The Ship Model Forum

..

Hello mates
I made the Zumwalt at 1/100 scale
Looking for pictures to improve accuracy

This is the link to the french forum where I usually post

http://www.laroyale-modelisme.net/t13608-uss-zumwalt

Nice build, chienjaune! I think we are all waiting for the 1:1 build to progress to assess the next layer of detail!

The real ship only will get SPY-3 radar (no SPY-4 S-band long range radar). There are some places on the superstructure, which are recessed, but still have tiles there, i.e. cannot be radar antenna. Are these the places, where the SPY-4 should have gone?

Is the lack of the SPY-4 the reason for the missing ability to use SM-3 missiles and to shoot down ballistic missiles?

_________________

No, the ship does not have a fire control system capable of guiding the SM-3 in all phases of flight. The SM-3 does things a LOT differently than then SM-2, which 1000 can now that its WDS was redesigned to shift the ship from a "DD" to a "DDG".

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance

The main fire control radar would be SPY-3. Is SPY-3 not capable to control SM-3 or is the software not capable to guide SM-3 (and also SM-2?)? Can she only use ESSM in combination with SPY-3?

_________________

I am nit sure about the SPY-3 being unable to terminally guide SM-3s but since it is not designed as a SPY-1 replacement but instead as a separate radar, I am willing to bet it cannot perform the very long range guidance, direction, and terminal illumination that the SPY-1 and SPQ-62s can.
As for the software, no. The ship's WDS cannot perform BMD, nor should it. From an active duty Navy perspective, making it a "G" ship was a very costly mistake that is leading to huge and debilitating mission creep.

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance

SPY-3 is working on the X-band, whereas SPY-1 is working on the S-Band. The SPY-1 is not precise enough for terminal illumination and therefore the Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burke class still needs the SPG-62, whereas SPY-3 should be precise enough for terminal illumination.

SPY-3 is more similar to the European active phased array radars as APAR, which is used to guide SM-2, and which can be adapted to guide SM-3. The ships equipped with APAR also have SMART-L long radar and their equivalent, SPY-4 (working on the S-Band), is missing in Zumwalt.

I also think that the long range guidance could be the problem. If it would be also a software problem, it would be easy to modify.

For its size and price it is strange that Zumwalt is now without the SPY-4 long radar - which will be apparently used on the Ford aircraft carrier, i.e. the SPY-4 is built anyway.

_________________

Carr can quote the exact number, but the Navy deleted the Volume Search Radar (what you're calling the SPY-4) because of money. Since the ships were already 9 times the designed cost, $6.1 Billion for DDG-1000, they needed to save money. Another likely cause for deleted the Mk110 57mm guns as well.

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance

For the one who don't read french ...
My Zumwalt is not quite an accurate reproduction for I had only a few pictures founded with Google
I only wanted tu have a RC model able to sustain an airsoft gun ......
with the room inside I have placed a CD reader with some interesting music i have also the FM radio of course
I also can shoot fire works like "Roman candellas" With 20 shots climbing at 20 feet
I have two locations for " bottle fuses" shooting forward
an helicopter has a turning rotor when steering of the boat is actuating, like the turrets of the main artillery .
With more informations I may improve the most ugly ship I had ever built....
I hope that my english is not too bad......for its not my mother language .....

ESSM has an unacceptable minimum range and a number of other seemingly unsolvable issues that prohibits it from being used in a CIWS role. The USN has purchased a very large number of these missiles with these mechanical problems, which means there won't be any fixes. That's one of the reasons why the Navy paid Raytheon to rebuild the Phalanx CIWS production line after it was repurposed in 2005. ESSM was supposed to take the place of CIWS. It didn't work. The Navy had to go back to Phalanx, because its $2.3 Billion destroyers were starting to roll around without any defense inside 2.5 miles.

The ESSM issues have been reduced, but there are certain things it cannot get around. As a result, no; ESSM cannot be reliably used as CIWS.

It was qualified in 2005.

For general information, the Navy chose the 30mm Bushmaster over other systems (including the Millennium Gun), because the Navy had a number of Mk44 30mm turrets on order for the AAAV when it was canceled and built them into the Mk46 30mm gun system. The Navy did the cheap thing and pursued what was laying around instead of an appropriate system. The LPD-17s and LCS classes have illustrated the consistent problems with the point-and-shoot nature of the 30mm Bushmaster system, the long-lived consequences of unnecessarily cutting corners.

I offer that the unfortunate issue remains: the Navy's most expensive destroyer has no inner defense against missiles. There is an easily obtained solution: purchase the Millennium Gun from Lockheed. They are already making it for their foreign sales, and over 3000 units have already been delivered through both companies (aka supply chains exist).

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance

Check this story:

http://news.usni.org/2014/08/05/navy-swaps-anti-swarm-boat-guns-ddg-1000s?utm_source=USNI+News%3A+Members&utm_campaign=8114b3babe-USNI_MEMBERS_NEWS_DAILY&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_212f579a99-8114b3babe-229881317&ct=t(USNI_MEMBERS_NEWS_DAILY)&mc_cid=8114b3babe&mc_eid=ae886b0afd

Hmmm. Ain't that a b!tch?!

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance

So they took all point defense off? My understanding of the Mk46, is that it can't be reliably used for point defense.



Are you sure about that? I thought only about 10% of the load out was LRLAP with the rest being unguided rounds?

Unfortunately, yes. All aerial point defense is gone.

Yes. There is no unguided round contracted. It's only in the GAO, CRS, and DOT&E reports that it is stressed that the AGS cannot physically load or fire conventional ammunition. There was an option for development of a new ballistic round that would be compatible with the AGS handling system and barrel, but unless something has recently changed, there is none. Otherwise, it's all LRLAP.

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance

That's going to be one expensive magazine.

Lots photos of the almost complete Zumwalt and the under construction Michael Monsoor here:

http://intercepts.defensenews.com/2014/ ... arly-here/

_________________
Martin

"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne

Ship Model Gallery

Latest piece on the Zumwalt by Chris Cavas at DefenseNews, highlighting the changes noted here (and more) and the rationales behind them for the Zumwalts: http://www.defensenews.com/interactive/ ... ext-Spring

In particular, why the 30mm was chosen, the replacement of the conical mast with a traditional one, where all the railings/lifelines are, and the extent of her anti-air capability.

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Will it not have Phalanx for anti-air point defence?

_________________
In 1757 Admiral John Byng was shot "pour encourager les autres". Voltaire

Nope. Everything about Zumwalt is stealth. Phalanx CIWS is super un-stealthy. That's one of the reasons why the Millennium Gun is such a perfect fit.

_________________
Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance