Military Review

Ambition Above All: American Destroyer of the Future

62

Instead of "Zamwalt" and "Arleigh Burke"



Today, the US Navy is the most powerful in the world: this applies, in particular, to fleet guided missile destroyers weapons. The Americans built 70 (!) Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. The ship is constantly being improved, making it more and more dangerous for opponents. US ambitions are growing.

Theoretically, China can overtake the Americans, especially since the Chinese shipbuilding conveyor is running at full capacity. Beijing has already put into service about 20 Type 052D destroyers (they have been built since 2012), as well as four, without exaggeration, giant Type 055 destroyers (total displacement is 13 tons), which are sometimes called "cruisers" in the press.


Chinese forces are not enough to pose a real challenge to the Americans.

At the same time, the Americans themselves are experiencing serious difficulties.

The destroyer has become a real symbol here. Zamvolt, which can be deservedly called "the most unfortunate ship in stories US Navy. "

Initially, the States wanted to build 32 of these ships. Later, this number was reduced to 24, then to seven, and finally to three units.

The real talk of the town was the armament of the Zamvolt, but this is a separate story, very sad for the US Navy.

Next-Generation Guided-Missile Destroyer


Another destroyer will become a real replacement for the Arleigh Burke-class ships.

The program was called DDG(X) or Next-Generation Guided-Missile Destroyer. It was the culmination of the Large Surface Combatant (LSC) initiative, which followed the cancellation of the CG(X) program, reduced purchases of Zumwalt-class destroyers, and the possible need to replace existing destroyers and cruisers. LSC eventually morphed into DDG(X) with a program office established last June.

On what the new ship will (might) look like, US Navy showed in January this year.

De facto, this is just one of the possible ship configurations. Nevertheless, it allows us to draw some conclusions.

We are talking about an extremely large ship (the exact dimensions are not specified), which will have broad anti-submarine and strike capabilities, as well as powerful directed energy weapons.

The DDG (X) concept itself and some details of its design were presented as part of the Surface Navy Association National Symposium, which was held in Arlington (Virginia, USA). The Americans do not abandon the production of destroyers "Arleigh Burke", however, the capabilities of the ship are considered insufficient, in terms of its ability to continue to receive updates and improvements in the future. This is inextricably linked to the hypersonic weapons that the United States is now building.

As it became known earlier, the troubled "Zamvolt" will be the first of the ships with which it will be supplied. At the same time, as noted above, there are only three such destroyers, and ships of the Arleigh Burke type may not have enough internal space to become real platforms for launching hypersonic weapons.


First of all, the concept of DDG(X) attracts attention.

Apparently, the United States finally abandoned the idea of ​​​​getting an "inconspicuous" fleet. The new ship is much more like the Arleigh Burke than the Zamwalt.

The Navy itself has claimed to be using an "evolutionary" design approach. This means that it draws on technologies proven on the Ticonderoga-class cruisers, as well as in the modernization of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

The ship was initially created to meet the requirements of the Asia-Pacific region with an eye to operations in gigantic sea spaces.

In addition, he will be able to operate more effectively than his predecessors in the Arctic region.

The cruising range of the ship will increase by about 50 percent compared to its predecessor. This is expected to be achieved, at least in part, by improving fuel efficiency as well as reducing fuel consumption by at least 25 percent.

Lasers and missiles


DDG(X) will rely on elements of the combat system inherited from the Arleigh Burke, including the AN / SPY-6 radar system, as well as the ship's AEGIS Baseline 10 multifunctional combat information and control system.


First, the ship will receive two 21-cell Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) anti-aircraft missile systems, which are already widely used. Later, they plan to install two lasers with a power of 600 kilowatts in their place. They will be ten times more powerful than the laser systems currently in use. Experts call a 600-kilowatt laser optimal for destroying low-flying cruise missiles. In addition, DDG(X) will receive a 150-kilowatt front-mounted laser.

Initially, DDG(X) will receive a unified vertical launch vehicle for guided missiles Mk 41 with 32 cells.

The Navy anticipates that the DDG(X) will have "about the same capacity" of strike missile weapons as the destroyer DDG-51 Flight III, which has 96 cells.

How exactly this will be achieved is still unclear.

