US Navy News and updates

[John Fedup]

Although there is no certainty on USS Connecticut’s damage, some reports suggest it is pretty significant which will require a hard choice, junk for parts or rebuild. In hindsight shrinking the Cold War peace dividend by continuing with a couple of extra Seawolves would have been a great idea. Repair or replacing with a Virginia will take years. This should be a signal to Australia wrt to their SSN selection, America may not be willing or able to share SSN production with Australia given their urgent needs.

Navy Faces Prospect That Crash Will Force USS Connecticut Out Of Service

As the Navy faces the prospect of losing a second major front-line asset in little more than a year, it is time for the Navy to start openly discussing some uncomfortable options.

www.forbes.com

 

[John Fedup]

Three crew including the USS Connecticut’s commander have been relieved. When a multi billion dollar boat is wrecked, right or wrong you are gone.

Navy Fires Commander, Other Leaders of Damaged Submarine

A separate safety investigation is still proceeding into the Oct. 2 grounding of USS Connecticut.

www.defenseone.com

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Extremely expensive but not as successful as the Arleigh Burke class of destroyers.

|"As a result, the DDG 1000 class ships will remain incomplete and incapable of performing their planned mission until at least 2025."|

The Navy's $9B Stealthy Super Destroyer Is Covered In Rust

The controversial futuristic warship looked less than gleaming as it pulled into San Diego Bay recently.

www.thedrive.com

 

[ASSAIL]

Extremely expensive but not as successful as the Arleigh Burke class of destroyers.

|"As a result, the DDG 1000 class ships will remain incomplete and incapable of performing their planned mission until at least 2025."|

The Navy's $9B Stealthy Super Destroyer Is Covered In Rust

The controversial futuristic warship looked less than gleaming as it pulled into San Diego Bay recently.

www.thedrive.com

Big ship, small crew, tough trials schedule, not a good look but inevitable.
PS I’m usually the one who complains about the Bombay Bum Boat look cultured by the RAN these days but I think the Zumwalt’s case is different.

 

[Volkodav]

Interestingly their sea keeping is apparently good, I wonder how their propulsion and power generation is going. The rust and RAM don't look good but I'm surprised new gen coatings and adhesives (maybe an AUKUS counter trade) couldn't be used.

The combat system side of the project was royally screwed but the ship platform itself seems to have a lot going for it. Start punching them out with the latest iteration of AEGIS, SPY-6, SM-3, SM-6, directed energy weapons, the originally spec'd 57mm (with guided rounds), hypersonic attack missiles, even fit a 5"gun.

 

[SolarWind]

If a ship does not rust after being at sea for so long, then it's not made out of the right materials. The issue, like ASSAIL notes, is a smaller crew due to higher automation. I guess not enough manpower to scrape it to a shine. Maybe it's not important.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

If a ship does not rust after being at sea for so long, then it's not made out of the right materials. The issue, like ASSAIL notes, is a smaller crew due to higher automation. I guess not enough manpower to scrape it to a shine. Maybe it's not important.

It would not matter if they had a larger crew. The USN has seemingly ceased conducting rust management while deployed. Image is from Oct when the Iwo returned from deployment. I have not seen an image of USN ships returning to port in quite some time where they couldn't be mistaken for laid up reserve fleet vessels.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1469173715602706435

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Oh my, finally some images providing a bit more detail of USS Connecticut's damage
That does look like it's going to be very expensive.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470076861128626180

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470078114906660872

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Oh my, finally some images providing a bit more detail of USS Connecticut's damage
That does look like it's going to be very expensive.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470076861128626180

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470078114906660872

Here, this should reduce the number of steps everyone will have to take to look closely at the images

 

[ngatimozart]

It would not matter if they had a larger crew. The USN has seemingly ceased conducting rust management while deployed. Image is from Oct when the Iwo returned from deployment. I have not seen an image of USN ships returning to port in quite some time where they couldn't be mistaken for laid up reserve fleet vessels.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1469173715602706435

It seems to be common across FVEY navies now. They contract out ships maintenance and as such the crews don't do routine preventative maintenance at sea any more. The contracts prevent them from doing so. That's the way it is with the RNZN and the ships end up looking like gash boats or as HRH The Duke of Edinburgh would have said, a "Bombay bum boat".

 

[ASSAIL]

It seems to be common across FVEY navies now. They contract out ships maintenance and as such the crews don't do routine preventative maintenance at sea any more. The contracts prevent them from doing so. That's the way it is with the RNZN and the ships end up looking like gash boats or as HRH The Duke of Edinburgh would have said, a "Calcutta bum boat".

Bombay, please!

 

[ngatimozart]

Bombay, please!

