What's going on?

When l first saw the pictures for this class my first thought was the US navy was doing it's own version of "back to the future" film. The idea that a 15,000 odd ton Destroyer  the size of an old ww1 battleship could hide behind a "stealthy" new and radical hull design with a radar signature return of a small trawler admittedly sounded good, in theory, but when faced with the fact that most countries that are considered 'threats to USA security' use satellite based recon assets.

l have to wonder just how effective that design really is.

Specially with the advent of the likes of China developing ballistic missile based anti-ship weapons.

The only thing l really liked was the AGS gun system that was supposed to be the primary offensive weapon of the class.

And they couldn't even get that right! With the land attack shell costing more than $800,000 a shell making the whole system uneconomic.


While the idea of a Hyper velocity shell based on the railgun design been developed in the US sounds like a good idea, the basic problem that has always cropped up is the wear on the barrel resulting from the velocity. 

As yet neither the developers of the railgun nor any other design where the velocity is developed within the internal ballistic phase of the firing and pack delivery evolutions.

Except for an enterprising Norwegian? Company that has come up with the idea of a 'ram-jet' assisted long range 155mm shell concept.

Google it and see for yourself.

Fired at more normal muzzle velocities it apparently uses a pretty standard solid rocket assistance package to accelerate the shell to mach 3 like speed required for ram-jet initiation and once that occurs the built in ram-jet using the same type of, or similar, solid fuel which then accelerates the shell to mach 5 speeds. 

Hay press toe! Hyper velocity!

It gives a theorized range of 61mile which is at that  magical 100km range the US marines say is their 'golden' artillery support range.

Thus giving the US their desired long range hyper velocity artillery support that doesn't require a barrel change out after 8 shots.

Further the time old stupidity of developing naval specific weaponry, the Navy will probably waste even more money of developing it's own AGS equivalent munitions or the electric railgun they have gone all gags over.

BAE Systems even came up with a AGS Lite system for the DDG-51 flight 3 fleet and got little public response so far.

If they ( the US Congress) are so worried about multiple expensive developments why don't they direct the three branches of their military that use 155mm calibre systems to put their collective heads together and develop ONE gun system for all three based on a 155mm 55L artillery piece that can fulfill all their requirements?

Examples of which already exist, they only require 'navalisation ' and most of the R&D costs has already been spent

We will just have to wait and see if they 'see the light'.


latest news 26-7-2019

Well there doesn't  seem to be any further development on the replacement gun system on the DGG 1000.

In fact it is looking like this futuristic design just might become the test bed for the next CCG replacement project for the US Navy as it seems they are going to optimize the 3 ship class as misslie area defence ships.

Although the Flight 3 version of the DDG51 class is still looking like  the near term new build replacement, it isn't exactly that 'next generation' design that will take the US navy past 2030's and beyond.

Latest comments

19.05 | 15:01

Good point! I was thinking Helo pads but never got around to it. The design thought been why not have full port or base resources including dry dock and repair

19.05 | 11:44

Why is there no airport on top of the base?

03.04 | 13:07

Just found your site-very cool. Also agree with your views regarding government decision processes, all about looking after their arse after they're booted out

19.01 | 08:39

Detailed answers on blog page.