Military Review

Meet Zumwalt! The invisible destroyer of the US Navy will be released into the sea next spring

107
Meet Zumwalt! The invisible destroyer of the US Navy will be released into the sea next spring



The silhouette of the ship is clearly visible from Front Street in the center of the town of Bath. For more than a hundred years of building ships at the Bath Iron Works shipyard, nothing of the kind has been seen here - the angular, slightly clumsy giant captivates with its brutality and grace at the same time

The futuristic form of Zumwalt DDG 1000 became recognizable after more than a decade of graphic presentations and artistic drawings, the destroyer models were the main exhibit at maritime exhibitions for several years. And now the ship is coming out entirely, all the structural units are assembled and launched. People walk on its decks of the ship, it rises and falls with the tide and the whole project turns into a real thing. The ship will be released for the first time in the sea next spring

Zumwalt is a model stealth ship, angular shapes give it a ship filled with new features. First of all, when you are on deck, its size is impressive - at the moment it is the largest ship ever named “destroyer”. It should be quite spacious inside.

“You know, the weight of the ship is almost 16 000 tons, length 610 feet, width about 81 feet, can you imagine how it should be roomy,” said the future commander of the ship Zumwalt captain James Kirk. “But when you climb it, you realize that it is equipped with everything necessary for work and warfare.”


Defense Minister Chuck Hagel (left) and future Zumwalt captain James Kirk

Under the decks there is a large and wide passage of the main deck, it is designed for quick and easy movement of stocks and ammunition to the storage rooms below. In front of the station, there is equipment for automatic loading of ammunition and slug stores for two naval 155-mm naval guns - the largest cannons mounted on a naval vessel since the Second World War.

The guns are placed along the centerline, on other rocket ships, installations of vertical launch are placed at this place. On the Zumwalt missile compartments are located on the side of the guns, forming a line of the hull sides in the bow and stern.

To the middle part of the ship, the pointed nose section smoothly expands, here the full-width hull is crammed with power equipment. The Zumwalt, an electric ship with an installed power of 78,5 megawatts, is an unheard of parameter for a destroyer. Power units are located throughout the ship, reminding everyone of the different nature of its integrated energy system, capable of transmitting energy from the power plant to sensors and weapons.

The bridge is located low on the superstructure at the level of O2 and will be equipped with at least three watch officers. This summer, shipbuilders installed special windows here that the water can withstand, since the narrow nose cuts the waves rather than slides along them.

DDG 1000: in pictures

Behind the bridge is the multitask center of the ship, but for now the scaffolding completely surrounds it on two levels. More team members will be assigned to it than anywhere else; some will work in the intermediate zone at the O3 level.

As expected, the engine rooms are large, but surprisingly quite tightly packed with equipment. The power plant has two large main turbine generators MT-30, two auxiliary turbogenerators MT-5 and two modern asynchronous electric motors for generating all electric power.

At the stern, a large compartment for boats is located under the flight deck, it is able to receive two 11-meter high-speed inflatable boats on a ramp, the third one “parks” from above. The doors in the flat section of the stern open, the ramp extends, from which the boats can descend and to which they can return at the ship’s speed to 13 nodes.

Around Zumwalt, there are systems that open or retract, rise or fall, many of which are classified or have a “for limited use” stamp. The stern will have a towed antenna array and a towed torpedo control system. Side doors for the transfer of goods in the course of the vessel are opened to extend the cargo handling mechanism, and special radars are raised on telescopic masts.

With the exception of the flight deck, sailors will rarely appear on the upper deck while the ship is in motion. When the ship is at sea, the guard rail of the front deck is removed. Loading and mooring posts are hidden in the hull behind large hatches.

But still, in all this technologically perfect world, one concession was made to traditions and conventions. In front of the deck superstructure there is a small mast for carrying the national banner; after the small conical superstructure with sensors was removed, its change became more convenient.

While Zumwalt is definitely different from other destroyers, Captain Kirk insists that he can easily mix with the rest. fleet.

“Although differing in many different aspects, this multi-purpose ship is capable of performing some of the tasks that cruisers and destroyers of the Arleigh Burke class carry out,” he said.

“What makes it unique is the energy it produces; viability is inherent in many of its systems, the same can be said about the instrument. This is a unique feature of the ship. ”

However, guns that were not intended for shooting at moving targets can give three ships of the Zumwalt class completely new possibilities.

“When you have ammunition in hundreds of shells, your ability to influence what is happening is much higher,” he explained. - If you have a lot of Tomahawk and 600 long-range missiles for ground attack, then you have a significant advantage. I guess this is a unique feature. ”

Yet in one of the spheres this ship will not be so powerful. This provision of air defense, cover other ships in a wide area.

“These options are limited,” Kirk admitted. - This is not the same air defense as the cruiser. But it is quite effective. All signs indicate that its air defense capabilities are quite worthy, but in the case of this ship these ranges are smaller and all this in connection with the removal of the airborne observation radar. You just do not have the capabilities that have a destroyer or cruiser with the radar Aegis SPY-1 on board. "

The flight deck of the ship is significantly larger than that of the Burke class destroyers.

"The flight deck is almost twice the deck size on the Burke destroyer," Kirk noted. - This, given the transport of special forces, is very important. You take it all together. If I needed to solve a military task, then there are definitely tasks that this ship can perform, and other ships are not quite suitable for this. ”

One serious question arises when the ship goes to sea. How does its unusual inverted hull, which narrows above the waterline, behave in the open sea?

“This hull shape gives different stability characteristics for different maneuvers,” said Kirk. I conclude from what I see, we need technical information and guidance in order to go at full speed in order to maneuver properly based on weather conditions, for example. "

Zumwalt class ships will have their maneuverability limitations just like any other ship. “If there is a certain impact of the waves at certain speeds, you can have a dynamic stability impaired,” he explained. “Then you have to be sure that you are turning at the right speed in order to limit the risks to the ship’s stability.” I am quite satisfied with what we have, we know how to steer the ship. Whatever sea we go to. ”

Changes in the project

In the Command of Naval Systems in the Navy in Washington, the program manager, DDG 1000, Captain James Downey oversees the development team that solves all the technical problems associated with the ship. He noted several key changes to the design or concept.

“In 2010, we removed the airborne surveillance radar, the S-band sensor in a two-way radar system, leaving the SPY-3 X-band radar. Raytheon upgraded it to improve its surveillance capabilities. The system installed for testing at the Flight Center on Wallops Island will be tested next year on the trial vessel Paul F. Foster, which has already been carried out a series of SPY-3 tests, said Downey. “These previous tests went very well.”

A number of other changes allowed the designers to remove about 50 tons from the deckhouse. This made it possible to go from composite to steel construction on the third ship of this class Lyndon B. Johnson. The second ship was named Michael Monsoor.

Part of the above-mentioned mass was saved due to the change in the auxiliary weapon system of the ship used for short-range defense. Initially, the 57-mm gun Mark 110 was determined for this ship, the same guns are used as the main weapon on coastal warships and coast guard boats.

As a contender for the DDG 1000, Downey also considers the Mark 30 46-mm cannon mounted on San Antonio-class amphibious assault ships. “The smaller gun weighs half as much, is half the cost and has a greater offensive potential compared to the 57 mm. I asked my team to go back and look at the issue again with this gun. ”

Studies have shown that the capabilities of the 57-mm guns were overestimated, whereas the 30-mm guns were underestimated. In these studies, a non-compliant system was identified and a system corresponding to them. ”

As a result, the bonus was the reduction in weight on 24 tons in the case of installing 30-mm guns.

