There's a need for China to build Zumwalt type radar evading style destroyers.

[TyroneG]

1)China has demonstrated it can do faceting on jet fighters to evade radar. I don't see why they can't do the same on ship.
2)More stealthy than conventional aegis destroyers like what Japan has currently.
3)I don't see the need for Rail Gun. All it needs to do is get close enough to enemy ships and then release massive amount of anti-ship missiles.
4)Should carry air defense missiles and phase array radar.
5)It's small RCS should be difficult for enemy anti-ship missile to target

 

[Jovian]

Pardon me for my lack of understanding behind the concept of the Zumwalt class destroyer, but what is the purpose of this type of ships? I thought the best type of "stealth" warships is the submarine. Why go to such length of building a surface ship that evade detection? Why not build a submarine that can accommodate some of the (more important or needed) functionality of a destroyer instead?

From an untrained eye, the Zumwalt looks like a submarine, it has VLS like some submarines and it (appears) to be designed to function like a submarine (evading detection). However, it is deprived of a submarine's best radar evading feature; it cannot dive.

 

[bd popeye]

Pardon me for my lack of understanding behind the concept of the Zumwalt class destroyer, but what is the purpose of this type of ships? I thought the best type of "stealth" warships is the submarine. Why go to such length of building a surface ship that evade detection? Why not build a submarine that can accommodate some of the (more important or needed) functionality of a destroyer instead?

From an untrained eye, the Zumwalt looks like a submarine, it has VLS like some submarines and it (appears) to be designed to function like a submarine (evading detection). However, it is deprived of a submarine's best radar evading feature; it cannot dive.

Read about it here;

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I feel they are tooooo costly. So costly in fact the USN plans only three. a cool $3.3 billion USD each.

 

[Blitzo]

1)China has demonstrated it can do faceting on jet fighters to evade radar. I don't see why they can't do the same on ship.
2)More stealthy than conventional aegis destroyers like what Japan has currently.
3)I don't see the need for Rail Gun. All it needs to do is get close enough to enemy ships and then release massive amount of anti-ship missiles.
4)Should carry air defense missiles and phase array radar.
5)It's small RCS should be difficult for enemy anti-ship missile to target

1) It's not as simple as that, but I agree, that the chinese military ship designers should be able to design a comprehensively stealthy ship like zumwalt
3) There's no need for two massive 155mms like zumwalt either. Personally I think the zumwalt class will have made a lot more sense with the second AGS removed for more VLS cells. Although there should be an IPS like zumwalt to facilitate laser and rail gun weapons when they eventually come about.
4) Yes, no self respecting multi role destroyer these days will lack a phased array radar or SAMs
5) a smaller RCS will bring other benefits as well


Major surface combatants will naturally become more stealthy, so there is no need to call for a super stealthy destroyer like zumwalt. What the PLAN needs, are a class of larger cruiser sized ships carrying significant numbers of VLS cells, powerful phased array radars, integrated propulsion systems, new and larger C4I facilities, multirole attack capabilities, all within a single, survivalbe hull with growth for new technologies and weapons for the forseeable future.

That will naturally give you a large 10k ton+, stealthy surface combatant possibly resembling zumwalt in some degrees. But you don't need two whopping 155mms or a tumblehome hull. Function dictates form, not vice versa.

 

[Mysterre]

3) There's no need for two massive 155mms like zumwalt either. Personally I think the zumwalt class will have made a lot more sense with the second AGS removed for more VLS cells. Although there should be an IPS like zumwalt to facilitate laser and rail gun weapons when they eventually come about.

This ship was designed from the keel up to be a littoral support warship, especially bombardment of shore targets, something the USN has lacked since the retirement of the Iowa BB's. In fact the design was originally built around the gun system itself (VGAS) until that idea went the way of the dodo. If they had wanted a more multirole destroyer they would have just bought more AB's, but what they wanted was a shore bombardment vessel with some extra goodies, and that's essentially what they'll get, at $7 billion a pop including R&D.

