… By his twenty-five years, Vasya had completely sunk and lost the meaning of life. Bad heredity and the reduction in financial aid from wealthy parents played a cruel joke with him: in general, a good guy, according to neighbors and acquaintances, he finally "got out of the rut" and got hooked. An emaciated skeleton with a swollen face is all that remains of the former athlete, candidate for master of sports in freestyle wrestling. The former contender for the title of winner of regional competitions in martial arts has completely lost touch with reality and now attaches importance to things, to put it mildly, strange - he occasionally kneads his flabby muscles, offending the kids in the yard, and spends most of his time in a coma, shaking in convulsions of another overdose …
As the reader has already guessed, we are not talking about a living person, but about a ship - destroyer with guided missile weapons (URO) of the Orly Burke type. The destroyer is unusual in many ways, a recognized record holder in a number of combat characteristics and in terms of construction volume.
62 ships built for 2013 - the number of American Berks exceeds the number of destroyers flying the flags of all other countries of the world combined! At the same time, the construction of the Berkov continues: two more ships of the new IIA + series were laid down in 2011. In total, according to plans, the IIA + series will include 9 units. And then even more advanced "Berks" of series III (Flight III) - twenty units after 2020 will gush like a steel avalanche.
Launching USS John McCain (DDG-56), 1992
This is without taking into account the foreign "replicas" of the American "Aegis" destroyer "- the Japanese" Atago "and" Congo ", the Spanish" Alvaro de Basan ", the South Korean" King Shojon "… The situation is just taking a frightening turn. Aegis are spreading around the world like poisonous insects.
The massive appearance of Berks is the result of maximum standardization and unification of the US Navy: in the near future, the fleet should retain only one type of universal destroyer, which will replace all existing (or existing) types of missile cruisers, destroyers and frigates.
How fair is this decision? Will the Aegis destroyer be able to effectively solve the tasks of ships of other classes?
The answer is obvious - the destroyer "Berk" will brilliantly cope with the tasks of any frigate, but the economy of any country will "bend" from such "standardization" - a destroyer with a displacement of 10 thousand tons instead of a 4-5 thousand-ton frigate! The Yankees build their ships on an unpaid loan, so they don't think too much about the exorbitant costs of the fleet. Given that the cost of the last "Berks" is estimated at 1, 8 … 2 billion dollars.
Will the admirals ask for another 20 destroyers? Sure, not a problem…
US Navy development scenarios until 2042. The first, optimistic, assumes a 40-year life cycle for destroyers. The second, pessimistic, with limited funding, assumes a 35-year cycle. The plans are to keep the number of destroyers at around 90 units.
Ticonderoga-class cruisers (CG-47) will definitely be decommissioned by 2028
"Berks" I and II series (DDG-51) are gradually replaced by DDG-51 series III
Zamvolty (DDG-1000) - narrow strip, a series of three experimental destroyers
DDG (X) is a new generation destroyer. Until no one even knows what it will look like
Why the domestic BOD is not inferior to "Burk"
90 rocket launchers. Combat information and control system "Aegis", which combines all means of detection and communication, a complex of weapons and systems for fighting for the survivability of the ship. Reliable and efficient power plant. The building, built with the stealth technology in mind. A multifunctional robot ship capable of smashing targets on the ground, under water and in the air.
However, the first impression is deceiving. Admiration at the acquaintance with the Orly Burke is quickly replaced by suspicion about the discrepancy between its declared combat capabilities and the real state of affairs.
After all, being created as a "castrated" version of the missile cruiser "Ticonderoga", the destroyer "Berk" initially did not shine with high performance and was a "step back" in terms of creating surface combat ships. The only thing that attracted admirals in this project was the declared cheapness and efficiency: according to initial calculations, the destroyer should have retained 2/3 of the cruiser's capabilities at 1/2 of its cost. But even these numbers turned out to be overly optimistic.
Launched to the sound of fanfare, the lead USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) turned out to be far from the idea of an "ideal" destroyer.
Truth is learned by comparison. To understand the main problems faced by American sailors, I propose to take for comparison its Soviet / Russian peers - large anti-submarine ships of projects 1155 and 1155.1.
Even for its intended purpose - as an air defense ship - the Burk's design raised a lot of questions. First and foremost, why does a super destroyer have only three target illumination radars? Of these, only one falls on the front hemisphere. Clear evidence that the destroyer, despite its declared qualities, is not capable of repelling massive air attacks.