The size of the crew continues to be discussed. The ship is equipped with 186 regiments or berths, the official crew is 130 people, another 28 people are assigned to aviation group. But in the framework of the program, the organization of crew accommodation with 17 additional members has already been determined, which amounts to 147 crew members, and 175 people with an aviation group, respectively.

Additional crew members, according to Downey, could join the ranks of mechanics, gunners or communication and information component. The decision must be made in a timely manner so that the strength can be included in the budget request for the 2016 year.

The rest of the places were given to the command group and special operations group. Space is provided for the squadron commander and a small staff of six officers. Another feature of the ship is that it can take a group of special operations from 14 people and their equipment.

Destroyers Zumwalt also had to command an officer with the rank of captain of the third rank as the rest destroyers. Currently, the staffing has changed and the ships Zumwalt will be commanded by the captain in a higher rank - in the same way as the commanders of cruisers.

Ships, as explained by Downey, are quite expensive with complex capabilities. This requires a very high level of training for officers and men, and therefore for a general command an officer with a higher rank is required.

The DDG 1000 destroyer program is phenomenally expensive, by the time all three ships are delivered to the fleet, approximately 20 billion dollars will be spent on them for more than 22 years, for research and development, design and construction. It was originally planned to build 28 ships, then seven, then two, and finally three, all from the same expenditure item. The US Navy claims the average cost of the Zumwalt class 3,3 billion-dollar destroyer, but numerous critics have warned that this figure could exceed 5 billion dollars apiece.

At least for today, these forecasts are not justified. So far, the cost of one Zumwalt is "approximately 3,4 billion dollars."

In the spring, the Zumwalt destroyer is expected to enter the sea, where its technical and system tests will begin, which will last the whole summer. The fleet hopes to get the ship before the end of 2015.

And even in this case, the ship will not be fully ready. There will be a revision of combat systems and computing tools. But the time will come when the big ship will head across Front Street to the Kennebec River, and the world will see a completely different type of warship.






Based on materials from www.defensenews.com
107 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. avt
    avt 10 October 2014 09: 39
    +19
    “However, guns that are not designed to fire at moving targets could give the three Zumwalt-class ships completely new capabilities.” ------ wassat However, maybe they will still try to load from the muzzle, well, you look, and some other opportunities will appear. ,, The program for the destroyer DDG 1000 is phenomenally expensive, by the time all three ships are delivered to the fleet, they will be spent on them for more than 20 years approximately $ 22 billion in research and development, design and construction. It was originally planned to build 28 ships, then seven, then two, and finally three, all from the same cost item. The US Navy claims an average cost of a Zumwalt-class destroyer of $ 3,3 billion, but numerous critics warn that this figure could exceed $ 5 billion apiece. "----- well, naturally golden weights -, saw Shura, saw. ...
    1. reality
      reality 10 October 2014 10: 46
      +17
      They really do not care how many billions of soap bubbles this thing costs, they just pretend that people do not get angry. The US state does not perceive dollars at all as ordinary people. Do not forget that we are paying for this destroyer.
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 10 October 2014 11: 38
      +9
      Quote: avt
      warn that this figure could exceed 5 billion dollars apiece. "----- well, naturally golden weights - ,, saw Shura, saw."

      Development of new technologies, the fact that the American destroyer Zumwalt is a new generation ship, no one will argue, some technologies will confirm their effectiveness and some will not, and this is normal, the Admiral Gorshkov is also not very cheap.
      1. Evgeny_Lev
        Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 12: 08
        +10
        Let's fantasize.

        Development of new technologies in what, maybe?

        1. The shape and contours of the hull - it is doubtful, if you remember how many "stealths" in aviation there were, then fundamentally something new can be expected, vryatli. The contours with the sides heaped inward and the opposite angle are still not the first fresh solution, a step back in evolution.
        2. Weapons - a set of weapons is nothing from submarines, except that they are no different in tools. But if you take into account the shape of the hull, it will be extremely interesting to see how Zumwalt will shoot when the sea swells? Burrowing even into a relatively weak wave, he will risk flooding the launch cells. Remain guns?
        3. Communication, management and other muinya -? I think a breakthrough reality, the Americans will quickly install their defense industry on mass products.
        4. Powerful detection systems? It will be fun for the enemy on his radar to see a fishing boat that radiates like an aircraft carrier))
        1. calocha
          calocha 10 October 2014 12: 58
          +1
          It is interesting to see how ... he will sink, probably he will go to the bottom with a stone ..
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 10 October 2014 21: 58
            +11
            Quote: calocha
            It is interesting to see how ... he will sink, probably he will go to the bottom with a stone ..
            Itself probably will not work, you need help!
            But I'm talking about something else. The author translated as he could. We’ll clarify a bit.
            1.Zumwald is a model of the invisible ship... Nonsense! And in the optical range too? Therefore, it is a "stealthy" ship in the cm r / l range. And from space? Along the white wake trail, because it has a "chopped" stern (straight transom board), it will then be like all Americans - a breaker astern, a wake, which will lengthen the target by 500-600m for our torpedoes with a wake location.
            2.On the ship cellars of the Kyrgyz Republic along the sides! At 949 Ave too. But on the submarine, they are constructive protection (a non-contact TO explosion), for the NK, they are a rocket in a powder magazine! This "miracle of shipbuilding" will not stand more than one anti-ship missile!
            3. A lot of electricity - where is the railgun? where is the energy weapon? Apparently still to come. Is it dangerous! Extremely dangerous for NK and AB, but not for submarines!
            4. Bridge. Running post. at a normal level - 2,0 m from the deck. But GKP-TsKP inside the ship, structurally protected, as it should be. And all the operators gather there, as on the GKP submarine. This is where our anti-ship missile system with a semi-armor-piercing, penetrating warhead must break through!
            5. Retractable devices, even radar retractable! And if there is a breakdown, or the hydraulics will click! Detection means - BUGAS with an extended g / a antenna, BOCA DU! - against torpedoes. That was all already.
            6. Touched "a mast in the bow for carrying the national banner!"- Well, it was necessary to call it a jack-stock together with a jack !!! (Striped cloth with a rattlesnake and the motto: "Don't touch me!")
            7. 155mm guns, the form of the stem on site discussed, there is no point in repeating.
            8. On the picture nasal bulb - probably this is a G / A mine detection station. And they are usually needed in shallow water (relative).
            9. There is no Aegis, the Far East Military District radar is something new! Probably, the missile defense will be carried out by a railgun or an energy miracle weapon!
            And the whole article construction says that these are ships not of the open sea, but of the littoral zone, where such a body will easily cut short coastal waves. But the long, ocean waves cause the cap ... certain doubts and a desire to follow the recommendations, so as not to play an overkill, or not to lie aboard.
            In any case, interesting article, although not translated by a professional. Personally, I would gladly read her extrapolation to the modern stage and perspective in the arrangement of Oleg Kaptsov.
            IMHO.
            1. Ptah
              Ptah 11 October 2014 00: 51
              +3
              Greetings, Alexander!
              My applause for the brief but informative review.
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              these are ships not of the open sea, but of the littoral zone

              Who understands, with this phrase it was possible to start and end an article that has appeared repeatedly even here, only in different interpretations and with varying degrees of ASSUMPTIONS about both its (future) "filling" and driving performance.
              Hence and -
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              the form of the stem on the site was discussed, it makes no sense to repeat.
              .
              Favorite "corn" of scoffers ... laughing Chisel, iron, etc ...
              Even the "salty mareman" cannot PREDICT how "Zuma" will behave not in a stand pool or a computer. calculations, but on a specific "fresh" wave. How will it behave at turning radii or mooring at sea (with a "reverse" camber angle) ...