It is known, however, that in the future they want to replace the Mk 41 installation with 12 larger cells. They will probably be adapted for new hypersonic missiles. Be that as it may, the armament of the DDG(X) may change over time: the size of the ship allows you to increase the number of missiles.


Of the obvious advantages over Arleigh Burke is a larger hangar where manned helicopters and drones can be based. They want to equip the destroyer with an additional destroyer payload module, which can be regarded as another attempt to put into practice an ambiguous modular concept.

As for the timing, it's hard to say anything right now. The Navy has previously said it intends to start building new destroyers by fiscal year 2028.

In general, the program raises many questions.

For example, while there is no clarity about the upcoming costs.

The price of the ship's hull is estimated at about one billion dollars: everything else can be calculated separately. DDG(X) will almost certainly become one of the most expensive programs in the history of the US Navy and will cause a lot of controversy and controversy.

In this regard, it is appropriate to recall the gigantic funds that the Americans will have to spend on a new generation multi-purpose submarine (SSN[X]) and a Columbia-class strategic submarine.

In addition, the United States is pursuing an ambitious next-generation Constellation-class frigate program (and that's not counting the Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers and America-class amphibious assault ships). It is difficult to imagine all this in practice, but so far the US naval ambitions do not run counter to their financial capabilities.
Author:
62 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 18 January 2022 05: 20
    -4
    It is difficult to imagine all this in practice.
    Arming, arming ,,, They have such a tradition.
    1. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 18 January 2022 05: 27
      +10
      Beijing has already commissioned about 20 type 052D destroyers (they have been built since 2012),
      no words ... for 10 years ... in the picture, ships under construction at the same time in varying degrees of readiness.
      1. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. 18 January 2022 05: 42
        +6
        for 10 years ...

        They build a skyscraper with dozens of floors and build bridges in a few days ... light up. belay
        What is there to say about destroyers ... the highest organization of business ... there is much to learn from them ... effective managers really work there, and they don’t drive bullshit in Courchevel.
        Sometimes I think maybe our Chinese sailors can give away our long-term construction, order aircraft carriers ... it will be faster in time.
        1. bulvas
          bulvas 18 January 2022 16: 15
          +1
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          It is difficult to imagine all this in practice.
          Arming, arming ,,, They have such a tradition.


          I watched the movie "Don't Look Up", 21st year, starring DiCaprio.
          Americans about themselves.

          It seems that they did not have long to come up with such projects.


          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 23 June 2022 17: 03
            0
            Danila Bagrov also predicted - soon America kirdyk smile
        2. Sevastiec
          Sevastiec 8 February 2022 17: 21
          0
          In fact, Chinese billionaires drive around Courchevel no less than ours. It's just that there are many times more Chinese and they all need to plow to the fullest. Elementary labor market competition, which is prohibitive in China.
      2. German A
        German A 18 January 2022 06: 52
        +1
        I was amazed, in the USSR, Akula and Kirov were built in 3-3.5 years. And then 13-15 year old titanium submarines and 28000 ton battlecruisers were put under the knife by Russia ... Many cars last longer.
        Now what? The corvette was built for 9 years and then burned down exponentially. I was even surprised that for some reason the Western media didn’t take a good look at this fact.
        How is import substitution in China? Everything is fine? Do you need to buy lighting in Norway? And who makes gas turbines for them? Kiev? Like fucking Kiev! The QC280 relates to the Ukrainian GT-25000
        1. UGM159
          UGM159 18 January 2022 07: 32
          -2
          QC280 - 28 MW.
          QC400 - 40 MW.
      3. UGM159
        UGM159 18 January 2022 07: 13
        +9
        8х055 (13000 tons)

        25х052D/DL(7000-7500 tons)

        6х052C(6500 tons)

        2х052B(6000 tons)

        4x956E/956EM (modernization, 8000 tons)

        1х051B(6600 tons)

        2х051C(7100 tons)

        34х054/A(4000 tons)

        72х056/A(1400 tons)

        8х071 (25000 tons)

        3х075 (40000 tons)

        2х001/002 (67000 tons)

