Destroyers of the ddg 1000 project. Destroyers of the Zamvolt class. Reconnaissance and combat control systems

Travel speed 30 knots (55.56 km / h) Crew 148 people Armament Radar weapons AN / SPY-3 Tactical strike weapons 20 × UVP Mk.57 for 80 Tomahawk, ASROC or ESSM missiles Artillery 2 × 155 mm AGS gun (920 rounds, 600 of them in automatic loaders) Flak 2 × 30 mm AU Mk.46 Rocket armament RIM-162 ESSM Anti-submarine weapons RUM-139 VL-Asroc Aviation group 1 × SH-60 LAMPS helicopter
3 × UAV MQ-8 Fire Scout Images at Wikimedia Commons

Destroyers of the "Zamvolt" class (eng. Zumwalt class guide missile destroyers) is a new type of missile-armed US Navy destroyers (also formerly known as DD (X)), with an emphasis on attacks from coastal and ground targets. This type is a smaller version of the ships of the DD-21 program, funding for which has been discontinued. The first Zumwalt-class destroyer, DDG-1000, was launched on October 29, 2013.

The main weapons of the destroyers of this series are 80 Tomahawk cruise missiles and artillery systems, which predetermines the main task of the destroyers to support ground forces by attacking coastal targets.

The ship uses a promising control system for all weapons through Raytheon's TSCE-I, abandoning the concept of local computer systems. The destroyer has stealth means that reduce its RCS by 50 times.

The program is named after Admiral, Head of Naval Operations Elmo R. Zumwalt.

History of design and construction

Design: Launching Missiles from Destroyer Zumwalt's Vertical Silos

Among US warships under development, the DDG-1000 should precede the Littoral Combat Ship and possibly follow the CG (X) cruiser, competing with the CVN-21 anti-aircraft. The DDG-1000 program is the result of a significant reorganization of the DD21 program, whose budget was cut by Congress by more than 50% (under the SC21 program of the 1990s).

Initially, the naval forces hoped to build 32 such destroyers. Later this number was reduced to 24, and then to seven due to the high cost of new experimental technologies that should be included in the destroyer. The US House of Representatives remains skeptical about this program in view of the ship's missile defense system problems, as discussed below, as well as the lower stealth and much lower cruise missile loading of the Ohio submarines. Although the old converted Ohio-class submarines are capable of carrying 154 cruise missiles instead of 80 missiles from the Zamwalt, the cost of refitting the old nuclear submarine is more than half the price. Therefore, money was initially allocated only for the construction of one DDG-1000 for a "technology demonstration."

Initial funding for the destroyer was included in the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act. In 2007, $ 2.6 billion was allocated to finance and build two Zumwalt-class destroyers.

On February 14, 2008, Bath Iron Works was selected to build USS Zumwalt DDG-1000, and Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding was selected to build DDG-1001 at a cost of $ 1.4 billion each. According to Defense Industry Daily, the cost could rise to $ 3.2 billion per ship, plus $ 4.0 billion in the life cycle of each ship.

On July 22, 2008, it was decided to build only two such destroyers. A few weeks later, it was decided to build a third destroyer of this type.

Name	room	Shipyard	Bookmark	Launching	Commissioning
Zamvolt USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000)	1000	Bath iron works	November 17, 2011	October 29, 2013	16 october 2016
Michael Monsour USS Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001)	1001	Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding	23 May 2013	21 June 2016	24 april 2018
Lyndon B. Johnson USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002)	1002	Bath iron works	January 30, 2017	2017 (plan)	2018 (plan)

After being commissioned, the Zamvolt-class destroyers will be operated together with the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.

On December 7, 2015, the first of three destroyers, Zamvolt, estimated by this time at $ 4.4 billion, went to sea for sea trials.

The cost of building all three destroyers is estimated at $ 12.73 billion. The total cost of the program, which includes research and development costs in addition to shipbuilding costs, is estimated at approximately $ 22.5 billion.

In November 2017, it became known that the United States was partially cutting funding for the project by refusing to create some systems for subsequent ships of the series. In particular, they will abandon the common ship computing environment and the vertical missile launch system Mk57.

Design

General structural diagram of "Zamvolt", where its main parts are visible: a single power plant, radar, missile launchers, sonar, and an artillery system

Ship control system

Zamvolt's command bridge.

Power plant

Zamvolt used the method of a universal power plant "turbine-generator-electric motor", known from submarines "Ohio": the engine rotates only electric generators and then all energy consumers, from the radar to the ship's propellers, are electric, that is, the ship is driven by electric motors. Instead of a nuclear reactor, the Zamvolts use a diesel-gas turbine engine.

However, such a system dramatically increases the cost of the propulsion system, reduces its efficiency and reliability, therefore, in Ohio submarines, it was used only for movement at low speed in the sneak mode, in order to reduce acoustic noise on the propeller shaft gearboxes. Stealth facilities for Zamvolt were the core concept of the project, so the same design solution was chosen [ clarify]. However, it was not taken into account that such a system proved to be insufficiently reliable and powerful for cruising speed, so the Ohio switched at cruising speed to the traditional direct power supply from the turbine to the propeller shaft gearboxes, bypassing two energy conversion stages. The designers of Zamvolt convinced the customers of the US Navy that they had managed to solve the problems of reliability of an installation of this class and that direct operation through gearboxes was not required. But in practice, when trying to use the Zamvolt at full speed, the power plant broke down in less than 1 month of operation and demanded to tow a ship without power supply for repair.

Some analysts indicate that it is possible that the choice of a single power plant was associated with an experimental cannon based on a railgun, which required a lot of electrical energy. But this weapon has not yet been tested and installed on the ship - a traditional cannon has been used.

Armament

Cruise missiles

Test of the Zamvolta artillery mount

The ship's main armament is 20 Mk-57 universal launchers with a total capacity of 80 missiles. The main missile is supposed to be the Tomahawk. The missiles are deployed along the sides in PVLS vertical launch units. According to the designers, this increases the survivability of the ship, since during a freelance rocket explosion, it does not occur inside the ship, but on board, with the main energy of the explosion being thrown overboard. Critics point out that, on the other hand, anti-ship missiles will almost always hit Zamwolt's ammunition load and the anti-ship missiles explosion will be amplified by the partial detonation of Tomahawks.

Artillery installation "land" caliber

For the destroyer, prototypes of the most exotic artillery systems technologies were discussed, including the railgun, but in the end they settled on 155-mm artillery mounts of an unconventional active-reactive scheme, which provides an increased range of up to 148 km (LRLAP). At such a distance, artillery is capable of accurately hitting the target only with guided projectiles, and the accuracy is required higher than that of cruise missiles, since the mass of the warhead is much less.

To achieve a range of 148 km, it was necessary to lengthen the missile part of the artillery system's active-rocket projectile, and therefore it does not fit entirely into the cradle of the artillery bolt. The "Zamvolt" gun for reloading must take a vertical position every time.

