money to begin construction on one DDG-1000 destroyer as a "technology demonstrator." The initial funding allocation for the DDG-1000 destroyer was included in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007.^[3]

However, the 2007 appropriations bill passed on September 26, 2006 by the House, and later by the Senate, allotted 2.6 billion USD for the funding and building of two Zumwalt-class destroyers. Under this current plan, Bath Iron Works in Maine and Northrop Grumman's Ingalls Shipbuilding in Mississippi will build one ship each.^[4]

Among U. S. warships in development, the DDG-1000 is to be preceded by the Littoral Combat Ship and followed possibly by the CG(X) cruiser, concurrent with the CVN-21 aircraft carrier. The DDG-1000 program resulted from a large re-organization of the DD21 program when Congress cut its budget by over 50% as part of the SC21 program of the 1990s.

The Zumwalt-class destroyers are multi-role and designed for surface warfare, anti-aircraft, and naval fire support. They take the place of the battleships in filling the former congressional mandate for naval fire support, though the requirement was reduced to allow them to fill this role. The most numerous Navy main surface warfare combatants are, and will remain for the foreseeable future, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class cruisers. All are part of the Aegis system.

[edit] Design and development

The DDG-1000 will feature the following: a low radar profile; an integrated power system, which can send electricity to the electric drive motors or weapons, which may someday include railguns; a total ship computing environment infrastructure (TSCE-I), serving as the ship's primary LAN and as the hardware-independent platform for all of the ship's software ensembles; automated fire-fighting systems and automated piping rupture isolation. The destroyer is being designed to require a smaller crew and be less expensive to operate than comparable warships. It will have a wave-piercing "tumblehome" hull form whose sides slope inward above the waterline. This will reduce the radar cross-section, returning much less energy than a more hard-angled hull form.

In late 2005, the program entered the detail design and integration phase, for which Raytheon is the Mission Systems Integrator. Both Northrop Grumman Ship Systems and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works share dual-lead for the hull, mechanical, and electrical detail design. BAE Systems Inc. has the advanced gun system and the MK57 VLS. Almost every major defense contractor (including Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman Sperry Marine, L-3 Communications) and subcontractors from nearly every state in the U.S. are involved to some extent in this project, which is the largest single line item in the Navy's budget. During the previous contract, development and testing of 11 Engineering Development Models (EDMs) took place; Advanced Gun System, Autonomic Fire Suppression System, Dual Band Radar [X-band and L-band], Infrared, Integrated Deckhouse & Apertures, Integrated Power System, Integrated Undersea Warfare, Peripheral Vertical Launch System, Total Ship Computing Environment, Tumblehome Hull Form,

Many of the ship's features were originally developed under the DD-21 program ("21st Century Destroyer"). In 2001, Congress cut the DD-21 program by half; to save it, the acquisition program was renamed and heavily reworked. According to a Government Accountability Office report,^[5] milestones include:

Formal program launch, April 2002
Preliminary design review, March 2004
Lead ship authorized, March 2005
Critical design review, August 2005
Start fabrication, June 2007
First ship launched, June 2012

USS Hayler (DD-997) (1982) was the last Spruance-class destroyer, and DDG-112 (2010) is to be the last Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. The Zumwalt's hull number will be DDG-1000.

[edit] Design elements

The DDG-1000 with planned features.

[edit] Advanced Gun System (AGS)

The Advanced Gun System is a 155 mm naval gun, two of which would be installed in the proposed class. This system consists of an advanced 155 mm gun and the Long Range Land-Attack Projectile. This projectile is in fact a rocket with a warhead fired from the AGS gun. The warhead weighs 11 kg / 24 lb and has a circular error of probability of 50 meters. This weapon system has been tested to 110 km / 59 nmi but ultimately a range of 185 km / 100 nmi is envisioned. The system will be provided with a magazine of 600 rounds or more per weapon and offers a rate of fire of 10 rounds per minute per gun. The barrel is water cooled to prevent over-heating issues. The combined firepower from a pair of turrets gives Zumwalt-class destroyers firepower equivalent to 18 conventional M-198 field guns.^[6]^[7]