        1-2х003(85000-95000 тонн)
        1. German A
          German A 18 January 2022 07: 43
          +4
          Unlike the USSR, they did not break the system, but quietly increased their economic power and changed economic relations. Of course, the West can be largely blamed. Including for allowing the leakage of Soviet military technology to China. But there were plenty of their own goats, too. Well, what can I say ... It's just a shame for the people who endured the Second World War on their hump, so that all their lives, pain and suffering were trampled into the dirt.
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 18 January 2022 11: 11
            +6
            Quote: German A
            they did not break the line

            They broke him. They just did it quietly and without external effects.
            1. Looking for
              Looking for 18 January 2022 17: 22
              -1
              but it’s interesting. how did they break it. if the only ideology in China was and remains COMMUNIST? Maybe modified. but COMMUNIST.
              1. kalibr
                kalibr 18 January 2022 18: 18
                +3
                Quote: Seeker
                Maybe modified. But COMMUNIST.

                Basis - the economic foundation of a country based on capitalist production is more important than beautiful words written on white paper. Being determines consciousness, and not vice versa!
            2. German A
              German A 19 January 2022 08: 46
              +2
              They handed out nothing to anyone just like that. There was no privatization - the Abramovichs, Khodorkovskys and other comrades
              The largest oil company in the world, despite the fact that there is really no oil of its own. All 3 whales are under state control.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Petrochemical_Corporation
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_National_Petroleum_Corporation
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_National_Offshore_Oil_Corporation
              And yes, there is no communism, no one gives out housing for free. Everywhere the market economy is under the control of the state - go ahead, not for the good of the Motherland.
          2. House 25 Sq. 380
            House 25 Sq. 380 18 January 2022 20: 53
            +2
            Instead of a planned economy smelting cast iron, they began to develop a market economy with obtaining licenses and localization .. did you mean to say that?
            I would also like to remind you that China entered the 90s with the economy of producing goods for the masses, and not with the economy of tanks, where there was a queue for TVs and washing machines ...
            1. German A
              German A 19 January 2022 09: 06
              0
              Instead of a planned economy smelting cast iron, they began to develop a market economy with obtaining licenses and localization .. did you mean to say that?

              This or not this. You can't hand out large enterprises on which the entire economy is based into the hands of some crooks. Loans had to be given for the development of the new, and not for the redemption of the old.
              Why not make more TVs?
              The problem is that it wasn't China that set up production of more TVs, but the West. And on the basis of this, the Chinese riveted their own in parallel, studying and earning money. Those. this TV to the West, here we are not sorry, but this one is for ourselves. But no one was going to invest in production in the USSR. Because they were afraid of the USSR and wanted to destroy it. China would have had nothing if not for the West, which, not considering it its enemy, was withdrawing production for the sake of profit.
              Those. what they were afraid of from the USSR - a strong economy, China successfully turned and began to build up the military commissar.
          3. Ali Rendarman
            Ali Rendarman 19 January 2022 00: 35
            +2
            There is an alternative point of view: they didn’t break the system, but modernized it, and along the way changed the whole world, almost alone (for the better, of course). And by the way, the world has not seen more global changes since World War II.
            1. German A
              German A 19 January 2022 09: 13
              +1
              Of course for the better. Without China krantets Russia. It’s true that she’ll fall in love with her, but China will extend her life ...
              1. kalibr
                kalibr 19 January 2022 12: 07
                +1
                Dear German! China is just LUCKY. The scientific and technological revolution coincided with the wild demand for rare-earth metals - that's what China got out on. Because 92% of the world's REM reserves belong to him. And 8% - Russia, Brazil, Kazakhstan and the USA. Then the dog rummaged!
                1. German A
                  German A 20 January 2022 08: 55
                  +1
                  This is a very simplified explanation. China did not follow the principle of completely copying the capitalist model, as the Union did, but left a symbiosis of market and state property. Russia came to this model - Gazprom, the work of Kamaz and Mercedes, but a lot of inevitable troubles were done in the late 80s and 90s, when everything turned into a simple robbery of state property and resources. I don't know why there were no Western manufacturers in the USSR, why they also didn't appear after the collapse. Why all the countries of the former USSR have turned into raw material appendages. Why did Mercedes not work with Kamaz under the USSR, but in Russia it does it and in China it does, although there are communists there. Why in the USSR Germany did not build modern cement plants, but in Russia it builds, why the experience of agricultural production was not taken up, but in Russia please. Why didn't they build skyscrapers, but in Russia please? Why does the USSR, as a winner in the war, not have control over the technologies of Japan and Germany, while America does? What has changed? If the West staged a blockade of the USSR, if the leadership of the USSR wanted to ruin everything? But if the West was afraid of the Communists, then why weren't they afraid of China?
                  1. kalibr
                    kalibr 20 January 2022 10: 40
                    +1
                    What are some good questions you ask? Good question - half the answer! But with China, everything is easier. REM. Without them, nowhere! And he holds the Western world by the throat with an iron hand. In the United States in 2015, even the "War for Resources" doctrine was adopted. REMs are in the first place there.
    2. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 18 January 2022 05: 55
      -15
      Unsecured dollars are being printed and printed in wagons ... also a tradition in the United States ... when their printing press breaks down.
      1. NDR-791
        NDR-791 18 January 2022 06: 28
        +4
        The cost of the ship's hull is estimated at about one billion dollars.