But the main reason for criticism from the Pentagon is that the cost of one guided projectile for the gun has reached $ 0.8-1.2 million, and taking into account the amortization and current repairs of the gun, the cost of a shot has reached $ 2 million. In other words, the Zamwolt projectile has become more expensive than the Tomahawk cruise missile, which has an order of magnitude greater range and power (weight) of the delivered ammunition. The command of the US Navy also questioned the LRLAP program and did not include the procurement of shells for the artillery system in the budgets of 2016 and 2017, and only 100 shells produced by the manufacturer for 120 million dollars in 2009 are available to all three planned destroyers of the Zamvolt series. In 2016, the US Navy was considering abandoning the LRLAP guns or changing the ammunition, as the current cost of the shells was "unacceptable."

Stealth tools

Floating model of Zamvolta on which the designers proved to the US Navy that the destroyer would not capsize in a strong wave

The ship is made with flat beveled surfaces to reflect radiation from enemy radars into the sky, the bow of the ship is beveled like a breakwater also into the sky, since the sharp edge of the bow of the ship is a strong reflector of radio waves. Many American experts in shipbuilding immediately stated that the profile with a roll-over of the sides (tumblehome) makes Zamwalt dangerous for the crew due to reduced stability and with a strong side roll, the ship can turn over. Therefore, uninterrupted operation of the ship's propulsion system is critical for the "dynamic stability of the ship" due to movement, since in the event of an engine failure, a stationary ship can be unstable. In response to this criticism, the ship's designers created a miniature version of the Zamvolt with an electric motor and demonstrated this model to US Navy customers, proving that the ship was stable.

"Zamvolta" add-on. In the photo, under the outer cladding, cork panels are visible for thermal insulation of the structure.

To prevent reflection from small protrusions on the surfaces, the vessel is painted with ferrite paint, which has partial properties of a radio-absorbing material.

Service

Incidents

Notes

DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer
Andrew Tarantola. America "s Newest and Deadliest Destroyer Has Finally Set Sail (eng.). Gizmodo (October 29, 2013). Retrieved December 12, 2017.
Losses in Iraq // "Foreign military review": magazine. - 2008. - No. 8. - S. 76.
"Zumwalts" today will be like battleships during the Second World War - US Navy Command // October 16, 2013
The admiral called the latest destroyer adopted by the US Navy Batman's ship // Lenta.ru
Third Zumwalt-class destroyer to be named Lyndon B. Johnson
David Sharp. Largest Destroyer Built for Navy Headed to Sea for Testing (eng.). Associated Press (7 December 2015). Retrieved December 9, 2015.
The documents on the transfer of the lead destroyer class DDG-1000 "Zumwalt" to the US Navy were signed. World Arms Trade Analysis Center (CAMTO) (23 May 2016). Retrieved 23 May 2016.
Navy Requires $ 450 Million More to Complete Zumwalt-Class Due to Shipyard Performance. USNI News (6 April 2016). Retrieved November 27, 2016.

MOSCOW, Dec 13 - RIA Novosti, Andrey Kots. The ultra-modern American destroyers Zamwalt seem to be pursuing a "family curse." Experts did not have time to finish discussing last year's breakdown of the lead ship DDG-1000 in the Panama Canal, as this week its "younger brother" - DDG-1001 "Michael Monsour", partially broke down. ... The ship has failed harmonic filters that protect sensitive electrical equipment from power fluctuations. As a result, Michael Monsour temporarily lost most of its high-tech electronics. The American naval sailors have an additional headache: ships, second only in price to aircraft carriers, stubbornly refuse to get rid of a multitude of "childhood diseases." About why the project of the latest destroyers is still stalled - in the material of RIA Novosti.

Too advanced

Destroyers with guided missile weapons Zumwalt were supposed to become versatile warships, but with an emphasis on combating coastal and ground targets. The Zamvolty were planned to be assigned the tasks of fire support for amphibious assault, precision weapons strikes against troops and infrastructure, as well as attacks by enemy surface ships. The program for the construction of promising destroyers was launched in 2007, when the Congress allocated 2.6 billion dollars for the creation of the first two Zamvolts. In total, the US Navy expected to receive 32 ships of this type and keep within 40 billion.

However, the cost of the ships of this project, which American engineers tried to pull up to the high requirements of the military, began to grow at an astronomical rate. First, the order was reduced to 24 destroyers, then to seven. As a result, in 2008 the fleet decided to limit itself to only three ships. Each of them, according to the latest data, cost the treasury $ 4.4 billion, not counting the cost of servicing the ship throughout its life cycle (the total cost may exceed seven billion).

The first Zamvolt entered the US Navy on October 16, 2016. A month later - November 21 - DDG-1000 stalled in the Panama Canal on its way to the port in San Diego. Sea water has penetrated two of the four bearings that connect the ship's induction inboard motors to its drive shafts. Both ramparts failed, and the Zamvolt crashed into the canal walls. The ultra-modern destroyer had to shamefully return to port in tow. Moreover, in San Diego, a leak in the lubricant cooling system was found on a ship, but its cause could not be established at that time. As recent events have shown, the second destroyer of the series is also experiencing serious problems with the power plant.

“We must be aware that the Americans know how to build warships,” military expert Alexei Leonkov told RIA Novosti. “And Zamvolt, in all its parameters, is a very interesting, original project. Especially its unusual power plant, similar to the one which is used on strategic submarines of the Ohio class. The only difference is that instead of a nuclear reactor, a diesel-gas turbine engine on the Zamvolta is connected to electric motors that are used at low and medium speed. In theory, this approach implies fuel economy, when the ship is cruising on one electricity. In practice, such a system has dramatically increased the cost of the propulsion system and reduced its reliability. Hence the breakdowns. "

Alexei Leonkov recalled an old joke: "Americans always find the right solution, but only when they try all the wrong ones." The expert emphasized that the same story was with the initially "raw" M-16 assault rifle and the F-16 fighter, which were eventually brought to almost perfection. There is no doubt that Zamvolty will also be polished over time. But it is still unclear what niche these three ships will occupy in the Navy.

Hole for the budget

William Beeman: Zamwalt destroyers off the coast of China - the US fear of the PRCThe reason for the decision to place the latest weapons on the borders of China is the US concern about the growing influence of the PRC in the Asia-Pacific region. So the American political scientist commented on the recent statement of the head of the Pentagon.

Impact capabilities "Zamvolt" are high enough, but not outstanding. Its main armament is 80 cruise missiles in vertical launch silos located along the sides. The know-how of the destroyer was to become artillery weapons. It was originally planned to install two electromagnetic railguns on it. However, the project was doomed to failure, since this weapon would eat up all the power of the ship. The destroyer armed with railguns, in fact, turned into a floating gun carriage and "disconnected from the network" after each shot.

Later it was decided to stop at two 155-mm AGS artillery guns of an unconventional active-reactive scheme with a firing range of up to 148 kilometers. The LRLAP shells used in them, according to developers from the Lockheed Martin concern, are so accurate that they are capable of "hitting targets in the canyons of coastal cities with minimal collateral damage." Everything would be fine, but the cost of one ammunition of this type has already exceeded 800 thousand dollars. For comparison: the Tomahawk cruise missile, which has been perfectly tested in dozens of armed conflicts, hits 2.5 thousand kilometers and costs only slightly more - about a million. Since 2016, the US Navy has been looking for an alternative to the "golden" projectiles for the wonder cannon, but has so far been unsuccessful.

"Thus, the Zamvolts have only 80 Tomahawks per ship," said Alexei Leonkov. "Now let's do some simple calculations. One destroyer with 80 missiles costs $ 4.4 billion. The Ticonderoga-class cruiser (up to 122 Tomahawks) costs US taxpayers about a billion The Arlie Burke-class destroyer (up to 56 Tomahawks plus anti-ship missiles and Aegis missile defense system), according to the latest data, costs about 1.8 billion. Both of these ships are excellently tested in combat conditions and long ago brought to mind. Yes, "Zamvolt" is made using stealth technology. But any radar specialist will tell you that all these games with invisibility are just games. You can only partially reduce the visibility and in a certain range. So Isn't it easier for the same money to build two Ohio-class nuclear submarines, each of which, in a non-strategic version, can carry 154 Tomahawks? Such a submarine is certainly less noticeable than the Zamwault, and in terms of its striking power it rises twice. "

According to the expert, "Zamvolt" will never go into large-scale production, remaining an expensive and useless "toy". As Leonkov stressed, the implementation of at least three ships of this type "in metal" is a direct consequence of the efforts of the lobbyists of the project in the ruling circles of the United States. The American industry has long been able to build cheaper and more efficient ships. Even if not so high-tech and original in appearance.

The floating pyramid of Cheops, as if it had arrived from another dimension. Which era does this ship belong to? Who and why created this outlandish design? Perhaps everything is much simpler. The appearance reflects the essence - a grandiose financial pyramid, which absorbed more than 7 billion dollars at a time.

Definitely, "Zamvolt" has something to be proud of: the largest and most expensive destroyer in the history of this class of ships. And this record will remain at least until the early 2030s. Its sinister silhouette leaves no one indifferent. But what secrets are hidden inside this "starship"?

Stealth? Railgun? Linux?

The stealth missile and artillery ship is being built using the latest technologies, many of which were first introduced in the navy. The key direction was chosen to reduce the visibility in the radio wave range of the EM spectrum, in which most detectors operate. In the architecture and appearance of Zamvolt, the features of stealth technology are aggressively emerging.

Pyramidal superstructure. A powerful blockage of the sides - due to which the radio waves are reflected towards the sky, which excludes their repeated reflection from the water surface. Stealth casings for artillery pieces. Complete absence of masts, radio contrast mechanisms and equipment on the upper deck. A breakwater nose that allows you not to "ride the wave", as ordinary ships do, but, on the contrary, to hide from enemy radars among the crests of waves. Finally, the entire body of Zamvolt is finished with ferromagnetic paints and radio-absorbing coatings.

These techniques are well known among shipbuilders around the world. Russian corvettes and frigates of a new generation (for example - "Guarding"), French ships "Lafayette", Swedish stealth corvettes of the "Visby" type ... But in the case of "Zamvolt", the situation is special: for the first time in the history of the fleet, all elements of the "stealth "Were implemented in such a grandiose, all-encompassing volume on such a large ship.

14.5 thousand tons - another cruiser will envy the size of the destroyer "Zamvolt" (as a comparison: the total displacement of the Black Sea Fleet's flagship, the missile cruiser "Moscow" is "only" 11 thousand tons)

There is no doubt about the effectiveness of techniques for reducing the visibility of enemy radars: stealth technology is widely used in the creation of naval and aviation equipment around the world.

The concept of Zamvolt itself is of much greater interest. A missile and artillery destroyer with the dimensions of a cruiser is not a 600-ton Swedish corvette. How to hide such an "elephant" in the middle of an open area?

The creators of "Zamvolt" explain that this is not about complete invisibility, but only about a decrease in visibility - as a result, "Zamvolt" will be able to detect the enemy before he sees the stealth destroyer. Official press releases indicate that the effective dispersion area (RCA) of a 180-meter destroyer is the same as the RCS of a small fishing felucca.

Artillery

For the first time in 50 years, an artillery gunship was built. Zamvolt is the first and so far the only modern cruiser and destroyer to be armed with cannons over 5 inches. The destroyer has a pair of 155 mm (6.1 in) automated Advanced Gun System (AGS) installations at the bow of the destroyer, firing high-precision ammunition at a distance of 160 km. The total ammunition load of the installations is 920 shells.

The revival of naval artillery is a direct consequence of the discussion about the provision of fire support to amphibious assault forces and the delivery of strikes along the enemy's coast (more relevant than ever in the era of counter-terrorist operations and local wars).

An artillery shell has a number of important advantages over an air bomb or cruise missile.:
- all-weather application;
- quick response to calls - in a couple of minutes the specified place will be razed to the ground;
- invulnerability to enemy air defense systems;
- no need for a super-expensive carrier (multipurpose fighter 4/5 generations and a trained pilot) - as well as no risk of losing the carrier on the way to the target;
- a much lower cost of shells compared to the Tomahawk cruise missile - with the same opportunities in providing fire support to the marines.

Moreover, the accuracy of modern artillery shells with a GPS or laser beam guidance system is in no way inferior to similar aviation and rocket ammunition.

It is noteworthy that as an auxiliary artillery system for the destroyer's self-defense, a system with an unusually large caliber was again chosen - the automatic 57 mm Bofors SAK-57 Mk.3 installation (a pair of such guns are installed in the rear of the Zamvolta superstructure).

Unlike traditional rapid-fire, SAK-57 fires only 3-4 shots per second, but at the same time shoots special "intelligent" ammunition, whose fuses are triggered when flying near the target. And the power of its shells is sufficient not only for self-defense in the near zone, but also for use in naval combat against boats and other enemy weapons at a distance of up to 18 km.

Radars

Initially, a sophisticated DBR radar complex with six AFARs operating in the centimeter and decimeter ranges was created for Zamvolt. This provided unprecedented range and accuracy when detecting any type of air, sea or transatmospheric targets in Earth orbit - within the coverage area of \u200b\u200bthe DBR radar.

By 2010, when it became clear that the Zamwolts were too expensive and could not replace existing destroyers, the DBR radar concept underwent a drastic reduction. As part of the Zamvolt's detection equipment, only the AN / SPY-3 multifunctional centimeter-range radar with three flat active phased array devices located on the walls of the destroyer's superstructure remained.

