HG S2 (Intel Bot) Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 While the consensus opinion is the DDG-1000 is going to be this impossibly expensive warship, Chris Cavas has an article up on Defense News noting that the first Zumwalt class destroyer is on cost and on schedule. It is still early, but apparently the Navy is willing to demonstrate some confidence regarding the ship, because from whatever quiet cubicle they have been hiding the DDG-1000 program manager, Captain James Syring, apparently he has been given permission to do an interview. As far as I know, at least the rumor on the street has been... Captain Syring has not allowed to give interviews since at least March of 2008, some 16+ months ago. There is no point in citing any specific part of this article, read it all, and if you are even partially familiar with the way most ships have been developed over the last many years take note at all the positive signs. Imagine the Navy completing systems designs, hull designs, integration testing, and waiting until maturity before construction... a novel concept that so far points to a DDG-1000 that may actually be the first surface warship class since the Ticonderoga class not 100%+ over cost. The only real surprise to me in this story is the very last paragraph, which suggests the DDG-1000 CO will be a Commander. I guess that makes sense, being the Navy continues to insist the Zumwalt is a destroyer even as they will displace more weight (by several thousand tons) than every warship in the world except for the Russian nuclear battlecruiser Pyotr Velikiy. I do wonder though, if that by letting Captain Syring loose with interviews with the press if that doesn't represent a sign that the DDG-1000 hull is getting more attention as a future surface combatant option after FY11. DDG-1000 is, at least at this point in time, the only good news story in surface combatant shipbuilding when it comes to first in class cost and schedule. While this can surely change, good news in surface combatant shipbuilding is so rare can anyone blame the Navy for getting this information out to the press? I don't. I have no idea what the future of the DDG-1000 hull is, but I still say we end up with four, not three, when it is all said and done. From an industrial perspective, not to mention a historical perspective of the Navy wanting 4 NSFS vessels (remember, there were 4 Iowa class maintained in the 600 ship Navy plan), building 3 the DDG-51s in Mississippi and building a 4th DDG-1000 in Maine should get both shipyards to FY12, by which time the Navy should have a better idea what they want for the CG(X) program, not to mention some idea how to meet the often stated requirement of "more than 313 ships" testified to Congress every time the Flags go to the hill. View the full article
broncepulido Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 Very impressive, yes the first Zumwalt class destroyer is on cost and on schedule Also, I see in the reading of the full article, the actual designation of one of her radars is SPY-4 VSR, not SPY-2 VSR, as in the DB, there're some controversy about the actual designation: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...systems/vsr.htm Googling the new designation SPY-4 links almost only to the original article: http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=423...c=FEA&s=CVS and to this technical and generic article: http://www.virtualacquisitionshowcase.com/...rvice-Brief.pdf
Recommended Posts