For comparison, the Soviet BOD, which was never positioned as an air defense ship, was equipped with two antenna posts for the guidance of ZR95 missiles. Each radar with HEADLIGHTS provided SIMULTANEOUS guidance of up to 8 missiles at 4 air targets in the 60 x 60 degree sector.
The small number of illumination radars and the limited number of targets to be fired are by no means all the problems of the American destroyer. The leadership of the US Navy ignored the claims of the sailors to the AN / SPY-1 multifunctional radar (of course, after billions were invested in the program to create a superradar, there is no turning back).
The main component of the Aegis system is a powerful three-dimensional radar station with four fixed phased antenna arrays, capable of detecting and automatically tracking hundreds of air targets, programming the autopilots of launched anti-aircraft missiles and tracking targets in low Earth orbit.
In practice, she showed the opposite. Despite its state-of-the-art appearance and broad capabilities for monitoring airspace at long distances, the AN / SPY-1 radar turned out to be "blind" in detecting low-flying targets (NLC) - and it serves it right!
Usually, on warships, specialized radars are used to detect high-speed NLCs - for example, the domestic Podkat radar with a narrow-beam search beam and a high data update rate or a dual-band Japanese radar with an active phased array FCS-3A, operating in frequency bands C (wavelength 7, 5 up to 3.75 cm) and X (wavelength from 3.75 to 2.5 cm).
The Americans probably thought they were the smartest, so they tried to solve the problem of detecting NLCs with the multifunctional AN / SPY-1 - one radar for all occasions! At the cost of tremendous effort, the team of programmers managed to "drown out" the interference and teach the AN / SPY-1 to scan with a narrow beam at a small angle of elevation. But how effective was the AN / SPY-1 in this mode?
There is still no information in the open press about the defeat of supersonic air targets by the Aegis at an extremely low altitude - probably, the American Berks never learned how to deal with such threats. The released Mosquito or the Russian-Indian Bramos with a high probability will break through the destroyer's air defense / missile defense system and hit the target.
In addition, the AN / SPY-1's capabilities to detect the NLC are limited due to the poor location of the antenna devices: unlike other ships, where antenna posts are trying to be placed on the tops of the masts, the AN / SPY-1 phased antenna arrays hang on the walls of the superstructure, like paintings at the Tretyakov Gallery.
This gives the ship a stylish, modern look, but reduces the NLC's detection range (radio horizon problem). Finally, as follows from the specifics of the operation of the radar itself, four fixed PARs are not the best solution when repelling massive attacks from one direction. One of the grids becomes overloaded with information, while the other three are inactive.
By now, Orly Burke with its AN / SPY-1 is completely outdated - modern British Daring, Franco-Italian Horizons or Japanese Akizuki are head and shoulders above the American destroyer in air defense capabilities, especially in intercepting high-speed NLCs.
On the destroyers of other fleets, radars with active HEADLIGHTS (SAMPSON, S1850, FCS-3A) have long been used. Anti-aircraft missiles with active homing heads (the European PAAMS air defense system with missiles of the Aster family) are flying with might and main. But the Americans have nothing like this! Burke continues to use outdated technology with the AN / SPY-1 blinded radar and the Standerd-2 family of missiles and the RIM-162 ESSM with semi-active guidance. With that, as mentioned above, the destroyer has only three AN / SPG-62 illumination radars, capable of guiding only one missile at a time.
The presence of SM-3 super-ammunition, capable of hitting targets at transatmospheric altitudes, does nothing for the destroyer in real combat - the three-stage SM-3 interceptor is useless against aircraft and low-flying anti-ship missiles.
That's it. The superhero turned out to be a "frayer" with very mediocre characteristics.
If the capabilities of the destroyer "Berk" to repel air attacks can be defined as "average", then its anti-submarine and anti-ship capabilities are assessed as "below average", or even "none at all."
For example, the first 28 destroyers (Flight I and II) did not have a helicopter hangar at all - only a landing pad at the stern. At a time when domestic BODs carried two anti-submarine helicopters on board!
Further comparison of the anti-submarine (PLO) capabilities of the first "Berks" with the BOD pr. 1155 (cipher "Udalaya") is like a "one-sided game":
Our BODs were equipped with a grandiose sonar station "Polynom" weighing 800 tons. The detection range of submarines, torpedoes and sea mines under favorable hydrological conditions could reach 40-50 km. Even the most modern modifications of the American AN / SQS-53 sonar can hardly boast of such characteristics.