At the end of October 2013, at the American shipyard Bath Iron Works, the lead destroyer (destroyer) of project DD (X) - DDG-1000 USS Zumwalt (in Russian transcription “Zamwault“ or “Zumwalt”) was launched. The destroyer USS Zumwalt, named after Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, is one of the most unusual and controversial developments in American military shipbuilding. Great hopes are being pinned on the ships of this project, the American press has already dubbed them "ships of the future" and "tomorrow of the American navy." However, the overseas press is supposed to sing the praises of the US government and the Pentagon, but many military experts fundamentally disagree with the enthusiastic assessments of both this ship and the project as a whole.

The history of the DD (X) project dates back to the nineties of the 20th century. Then the American naval forces voiced the requirements for promising ships that were supposed to enter service at the beginning of the 21st century; These programs received the designations CG21 (cruiser) and DD21 (destroyer) - later the development programs for cruisers and destroyers were renamed CG (X) and DD (X), respectively. The requirements for the new ships were very high: cruisers and destroyers had to perform a wide range of combat and auxiliary missions. Depending on the situation, any of the promising ships CG (X) and DD (X), according to the plan of the US Navy command, could attack enemy ships or submarines, protect land and sea formations from air attacks, and, if necessary, deliver missile strikes against mechanized or well-fortified enemy units, evacuate the population from areas of natural disasters or countries affected by revolutions, etc.

However, the estimated calculations at the pre-design stage showed that the cost of such a "universal" ship is prohibitive. In this regard, the US Congress in 2002 insisted on the closure of one of the programs - based on the results of the analysis, it was decided to abandon the development and construction of the CG (X) cruisers and stop at creating destroyers. Thus, after the end of the service life of all Ticonderoga-class cruisers in the US Navy, destroyers of the Arleigh Burke and DD (X) types were supposed to be used as multipurpose ships with missile weapons.

Initially, the naval forces hoped to receive 32 DD (X) class destroyers. Later, this number was reduced to 24, and then only to 7 units due to the high cost of new technologies and solutions that must be applied in the construction of promising destroyers. The US House of Representatives is still skeptical about this program (mainly for financial reasons) and therefore initially allocated money only for the construction of one (!) DD (X) - DDG-1000, solely for the possibility of "technology demonstration". Nevertheless, under pressure from the Pentagon, in 2007 another $ 2.6 billion were allocated for the construction of the hulls of two more destroyers - DDG-1001 and DDG-1002. At this point, the "epic" with promising destroyers of the DD (X) project ended, and as a result, the initial figure of 32 ships turned into 3 (!) Pennants, which, as everyone understands, will not make any difference in the fleet.

Preparations for the construction of the lead ship of the DD (X) series began in 2008, and the laying ceremony took place in November 2011. At the end of October 2013, the first destroyer of the new project - DDG-1000 Zumwalt - was launched. Preliminary work on the construction of the hull of the second ship DDG-1001 (USS Michael Monsoor) started in September 2009 at Ingalls Shipbuilding. In 2015, it was planned to hand over to the customer the lead destroyer - Zumwalt, as well as to continue the construction of the following ships. However, due to a number of shortcomings, the commissioning date for the first ship of the series - DDG-1000 - has been postponed to the end of 2016, and there is no guarantee that it will be met. The dates for the rest of the ships are also constantly shifting upward.

And now the most interesting thing: the cost of each of the three new destroyers of the DD (X) project, taking into account the costs of design and testing, has already crossed the $ 7 billion mark. For comparison, the ships of the Arleigh Burke project cost the US budget about 1.8 billion each, which is almost four times less than the cost of Zamvolt and its "brothers". The new destroyer ultimately cost the Pentagon more than the last American Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77), which caused a storm of indignation in the leadership of the US Navy. It should be borne in mind that the construction time for the third destroyer, which is planned to be laid on the slipway only in 2018, will lead to a further increase in the cost of the ship. What it will be in the end, we can only guess, but it is already clear that the military budget is not able to pull another "black hole" similar to the fifth generation F-35 fighter, which, despite tens of billions of dollars spent on its development, is still has not yet been adopted by the US Army due to serious problems with the propulsion system and avionics.

The first thing that catches your eye in the ships of the DD (X) project is their unusual appearance. In the case of the destroyer Zumwalt, reducing radar signature became the main task in the design of the hull and superstructure contours. The American destroyer looks like a long and narrow platform, in the middle of which there is a protruding superstructure of a complex shape, somewhat reminiscent of its appearance as a battleship of the late 19th century. All the outlines of the ship's surface are a system of planes mated to each other at different angles (the same technology was applied in the development of the T-14 Armata tank - just look at its complex asymmetrical turret). The outer hull and superstructure of the ship are covered with radio-absorbing materials approximately 2.5 cm thick, the number of protruding antennas and other parts of the hull has been reduced to a minimum.

The armament of the Zumwalt destroyer consists of 20 universal Mk-57 launchers with the ability to install up to 80 missiles in them, two long-range 155-mm AGS artillery mounts and 30-mm rapid-fire anti-aircraft systems.The destroyer provides for the basing of a helicopter and several unmanned aerial vehicles. The ship's displacement is approaching 15 thousand tons, which makes the DD (X) project destroyers the largest modern non-aircraft-carrying warships in the world after the Soviet / Russian nuclear-powered missile cruisers of Project 1144 (a series of four cruisers built in the USSR in the period from 1973 to 1989) , at the moment - the only surface ships with a nuclear power plant in the Russian Navy), the displacement of which reaches 26 thousand tons. The USS Zumwalt uses two Rolls-Royce Marine Trent-30 gas turbine engines with a total capacity of 105,000 hp as the main power plant. The engines are connected to electric generators in a single power system, which supplies energy to all systems of the ship, including two electric motors that rotate the propellers. Such an "architecture" of the power plant made it possible to ensure high running characteristics - the declared maximum speed of the destroyer exceeds 30 knots.

It would seem that everything is fine (with the exception of the cost, of course), but as often happens recently with American military developments, there are nuances:

1. Seaworthiness.In the destroyers of the DD (X) project, a daring, innovative solution was used - a sharp with a reverse angle of inclination, "ramming type" stem. This shape of the nose is the embodiment of the opposite, in comparison with the now widespread, the concept of wave flow around the bow and keel of the ship - and, according to American shipbuilders, this should have provided the destroyer with good seaworthiness at a low, for the sake of reduced radar signature, side. This shape of the bow of the ship should "pierce", "cut" the waves - instead of "climbing" on the wave. However, during sea trials, it was found that even with medium waves, the USS Zumwalt begins to seriously “nod off”, which has the most negative effect on its speed and stability. It is not possible to eliminate this problem as it stems from the existing geometry of the ship's hull; the only thing that can be done is to try to somehow neutralize its negative impact on the seaworthiness of the ship. True, American engineers have not yet figured out exactly how.

2. Armament. Initially, it was assumed that the DDG-1000 destroyer would be able to perform the functions of both fire support and anti-missile defense in any theater of operations, as well as provide anti-aircraft cover for sea and land formations. To do this, it was planned to equip it with SM-2MR or SM-6 missile launchers, and for missile defense missions - with promising modifications of the SM-3 antimissile. However, at the moment, nothing (!) Of the above has been installed on the ready-made Zamvolta, and due to the problems of adapting air defense and missile defense launchers to the hull design, it is unclear when it will be installed - and whether it will be at all!