              Threat. I would love to stand on a deck or bridge ... what crying
    3. vjhbc
      vjhbc 10 October 2014 14: 28
      +5
      I want to tell all the critics of this ship that you know about it except that the Americans let you know secondly about the price; it practically doesn’t matter for the United States because they don’t earn dollars and print even if, from the point of view of us, it’s so dear to us all it needs to be wrung out a lot and could be done cheaper, and thirdly, no matter how offensive we are, the USA is a world leader in marine technology and this is a fact that doesn’t apply to patriots
      Quote: avt
      “However, guns that are not designed to fire at moving targets could give the three Zumwalt-class ships completely new capabilities.” ------ wassat However, maybe they will still try to load from the muzzle, well, you look, and some other opportunities will appear. ,, The program for the destroyer DDG 1000 is phenomenally expensive, by the time all three ships are delivered to the fleet, they will be spent on them for more than 20 years approximately $ 22 billion in research and development, design and construction. It was originally planned to build 28 ships, then seven, then two, and finally three, all from the same cost item. The US Navy claims an average cost of a Zumwalt-class destroyer of $ 3,3 billion, but numerous critics warn that this figure could exceed $ 5 billion apiece. "----- well, naturally golden weights -, saw Shura, saw. ...
      1. Dormidont2
        Dormidont2 10 October 2014 15: 06
        +2
        I agree, we must somehow respond to the amers, namely, detection systems, it is time for the Russian Federation to launch reconnaissance UAVs (such as the x-37 in the United States), to detect these invisible things, it’s desirable that they also give the coordinates of the raptors, for air defense
      2. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 10 October 2014 18: 30
        +4
        Quote: vjhbc
        I want to tell all critics of this ship that you know about it except that the Americans let you know

        And what they hide is that all the capabilities of the ship are presented by and large.
        The article was in 2013 at this forum http://topwar.ru/34954-noveyshiy-esminec-vms-ssha-upravlyaetsya-linux.html
        1. vjhbc
          vjhbc 11 October 2014 03: 44
          0
          you cut me off, I completely forgot that Americans are the most honest people GENTLEMEN - forgive me wretched
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          And what they hide is that all the capabilities of the ship are presented by and large.
          The article was in 2013 at this forum http://topwar.ru/34954-noveyshiy-esminec-vms-ssha-upravlyaetsya-linux.html
    4. Civil
      Civil 10 October 2014 15: 45
      +4
      Come on, tell us in the comments that the battleship Potemkin is up to perfection in comparison with the Zumwalt, that it is all plastic, and the radar from any of our RTOs sees right through.
      This is a serious ship! It is not necessary to engage in hatred and dust themselves in the eyes. We need to think about the answer and the state in our shipbuilding.
      1. Dreamscripter
        Dreamscripter 10 October 2014 20: 00
        +4
        The ship is undoubtedly powerful and interesting. Judging by the article, it is best to deal with such with the help of aviation - you need to study the issue.
        In addition, it is worthwhile to find out how noisy he moves - and, accordingly, whether our submarines can effectively resist him.
      2. Per se.
        Per se. 10 October 2014 23: 12
        +6
        Quote: Civil
        This is a serious ship! It is not necessary to engage in hat-making and to dust yourself in your own eyes.
        Of course, it is not necessary to engage in shapkozakidatelstvo, especially if you remember the difficult state of our industry and shipbuilding in particular. The "Zumwalt" is interesting in that this ship is most likely intended more for preemptive land attacks with cruise missiles than for fighting at sea. And, here, the statements of Udav KAA about the littoral zone are quite appropriate and logical. It's hard to say how much the Yankees succeeded in it, but looking at their attempts, I recall the project of the "water-armored destroyer" Drzewiecki, when they tried to create a hybrid of "invisibility", "armor" and "speed", as a result they lost both the qualities of the destroyer and the submarine , and the "battleship" did not work.
  2. Imperialkolorad
    Imperialkolorad 10 October 2014 09: 44
    +2
    What a freak.
    1. Spitfire
      Spitfire 10 October 2014 09: 47
      +10
      Something like river battleships of southerners during the American Civil War.
      1. AVTIHON
        AVTIHON 10 October 2014 12: 31
        +3
        In the film, the League of Outstanding Gentlemen on such a captain Nemo sailed.
        1. Patriot.ru.
          Patriot.ru. 10 October 2014 18: 36
          +2
          They have a nostalgia for civil war, which I wish them in every way. And this iron reminds me of the invisible F-117.
  3. Ptaha
    Ptaha 10 October 2014 09: 48
    +7
    ... and future commander of the ship Zumwalt captain James Kirk

    Ha ha! Why isn't the ship an Enterprise?
    1. Bronis
      Bronis 10 October 2014 10: 05
      +11
      GOOD! ))) the mustache will be .... Klingons tremble)))
      1. i80186
        i80186 10 October 2014 14: 57
        +3
        Quote: Ptaha
        Ha ha! Why isn't the ship an Enterprise?

        Because it has not yet been completely cut.

        USS Enterprise (CVN-65)
      2. Raphael_83
        Raphael_83 10 October 2014 18: 39
        +1
        Defense Minister Chuck Hagel (left) and future Zumwalt captain James Kirk

        The facial expressions of the characters at this moment are like when Bones uttered his catchphrase: "He's dead, Jim". fellow
  4. Crang
    Crang 10 October 2014 09: 52
    0
    Powerful battleship. We also need these.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 10: 31
      +3
      no thanks. Eat it yourself.
      1. Crang
        Crang 10 October 2014 11: 17
        +1
        I eat with pleasure. And you fight on hydrographic ships and naval armed tugboats.
        1. demon184
          demon184 10 October 2014 11: 48
          -2
          1 tugboat equipped with missile launchers club m is much more practical cheap and inconspicuous than this turntable with pseudo stealth technologies that have proven themselves in Yugoslavia
        2. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 11: 52
          +1
          these two types of ships, the only thing you know?


          Can you tell why Zumwalt is better than submarine?
          1. Crang
            Crang 10 October 2014 13: 21
            +5
            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            Can you tell why Zumwalt is better than submarine?

            Following your crazy logic, you might think that surface ships are no longer needed at all. "Zumvalt" is better than a submarine exactly the same, the better a submarine is any surface combat ship:
            1. The presence of artillery, with which it is very convenient and most importantly cheap to strike at coastal targets.
            2. The presence of a perfect air defense system with appropriate search equipment, which allows you to fight with the aircraft of the enemy.
            3. The presence of its own airborne aircraft and take-off area.
            4. The presence of the docking chamber and the ability to receive / land sabotage units, marine units and equipment.

            In general, "Zumvalt" is a typical versatile and at the same time an ultramodern battleship. Maybe he carries normal armor. The classification "destroyer" is clearly taken for the sake of tradition. In terms of size and displacement, this battleship is quite comparable to our RRC pr.1164 "Atlant".
            1. Evgeny_Lev
              Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 13: 35
              +4
              Listen to my "crazy" logic again and you will understand that it is not like that.