 

[Blitzo]

This ship was designed from the keel up to be a littoral support warship, especially bombardment of shore targets, something the USN has lacked since the retirement of the Iowa BB's. In fact the design was originally built around the gun system itself (VGAS) until that idea went the way of the dodo. If they had wanted a more multirole destroyer they would have just bought more AB's, but what they wanted was a shore bombardment vessel with some extra goodies, and that's essentially what they'll get, at $7 billion a pop including R&D.

Yep, completely true.

I suppose costs would have been similar had zumwalt/DDX been designed without a shore bombardment requirement given the groundbreaking nature of everything else.

Personally I don't see how three zumwalts with a pair of 155mm guns each will make up for the four iowa battleships each with nine 16 inch guns... Better to have invested more into the ERGM for the existing burke's 127mm guns giving similar capabilities to zumwalt's AGS, but across the entire fleet armed with Mk 45s rather than only three superships.

But I digress, the decision's been made, we'll see how it pans.

 

[Jeff Head]

Yep, completely true.

I suppose costs would have been similar had zumwalt/DDX been designed without a shore bombardment requirement given the groundbreaking nature of everything else.

Personally I don't see how three zumwalts with a pair of 155mm guns each will make up for the four iowa battleships each with nine 16 inch guns... Better to have invested more into the ERGM for the existing burke's 127mm guns giving similar capabilities to zumwalt's AGS, but across the entire fleet armed with Mk 45s rather than only three superships.

But I digress, the decision's been made, we'll see how it pans.

Thjose AGS are going to be awesome. They have longer range than the Iowa Class 16" guns and are far more accurate with a much higher sustained rate of fire.

A battery of two 155mm AGSs, firing-rocket assisted Long-Range Land Attack Projectiles (LRLAP) will provide precision strikes and volume fire at a range of up to 83 nautical miles. They are equivalent to three four gun batteries, or twelve 155mm howitzers n but with the much longer range and much higher accuracy and lethality.

So, they will be a nice thing to have. With three, they should be able to keep two available at all times. Perhaps they can mate one of these gun systems on the new Burke Flight IIIs, I know they are studying it.

Anyhow...I wish there were going to be eight of them instead of three...but that's not going to happen at all now, at least not for a few years.

If they prove their worth, it might be revisited later.

 

[TyroneG]

Pardon me for my lack of understanding behind the concept of the Zumwalt class destroyer, but what is the purpose of this type of ships? I thought the best type of "stealth" warships is the submarine. Why go to such length of building a surface ship that evade detection? Why not build a submarine that can accommodate some of the (more important or needed) functionality of a destroyer instead?

From an untrained eye, the Zumwalt looks like a submarine, it has VLS like some submarines and it (appears) to be designed to function like a submarine (evading detection). However, it is deprived of a submarine's best radar evading feature; it cannot dive.

stealth destroyer would pack alot of VLS air defense missiles and Phase Array Radar which submarine lacks.

With this type of shaping, it would approach conventional aegis destroyers undetected till it's too late.

With powerful radar, Anti-ship missiles then can be launched and guided from farther distance.

 

[hkbc]

stealth destroyer would pack alot of VLS air defense missiles and Phase Array Radar which submarine lacks.

With this type of shaping, it would approach conventional aegis destroyers undetected till it's too late.

With powerful radar, Anti-ship missiles then can be launched and guided from farther distance.

It's not going to be stealthy when it switches on that Phase Array Radar! If it doesn't switch on it's radar then how does it track and target? Sonar perhaps?

Besides unless this ship's machinery is silent and it's hull is covered in anechoic tiles, it will be picked up on sonar so it's not going to be sneaking up on any one!

So by redux as already pointed out, the vessels ends up looking like a sub that doesn't dive!

 

[andyhugfan]

I think the whole Zumwalt class is unneeded. Why built a ship of 180m+ and ~14000 tons when its only equipped with two guns and ESSM. They'll need escorts like tico's or Ab's to provide cover for advanced cruisemissiles and air-attack. Shore bombardment can also be carried out by ordinary destroyers, frigates or F/A-18's and F-35's. The concept of AGS is sounds effective, but you don't need a 180m ship for just two of them.

It's big
It's heavy
It's undergunned
It lacks long-range SAM
It's expensive
---------------------------+
It's unneeded