        Even with a printing press, such a price tag for a bare body is somewhat embarrassing. And in general, the composition of weapons is lasers that are useless in cloudy and foggy environments, which have no hypersound ...
      2. Yuri V.A
        Yuri V.A 18 January 2022 06: 44
        +9
        Again, your favorite song about the machine ... What then prevented you from printing on three dozen Zamvolts and SeaWolfs?
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 18 January 2022 14: 10
          0
          Quote: Yuri V.A.
          What then prevented printing on three dozen Zamvolts and SeaWolfs?

          Nothing interfered.
          There was no need. To get money, any money, you need to justify spending it. They could not substantiate ... The main enemy fell apart.
          Rest assured, when they need it, they will print...
          1. Yuri V.A
            Yuri V.A 18 January 2022 14: 21
            +2
            Well, that means the printing press is broken after all. One enemy fell apart, another was overslept, and the finished projects of a cruiser and a full-fledged destroyer, and not a lightweight Zamvolt, were twenty years ago
  2. UGM159
    UGM159 18 January 2022 05: 59
    +3
    Chinese Navy 2021
    1. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 18 January 2022 10: 29
      0
      The US fleet should be divided into two, Pacific and Atlantic.
  3. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 18 January 2022 07: 15
    -3
    What size do the Americans have their hypersound, from these sizes they will dance with the new destroyer.
    1. Romario_Argo
      Romario_Argo 18 January 2022 10: 10
      -5
      why is everyone silent and not indignant (?)
      For the past 15 years, everyone has been trolling our BODs, Cruisers and destroyers - like:
      - rockets are bulky
      - small ammunition
      And what do we see penguins went our way (!)
      only here is the problem The United States does not have hypersonic in anti-ship missiles, even the United States does not have supersonic in anti-ship missiles MB
      и USA does not have ZGRLS with issuance target designation on range 950 km as from NPP Typhoon
      Kaluga (monolith, mineral, monument)
      https://typhoon-jsc.ru/index.php/production-and-services/special-purpose/mineral-me
      link there export performance characteristics in 750 km
      1. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A 18 January 2022 14: 10
        +6
        Quote: Romario_Argo
        why is everyone silent and not indignant (?)
        For the past 15 years, everyone has been trolling our BODs, Cruisers and destroyers - like:
        - rockets are bulky
        - small ammunition
        And what do we see penguins went our way (!)
        only here is the problem The United States does not have hypersonic in anti-ship missiles, even the United States does not have supersonic in anti-ship missiles MB
        и USA does not have ZGRLS with issuance target designation on range 950 km as from NPP Typhoon
        Kaluga (monolith, mineral, monument)
        https://typhoon-jsc.ru/index.php/production-and-services/special-purpose/mineral-me
        link there export performance characteristics in 750 km


        ZGRLS - they do not know how to give target designation.
        Do not fantasize.

        Even the Sunflower cannot detect targets the size of an old Chinese destroyer beyond 220 km.
        It was these values ​​that were in joint tests with the Chinese.
        After which they ended up buying Sunflower.

        The numbers in 950 km of detecting a sea target are not even a fantasy - this is a deception and betrayal in the form of a deception.
        750km is work in RTR mode ...
        Also on this point there can be no target designation.

        Don't think of something that isn't there...
        1. Romario_Argo
          Romario_Argo 18 January 2022 18: 28
          -4
          ZGRLS - they do not know how to give target designation.
          Do not fantasize.