              I do not speak for all ships, I speak for Zumwalt, whose PRICE is equal to the price of a nuclear submarine, or even more. ONLY for this reason I am comparing them. I do not compare the fundamental need for one and the other.

              1. Artillery of this caliber is nothing.
              2. This item nullifies all stealth. Constructive execution, with a side-mounted TPK in the bow, raises suspicions about the impossibility of firing from them under the usual wave of the open sea. The iron will stupidly dig its nose into the wave and it can get into the TPK mine.
              3. The same thing, does he have something there, F-22 | 35? no? then this is the same unmasking factor.
              4. You will not argue that the submarine will cope with these MUCH better?

              About the ARMOR and TYPICAL, sorry I will not even discuss. A ship built for $ 5 - Apriori does not have the right, at least in something, to be typical.
              1. Crang
                Crang 10 October 2014 14: 10
                +3
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                I don’t speak for all the ships, I speak for Zumwalt, whose PRICE is equal to the price of a nuclear submarine,

                The price of any large ship is equal to the price of a nuclear submarine. What do you think our RRC pr.1164 and pr.1144 cheaper or what?
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                1. Artillery of this caliber is nothing.

                How is it "nothing"? very much even WHAT. After all, back in the 70s, ours were developing a project for a missile and artillery battleship with armor protected by DZ and 203mm Pion caliber guns. So this one - 155mm shells weigh more than 50kg, which means their effectiveness will be beyond praise. As for the missile launchers launched through the barrels of 155mm guns, even the 127mm missile launchers of the previous US destroyers flew 120 km (like our Moskit and Malachite anti-ship missiles, which are equipped with the vast majority of Russian attack ships).
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                3. The same thing, does he have something there, F-22 | 35? no? then this is the same unmasking factor.

                What is the unmasking factor? What nonsense? All of his aircraft are in the hangar. It can be at least F-35, at least helicopters. This is a UNIVERSAL ship.
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                4. You will not argue that the submarine will cope with these MUCH better?

                I will argue. How will a submarine be able to land a marine unit with armored personnel carriers, amphibious tanks, SUVs and amphibians? How to stuff all this into a submarine at all? No - NK is just out of competition here.
              2. Assistant
                Assistant 10 October 2014 21: 55
                +1
                3. The same thing, does he have something there, F-22 | 35? no? then this is the same unmasking factor.


                While they say that there will be a helicopter. But in the discussion of one of the articles about the iron on VO, there was a debate about the purely theoretical possibility of using the penguin-B as a personal aircraft of the AWACS on it.
                Iron runway the use of a vertical penguin purely theoretically allows. The experience of guiding the missile launched by the destroyer with the Hawkeye AWACS has already been carried out. The penguin's radar-optical system is celebrated almost as the best thing in this aircraft. The communication and situational awareness system competes with it. Fuel, of course, eats as if not into itself in vertical modes, but if you take only a couple of short-range missiles from a weapon, then it can spin at subsonic speed, because he does not need supersonic in patrol mode. A weapon - any cruise missile that fits into a standard missile launcher cell, including self-defense missiles - will be carried by a destroyer for it. If anyone attacks, at the very least, the 35th will remember that he is, in fact, a fighter.
                While this, of course, is not feasible, but irons are still under construction.
            2. Bronis
              Bronis 10 October 2014 13: 42
              +9
              Arguing about the performance characteristics of the ship can be long and tense. "Most-most" he or not - it does not matter. What matters is whether it meets the needs of the US Navy at the moment or not ... And apparently, not very ... otherwise the number would be large ... Arleigh Burke will continue to build ... and it is clear why. Value for money is on their side ...
              But for Zumwalt, a different fate awaits: to demonstrate the technological capabilities of the United States and be a testing ground for the development of these technologies. Is it bad or not? This is just adequate to the current situation. And the role of Zumwalt in the development of the American Navy and not only the American will be shown by time ...
              1. Evgeny_Lev
                Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 13: 46
                +1
                Your words, yes "admirers" who would like this in the Russian Navy, in the ears.
            3. spech
              spech 10 October 2014 15: 10
              +2
              . The presence of a perfect air defense system with appropriate search equipment, which allows you to fight with enemy aircraft.

              Here from here in more detail.
  5. PROXOR
    PROXOR 10 October 2014 09: 54
    +2
    Quote: ImperialKolorad
    ship commander Zumwalt captain James Kirk

    Well, with such a commander, you need to call the ship Enterprise. By analogy with the Star Trek saga.
  6. romashki74
    romashki74 10 October 2014 09: 58
    +8
    Well, as we usually say, BIG SHIP- BIG TORPEDA! soldier
    1. roman_pilot
      roman_pilot 11 October 2014 02: 03
      0
      Took off the tongue
  7. Stiletto
    Stiletto 10 October 2014 10: 01
    +1
    At first glance at the photo it seemed to me that he swore laughing
  8. 3vs
    3vs 10 October 2014 10: 07
    +2
    We wish the ship good storms during the tests! bully
    1. Demetry
      Demetry 10 October 2014 11: 34
      +4
      Quote: 3vs
      We wish the ship good storms during the tests! bully

      So it seems like they conducted full-scale tests of a 30-meter model.



      And then the model is even with the model of Virginia. The truth is not on a single scale.

      1. samoletil18
        samoletil18 10 October 2014 17: 51
        +3
        If it enters the Black Sea incognito, you can fuck from the RCC. He is invisible - they shot at an empty place. And no one warned about entering the water area. fellow
    2. Ural45
      Ural45 11 October 2014 16: 44
      0
      And seven feet above the keel in total.
  9. Aydar
    Aydar 10 October 2014 10: 08
    +1
    intermediate class between destroyer and cruiser.
    1. Assistant
      Assistant 10 October 2014 22: 02
      +1
      intermediate class between destroyer and cruiser.


      This, of course, is my personal IMHO, but according to the capabilities and the intended areas of application, the iron is a real ship of the first rank. That is, according to the existing classification, it is at least a cruiser.
      It is difficult to imagine a situation in which he will only cover a ship of a higher rank. Well, only if they implement the stealth aircraft carrier project, then yes, it will go in the warrant.
  10. avt
    avt 10 October 2014 10: 15
    +1
    Quote: Aydar
    intermediate class between destroyer and cruiser.

    wassat This is actually how ??? Like ykrov, when they were sick of saying the word cruiser and they came up with their own - a circle!? laughing if you don’t want to call a destroyer or a cruiser, you call him how the amer himself seems to be called a destroyer. But you can, of course, turn on the smart one too - create your own, personal classification.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 10: 34
      +1
      Smart crossover wassat
    2. albert
      albert 10 October 2014 23: 04
      +1
      Perhaps the leader of the destroyers?
      1. Ural45
        Ural45 11 October 2014 16: 48
        0
        Maybe an iPhone sponsor?
  11. Alexander
    Alexander 10 October 2014 10: 15
    +6
    Smaller seas for you, torpedoes are thicker, in general - good luck)
  12. Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 10: 33
    +1
    Who will explain to me how it is better than a submarine, will get candy))
    1. Demetry
      Demetry 10 October 2014 11: 39
      +7
      Submarines have a very limited range of tasks.
      Surface ships have the same plus opportunities - landing, shelling the coast, displaying a flag, convoy of ships, blockade of the coast, etc. etc.