[edit] Peripheral Vertical Launch System (PVLS)

The Peripheral Vertical Launch System is an attempt to reclaim the prized center space of the hull while increasing the safety of the ship from the loss of the entire missile battery and the loss of the ship in the case of a magazine explosion. The system scatters pods of VLS around the outer shell of the ship having a thin steel outer shell and a thick inner shell. The design of the PVLS would be directing the force of the explosion outward rather than ripping the ship in half. Additionally this design keeps the loss of missile capacity down to just the pod being hit.^[6]^[8]

[edit] Dual-band radar

The radar will send and receive S-band (high altitude large airspace) and X-band (high altitude near airspace) signals with a common-phase conformal array on the deckhouse. Each band will have its own signal processors, with the returns combined by the display sensor manager. This system is thought to provide high detection and excellent anti-jamming capabilities. But at least one report by Congress' investigative arm, the GAO, raises concerns that it is too much of a technology leap.^[6]^[9]^[10]^[11]

[edit] Sonar

A dual-band sonar controlled by a highly automated computer system will be used to find mines and submarines.

[edit] Total Computer Environment

The ship's systems are slated to be controlled by GE Fanuc's LynxOS RTOS ^[12]

[edit] Propulsion

The DDX proposed to use a Permanent Magnet Motor (PMM) within the hull. An alternate twin pod arrangement being rejected as the ramifications of pod drives would require too much development and validation cost to the vessel. The PMM is considered to be another technology leap and is the cause of some concern along with the radar system from Congress.^[6] As part of the design phase, Northrop Grumman had built the world's largest permanent magnet motor, designed and fabricated by DRS Technologies. This proposal was dropped when the PMM motor failed to demonstrate that it was ready to be installed in time.

Zumwalt will have Converteam's Advanced Induction Motors (AIM), rather than DRS Technologies' Permanent Magnet-Synchronous Motors (PMM).

"...The exact choice of engine systems remains somewhat controversial at this point. The concept was originally for an integrated power system (IPS) based on in-hull permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMMs), with Advanced Induction Motors (AIM) as a possible backup solution. The design was shifted to the AIM system in February 2005 in order to meet scheduled milestones; PMM technical issues were subsequently fixed, but the program has moved on. The downside is that AIM technology has a heavier motor, requires more space, requires a "separate controller" to be developed to meet noise requirements, and produces one-third the amount of voltage. On the other hand, these very differences will force time and cost penalties from design and construction changes if the program wishes to "design AIM out"..."^[13]

[edit] Integrated Power System (IPS)

The Integrated Power System (IPS) is a step both forward and backwards. In some ways similar to the old turbo-electric drive, the addition of PMMs and integration of all electrical power systems gives ten times the power available on current destroyers. It also impacts the ship's thermal and sound signature. The IPS has added to weight growth in the Zumwalt-class destroyer as noted by the GAO.^[6]^[14]^[11]

[edit] Stealth

Despite being 40% larger than an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer the radar signature is more akin to a fishing boat and sound levels are compared to the Los Angeles-class submarine. The tumblehome hull reduces radar return and the inclusion of composite materials reducing it still further. Water sleeting along the sides, along with passive cool air induction in the mack reduces thermal emissions.^[6]

[edit] Tumblehome wave piercing hull

A return to a hull form not seen since before World War I, the Zumwalt-class destroyer reintroduces the tumblehome hull form. In this hull form the hull widens from the deck to the waterline instead of flaring from the waterline up to the deck. This was done to reduce the radar return of the hull. The bow is designed to cut through waves rather than ride over them. This hull form has been the center of arguments given in the Naval Architecture community over stability in high sea states.^[6]^[15]

[edit] Automated fire suppression system

Water spray or mist systems are proposed for deployment in the Zumwalt-class destroyer but the electronic spaces continue to provide a challenge to the designers. Halon/Nitrogen dump systems are preferred but do not work when the space has been compromised (hull breach). Again this system has been pointed out by the GAO as being a potential problem yet to be addressed.^[6]^[16]^[11]