3. Radar capabilities.In addition to radar stealth, detection means are of great importance for ships of this type - after all, if you are "invisible" to the enemy's radar, but you yourself cannot detect the enemy, then all the advantages of stealth technologies immediately come to naught. For DD (X) series destroyers, a bundle of two powerful radar systems of different ranges was initially developed: AN / SPY-3 - for low-flying / high-altitude targets and targets in near space and AN / SPY-4 - a "volume search" radar. Faced with the fact that the SPY-4, being developed for the "deceased in Bose" cruiser CG (X), does not fit the hull of the DDG1000 project, the Pentagon, without hesitation, simply stopped its development in 2010, and began designing a new AMDR system ( Air Missile Defense Radar) specially for the DDG-1000 Zumwalt. But then serious problems began with AMDR, and at the moment Zamvolt is equipped only with the AN / SPY-3 radar system, which meets only half of the declared requirements of the US Navy for this type of ships.

4. Versatility.“Zamvolta” does not have one more type of weapons, which for modern ships must be available if they are declared as independent combat units of the fleet - these are anti-ship missiles. The US Navy is armed with only one type of them - the Harpoon subsonic anti-ship missile system. However, the "Harpoon" could not be adapted to the DDG-1000 silo launchers, since the "Harpoon" is launched from its own four-container installations, for which, in turn, there was no place in the destroyer's hull. Vicious circle. As a result, “Zamvolt” was left without anti-ship missiles at all! To somehow justify this obvious failure of theirs, the Pentagon said that "the new destroyer does not need PK missiles at all, and the easiest way to fight enemy ships is by aircraft from aircraft carriers." With whom then Zumwalt will fight, they did not specify ...

5. "Technologies of the future"... Initially, instead of the 155-caliber artillery system, it was planned to install an electromagnetic cannon (EMF) on ships of the DD (X) / GG (X) type, but then they decided to abandon this idea. In particular, when firing from an EMF, it would be necessary to temporarily turn off most of the destroyer's electronics, including air defense and missile defense systems, as well as stop the ship and life support systems, otherwise the power of the power system is not enough to ensure firing. In addition, the resource of the EM cannon is extremely small - only a few dozen shots, after which the barrel breaks down due to enormous magnetic and thermal overloads. This problem has not yet been resolved. Research and testing, or rather, "budget development", under the program for the development of electromagnetic weapons are currently continuing, but it is unlikely that EMF with the characteristics that were announced at the start of this program will appear in service with the US Army in the foreseeable future.

Of course, this is not to say that the Zumwalt is completely devoid of merit. He has them: stealth in the radar range, and a new generation of hybrid power plant, and high automation of all control systems of the ship, as a result of which the crew is only 140 people, and the rapid-fire artillery system AGS with a caliber of 155 mm. But given that a number of shortcomings, and quite significant ones, have not yet been eliminated (and some cannot be eliminated in principle), as well as the fact that the cost of one ship has already exceeded $ 7 billion and will only grow, this is negates all the advantages of the destroyer.

One can hear the opinion that the futuristic Zumwalt is the prototype of the "ship of the future", but the "ship of the future" is characterized not by its appearance, but by a combination of stealth and low noise, seaworthiness, survivability and firepower, which makes it possible to equally successfully deal with surface, underwater and air targets of the enemy ... And, what is especially important, the "ship of the future", whether it be an aircraft carrier, destroyer or cruiser, should also be distinguished by a reasonable price - allowing it to be produced and put into service in serial quantities. And Zumwalt does not meet these criteria - at the moment it is just a very expensive "toy", "a showcase of American military-industrial complex technologies," as one of the US senators put it. So what did the Americans ultimately create - a destroyer of "tomorrow" and a "storm of the seas" capable of terrifying the enemy's fleet, or a floating "museum" advertising the capabilities (and appetites) of the American military-industrial complex? Considering that only 3 ships of the DD (X) project will be built and put into service, the answer is obvious.

The American shipyard Bath Iron Works, a division of General Dynamics Corporation, has launched the DDG1000 lead missile destroyer of the future. What is good and bad about this unusual-looking ship, and what are the competitors of the United States preparing in response - the next-strongest ocean-going fleets of Russia and China?

And is the American media really so right in extolling this ship to the skies?

The descent of the ship's hull was carried out without an official ceremony of "christening", breaking a bottle of champagne and other traditions. The point is not only that the descent took place at night, away from the eyes of other satellites and scouts "in civilian clothes" - for example, secret nuclear submarines for special purposes in the USSR and the Russian Federation were so often launched, but also that they saved money on "baptism". Due to the recent "shutdown" of the US government and the launch itself was postponed for a week and a half, and magnificent ceremonies will also take place later. Although superstitious sailors say that such things should not be neglected - not for good.

DDG1000, which is planned to be named "Zamvolt", looks extremely unusual for the modern eye. It is no secret that all modern warships are built taking into account the task of reducing the effective dispersion surface (EPR), that is, the ship's radar signature. By the way, one of the first warships built with partial consideration of these requirements was the Soviet nuclear-powered heavy missile cruiser Kirov (there are also other opinions that such a ship was our patrol ship Fearless or French frigates of the Lafayette class).

The only smooth superstructure cut out like an ax, a minimum of protruding elements of electronic weapons and weapons - everything is subordinated to this goal. For the same, the sides heaped in the opposite direction are also made, they are often found on modern ships, but no one has them heaped right from the waterline, which makes the DDG1000 look like a battleship or armored cruiser of the late 19th or early 20th century.

It is even more related to such ships by the sharp with a reverse angle of inclination, "ram-type" stem. This shape of the nose is the embodiment of a different, in comparison with the now widespread, concept of wave flow around the bow of the ship - supposedly it guarantees him good seaworthiness with a low, for the sake of reducing the RCS, side. This is called “breaking through,” piercing the wave — instead of climbing the wave. The Americans, of course, built a small prototype ship to test this idea, but how it will all be in the conditions of real great excitement, neither computer simulations, nor experimental ships can establish one hundred percent. In general, it will be seen when it goes out to sea. It is worth noting that in Russia there are also ships built with a similar bow shape, and they are being built for the Arctic.

The destroyer came out big - 183 meters long and 14,500 tons of displacement. It is difficult to say whether it can be considered a destroyer at all or a better cruiser; at the moment, in the US Navy, these two types of ships have practically merged into one and differ only slightly in size and capacity of universal vertical launchers (UVP). Considering that the Zamvolt is much larger than the Orly Burke-class destroyers under construction in a large series, and there will be only three of these ships, it would probably be better to reclassify it as a cruiser. And its price corresponds not to a destroyer, but rather to an aircraft carrier, which ultimately ruined the dreams of a large series of these super-ships.