      Confetka .... yeah her .... kilo buckwheat is? )))
      1. Evgeny_Lev
        Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 11: 56
        +1
        What kind of landing can I land from Zumwalt? Something in TTX is not such a function.
        About shelling of the coast, convoy of ships, blockade of the coast - do you seriously think that he is able to do this better than the submarine ????

        There remains a demonstration of the flag for 22 billion dead presidents.
        Cool cho
        1. Demetry
          Demetry 10 October 2014 12: 27
          +3
          In general, I wrote about surface ships in a post and not about this particular one. In any case, he has 3 to 11 meter boats on board, that is, he can drop a person of 30 or more on the oil platform and on the ship and on the island.
          Quote: Evgeny_Lev
          About shelling of the coast, convoy of ships, blockade of the coast - do you seriously think that he is able to do this better than the submarine ????

          Each has its own niche. But, as a rule, 5-8 surface ships and only 1-2 submarines are usually included in the AUG guards. I think it’s stupid to say that the submarine will not save the guarded ship from an air attack, but the NK will do it. So the Guard and the convoy - definitely.
          Shelling the coast .... and what bothers you? Ships have always been intended for this function too. Powerful artillery on Soviet destroyers of project 956 was specifically intended for this. What bothers you?
          Blockade of the coast. And here are some questions. Will get up near Guinea Bissau and not a single ship without his knowledge will not go out.

          So the question I did not quite understand. Submarine is a good thing, but with a limited range of capabilities, unlike NK, this Zumwalt is.

          Well, the fact that he is expensive is their problem. If they consider it normal then let them build. But it seems like they decided that it was a little expensive and instead of the remaining 19 Zumwaltes they ordered the next version of O. Burkov.

          Everything is logical ...

          ----------

          PS The question is akin to: "what makes a hat better than a boot?" )))
          1. Evgeny_Lev
            Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 12: 38
            0
            So it is hardly noticeable, what would go in the AUG?

            Let me find out how Zumwalt will perform its air defense functions as part of the AUG, in the ocean, with excitement? You probably know where the TPKs are located at Zumwalt?

            Where is the powerful artillery on Zumwalt? I see weapons for high-precision ammunition, not so powerful. Do you think a salvo of "axes" is less effective?

            The whole question of comparison has become only for one reason, the reason for the price of the device. Ships at the submarine won in price and labor. If the ship costs as much as the submarine, and even with lesser capabilities, then it is obvious that you need to build a submarine.

            pysy. And do not cite the example of aircraft carriers and their price. The price of an aircraft carrier is the price of all ships in the AUG.
        2. Ural45
          Ural45 11 October 2014 16: 55
          0
          It is written - up to 14 people with underwear, etc.! Little what?
    2. Ptah
      Ptah 10 October 2014 12: 57
      +4
      Quote: Evgeny_Lev
      Who will explain to me how it is better than a submarine, will get candy))

      1. From the "Zuma" it is more convenient to shoot at the sugar plantations of the island of Borneo.
      2. Somali corsairs will have difficulty placing submarines on deck.
    3. Ural45
      Ural45 11 October 2014 16: 53
      0
      After the hit, unlike the submarine, it plunges only once, after which it no longer bothers anyone (except the relatives of the crew) and becomes almost invisible, well, for the naked eye, of course.
  13. no matter who i am
    no matter who i am 10 October 2014 10: 45
    +5
    You can’t put guns on a submarine. And in general, for some reason, all surface ships are needed
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 11: 35
      0
      The submarine is inconspicuous, even if this iron is several times larger in size.

      Missile weapons are now such that there is no need for guns.

      The only thing is, the ships won at the price of construction ... but as you can see, this is not a story about Zumval.

      So what is he better?
      1. GRAY
        GRAY 10 October 2014 12: 36
        +2
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        So what is he better?

        I dare to suggest that to suppress coastal defense this ship is more suitable than submarines as it has more powerful detection tools and artillery. He is quite capable of detecting the launches of anti-ship missiles and striking at their positions, as well as providing fire support for the landing.
        1. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 12: 49
          0
          Those. Do you think that a "fishing schooner" on the radar, but at the same time emitting, like AUG, is capable of misleading the calculations of coastal complexes?

          The firing range of the guns, with all this, what?

          Weather conditions and their impact on a ship of this form, I have already mentioned.
          1. Demetry
            Demetry 10 October 2014 13: 05
            +1
            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            Those. Do you think that a "fishing schooner" on the radar, but at the same time emitting, like AUG, is capable of misleading the calculations of coastal complexes?

            And not only it is radiating, but also a lot of false interference.

            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            The firing range of the guns, with all this, what?

            From memory up to 180 kilometers. Controlled, maneuvering shells. For comparison, the Sovremenny destroyer fired at 30+ km and was created for shelling the coast.
            And by the way, 180 km is more than half of anti-ship missiles.

            Once again, NK (including this one) perform the same functions as the submarine plus a bunch of others.
            1. Evgeny_Lev
              Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 13: 24
              +1
              "A lot of false interference" - ?? those. will there be a flotilla of "fishing schooners" on the radar?

              180 km? Are you seriously?
              Coast defense is not only coastal fortifications, it is also aviation and the navy (the same littoral)

              How will the device be heated by the watchdogs?

              What other Zumwalt can perform functions other than submarines?
              1. Demetry
                Demetry 10 October 2014 13: 45
                +1
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                180 km? Are you seriously?

                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/155-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0
                %BB%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%83%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%
                BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BA%D0%B0_AGS
                Well yes. True, I seem a little wrong. 110 km. 180 km (100 nautical miles) were set as a goal, but it seemed like they decided to make it a little easier. It is necessary to rummage.
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                Coast defense is not only coastal fortifications, it is also aviation and the navy (the same littoral)

                How will the device be heated by the watchdogs?

                And why did the surgeries, corvettes, frigates surrender to him .... Orly Björki and carrier-based aircraft will deal with them. Everything is distributed by roles.
                Moreover, they are about to adopt the new LRASM PKV

                which will be included in the set of weapons VPU Mk41. In this Mk57 I, however, do not know whether they will or not. But if it’s very impatient, then they will put it there.
                And this racket will be like Harpoon but more modern and long-range.
                Read, unpleasantly surprised.
                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/LRASM


                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                What other Zumwalt can perform functions other than submarines?

                I don’t understand. Do you want to introduce him as a Swiss knife? The fact that it was listed is the main one and that is ABOVE THE ROOF ALREADY !!!.

                Let's add. He can organize air defense formations with his Aegis (the submarine did not even dream of such), he can destroy naval mines when installing standard mine detection blocks, he can evacuate the embassy. Is that not enough ???
                1. Evgeny_Lev
                  Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 13: 57
                  0
                  About 180 km, the question was not in the very range, I have no doubt that this can be achieved.

                  What is the meaning of invisibility if the device is part of quite a noticeable OrlyBerkov?
                  Why, then, obstructed corners and worsening seaworthiness?

                  About the location of the TPK by the ports in the bow of the ship and the risks associated with this, with this design, I have already said.

                  If he will illuminate the IJIS and organize something there, then WHAT IS ONLY from invisibility, for which it was built?