[edit] Boat and Helicopter arrangements

Two spots will be available on a large aviation deck while boat handling is to be dealt with in a stern mounted boat hangar with ramp, the boat hangar’s stern location meeting high sea state requirements for boat operations.^[6]

[edit] Automated replenishment

AGS rounds, food, and other stores, are all mounted in containers able to be struck below to magazine/storage areas by an automated cargo handling system.^[6]

[edit] Manning reductions

Automation of the AGS magazines, Fire suppression, and replenishment operations, are all designed to reduce crew on Zumwalt-class destroyers. One of the major contributors to life cycle costs are staffing requirement on a warship.^[6]

[edit] Development history

The House of Representatives opposes the DDG-1000 and has cut some funding, preferring to build another Arleigh Burke class destroyer and the new littoral combat ships. The Senate supports the DDG-1000 and continues to approve more funding.

It was reported on October 17, 2005, that an October 5 Pentagon report recommended "canceling the DD(X) destroyer being developed by Northrop Grumman Corp." ^[17]

On November 23, 2005, the Defense Acquisition Board approved a plan for simultaneous construction of the first two DDG-1000 ships at Northrop’s Ingalls yard in Pascagoula, MS and General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME. However, as of that date, funding had yet to be authorized by Congress.

In late December 2005, the House and Senate agreed to continue funding the DDG-1000 program; however, only seven of these ships will be built under the 2005 authorization instead of the originally planned 23 to 30.

In April 2006, the first of the class was announced and will be named the Zumwalt and carry the designator DDG-1000. The ship will be named to honor the former Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Elmo R. “Bud” Zumwalt Jr. In so doing, the Navy will eschew the guided missile destroyer sequence begun with DDG-1 Gyatt and continue in the previous "gun destroyer" sequence left off with DD-997 Hayler.

The Associated Press reported on November 13, 2007 that the U.S. Navy had awarded a $90 million contract to Northrop Grumman to prepare construction materials for the DDG-1000 order.

[edit] Debates and controversy

[edit] Cost and technology

Lawmakers and others have questioned whether the Zumwalt class costs too much and whether it provides the capabilities the U.S. military needs. Navy leaders have responded to the criticism by reducing the planned class from 32 ships to seven, and introducing incremental funding to pay for them. Congress has allotted enough money for just two ships so far, describing them as "technology demonstrators," and has expressed mixed feelings about incremental funding for ships.^[18]

[edit] Tumblehome design stability

In early 2007 a controversy developed around stability issues with the DDG-1000 hull design in heavy seas.^[19] A Press article notes, "....Brower explained: "The trouble is that as a ship pitches and heaves at sea, if you have tumblehome instead of flare, you have no righting energy to make the ship come back up. On the DDG 1000, with the waves coming at you from behind, when a ship pitches down, it can lose transverse stability as the stern comes out of the water - and basically roll over."^[19]

[edit] Naval fire support role

A controversial point of the DD(X) destroyer(s) is their planned naval surface fire support role. The original DD21 and the Arsenal Ship had more serious NFS capabilities, which would meet a Congress-mandated requirement related to the Iowa-class battleships. The requirement was eventually relaxed, the battleships stricken from the registry, and the Navy left with small tonnage ships for NFS or alternative methods such as air support.

Artist's impression of the Advanced Gun System aboard a DD(X) Destroyer

The DD21 was to have been designed around an advanced "vertical gun" system, which would only have been compatible with guided projectiles, but the project ran into serious technology/cost problems and was radically scaled back to a more conventional 6.1 inch Advanced Gun System (AGS).

The Zumwalt-class will have two 6.1 inch (155 mm) guns with limited ammunition. While smaller caliber guns (and missiles) have been used for centuries in naval fire support, very large guns have special capabilities beyond that of mid-range calibres. US battleships were re-activated three times after WWII specifically for NFS, and their 16 inch gunfire was used in every major engagement of the U. S. from WWII to the Gulf War.