Corrected Sahib.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Warship Wednesday
USS Portland (LSD-27) at Battle Stations-Laser (pew-pew)
Digging the crew's laser specs

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1471174499836076032

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Oh my, finally some images providing a bit more detail of USS Connecticut's damage
That does look like it's going to be very expensive.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470076861128626180

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1470078114906660872

More new images of USS Connecticut, and some video
Had to be an awfully rough ride home across the Pacific

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1471242689383391232

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1471242872368381955

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1471245843697217543

 

[PetranPireotis]

US Navy destroyer USS Jason Dunham departing from Piraeus

 

[OldNavy63]

USN unveils it’s DDG(X) Program to replace the Ticonderoga CGs and ultimately the DDG-51 Class.

The United States Naval Institute posted the following summary which shows provision for hypersonic missiles, high power lasers, SeaRam and a larger hanger. VLS is about the same as DDG-51, but a bank of 32 VLS forward of the bridge superstructure can be swapped out for 12 larger VLS for hypersonic missiles.

Navy Unveils Next-Generation DDG(X) Warship Concept with Hypersonic Missiles, Lasers - USNI News

ARLINGTON, Va. – The Navy wants its next warship to fire hypersonic missiles and lasers that would be ten times more powerful than the service’s existing laser weapons, according to the most detailed outlook to date of the DDG(X) next generation warship issued by the service. The warship, the...

news.usni.org

Um, I guess there may be more than a couple of changes before they start building the new class, such as the number of cup holders in the Captain’s chair etc.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

USN unveils it’s DDG(X) Program to replace the Ticonderoga CGs and ultimately the DDG-51 Class.

The United States Naval Institute posted the following summary which shows provision for hypersonic missiles, high power lasers, SeaRam and a larger hanger. VLS is about the same as DDG-51, but a bank of 32 VLS forward of the bridge superstructure can be swapped out for 12 larger VLS for hypersonic missiles.

Navy Unveils Next-Generation DDG(X) Warship Concept with Hypersonic Missiles, Lasers - USNI News

ARLINGTON, Va. – The Navy wants its next warship to fire hypersonic missiles and lasers that would be ten times more powerful than the service’s existing laser weapons, according to the most detailed outlook to date of the DDG(X) next generation warship issued by the service. The warship, the...

news.usni.org

Um, I guess there may be more than a couple of changes before they start building the new class, such as the number of cup holders in the Captain’s chair etc.

1. RAM, not SeaRAM.
SeaRAM is the 11-cell launcher mated to the Phalanx CIWS mount. RAM is a 21-cell launcher that is integrated with the ships radars (unlike Phalanx & SeaRam)

2. Forward block of 32-cell Mk-41 replaced by 12 Large Missile Launcher cells
Seeing some discussion amongst naval journalist types I interact with that these LML cells or block may be akin to something like the multipurpose mission payload tubes in the Virginia Payload Module

3. so RAM replaces the the baseline Phalanx CIWS found on the Tico's & Burke's, with the 'objective' to mount 2 very high power lasers in their place. While also upgrading the 60 KW HELIOS currently being tested on the Burkes with a 150 KW system

And, a link to the briefing powerpoint.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21177740/sna2022-captdavidhart-ddgx-program.pdf

 

[spoz]

I’d love to see the CNO’s requirements! I’m not normally a cell counter but only 32 Mk41 in a ship which will presumably have a primary anti air mission seems rather too few, even if you then add the 12 large cells. And it doesn’t seem clear as to whether they are in addition to, or replace, the Mk 41; hopefully, the former. The destroyer payload module might redress this, I suppose - but it is only seen as an option at this stage apparently.

 

[Volkodav]

I’d love to see the CNO’s requirements! I’m not normally a cell counter but only 32 Mk41 in a ship which will presumably have a primary anti air mission seems rather too few, even if you then add the 12 large cells. And it doesn’t seem clear as to whether they are in addition to, or replace, the Mk 41; hopefully, the former. The destroyer payload module might redress this, I suppose - but it is only seen as an option at this stage apparently.

I though it was 96 cells with the forward 32 designed to be replaced by payload modules? The graphic appears to show a VLS forward of the hangar.

 

[StingrayOZ]

I’d love to see the CNO’s requirements! I’m not normally a cell counter but only 32 Mk41 in a ship which will presumably have a primary anti air mission seems rather too few, even if you then add the 12 large cells. And it doesn’t seem clear as to whether they are in addition to, or replace, the Mk 41; hopefully, the former. The destroyer payload module might redress this, I suppose - but it is only seen as an option at this stage apparently.

its 96 VLS standard
its 64 + 32 and the 32 can be swapped out for 16 larger making it 64 +16 = 80 VLS

The current DDG-51s field 96 MK-41 VLS cells and USNI News understands that Navy requirements keep the VLS cells for DDG(X) about the same.

I find this bit interesting

The Navy is also calling for a ship that can travel 50 percent farther and spend 120 times longer time on station. The plan also calls for a 25 percent reduction in fuel usage compared to the DDG-51 and reduced requirement for the Navy combat logistics fleet.