They will likely end up like the early Tico's and OHP's with the Naval Inactive Ship Maintenance Facility then after a while scrapped.
US Navy News and updates
- Thread starter AegisFC
- Start date
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
And the Japanese are currently building 2 more Atago class derivatives anyway
Old ships are difficult and expensive to maintain and even more so to upgrade, the returns of doing so diminishing pretty much exponentially as the platform ages. The USN is in a bit of a quandary at the moment in that their old ships are sapping resources needed to build new ships but the new ships lack the required capabilities to replace the capabilities possessed by some of the old ones.
Limited money is impacting training and operational preparedness, money spent on old ships makes this worse, upgrading old ships to increase capability makes this worse, the USN either has to retire old ships and concentrate on getting the most out of their newer better ones (later build cruisers and Flight IIA+ Burkes, or continue to suffer engineering casualties related to aging platforms and operational limitations resulting from training deficits.
The Flight III Burke is a band aid rather than a solution. It is a compromise, designed and built to a price, not a new generation ship designed with current requirements in mind. The longer old ships are retained and a new design is delayed, the worse the situation will get.
Limited money is impacting training and operational preparedness, money spent on old ships makes this worse, upgrading old ships to increase capability makes this worse, the USN either has to retire old ships and concentrate on getting the most out of their newer better ones (later build cruisers and Flight IIA+ Burkes, or continue to suffer engineering casualties related to aging platforms and operational limitations resulting from training deficits.
The Flight III Burke is a band aid rather than a solution. It is a compromise, designed and built to a price, not a new generation ship designed with current requirements in mind. The longer old ships are retained and a new design is delayed, the worse the situation will get.
I take an alternative view of the Flt III ABs.
Yes the hull shape is old, so what, it’s successful, but everything inside the hull is either new or incrementally improved. New engines, sensors, a pathway to rail guns and lasers, Baseline 10 Aegis, it’s all new generation with minimal risk.
What could be argued is that by building such large and complex platforms, has the USN left the cupboard bare on smaller more numerous and highly capable ships hopefully covered by the FFX programme.
https://www.militaryaerospace.com/sensors/article/14072532/flight-iii-destroyer-radar-power
The Flight III is limited to incremental improvements by power generation and cooling capacity, but lacks growth margins for anything else. What is needed is a new high end platform, with growth margins, to cover off the DDG limitations. There don't need to be a hundred of them rather two or three dozen, eventually, as there were, DLGs and CGs.
Ironically for the non cruiser missions a new, smaller, design can deliver almost the same, in some areas more, capability, plus greater growth potential than a Flight III Burke, by not having to fill the entire mission set.
Last edited:
I think a 10,000 ship is big enough and has the capacity to adjust the accommodation and CIC function to cater for CTG function.
I see that as the only real limitation, if any at all but would bow to higher authority as I’ve never seen a GA for the ships to explore my theory.
The Ticonderogas have aluminium superstructures and a more traditional hull form (vertical and parallel sides for much of their length) , giving them more internal volume than a Burke at the same displacement as a Flight III.
Don't get me wrong, I love the Burke, believe the USN did well building so many of them, and would have loved Australia to have selected a modified Flight IIA for AWD, but even the Flight III is not a cruiser, nor is it a multi role frigate. It's the world's best in production destroyer.
In some non
IRGC related news the USN is rapidly moving with the Hte FFGX program. Newest bidder counting on MW capacity to put it poverty the edge
RFP to close summer 2020
Fincantieri Betting on Power Generation to Land Navy Frigate Contest - USNI News
IRGC related news the USN is rapidly moving with the Hte FFGX program. Newest bidder counting on MW capacity to put it poverty the edge
RFP to close summer 2020
Fincantieri Betting on Power Generation to Land Navy Frigate Contest - USNI News
So, as I read this, the winner gets to be the one with the winning design, which allows them to build one ship.
Then their design is put out to tender for everyone else to bid on.
Now the "come-latelies" get the full design and the advantage of being able to under-bid the original winner.
Sounds like a right s#!t show to me.
Who would want to be the one to carry all the design risk so that others may profit?
?????
MB
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The USN is buying the the first ship AND the design. Not a bad idea from their perspective. Having two yards build the same design afterwards seems to be a better way for comparing shipyard performance as opposed to the LCS !$&? show.
A Russian Navy intel ship made a close run to the USS FArragut in the Arabian Sea
VIDEO: Russian Warship Takes ‘Aggressive’ Action Against U.S. Destroyer - USNI News
VIDEO: Russian Warship Takes ‘Aggressive’ Action Against U.S. Destroyer - USNI News
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Somewhat less aggressive ( actually a lot) than the submarine encounters at the height of the old war but one has to wonder at what kind of useful information the Russian navy gets from such interactions.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
This link describes a USN program that is apparently collecting vast amounts of information on ambient ocean noise. Clearly this information will be useful for their submariners.
New Clue In Mystery Of Unidentified U.S. Navy System
New Clue In Mystery Of Unidentified U.S. Navy System
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The USN’s future large surface combatant ship has been put off until the late 2020s. Primary reasons are hull shape and propulsion options. There seems to be agreement that IEP is the way forward. The Zumwalt should confirm this over the next few years and it’s components could be tweaked to optimize a final configuration. The hull form will be a more complicated decision and it will be interesting to see if a variation of the Zumwalt hull form is retained.
Future Large Surface Combatant Pushed to Late 2020s, Navy Takes 'Measured' Development Approach - USNI News
Future Large Surface Combatant Pushed to Late 2020s, Navy Takes 'Measured' Development Approach - USNI News
Ananda
The Bunker Group
2nd day of SNA with Xavier focus on Fincantieri FFGx FREEM based as USN next gen Frigates. Certainly will be more capable than OHP class, but I do wonder with Fincantieri choice of Electric Diesel Hybrid. It's more economical and Fincantieri seems confidence this hybrid propulsion system will also able to generate up to 6 MGw electricity for future system development.
However as my understanding, USN seems so far leaning more to Gas Propulsion either CODAG or COGAG..I don't know if this kind Propulsion will be enough to convince USN.
Except that it does not have a dock as such. These are also based on the high speed craft code and will have operating limitations based on that structure. Added to this .... they are not cheap.
Good for the USN though who have a number of ships of this type (high speed transport) and have the size and diversity of platforms to make use of such a beast.
Lethality enhancements for LCS:
Interesting. The two add-on structures (silos?) up top for the VLS cells (MK41 single-cell Tactical length) are a bit odd looking, but all in all these seem like good improvements. ESSM + SeaRAM + NSM + 57mm is a pretty good mix. Even has a frikin' laser!
Interesting. The two add-on structures (silos?) up top for the VLS cells (MK41 single-cell Tactical length) are a bit odd looking, but all in all these seem like good improvements. ESSM + SeaRAM + NSM + 57mm is a pretty good mix. Even has a frikin' laser!
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Naval Today | The industry's seaborne news provider
The US has named the 4th Ford class Carrier USS Doris Miller after the African American Sailor who despite no trg manned a AA Gun during the attack on Pearl Harbour.
Definitely an improvement on naming Carriers after politicians.
The US has named the 4th Ford class Carrier USS Doris Miller after the African American Sailor who despite no trg manned a AA Gun during the attack on Pearl Harbour.
Definitely an improvement on naming Carriers after politicians.
There is a photograph of Doris Miller receiving his Navy Cross - it was presented by Adm. Chester Nimitz on the deck of USS Enterprise. It seems somehow appropriate that the three names will all be simultaneously carried by supercarriers (unless Nimitz decommissions first)
oldsig