Up to 2006, the remaining Iowa-class battleships were kept on the Naval registry, in part to fill a naval fire support role. The Zumwalt-class is noted to be able to fire a specially designed "guided" artillery shell some 63 nautical miles inland.^[20] However, this shell has a reduced warhead size and uses new technology, so most of the shells carried on the DDG would have vastly shorter range. A sub-calibre sabot round had already been partially developed for a battleship gun; an 11 inch sub-calibre saboted long-range round for the 16"/50 Mark 7 was tested in the 1960s^[21] while another, even longer range one was proposed and evaluated in the late 1980s. The studies for this formed the basis for the original (not current) long range AGS gun in the DD21 (but not DDG-1000).^[21]

[edit] Missiles: 80 MK57 VLS Cells

The original DD21 design, displacing around 16,000 tons, would have accommodated between 117 and 128 VLS cells. However, the final DDG-1000 design was considerably smaller than that of the DD21, resulting in room for only 80 VLS cells.^[22] Given the vessel's size and expected role, the Zumwalt class destroyers will likely carry many more Tomahawk missiles than either the Ticonderoga or Arleigh Burke class ships.

[edit] USN position and political debate

“

"In summary, the committee is concerned that the Navy has foregone the long range fire support capability of the battleship, has given little cause for optimism with regard to meeting near-term developmental objectives, and appears unrealistic in planning to support expeditionary warfare in the mid term. The committee views the Navy's strategy for providing naval surface fire support as 'high risk', and will continue to monitor progress accordingly."

”

The official position of the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Navy is that the Zumwalt-class destroyer(s) will be adequate as naval surface gunfire support ships, although there are dissenters.^[23] In March 2006, the Iowa and Wisconsin were struck from the Naval Vessel Register. However, Congress remains "deeply concerned" over the loss of naval surface gunfire support they could provide and noted that "navy efforts to improve upon, much less replace, this capability have been highly problematic."^[24] The U.S. House of Representatives asked that the battleships be kept in a state of readiness should they ever be needed again^[25] and directed the Navy to increase the number of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers that are currently being modernized.^[25] The modernization includes extending the range of the 5-inch guns on the Flight 1 ships with extended range guided munitions (ERGMs) that would enable the ships to fire projectiles about forty nautical miles inland;^[26]^[24]^[27] However the ERGM has now been canceled, leaving the nature of future DDG NGFS up in the air.^[28]

In 2007, a thesis report submitted to the Joint Forces Staff College/Joint Advanced Warfighting School by Shawn A. Welch, a Colonel in the Army National Guard's Corps of Engineers analyzed the current capacity for naval gunfire support (NGS) and made several conclusion based on the progress made since the retirement of the last two Iowa-class battleships. Welch's thesis report, which earned the National Defense Universities award for Best Thesis in 2007, estimates that the full force of DD(X) destoyers needed to replace the decommissioned Iowas will not arrive until 2020-2025 at the earliest, and alleges that the U.S. Navy has not accurately assessed the capabilities of its large caliber gun ships since 1990. The report alleges that the Navy has consistently scaled back or outright cancelled programs intended to replace naval gunfire support capacity, in the process making no significant gains for offshore fire support since the retirement of the last Iowa-class battleship in 1992. This failure by the navy to meet Congressional mandates to improve naval gunfire support has caused a rift with the United States Marine Corps and to a lesser extent the United States Army; in the case of the former, the concern is great enough that several three and four star generals in the Marine Corps have openly admitted to the press their concern over the absence of any effective ship based gunfire support, and two separate Commandants of the Marine Corps have testified before the Senate Armed Service Committee on the risks faced by the Marines in the absence of any effective naval gunfire support.^[29]

Separately from the above, there is an active civilian campaign to persuade the Secretary of the Navy to name DDG-1001 the USS Robert A. Heinlein. [2]

[edit] References

[edit] External links

companies involved in the DD(X) Destroyer program

Government reports regarding the DD(X) Destroyer program

v • d • e Zumwalt-class destroyer

Zumwalt

List of destroyers of the United States Navy \| List of destroyer classes of the United States Navy