Naval News website reports that the USS Zumwalt conducted its first ever live fire exercise (ESSM and Standard) on 14-Apr-2022. Okay, that’s nice but what’s noteworthy about a routine live fire exercise?
Well, it’s the fact that the Navy commissioned the Zumwalt on 15-Oct-2016 which means that it’s taken around five and a half years to get from commissioning to the first live fire exercise.
How many crew and captains have come and gone from the ship, never having fired a weapon?
Is a single live fire exercise every 5-1/2 years sufficient to establish and maintain combat proficiency?
Is 5-1/2 years really our standard for getting a combat system up and running after commissioning? Shouldn’t a ship be combat ready the day it’s commissioned?
 |
Zumwalt First Live Fire Note the cameras set up around the deck to record the momentous event. |
This is embarrassing and humiliating for the Navy.
_________________________________
[1]Naval News website, “USS Zumwalt Conducts Live-Fire Missile Exercise”, Staff, 1-May-2022,
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/05/uss-zumwalt-conducts-live-fire-missile-exercise/
For a fun perspective, look back to the Missouri- launched in January, commisioned in June, and sailed out for her first war cruise in December...OF THE SAME YEAR!!! Sure, it was wartime and by then our industry was running full tilt... But the Iowas were the most complicated and complex weapons systems in existence at the time, so its a good comparison...
ReplyDeleteZumwalt construction started Oct 2008 at BIW, eight years later Zumwalt was commissioned on Oct 15, 2016 (Congress was upset by the Navy sleight of hand and changed the law so that the Navy could not claim a ship only with HM&E completed (Phase 1 build) without its combat systems or electronics (Phase 2 build) could be commissioned and therefore included in the Naval Vessel Register’s list of battle force ships, new law came into force when Trump signed the NDAA 2019 on August 13, 2018 and Zumwalt and Michael Monsoor were kicked off the Register and the Navy battle force total was reduced by two).
ReplyDeleteFollowing within three weeks of the completion of the Phase 2 build at BAES San Diego four years later, Oct. 13, 2020 at the Point Mugu test range, Zumwalt test fired a SM-2 to structurally assess the new Mk 57 VLS system material readiness of the ship against shock and vibration of the weapon firing, as well as measure any hazards or degradations as a result of firing live ordnance, the Mark 46 Mod 2 Gun Weapon System (GWS) 30 mm also fired, Navy said it was the first "large caliber weapons firing" event for the Zumwalt class program. Navy never carried Zumwalt's Full Ship Shock Trials, it just arbitrarily cancelled them
A year and a half later April 14, 2022 at the Point Mugu test range Zumwalt fires its semi-active homing ESSM Block I and SM-2 missiles during final air defense testing against live targets, following the testing USS Zumwalt crew has now started preparing for its maiden deployment. From start of construction to first deployment of near fourteen years might be a new unwelcome record for Navy for first in class with its main weapon system its two AGS 155mm guns non-operational, though think LCS might match or beat Zumwalt's record?
GAO 2020$ estimate for the three ship class, development $12.5 Bn, procurement $12.7 Bn, total $25.2 Bn
In other news, water is still wet.
ReplyDeleteBest use of Zumwalt is to use them for future weapons R&D.
ReplyDeleteWonder when we will find out that Zumwalt and co hulls are cracking......its almost a certitude that there's problems USN hiding. Just look at USN track record......
ReplyDeleteWell, on the bright side, better now than in a battle with the PLAN!! :-)
ReplyDeleteWell, at least it can shoot missiles. As far as first deployments go, better late than never, I suppose. Heck, just park one of the Zumwalt's in Guam and make it BMD platform.
ReplyDeleteActually, I don't think it can do BMD. It doesn't have Aegis.
DeleteOn the other hand, I have heard suggestions that, instead of retiring some of the Ticonderoga cruisers or spending the money to upgrade them, we should just park a couple of THEM at Guam to do BMD.
Delete"Heck, just park one of the Zumwalt's in Guam and make it BMD platform"
DeleteNot a chance, Zumwalt was so massively over budget Navy cancelled fitting its large SPY-4 S-band volume surveillance radar and only installed its small SPY-3 X-band radar and the C2 is the oddball Raytheon TSCE, not Aegis, so no BMD capability.
So, basically we're SOL with the Zumwalts.
DeleteIt's far worse than you think. Read, "Zumwalt Self-Defense System Problems"
DeleteThe Zumwalt's ESSM and Standard missiles aren't even interchangeable with the rest of the Navy. They require special, unique comm guidance comm links.
The unique com links point toward the same problem as the Ford. New tech overload. Instead of just a new powerplant on the Ford, we had magnetic elevators, magnetic launch, new radars, and a dozen other new systems. All being tried out for the first time at the same time. Ditto Zumwalt.
ReplyDeleteThe trimaran with extreme tumblehome hull would have been radical enough. But instead it was new systems, new VLS cells, new gun system, etc. Other, existing ships in the fleet could have tested these much cheaper.
The 155mm could have been placed on a soon to retire Tico for testing. I seem to recall an 8 inch gun design in the 1980's being tested that way. The size of the 155 would no doubt have cut down on the number of VLS cells, but if the system didn't work out, they could have retired an already old ship they wanted to retire anyway. The systems (links etc.) could have been tested by refitting an older Burke.
The initial Zumwalt could have had its new VLS (a relatively safe upgrade) but with 5' guns in the positions for the 155s (along with a lot of ballast for the weight difference) and with systems and sensors as a Burke (and a steel "sail" as we could test that composite one later as well).
This way at any time any of those new system failed or were too expensive, but the new hull worked out we could have a functioning combat ship with a quicker shakedown time. When the 155 didn't work out, we could still have a stealthy destroyer (albeit cruiser sized) that would have a lower per unit cost than the Zumwalt did. Perhaps low enough to consider production on scale greater than 3 .
"same problem as the Ford. New tech overload"
DeleteYes and no. The problem is more than just new tech. The problem is stupid new tech. For example, yes, the Zumwalt 155 mm gun system was new tech and that's hard enough to develop, debug, and transition to service in the fleet but the problem was irredeemably compounded by being stupid. The gun was not only new, it was designed to be incompatible with NATO standard 155 mm ammo. Thus, when the Zumwalt's unique LRLAP munition failed, the gun was unable to make use of the vast, existing 155 mm NATO ammo stock. That's stupid beyond belief.
The same is true for Zumwalt's non-Navy-standard missile guidance scheme. Pure stupid.
And so on.
It's not just new tech, it's stupid tech.