On board the BOD there were eight anti-submarine missile-torpedoes with a launch range of up to 50 km ("Rastrub-B" / "Vodopad-NK"), not counting the auxiliary means in the form of RBU. For comparison: the modernized American rocket-torpedoes RUM-139 Vertical Launch ASROC are capable of hitting targets at a distance of no more than 22 km. From the point of view of real conditions, 22 and 50 km are no longer of particular importance, due to the difficulty of detecting submarines at such distances. However, the numbers are against Burk …
The anti-submarine capabilities of the Aegis destroyers increased markedly only starting with the IIA series (the lead destroyer, the Oscar Austin, was commissioned into the Navy in 2000). The ships of this series had the entire aft section completely re-arranged, where two hangars appeared to accommodate the Sea Hawk helicopters of the LAMPS III PLO system.
Good!
As one of the readers of the Voennoye Obozreniye portal put it cleverly, modern ships are not designed for naval combat. They are created for comfortable service of contract soldiers in peacetime.
This statement fully applies to Orly Burke-class destroyers - Wi-Fi, swimming pools and restaurant meals, 4, 4 sq. meters of living space for each sailor … The only thing that the designers of the ship have forgotten is that a destroyer must be able to conduct sea battles. And the modern "Berk" is categorically incapable of this.
BOD "Admiral Chabanenko" (pr. 1155.1), was accepted into the Navy in 1999
The new complex PLUR "Vodopad-NK" with launch through conventional TA allowed to place on board eight supersonic anti-ship missiles "Moskit". The nose battery of 100 mm guns was replaced with a twin automatic 130 mm AK-130 mount. Rapid-fire AK-630s have been replaced by 2 "Kortik" air defense missile systems
In addition to the general "flimsy" design inherent in all modern ships (the destroyer "Cole" was out of order after a submarine with 200-300 kg of explosives was blown up next to its side, 17 dead sailors, 34 wounded. Complete loss of progress and combat effectiveness - it is not difficult to imagine that will happen in the event of a direct hit in the US Navy destroyer of the most modest anti-ship missile) - in addition to low survivability and resistance to combat damage, the modern "Berk" is completely devoid of anti-ship weapons!
(The presence of a universal "five-inch" system and the theoretical possibility of firing missiles at surface ships can be neglected.)
How so?
Very simple. The destroyers of the first series were equipped with two formidable naval combat systems:
- specialized subsonic anti-ship missiles "Harpoon" (firing range 130 km, speed 0, 85 M, warhead weight 225 kg) in two quad launchers Mk141 at the stern of the destroyer;
- anti-ship missiles BGM-109B TASM, which are a modification of the famous SLCM "Tomahawk". The TERCOM relief guidance system has been replaced with an active radar seeker, similar to the Harpoon missiles.
Despite the ridicule about the subsonic speed (0.75M), the anti-ship Tomahawk was a hard-to-detect lethal ammunition that flew on the march section at an altitude of only a few meters above the crests of the waves (in contrast to the Soviet monsters P-500/700/1000, which soared up a couple of tens of kilometers). The low speed and obsolescence of the control center data was compensated for by special flight modes at the final section of the trajectory (“snake” search). Finally, the flight range of half a thousand kilometers and a warhead weighing 450 kg is 2-3 times greater than that of ordinary small-sized anti-ship missiles (exotic bulky Granites and Volcanoes do not count).
In the 1990s, a number of BGM-109B Tomahawk Anti-Ship Missles were commonly found in vertical launch cells on board US Navy destroyers and cruisers.
Orly Burk Series I Standard Stern Arrangement
Two AN / SPG-62 illumination radars to cover the aft corners (behind the chimneys), the Phalanx carriage (the complex itself was dismantled for technical reasons), inclined Mk.141 launchers for the Harpoon anti-ship missile system and, finally, the UVP cells with "Tomahawks"
Alas, by now "Burke" has completely degraded. In view of the disappearance of the only worthy enemy - the Soviet Navy, the anti-ship "Tomahawk" turned into unnecessary ballast. BGM-109B was completely removed from service in the early 2000s.
On series IIA destroyers, the installation of anti-ship missiles was generally considered unnecessary and useless. As a result, "Berk" lost its last weapon - the anti-ship missile "Harpoon". Of course, the sailors did not think to give up the missiles - everything was decided for them by the command of the fleet, which sought to reduce the already exorbitant costs.
As a result, a shameful situation has arisen: any Iranian corvette or RTO can "whack" a defenseless "Burke" with a pair of anti-ship missiles, and the American destroyer will not even have anything to snap back with.