          ZGRLS stand on
          MRK pr.22800 - Mineral
          corvette pr.20385 - Monument
          frigate project 22350 - Monolith
          SKR pr.11540 - Positive
          MRK pr.21631 - Positive
          Missile boats pr.1241 - Monolith
          etc.
          and perfectly give out target designation for anti-ship missiles at a distance of up to 950 km.
          see the link above to NNP Typhoon, Kaluga, there are export performance characteristics of 750 km.
      2. bayard
        bayard 18 January 2022 18: 15
        +4
        Quote: Romario_Argo
        USA no ZGRLS with the issuance of target designation at a distance of 950 km as from NPP Typhoon
        Kaluga (monolith, mineral, monument)

        These are radio engineering stations, not radar reconnaissance stations - passive location. Such a station can give target designation only by bearing, or by a very approximate triangulation method, but this requires two spaced ships.
        And such a system works only if the enemy does not observe complete radio silence. And in a real combat situation, it’s hard to hope for such a thing, how the US Navy knows how to maintain radio silence, at least the operation shows when their AUG with two ABs and their escort, leaving Japan completely unnoticed by our electronic intelligence, passed east of the Kuril ridge, and worked out a strike on our bases in Kamchatka. In 1983
        If the target is not emitting a signature, it is not visible in passive mode.
        In the event of a real war, no one will shine himself.
        And even after finding the direction of an enemy ship / ships, additional reconnaissance is necessary for accurate target designation - by aviation, UAVs, satellite constellations. And they have much more of this than we do.
        1. Romario_Argo
          Romario_Argo 18 January 2022 18: 30
          -6
          see the link above to NPP Typhoon, Kaluga, there are export performance characteristics in 750 km
          1. bayard
            bayard 18 January 2022 19: 19
            +5
            In general, in the past I am a radar specialist and I distinguish electronic intelligence from active radar. This is definitely not ZGRLS. Look at the photo of "Sunflower" and understand WHAT it is. ZGRLS is the decameter range. The wavelength is tens of meters.
            1. Romario_Argo
              Romario_Argo 21 January 2022 09: 53
              0
              the question then is why ZGRLS like Monolith, Monument, Mineral, Positive are put on our ships (???)
              ZGRLS stand on
              MRK pr.22800 - Mineral
              corvette pr.20385 - Monument
              frigate project 22350 - Monolith
              SKR pr.11540 - Positive
              MRK pr.21631 - Positive
              Missile boats pr.1241 - Monolith
              1. bayard
                bayard 21 January 2022 10: 24
                -1
                These are passive location and RTR stations. And their value is no less than active means of location. Warships glow with all their radiating means (radar, general navigation equipment, communications equipment. Moreover, this signature is very characteristic and allows you to determine the type of ship, and sometimes the ship’s own name, the captain’s last name and the navigator’s patronymic.
                And bearing.
                And in principle, in combat conditions, the bearing to the enemy ship can become a conditionally sufficient target designation tool. Heavy anti-ship missiles of the USSR / RF have a range of 500 - 700 km. , and the RCC will be able to carry out its own additional reconnaissance already in flight, both in passive and in active mode.
                Such (the above passive reconnaissance radars) are also used as part of the RF DBK.
                And yes - they are conditionally over-the-horizon, because the electromagnetic wave is reflected from the ionosphere, according to the laws of refraction (especially in the range of "long meters") they fall into the super-refraction mode (for the first time in practice it was detected on the P-70 radar in certain weather conditions (temperature, pressure, humidity) - the coastline of the southern coast of the Caspian Sea was drawn on VIKO) . That P-70 was part of a separate radar company in the North-East Bank, Azerbaijan SSR. But this regime is unstable and very dependent on the state of the atmosphere.
                So these passive radars are very useful and in demand on our ships. And yes - under certain conditions they can give target designation of anti-ship missiles.
                1. Romario_Argo
                  Romario_Argo 21 January 2022 10: 26
                  0
                  The shipborne radar complex "Mineral-ME" is designed to survey the surface space; long-range (over-the-horizon) detection and tracking of surface targets; automated reception and processing of information on the surface situation from carriers equipped with compatible systems; receiving and processing information from external sources (command automated control systems, observation posts); control of joint actions of carriers equipped with compatible systems; generation and output of target designation data on surface targets to missile weapon control systems of ship and coastal missile systems, ship systems of artillery torpedo weapons.