The history of this project itself is the history of a constant struggle with the continuously growing price and a decrease in its serial production, as well as a simplification of the design and a decrease in tactical and technical characteristics (TTX). It all started, probably, back in the late 70s, when the minds at the headquarters of the US Navy seized the idea of \u200b\u200ban "arsenal ship" - a ship with a minimum of superstructures, with a reduced ESR, but packed with the maximum number of cells of unified silo launchers for various weapons, in mainly shock, to attack ground targets. By the way, exactly the same idea came to the mind of the Soviet naval commanders - in those years there was a project 1080 - an arsenal strike cruiser. We had such projects in the 80s. But in the end, such ships were not built either in the USA or in the USSR.

The new concept of the promising heavy ships of the US Navy SC-21 appeared after 1991. It consisted of the promising cruiser CG21 (then CG (X)) and the promising destroyer DD21 (later DD (X)). The main idea was versatility - it was assumed that both the cruiser and the destroyer should have the ability to perform any tasks, both combat missions (support for assault forces, strikes against ground targets or fighting surface ships, submarines, providing air defense of a ship's formation) and non-combat ( for example, the evacuation of civilians from a "problem" country). Only all these good wishes for "everything and more" immediately ran into harsh economic days.

The need for these ships was not obvious in the new conditions, and the price began to grow explosively. This was due to the rise in prices for modern electronics and weapon systems, and to the growing appetites of companies, which, when it is not about US survival in a military confrontation, do not care about the country's interests, but their own pocket is very important. Of course, an increase in price led to a reduction in the series, and a reduction in a series led to an increase in price, since the total costs were distributed over a smaller number of buildings. The first victim of Congress fell the cruiser, which was first postponed, and now they do not remember at all. It is believed that the Ticonderoga-class cruisers will not have replacements; more precisely, they will be replaced by the Orly Burke-class destroyers of the latest series.

Then the destroyer began to be cut. First, the series, planned from 32 ships, was reduced by eight. Then there were 11 of them, then seven, and in the end the series was reduced to two ships. And then the lobbyists of the project managed to beg for another one. The price, of course, also went up. About $ 10 billion was spent on the development of the project alone. Along with the allocation of R&D costs across the three hulls, the ship's price is about $ 7 billion per unit, not counting the life cycle cost. Yes, for that kind of money, you can build a nuclear aircraft carrier or a couple of nuclear submarines! And in Russia, there would probably be enough for a couple of aircraft carriers (only it would take a long time to wait for them - while we build large ships very slowly).

Naturally, over time, not only did the price rise, but the project's capabilities also diminished. Ultimately, DD (X) was renamed DDG1000, while reducing displacement and armament. Moreover, the results of these reductions cause a rather ambivalent attitude. Let's try to figure it out.

The DDG1000 uses a new type of universal vertical launcher (UVP) Mk.57 instead of the widespread UVP Mk.41. Each section consists of four slots, for a total of 20 sections and 80 missile slots on the ship. DD (X) was supposed to have a larger number of cells - 117–128, but the ship itself would be 16,000 tons, with, however, increased capabilities. Moreover, an original solution was applied at Zamvolta - unlike previous projects, airborne control systems are not located in two places (in front of and behind the superstructures), but in groups along the sides throughout the ship. On the one hand, this solution makes missiles in silos less vulnerable and less prone to detonation. On the other hand, the protection of the internal compartments with missile cells looks like a rather strange solution.

What does a destroyer carry in its 80 nests? These are primarily sea-based cruise missiles "Tomahawk" of various modifications for striking ground targets in conventional equipment (the US Navy no longer has nuclear non-strategic weapons, destroyed, unlike the Russian Navy, where it is and is developing). ASROC-VLS anti-submarine missiles can also be used.

With anti-aircraft missiles, the issue is somewhat more complicated. Initially, it was assumed that the destroyer would be able to perform the functions of both theater missile defense (theater missile defense) and zone air defense units. For this, it had to be equipped with the SM-2MR missile defense system, their descendant SM-6, and for missile defense missions - with modifications of the SM-3 anti-missile. Only now, nothing of this will be on these ships at this stage, perhaps only for now. Mine launchers are compatible with these missiles, but problems arose with the radar. For "Zamvolt", at first, a bunch of two powerful radar systems of two different ranges was developed: AN / SPY-3 with excellent capabilities for high-altitude targets and targets in near space and AN / SPY-4 - radar for volume search. Faced with the fact that the SPY-4, also developed for the "late" cruiser CG (X), does not fit into the cut-down DDG1000 project, the Pentagon simply stopped its development in 2010, starting from scratch the design of a new AMDR (Air Missile Defense Radar) system ... But then problems began with him, there is still nothing at the output.

There are also problems with the SPY-3, as a result of which the only type of anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAM) is indicated everywhere for Zamvolt - RIM-162 ESSM (Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile). This SAM, created on the basis of the old Sea Sparrow SAM family (based on the well-known air-to-air missile), is their deep processing. It is adapted to launch from both old launchers and TLUs. It has a range of up to 50 km and an interception ceiling of up to 15 km and corresponds approximately to the SAM of the Russian naval air defense system "Shtil-1". This weapon is well suited for ships such as a corvette or a frigate, but for such a destroyer, which should rather be called a cruiser because of its size, it is clearly not enough. Although the ESSM has a big plus: it is compact and fits into one cell of four, so the ammunition load of these missiles can be measured in a couple of hundred. Despite the statements of representatives of the developers of the ship's anti-aircraft systems - the company "Raytheon" - that the anti-aircraft and anti-missile capabilities of the DDG1000 "are not lower than that of other large ships of the US Navy", high representatives of the naval command have so far stated the opposite. In general, it should be assumed that the long-range missiles SM-2 and SM-6 on these ships will eventually be, but about the capabilities of missile defense - it is still unclear.

There is no other type of weapon on Zamvolta, which is practically obligatory for modern ships, if they are considered multifunctional - these are anti-ship missiles (ASM). The US Navy is armed with only one type of them - the Harpoon family of subsonic anti-ship missiles. In the Russian navy, the Kh-35 Uran and Kh-35U Uran-U missiles are direct analogs of the Harpoons, and they are considered light weapons for small ships and for fighting light forces. But our situation is different from that of the Americans: we have much fewer ships, and they are also geographically divided into several isolated theaters. Therefore, we rely on extremely difficult to intercept supersonic anti-ship missiles with powerful, including nuclear, armored warheads, equipped with guidance systems, coordination of missiles in a salvo and advanced logic of behavior in battle. And the Americans do not bite the carriers, and they put a bunch of fairly simple and weak, relatively easily intercepted anti-ship missiles on strike, counting on a simple overload of air defense channels on the attacked target. In addition, the Harpoon could not be adapted to the universal mine TLU - it is launched from its own four-container installations, of which two are usually installed.

