The future Zumwalt DDGs might get to the shore attack/ naval fire support role in amphibious landings quiet a bit.
With 14,500t displacement, that's far more than anybody would currently devote to a destroyer. It's even more than most cruisers have.
The DDG-1000 will have 80 PVLS tubes, those Mk 57 tubes will be bigger than the Mk 41 to hold bigger missiles or more of a smaller type. The Zumwalts are devoted to the littoral warfare/ landing support role in the first place, meaning they will carry mostly Tomahawks perhaps around the 61(?) the Spurance are/were carrying.
Plus, the Zumwalts will have two 5in/62 guns with extended range (up to 100miles) and LRLAP as naval fire support for landing troops.
A very important thing on them is the stealth capabilty (RCS, IR, niose, magnetics) wich will allow them to reach littoral waters unnoticed and mount suprise attacks far inland. Supported by a new dual-band radar and tactical-tomahawks / SM-2IV.
Now the problem with these is of course the cost of over US$ 3B per ship for construction alone. The navy might only get two to eight vessels. So they might get streched rather fast.
Once in place they seem likely to me to operate with the new LCS in costal operations, complementing each other very well. And since the Zumwalt will only come in small numbers, I can't really imagine them being part of a CSG. The strike roles are done by the aircraft, and the Burkes are a bit more dedicated to AAW. The AD for SAG comprising of Zumwalts and LCS could then come from the possible future CG(X), if the DDG-1000 is succesfull. The CG(X) will actually be smaller than the -1000s, if I'm correct. They will feature even better stealth characteristics and be dedicated to AAW/TBMD. Though the Zumwalt will have the growth capacity to fullfill CG-21 missions once needed.
Vessels other than CVs, LHAs, are becoming bigger again. It's still a gap to battleships, -cruisers. But there seems to be a place for them, at least in the biggest navy on earth.
But I am not so sure if the new capabilities are worth the price. Mostly because less than ten vessels is not much. The burkes will stay in service for still some time, but when you start to replace them with only a dozen modern AAW destroyers too, there will be a big gap in US naval habours.
For comparision. The latest burkes have 96 cells, and the Ticos 122 (Mk 41).
With 14,500t displacement, that's far more than anybody would currently devote to a destroyer. It's even more than most cruisers have.
The DDG-1000 will have 80 PVLS tubes, those Mk 57 tubes will be bigger than the Mk 41 to hold bigger missiles or more of a smaller type. The Zumwalts are devoted to the littoral warfare/ landing support role in the first place, meaning they will carry mostly Tomahawks perhaps around the 61(?) the Spurance are/were carrying.
Plus, the Zumwalts will have two 5in/62 guns with extended range (up to 100miles) and LRLAP as naval fire support for landing troops.
A very important thing on them is the stealth capabilty (RCS, IR, niose, magnetics) wich will allow them to reach littoral waters unnoticed and mount suprise attacks far inland. Supported by a new dual-band radar and tactical-tomahawks / SM-2IV.
Now the problem with these is of course the cost of over US$ 3B per ship for construction alone. The navy might only get two to eight vessels. So they might get streched rather fast.
Once in place they seem likely to me to operate with the new LCS in costal operations, complementing each other very well. And since the Zumwalt will only come in small numbers, I can't really imagine them being part of a CSG. The strike roles are done by the aircraft, and the Burkes are a bit more dedicated to AAW. The AD for SAG comprising of Zumwalts and LCS could then come from the possible future CG(X), if the DDG-1000 is succesfull. The CG(X) will actually be smaller than the -1000s, if I'm correct. They will feature even better stealth characteristics and be dedicated to AAW/TBMD. Though the Zumwalt will have the growth capacity to fullfill CG-21 missions once needed.
Vessels other than CVs, LHAs, are becoming bigger again. It's still a gap to battleships, -cruisers. But there seems to be a place for them, at least in the biggest navy on earth.
But I am not so sure if the new capabilities are worth the price. Mostly because less than ten vessels is not much. The burkes will stay in service for still some time, but when you start to replace them with only a dozen modern AAW destroyers too, there will be a big gap in US naval habours.
For comparision. The latest burkes have 96 cells, and the Ticos 122 (Mk 41).