                  The Mineral-ME complex provides a solution to the following tasks:

                  radar surveillance of the surface situation in the specified view areas using own means of active and passive radar;
                  detection and tracking of surface targets;
                  determination of coordinates (bearing, range) and movement parameters of tracked targets;
                  automated reception, processing and display of information on the surface situation coming from compatible systems located on ground vehicles or ships of the tactical group, from external sources (command control systems, remote observation posts located on ships, helicopters and other aircraft), using external radio communication equipment;
                  reception, processing and display of information on the surface situation, coming from naval sources of information: combat information control systems, radar stations, navigation stations, hydroacoustic systems;
                  control of joint combat operations of the ships of the tactical group;
                  state identification of tracked surface targets using a "friend or foe" radar identification system using built-in antennas;
                  issuance of target designation for surface targets to missile weapon control systems of ship and coastal missile systems, ship systems of artillery and torpedo weapons;
                  automated control of operating modes depending on the tactical situation;
                  automated performance monitoring and troubleshooting;
                  documenting information on the targets being followed, solutions developed, the state of the interfaced systems;
                  training of personnel when working in a simulated environment.

                  The composition of the complex "Mineral-ME" includes radio equipment:

                  active radar station (ARLS) "Mineral-ME1";
                  passive radar station (PRLS) "Mineral-ME2"
                  ;
                  station for the mutual exchange of information, mutual orientation and control of joint military operations "Mineral-ME3".

                  Key Features:

                  detection range of ARS of a surface target of the destroyer type (depending on radar observability) up to 500 km
                  The maximum detection range of PRLS (depending on the frequency range and power of emitting radar stations for surface targets) is up to 750 km.
                  https://typhoon-jsc.ru/index.php/production-and-services/special-purpose/mineral-me
                  ZGRLS use surface waves, the atmosphere has nothing to do with it
                  links to the official website of the manufacturer must be opened and read
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 21 January 2022 14: 49
                    0
                    Quote: Romario_Argo
                    ZGRLS use surface waves

                    What do you know about these waves, and is this not a saddle of the over-refraction effect? A unique mode , but it is necessary to adjust the operating frequency to the weather and atmospheric conditions .
                    There were no such people in my service yet, but they were working on it.
                    I read about "Mineral", but there is not enough information about it for me - operating frequencies, antenna design, etc., I still served in the RTV air defense.
                    Quote: Romario_Argo
                    detection range of ARS of a surface target of the destroyer type (depending on radar observability) up to 500 km

                    A very dubious characteristic for an active radar (if the abbreviation ARLS means just that). Judging by the linear dimensions of the canvas and the estimated total pulse power. Especially on ships at such a distance.
                    1. Romario_Argo
                      Romario_Argo 21 January 2022 18: 39
                      -1
                      go to the official website of the manufacturer NPP Typhoon. why are you squirming like an ignorant professor (?) (!)
                      everyone in Rosoboronexport is already laughing at you (!)
  4. yuriy55
    yuriy55 18 January 2022 07: 25
    +2
    One thing is clear: the USA and China, in addition to sketches, projects, models and programs, CAN produce something tangible, visible, having a displacement and weight. Russia, (so far) being on a pedestal, demonstrates incomprehensible sluggishness and clumsiness. And it is quite clear that no one will reckon with her weakness. It will not give time for rearmament and buildup ...
    1. alexey sidykin
      alexey sidykin 18 January 2022 12: 59
      -3
      Quote: yuriy55
      One thing is clear: the USA and China, in addition to sketches, projects, models and programs, CAN produce something tangible, visible, having a displacement and weight. Russia, (so far) being on a pedestal, demonstrates incomprehensible sluggishness and clumsiness. And it is quite clear that no one will reckon with her weakness. It will not give time for rearmament and buildup ...