And now, even in the United States, they considered that the easiest way to fight ships was aircraft from aircraft carriers. Therefore, on the last series of Orly Burke-class destroyers (the so-called Flight IIA series and the promising Flight III), and on the Zamvolts, Harpoon anti-ship missiles are absent. True, Berks can still strike ships with SM-2 anti-aircraft missiles, but this is clearly not the right weapon for such ships. Rumor has it that the Americans want to give these ships another version of the Tomahawk cruise missile in an anti-ship version instead of the Harpoons, but the idea seems questionable. Previously, in the United States, such a modification was and was in service. It turned out that a low-speed subsonic anti-ship missile with a range of 450 km practically cannot be used successfully at this range - due to the fact that the flight to the target took more than half an hour, the enemy could have time to get out of the area in which the missile could detect it. And to intercept the Tomahawk is much easier than the Harpoon. Now the Americans hope that they will be able to solve all these problems. But the economic situation is developing in such a way that, most likely, this development will stop.

Zamvolta also has a hangar for one anti-submarine helicopter and three unmanned helicopters. Unmanned mini-boats on board are also planned.

What is really extremely interesting "Zamvolt" is its artillery. It is armed with two bow turrets with 155-mm newest AGS (Advanced Gun System) artillery systems. For a long time after the war, it was believed that universal medium-caliber artillery had lost its significance. But after a number of local wars, it turned out that guns are needed, for example, to support the landing forces and for many other tasks. But the artillery was limited to a maximum of 127 mm (130 mm in our fleet) caliber. Now there is a trend towards an increase in the caliber and capabilities of ships' artillery. In Germany, they tried the turret of a 155-mm PzH2000 land-based self-propelled gun on a ship, in Russia they are developing a naval version of the extremely advanced 152-mm land-based self-propelled gun "Coalition", and the Americans created the AGS. Although at the end of the 70s in the USSR, the 203-mm shipborne artillery system "Pion-M" was also developed, but then this development was rejected.

The system is a turret 155 mm gun (barrel length 62 caliber) with an automatic loading system below deck. The tower was created taking into account the requirements of radar stealth, the gun in a non-combat position is hidden for the same purpose. The shots are separate-sleeve, firing is fully automatic until the ammunition is completely depleted. The ammunition load of the two towers is 920 rounds, of which 600 are in automated ammunition racks. However, the rate of fire is declared to be very low - 10 rounds per minute, which is explained by the fact that the projectile is very long and the loading system works only when the barrel is vertical. But the weapon is not intended to destroy high-speed sea or air targets, it is a weapon against ground targets, and against a weak enemy. Because this ship will not be able to approach the coast of, say, Syria, within the range of firing from such weapons - the coastal SCRC Bastion-P with the Yakhont anti-ship missile system available there are quite capable of drowning it at distances up to 300 km from the coast. But Washington's favorite targets for bringing democracy to the masses in recent years have been weak states, and against them such a system will be in demand, capable of bombarding targets with dozens of shells at distances of tens of kilometers.

The ammunition used by AGS is extremely interesting. This gun does not fire conventional 155 mm projectiles, even corrected ones. She only has special guided ultra-long-range projectiles LRLAP. In fact, this very long projectile with an engine and wings is better called a rocket both in design and in the ratio of the total mass to the mass of the warhead. The length of the projectile is 2.24 m, the mass is 102 kg, the mass of the explosive is 11 kg. In the bow there are four control wings, in the tail there is an eight-blade stabilizer. The projectile control system is inertial using GPS NAVSTAR. The range is promised up to 150 km, but so far they were shooting at a range of 80-120 km. Accuracy is declared at 10-20 meters, which, in general, is good for such a range, but not enough, given the low power of the target of such a projectile. And this is in case the enemy does not use jamming of GPS systems. In any case, a very interesting artillery system, and it is worth taking a closer look at the experience of its operation when it appears.

Moreover, initially instead of AGS, an electromagnetic gun was planned, but they decided to go the traditional way. Including because when firing from such a cannon, it would be necessary to de-energize most of the ship's systems, including air defense systems, and also to stop the course, otherwise the power of the entire power system of the ship would not be enough to ensure firing. Development, or rather, the "assimilation of funds" under the program of the electromagnetic gun is now continuing, but it is unlikely that this weapon will appear on "Zamvolts". It is both expensive, and the resource of the guns is extremely small, and shooting from a blind and deaf ship is extremely dangerous for him. The developers of the system, realizing this, try to enter with their cannon from another entrance, offering it to the ground forces. But hardly anyone there will dare to buy an artillery system, to ensure the transportation of all vehicles of one copy of which "only" four heavy military transport aircraft C-17A with a carrying capacity of 70 tons are needed, which are capable of taking away an entire battery of conventional self-propelled guns or missile systems. In general, this idea reminds of an anecdote about a man with a cool watch and two heavy suitcases - in them he has batteries for the clock.

In many respects, just to ensure the operation of electromagnetic guns on this ship, the main power plant with full electromotion is used, that is, the propellers only turn electric motors. Energy is produced by gas turbine engines that rotate generators, and it can be redistributed depending on the needs of the ship. The system, in general, is not new, but it has not been used on warships of this class.

Anti-aircraft artillery systems for short-range self-defense are represented on Zamvolta by a pair of 57-mm Swedish artillery complexes Bofors Mk.110 with a rate of fire of 220 rounds per minute and an anti-aircraft projectile flight range of up to 15 km. The transition to such a large caliber from the 20 mm used in the USA on such systems (in Europe, China and Russia - 30 mm) is explained, among other things, by the fact that neither 20-mm nor 30-mm projectiles can shoot down heavy supersonic anti-ship missiles - even with a direct hit of armor-piercing shells, the missile's warhead does not break through and does not detonate, reaching the target anyway like a heavy projectile. Mk. 110, on the other hand, provides both a long interception range and the use of adjustable projectiles, which will try to compensate for the drop in the rate of fire from several thousand rounds per minute to a couple of hundred. How effective it will be is still difficult to judge. In Russia, work with 57-millimeter naval artillery systems is also underway - in Nizhny Novgorod, the AU-220M artillery system is being developed.

The question of ensuring the survivability of the DDG1000 is also interesting. The Americans claim that great attention has been paid to this. There is probably no armor on this ship (it is found now only on aircraft carriers and heavy cruisers, and that is extremely moderate), but there is certainly constructive protection. This is the placement of VPU missiles in four groups along the sides, and various insignificant rooms along the perimeter of the ship, shielding important ones located inside. It is also possible to use various armor composites in critical places - like Kevlar or high molecular weight polyethylene. Of course, such protection from anti-ship missiles will not protect, but from fragments in an explosion - quite.