                  I will answer you, he did NOT THINK like a ship acting as part of an order. It was supposed to be a cool lone wolf. He approached imperceptibly, fired and ran away. ALL. And it could work if he didn’t cost as a submarine. And other things being equal, submarines are orders of magnitude less noticeable.
                  1. samoletil18
                    samoletil18 10 October 2014 19: 11
                    0
                    Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                    About 180 km the question was not in the very range

                    And for me, the land and non-missile, the question is: warhead, guidance system, engine, fuel - how long is the barrel into which this missile is put?
        2. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 12: 56
          0
          And don't get me wrong, my goal is not to "jump" this device, I just really want to analyze and understand - Why the hell did he give up?
          1. Demetry
            Demetry 10 October 2014 13: 13
            +5
            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            I just really want to analyze and understand - What the hell did he give up?

            Well this is called a "balanced fleet". A fleet in which ships do not replace each other but complement each other.
            Submarines work on their own specifics. Hidden search and discovery. Aircraft carriers in their own way - to iron sea and land targets. Destroyers in their own way - patrolling, search - destruction of submarines, defense of convoys and AUGs, artillery support for the landing, etc.

            Nobody asks "why a tug is better than a submarine." And so it is clear that he is by himself and the PL by himself. And they should not be "instead of" but should be "together".

            By the way, and who told you that the Americans do not have nuclear submarines. They have the largest submarine fleet in the world. And in a year they build 1-2 submarines. So there is enough over and under water.
            They just decided that they personally needed just such a number of surface and submarine ships to achieve their goals. It is in such a balance.
            1. Evgeny_Lev
              Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 13: 43
              +1
              They will ask about the tug and submarine when the construction of the first is equal to the price of the construction of the second.

              About the lack of nuclear submarines, thank you, I did not know that the United States has their fleet. Honestly, they opened my eyes directly.

              For heaven’s sake, let them do what they want there, I probably would not have written a line here if I hadn’t seen the odes in favor of the Zumwaltes and the comments of some users that they want such a device in the Russian fleet. I had a bite, so to speak.
              1. Demetry
                Demetry 10 October 2014 13: 52
                +2
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                For heaven’s sake, let them do what they want there, I probably would not have written a line here if I hadn’t seen the odes in favor of the Zumwaltes and the comments of some users that they want such a device in the Russian fleet. I had a bite, so to speak.

                You know, I would remember another comparison. Here you can say: "What could" Moskvich "not do and could" BMW "do?
                It would seem a logical question. But people began to buy very expensive BMWs, and Muscovites eventually died from falling demand.
                You can also ask "What could Buran do and could not do Unions, Protons, etc."

                The question is the development of science and technology and the search for new ways. Constantly some breakthroughs are being made which, as a result, either indicate the development path in this area or are a dead end branch.

                In this case, you have to wait. They screwed up with the price, but the operating time they had left will come up on new destroyers and frigates and corvettes.
          2. GRAY
            GRAY 10 October 2014 13: 39
            +3
            Quote: Evgeny_Lev
            And don't get me wrong, my goal is not to "jump" this device, I just really want to analyze and understand - Why the hell did he give up?

            This is clearly a highly specialized ship capable of operating only under the condition of complete dominance of the sea and in the air.
            The armament hints that this is a fire support ship for ground forces and marines.
            1. Evgeny_Lev
              Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 13: 49
              +1
              Provided complete domination of the sea and in the air, the canary of the times of the Second World War will cope with its tasks
              1. GRAY
                GRAY 10 October 2014 14: 07
                0
                Quote: Evgeny_Lev
                Provided complete domination of the sea and in the air, the canary of the times of the Second World War will cope with its tasks

                If, for example, there is an amphibious landing and a flock of airborne transports begins to finish off mobile coastal defense systems covered by air defense systems, then the gunboats of the Second World War will not be enough.
                1. Evgeny_Lev
                  Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 15: 44
                  +1
                  Of course, and therefore, it is urgent to build a ship for $ 5.
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 10 October 2014 18: 57
      +3
      Quote: it doesn't matter who I am
      You can’t put guns on a submarine. And in general, for some reason, all surface ships are needed

      And why not put it?
      The 100-mm ship’s gun of the 1936 model (B-24) is a Soviet artillery gun developed in January 1932 at the design bureau of the Bolshevik plant. B-24 has a barrel length of 45 calibers and is intended for installation on submarines. Almost all of the Decembrist-type submarines of the I series and the Leninets of the II series were re-equipped with the B-24-PL guns, as well as new submarines of the Pravda type (IV series) and C (IX and IX bis series) were armed , “Leninist” (XI, XIII, XIII-bis series), “K” (XIV series). Guns of this type may have been armed
  14. bmv04636
    bmv04636 10 October 2014 10: 49
    +2
    And I wish the "fair elves" as many of these ships as possible.
  15. Silhouette
    Silhouette 10 October 2014 11: 02
    +3
    Now it is clear that the vaunted "stealth destroyer", "stealth ship" is a myth and a mess. The counter supposedly consisted of the shape and construction of the superstructure in the form of an Egyptian pyramid. At first, they sang songs that the composite wheelhouse would reflect and absorb the electromagnetic radiation of the radar and make the ship invisible and it would mark on the radar screens as a fishing seiner. Well, such a trawler in an aircraft carrier order. Now we find out that the superstructure of the second building will already be made of steel. Is it special steel that absorbs EM radiation? Know-how is it? Maybe enough to hang noodles on the ears?
    1. demon184
      demon184 10 October 2014 11: 53
      0
      The main show and advertising of the defense industry. for a simple boat of a normal form, you cannot cut down so much dough as for a super duper an invisible revolutionary form a super destroyer. F-117 in Yugoslavia showed what their technology is capable of, they are not visible only to ultra-modern American radars.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 10 October 2014 14: 18
        0
        As you already enrage. The F-117 was detected by a thermal imager from a short distance, this was discussed in a neighboring article, and a single case is not yet a statistic.
        1. Patriot.ru.
          Patriot.ru. 10 October 2014 19: 33
          -3
          The next article is the law? And turn on your brains? I read the next one.
  16. Mhpv
    Mhpv 10 October 2014 11: 09
    0
    Edges formed at the intersection of the side surfaces of the hull with a diametrical plane in the bow and stern ends, along which the surfaces of the right and left sides are mated, are called pins. The bow stem located in the forward direction of the vessel is called the stem, and the stern stem is called the stem.

    The shape of the contours of the stems was developed in practice, usually in accordance with the purpose of the vessel.