      We see how the Americans gave out about Zemwalt in the article it is written ...
  5. Turist1996
    Turist1996 18 January 2022 07: 30
    +3
    They write about the ability to swim in ice. With such a bulb under the GAS, something is very doubtful.
    1. bayard
      bayard 18 January 2022 18: 17
      +1
      Quote: Turist1996
      With such a bulb under GAS, something is very doubtful

      No, they probably just provided for heating.
  6. Volder
    Volder 18 January 2022 09: 27
    -6
    Quote: Ilya Legat
    so far, US naval ambitions have not run counter to their financial capabilities.
    Of course, they don't have financial resources. The USA is a bankrupt country. The country cannot function without increasing the public debt limit. An absolutely inefficient economy, a negative trade balance (foreign trade balance), a gigantic defense budget and endless projects that are always money, but not brought to mind (Zamvolt, F-35, new aircraft carrier, railgun ...).
  7. Kalmar
    Kalmar 18 January 2022 11: 44
    +3
    I see that Zamvolt taught the Americans something: now they are more careful stuffing all sorts of innovations into their projects. Well, some kind of "plan B" is being considered: air defense systems instead of lasers at the first stage. There is even a possibility that a real ship will turn out, and not something innovative.
  8. Orsis338
    Orsis338 18 January 2022 12: 12
    +1
    It seems that the author simply described the picture, without doing much. For example, in the fact that there are 32 cells, but there is obviously another Mk.41 installation in the middle of the hull, where the number of cells will be even greater. And then what is the point of building a new destroyer with such a number, where there are significantly fewer cells, which the Americans themselves constantly remind that their strike capabilities are decreasing due to the decommissioning of Ticonderoga, and then bam. Yes, and their new frigate also has 32 cells
    1. bayard
      bayard 18 January 2022 18: 30
      +4
      The author has not yet learned how to count - the picture clearly shows 8 UKKS for 8 cells each, that is, 64 cells and only on the tank. About the same in the middle part. Another thing is that under the GZUR the cells will be larger, one of these will take places like 4 Mk-41 cells. But in the picture it is the classic cells for "Tomahawks" and missiles.
      Quote: Orsis338
      and their new frigate also has 32 cells

      The new frigate has 32 cells for both missiles and strike weapons. This is not enough - our project 22350.1 has 32 cells in 4 UKKS (PLUR, RCC, KRBD) + 32 Reduta cells (32 9M96 missiles, or 128 9M100 missiles). And this is with VI 5400 t.
      1. Orsis338
        Orsis338 18 January 2022 19: 14
        0
        So their purposes of application are completely different, the American one is designed to escort convoys and serve in secondary theaters, while ours is the main combat unit
  9. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 18 January 2022 13: 13
    0
    So far, this is all pure theory. Frigates are being built, but what they will be "on the move" and even more so in war, is still a big question. Ford-class aircraft carriers are still a very dubious acquisition. They still have more problems than advantages over the Nimitz. The destroyer is only "on paper" so far. In general, except for good intentions, so far nothing.
  10. zxc15682
    zxc15682 18 January 2022 13: 19
    0
    I don't understand why the ship needs art. Already in the 60s, they were no longer installed on cruisers. You can save a lot of space and tons
  11. deddem
    deddem 18 January 2022 15: 51
    -1
    Oops! Is it that the "iron" nose turned out to be not as good as it was sold to everyone?
    1. smaug78
      smaug78 18 January 2022 19: 50
      +1
      how he got screwed over
      so who got it?
      1. deddem
        deddem 20 January 2022 16: 33
        0
        Offhand, on the yacht "A" and "Captain Sokolov", and so at the naval salon there were quite enough models with a reverse bow a la Zumwalt and other Ulsteins.
  12. Brancodd
    Brancodd 18 January 2022 23: 11
    0
    Quote: bulvas
    I watched the movie "Don't Look Up", 21st year

    Yes, the movie is interesting. Three-star general and free nuts...
  13. the same doctor
    the same doctor 20 January 2022 18: 39
    0
    A billion dollar hull with a displacement of 13000 tons! Is it planned tenfold inflation until 2028 or 80% theft?
    Is it time for us to build shipyards in Murmansk and export ship hulls?
  14. Glagol1
    Glagol1 April 15 2022 15: 51
    0
    We need to build 22350 and possibly 22350M in the maximum possible series. These ships, frigates and super frigates will be able to withstand the striped ones. Especially if not very far from their native shores. In alliance with the SU-34M and SU-57. Yes, naval aviation with missiles for 200-300 km launch.