Realizing their helplessness, the sailors made a fuss. The result of the debate was the LRASM (Long Range Anti Ship Missle) project - the development of a long-range subsonic stealth anti-ship missile based on the AGM-158 JASSM aviation cruise missile, launched from the Mk41 UVP cells.
Instead of a high-speed "race for survival", LRASM relies on an "intelligent" breakthrough of the enemy's air defense / missile defense system - high autonomy, stealth, complex evasion maneuvers, jamming. The new missile is expected to enter service with the US Navy in the second half of this decade.
In the meantime … the Americans are powerlessly clenching their fists at the sight of Iranian missile corvettes.
Another moment of the Orly Burke's degradation is that the last destroyers enter service without short-range self-defense systems. The familiar six-barreled "Falanx" is recognized as an obsolete weapon, in return the destroyer received … an empty seat. Initially, it was assumed that the RIM-116 Rolling Airfame Missle (RAM) missile systems - a 21-charge launcher on the Falanx carriage - would replace the radar-guided anti-aircraft guns; missile design - fuselage from the aircraft "Sidewinder" + infrared seeker from the "Stinger" MANPADS. The complex is suitable for hitting air targets at a distance of up to 9 km.
However, it was decided to save money on the self-defense air defense system. Burke has lost its last line of defense.
USS Spruance (DDG-111) IIA series destroyer. At the stern is the obsolete Falanx. In front is emptiness
At the moment, the strike weapons of the Orly Burke-class destroyers are limited to the Tomahawk cruise missiles - many modifications with different guidance algorithms and types of warheads. In this standings, the American destroyers have no equal - "Burke" in the "strike" version is capable of taking on board 56 "Axes". A powerful rocket launcher for conducting local combat operations, capable of finishing off the air defense of any "banana republic" with one salvo. The main thing is not to come close to the coast, otherwise you can be great "shovel" from the counterfeit Chinese anti-ship missiles C-802 and other "wunderwaffe", which have proliferated around the world in extreme quantities. There is no hope for AN / SPY-1, and instead of the good old "Phalanx" the Americans now have, sorry, bare butt.
Huge plans
I wonder how the Yankees are going to fight in these, even now obsolete "pelvis" for the next 50 years? After all, no matter how puffed up the Pentagon, the US Navy will not have other destroyers in the near future (three experimental Zamvolta do not make the weather). Even if we assume the appearance of promising destroyers DD (X) in the 2030s, "Burks" will remain the basis of the surface component of the US Navy at least until the middle of the century. And according to a number of forecasts, the last of the Berk destroyers will leave the active composition of the 2070s! No other type of ship in history has remained in service in the "first line" for such a long time.
Changing the length of the gun barrel from 54 to 62 calibers will not get off here. As well as the addition of various high-tech systems (for example, MASKER, which supplies air bubbles to the bottom of the ship to reduce hydroacoustic signature). Autonomous robotic mine detectors RMS, active rockets, five armored bulkheads in the superstructure … no! You need something fundamentally different!
The Yankees have great hopes for the Third Series (Flight III). There is no exact information on these ships. Surely even the developers themselves have not yet decided on the appearance of the modernized "Burk".
But one thing is already clear - the AN / SPY-1 radar will retire. Instead, there will be a radar with an active HEADLIGHT AMDR or something similar - extremely energy-intensive, for monitoring the upper atmosphere and LEO. Having suffered a fiasco with the "universal" destroyer, the Yankees are increasingly inclined towards the idea of turning the Berks into floating missile launch sites of the national missile defense system.
There are plans to re-arrange the engine rooms - instead of gas turbines, destroyers will be equipped with full electric propulsion. If necessary, one of the helicopter hangars will be donated for the installation of an additional generator.
155-mm long-range gun AGS instead of a bow gun, active defense systems based on laser weapons, new types of rocket ammunition, target designation from radars of F-35 fighters …
Tests and small-scale assembly of SM-6 anti-aircraft missiles are in full swing. Raytheon promises to deliver the first major shipment to the Navy in 2015. The Yankees, with a delay of 10 years, still hope to adopt an active guided missile defense system.
The "degradation" of the destroyer Burke is nothing more than a spiteful joke. The modern American destroyer does not really shine with its performance characteristics, but quantity sooner or later turns into quality. The Yankees do have a lot of destroyers, and even more plans to modernize them.
What's next? Shows the future.