    The characteristic forms of the stems are shown in Fig. 3:


    a) inclined stem, characterized by a straight inclined line, in the underwater part smoothly or at an angle passes into the keel line. Such a stem gives the vessel a sense of striving forward, but it is done not only for the sake of an aesthetic impression, but also on the basis of practical considerations: an inclined stem combined with the collapse of the sides in the bow extends the useful area of ​​the upper deck and improves the emergence of the vessel in the wave;


    Fig. 3. Typical forms of ship stakes: a - inclined; b — clipper; in - bulbous; g - icebreaker; d - direct.

    b) the clipper stem is characterized by a smooth generatrix line directed by the upper end forward. Such a stem is made for the same reasons as the previous one, its shape is borrowed from sailing ships;

    c) the bulb-shaped stem has an inclined straight or concave line above the water, its underwater part has a drop-shaped shape and is lowered slightly below the keel line. Such a stem is provided on ships with a relatively large hull width to reduce water resistance to movement and increase the speed of the ship;

    d) the icebreaker stem in the above-water part is characterized by an inclined straight line, which, not reaching a little to the water level, acquires a smooth slope to 30 ° (worked out in practice), the slope continues in the underwater part until a smooth transition to the keel line. Such a stem has icebreakers and ships floating in the ice, so that the vessel could crawl out onto the ice field and push it with its weight;

    e) the straight stem has a vertical line of formation in the underwater part, smoothly turning into a keel line. Such a stem is found mainly in river vessels that have free space on the deck and do not float on a relatively agitated surface; it is convenient for viewing the space in front of the bow of the vessel with frequent sailing in narrow places and when approaching berths.

    http://flot.com/publications/books/shelf/chainikov/6.htm
  17. PV KGB of the USSR
    PV KGB of the USSR 10 October 2014 11: 09
    +7
    In the form of nothing new! That will return from the restoration of AURORA with the same cabin and will be one to one smile
    1. Demetry
      Demetry 10 October 2014 11: 43
      +5
      No, the French had the coolers better))) But somehow they didn’t take root)))
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 10 October 2014 20: 14
        +1
        Quote: Demetry
        No, the French had the coolers better))) But somehow they didn’t take root)))

        Ancestor
    2. Sars
      Sars 10 October 2014 13: 39
      +6
      Aurora, by the way, was built by the Americans.
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 11 October 2014 17: 52
        +1
        Quote: SarS
        Aurora, by the way, was built by the Americans.
        For a terrible hilarity, you are a plus, but where does such "knowledge" of the history of our fleet come from? The armored cruiser of the 1st rank "Varyag", indeed, was built by the Americans, the Crump company, Philadelphia, and with the "Aurora" you, my friend, beguiled! Armored cruiser of the 1st rank "Aurora" (of the same type with "Pallada" and "Diana"), construction site New Admiralty (St. Petersburg), the ship was laid down in 1896/1897, launched on May 11, 1900, in September 1903 the cruiser was complete.
    3. Sars
      Sars 10 October 2014 13: 39
      +1
      Aurora, by the way, was built by the Americans.
  18. Lone gunman
    Lone gunman 10 October 2014 11: 32
    +7
    Yes, we can mock, but in about 10 years we will have the need and opportunity for ships of the Zumwalt DDG 1000 type, and the stealth ship is really futuristic ...
    1. PV KGB of the USSR
      PV KGB of the USSR 10 October 2014 13: 22
      0
      After 10 years, our submarines will be completely silent, autonomous, ready to drown any American vessel. And the Americans, at the mannered Zumwalt, will host only gay parties.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 10 October 2014 14: 19
        +5
        And there will also be an endless ammunition stock of caps, by your own efforts.
    2. Bongo
      Bongo 10 October 2014 13: 52
      +12
      Quote: Lone gunman
      Yes, we can mock, but in years through 10 and we will have the need and opportunity for ships of the Zumwalt DDG 1000 type

      In order to build such ships, it would be nice to have the same shipyards. In general, the ship is not very small. I don’t know how on radars, but from space it is perfectly visible (photo taken about a year ago).
  19. bmv04636
    bmv04636 10 October 2014 11: 37
    +3
    The Severodvinsk submarine has recently left Severodvinsk. Photo from the beginning of the transfer of the submarine to the base station in Western Litsa
  20. dipqrer
    dipqrer 10 October 2014 11: 46
    0
    A very expensive toy. Understandably R&D, experienced ships, but a series of "destroyers" of 16000 tons is idiocy, despite the fact that
    The U.S. Navy does not need them. He cut the budget.
  21. Demetry
    Demetry 10 October 2014 11: 54
    +4
    The front part houses automatic ammunition loading equipment and shell magazines for two 155-mm naval guns, the largest cannons mounted on a ship since World War II.

    Well, if you don't remember the English "Vanguard" with 1946mm cannons, completed after the war in 381, there was still such a boat. Destroyer DD-945 Hall with an experimental 203mm cannon in 1974.


  22. alovrov
    alovrov 10 October 2014 12: 22
    -1
    I hope we do not find idiots for repeating such experiments. The search and construction of the wunderwafel led the Germans to today's slave position, I believe this will not happen to us. More weapons capable of fighting!
  23. Demetry
    Demetry 10 October 2014 12: 59
    +6
    Well, in our country we have our own "Zumwalts" not cheaper))). True, they are with the oligarchs. But if you put a couple of UKSK and a couple of guns, it will be quite a STEALTH)))
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 10 October 2014 14: 04
      0
      Cheaper by the way and by orders of magnitude
      1. Demetry
        Demetry 10 October 2014 14: 25
        +2
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        Cheaper by the way and by orders of magnitude

        Well, yes, it’s not enough to live up to the days when our oligarchs will build their own yachts for 3.3 billion dollars !!!
        God forbid)))
  24. user
    user 10 October 2014 13: 08
    0
    The U.S. Navy claims the average cost of a Zumwalt class destroyer is $ 3,3 billion, but many critics warn that this figure could exceed $ 5 billion apiece.


    The most important thing is this line, although they print dollars, but for them it is critical, i.e. most likely this ship will not have a large series.
    But the view from the stern is wonderful, the whole airfield, although air defense is a weak point more than once will manifest itself (if they will not fight with the Papuans).
    1. Demetry
      Demetry 10 October 2014 13: 15
      +3
      Quote: user
      although air defense is a weak spot more than once will manifest itself (if they will not fight with the Papuans).

      And with whom should they fight? With Russia or China? Then there will be a global nuclear war and it will not give a damn whether it has air defense at all or not.
      Although I agree. A strange decision on such a community is to limit air defense so ...
      1. schizophrenic
        schizophrenic 10 October 2014 13: 55
        +3
        Quote: Demetry
        Although I agree. A strange decision on such a community is to limit air defense

        Yes, they just could not cram everything into these sizes. Power plant alone, how much it weighs. In fact, a ship was created under it, various prototypes of energy weapons will be tested.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 11 October 2014 01: 11
          0
          Exactly! I agree. Any "electric" weapon will work on it
          close future: rail guns, lasers, etc. Electric ships -
          tendency as the Chukchi used to say smile
          And without a strong air defense-missile defense now, not a single warship alone -
          not a walker. You need to be able to shoot down both planes and cruise missiles. Here
          Americans have saved in vain.
          1. schizophrenic
            schizophrenic 11 October 2014 01: 58
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Americans have saved in vain.

            Since I understood from the article, they want to reduce something, in order to reduce the cost, or add some element. The dimensions in which the zumwalt was created were so limited that it was almost overloaded, so they play with weight, it’s harder to remove it easier to add. It seems that they will indulge with various equipment and one of them may turn out to have powerful air defense.
  25. chinArmy
    chinArmy 10 October 2014 14: 07
    0
    We must try, allocate money for research and development. Only trial operation will dot all i, show which design bureau keeps up with the times
  26. opus
    opus 10 October 2014 14: 14
    +2
    Meet Zumwalt! The invisible destroyer of the US Navy will be released into the sea next spring
    Desirable by May 17, 2015 (26th anniversary of the attack on the frigate "Stark")

    I hope the Iranians (or someone else) will repeat May 17, 1987 ....
    Sorry to be late for a year, so on May 17, 2014 (25th anniversary), perhaps ours would have distinguished themselves, and not shocked the long-suffering Donald Cook bucket in the Black Sea SU-24m

    that's how it floods


    =================================
    Ours waited, waited Zumwalt ..., spat and pressanul DK
    1. iwind
      iwind 10 October 2014 21: 53
      +3
      Only this is all rather wet fantasies "hurray-ptriot" than a real event. Will find at least one primary source about 27 dismissed, etc.
      the reaction was more than calm, whence the conclusions about the tantrum, etc.
      "Donald Cook is able to defend himself against two Su-24s, etc.
      http://www.stripes.com/news/us/pentagon-russian-fighter-flies-provocatively-clos
      e-to-uss-donald-cook-1.277941
  27. Internal combustion engine
    Internal combustion engine 10 October 2014 14: 45
    +1
    I think that such ships are not needed. If stealth is needed, then develop the striking power of submarines. Future surface ships will not differ much from the current ones, but their protection will be several orders of magnitude higher.
  28. Bongo
    Bongo 10 October 2014 15: 03
    +4
    Quote: ICE
    I think that such ships are not needed. If stealth is needed, then develop the striking power of submarines. Future surface ships will not differ much from the current ones, but their protection will be several orders of magnitude higher.

    The order of magnitude is the number of digits in the number minus 1. Two quantities are said to be of the same order if the ratio of the larger to the smaller of them is less than 10. Thus, an expression of an order of magnitude greater (or less) means approximately 10 times more (or less ), an expression two orders of magnitude means approximately 100 times more ... So be careful with the "orders".
  29. Abbra
    Abbra 10 October 2014 17: 25
    +1
    So that's where the "Aurora" was taken !!!!
  30. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 10 October 2014 17: 48
    +10
    Zumvolt has certain disadvantages:
    1) protection against submarines.
    2) protection from naval aviation.
    Perform tasks to attack the shore alone for these reasons he
    can not.
    A small escort group should be attached to it: a torpedo submarine, the destroyer Burke with
    good air defense and missile defense and, preferably, a minesweeper.
    Since there is no "stealth" destroyer with air defense of the Burke class yet, and even more so there are no "stealth" minesweepers,
    then the invisibility of Zumvolt himself will become superfluous - he will be given out by the escort group.
  31. ICT
    ICT 10 October 2014 18: 05
    0
    Quote: Demetry
    But somehow did not take root)))


    rather died, in fact it was rams as it was called by cunning
  32. IAlex
    IAlex 10 October 2014 18: 31
    +2
    And where did the railotrons from BAE Systems go for the sake of which they riveted this thing and with which they were going to shell us and China?
  33. INF
    INF 10 October 2014 19: 06
    0
    In general, I read all the comments, drank beer, to feel 100% of the result I drank more, I decided! Zumvolt garbage, all these loud statements about something very cool, in my opinion ended deplorably, the louder the yell, the faster it will sink.
  34. _Voislav_
    _Voislav_ 10 October 2014 19: 46
    +1
    Well, we are waiting in the Black Sea. Meet, treat and spend! soldier
  35. Ural45
    Ural45 10 October 2014 20: 21
    -3
    Like everyone, it is invisible only to a monkey.
  36. tan0472
    tan0472 10 October 2014 21: 31
    +3
    "The Zumwalt is an electric ship with an installed capacity of 78,5 megawatts - unheard of for a destroyer."
    Interestingly, can this power be used for laser or electromagnetic guns? And then they will remove 155mm guns and put something newer.
  37. Denimax
    Denimax 10 October 2014 21: 54
    0
    With such a small crew and such a large displacement, there should be a long autonomy of navigation. Why then does not have a nuclear power plant? Something foolish.)
  38. Demob 2012
    Demob 2012 10 October 2014 23: 23
    0
    Nifiga yourself a monster laughing , but how will it ply in the ice? how is the iron? or like a submarine.
  39. Libra
    Libra 10 October 2014 23: 38
    0
    Quote: AVTIHON
    In the film, the League of Outstanding Gentlemen on such a captain Nemo sailed.

    Oh God, the thunder of the seas)) ... for swelling grandmas, go 900 million to the trough the rest for a booze party)
    forever they are trying to stir up something invisible
  40. Grigorievich
    Grigorievich 10 October 2014 23: 39
    +1
    Quote: SarS
    Aurora, by the way, was built by the Americans.

    "Varyag" and not "Aurora"
  41. sharp-lad
    sharp-lad 11 October 2014 00: 19
    0
    Doesn't it come off the water? So it will go to the "Varshavyanka" snack!
  42. 1-ST Engineer
    1-ST Engineer 11 October 2014 00: 24
    0
    One rocket is a mosquito and there is no expensive toy ... Yes, beautiful, outstanding, it is only better to have at least 10 of these, but it’s too expensive even for a country to print candy wrappers. Today, the Russian stake is placed on a nuclear submarine, that's where the invisible war of no planes or mines was and disappeared. And at the cost, it’s also certainly invisible, and the atomic atom who doesn’t eat tons of tons of salary is the right decision, and the crew is only 60 officers, and this is no less than 300.
  43. Funnels
    Funnels 11 October 2014 02: 19
    +3
    And yet he yee *** but it looks ours are a hundred times more beautiful.
  44. Ivanovanych
    Ivanovanych 11 October 2014 09: 52
    0
    An almost 80 MW power plant is impressive. Perhaps this is generation + consumption. Such an amount of NK energy cannot be hidden. Well, and how is it better than submarines? only for the price.
  45. waggish
    waggish 11 October 2014 16: 42
    0
    Photos would be more !!!!!! Well, let's see who is cooler, but what about the vaunted Russians?
  46. barbiturate
    barbiturate 12 October 2014 08: 00
    0
    a strange ship, its stealth is controversial and this has been discussed more than once, the caliber of 155 mm is clearly too small to work effectively along the coast in comparison with the same aircraft carrier, and how many shells can fit on such a ship? Again, 155mm unguided projectiles fly normally, with a chance at least to hit somewhere, well, a maximum of 30 km, the Dutch claim 22 km, according to the experience of operating the German 2000 howitzer. If you screw the projectile with rudders and the engine, put a guidance system on it, then how will it be very different from rather expensive missiles? Yes, there is still a lot of controversy in it, let's see how this ship goes, but only waiting for it, in my opinion, is the fate of the submarine "Seawolf" - they will release a couple of three pieces of it, scratch the back of their head and return to rethinking (cheaper and simplified)
  47. SSam67
    SSam67 12 October 2014 18: 28
    0
    I have a feeling that their designers and military ranks are fans of "Star Wars" ...
  48. Rosko
    Rosko 13 October 2014 16: 36
    0
    French armored rams, the end of the 19th century, it seems the same thing))
  49. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 14 October 2014 17: 19
    +1
    The shape of the nose in the end is garbage, it will be necessary to redo it without hesitation. The most interesting thing about her inside. The power of the power plant is impressive, it is a reserve for the future for electromagnetic, radiation, etc. weapons, and in the future, the ease of replacing and upgrading engines. Plus an amazingly small crew for such a large ship. And given the traditional modernization potential of American ships, even with traditional weapons, they will figure it out along the way. No doubt a very interesting project with an eye to the future. Although it has, of course, controversial decisions on contours and sawed off money, our Vasilievs still have to grow and grow.
  50. kostyan77708
    kostyan77708 15 October 2014 08: 26
    +1
    judging by how much super-megaelectronics there is, how interesting it will be protected from EMR ??? question to professionals