True, there are also strange solutions. For example, the ship's combat information center (CIC), its heart, is housed in the superstructure. And although it is made of composites, almost all of it is covered with various antenna arrays. And it will be identified by the anti-ship missile homing head as the central, most reflective part of the ship. And there is a likelihood of hitting the CIC. True, it is also in the hull, since many missiles fly at a height of several meters and fall directly into the side. Even more strange is the absence of a double or triple bottom on the destroyer - this is clearly seen in the photographs from its construction. With the beginning of the use of torpedoes, such protection became mandatory for large ships. Or have the USA forgotten how modern torpedoes, exploding under the bottom, easily break through the skin over a large area and even break the ship's set, splitting it? No, hardly. It is also impossible to rely on passive means of protection and jamming systems against torpedoes, which are enough on this ship, and active ones capable of intercepting a torpedo are not used in the US Navy. But even if they were used, the bottom of the ship would still be threatened by torpedoes, mines, saboteurs, and rocky reefs. In general, something had to be done, otherwise the expensive supership will share the fate of the Titanic.

What about the competitors?

The Russian fleet is not building new destroyers so far. The new destroyer is being designed and little is known about it. It is only known that the lead ship will be laid in the area of \u200b\u200b2015. There is also information about its displacement - about 12-14 thousand tons, that is, it is similar to the "Zamvolt" and slightly more than the missile cruisers of the project 1164 of the Russian Navy. That is, we, too, have destroyers as a class in the future will practically merge with cruisers.

It is not yet very clear whether the new destroyer will have a conventional gas turbine power plant or it will be nuclear, which many in the command of the fleet really want. The logic of the supporters of the "atom" is clear - the new Russian aircraft carrier, when it reaches its construction, will almost certainly also have a nuclear power plant, and the same escort dramatically increases its operational mobility. However, such ships are more expensive, even fewer shipyards in our country can build them, and not all ports of the world will be allowed to use them. And it will take longer to build, but in our country they are building for an impermissibly long time and with delays in time. It is also unclear whether this ship will be of a traditional type, similar to the frigates and corvettes currently under construction, taking into account the requirements of stealth, or it will be something in the style of "Zamvolta". I would like to believe in the prudence of the admirals, our fleet does not need such a masterpiece - there is much less sense from it than it is worth.

The strike armament of the new ship will, like all new-built Russian Navy ships, from small missile to frigates, will be located in the UKSK 3S14 silo launch modules. Each module has eight cells. Considering that there are two such modules on the 5000-ton frigates of the project 22350 currently under construction, a destroyer should have at least four to six modules, that is, 32-48 cells for strike weapons. It will include:

- cruise missiles of the 3M14 "Caliber" family of strategic and tactical radii for strikes against ground targets;

- anti-ship supersonic anti-ship missiles P-800 "Onyx";

- subsonic, but with the acceleration of the shock stage in the final section to a high supersonic speed of the 3M54 Biryuza anti-ship missiles;

- anti-submarine missiles 91R;

- promising hypersonic anti-ship missiles "Zircon" (in smaller quantities).

The ship will be equipped with a more powerful version of the Poliment-Redut air defense system than on the frigates currently under construction. Anti-aircraft weapons will be deployed in their silo launchers. The number of standard cells for long-range missiles will obviously be at least 64 (the frigate of pr. 22350 has 32 cells), or even more, which will give a total ammunition load of hundreds of long-range, medium and short-range missiles, since our small missiles can be placed several in a cell. In general, in terms of armament, the new destroyer, most likely, will not be inferior to the Zamvolts and Berks, and will surpass them in the strike component.

But so far no destroyer is being built, although it is planned to have about a dozen of them. Even the lead frigate of project 22350 "Admiral Gorshkov" has not yet come out for trials - it is waiting for an artillery mount. Although its serial descendants are built much faster than the head body, so there is hope for an improvement in the future.

But the modernization of the first of the planned heavy nuclear cruisers - "Admiral Nakhimov" begins. So far, it is known that it will replace 20 mines under the "Granit" anti-ship missile system with the UKSK for about 64-80 missiles of the same types as listed above, and revolving launchers of the S-300F "Fort" air defense missile system can also be replaced with all the same "Polyment-Redut", which will also dramatically increase the ammunition load. The resulting ship can become a real "arsenal" of the fleet, although there was a lot of ammunition there before. But we will have to wait for it right up to 2018 - with large ships our ship industry is still working very slowly.

Our Chinese partners are doing much better with the speed of building ships. But their ships are usually developed with outside help, which, however, the Chinese do not advertise. This was the case with destroyers of types 051C, 052B and a number of other ships. Exactly the same situation is very likely with the newest type of Chinese destroyer - the Type-52D. Now four are under construction and eight more ships of this project are in turn. This very large ship of about 8000 tons of displacement is armed with two universal UVP with 64 cells for anti-ship missiles and missiles. The air defense missile system is represented by the HHQ-9A system, a naval version of the HQ-9A system, which is adapted to Chinese requirements and modified by the air defense missile system based on the S-300PMU-1. The Chinese have subsonic anti-ship missiles - YJ-62, created on the basis of tactical versions of the Russian KR X-55 and the American Tomahawk. Similar armament, but with the placement of 48 HHQ-9A anti-aircraft missiles in the revolver launchers traditional for the Russian fleet and in the previous Chinese modification of the destroyer - Type 052S, of which six have already been built. But all these ships should be regarded as competitors not to Zamvolt, but to the hard worker Berk. The Chinese are practical people and will not tear the veins in attempts to create a ship “like the Americans”.

So what is the DDG1000 Zamwalt? The author is of the opinion that this, undoubtedly, extremely interesting for its innovative solutions, well-equipped and powerful ship will not become the new battleship Dreadnought, which at once made all its former classmates obsolete and created a new class of heavy ships. All his wonderful solutions pale in front of his gigantic price, which is much more than the higher its combat effectiveness, say, in comparison with the Orly Burke-class destroyers. If the Dreadnought cost not 10% more than its ancestor, an ordinary battleship, being five times stronger, but 5-10 times, the era of such ships would never have come. In addition, many of the opportunities originally announced for Zamvolts have not yet appeared on it and, perhaps, will not appear due to savings in construction or technical complexity of solutions.

As a result, "Zamvolt" and his classmates will face the fate of the "white elephants" of the fleet - small-scale, extremely expensive and ruinous toys stuffed with unique solutions, which, in addition, will be protected and cherished. Of course, they will be proud of these ships, they will shoot in Hollywood action films about battles with yet another monsters crawling out of the depths of the director's drug hallucinations, about them, choking and crying, the leading propaganda programs for children on Discovery will tell - all this will be. But the service in the US Navy will be carried by the same Orly Burke, of which more than 60 have already been built and another dozen three will be built, and they will replace themselves. And the projects of competitors will be guided precisely by superiority over "Berks", and not over "Zamvolts". And the "Zamvolts" themselves, most likely, will become an incubator of solutions, which will gradually also be pulled over to the "Berks" of the last series. Only it hurts with an expensive incubator ...

text source: http://vz.ru/society/2013/11/5/658215.html - Yaroslav Vyatkin

We recall our recent review: and here's another interesting question: what do they do The original article is on the site InfoGlaz.rf The link to the article this copy was made from is

It might be helpful to read: