DD(X) National Team Completes Radar Cross-Section Testing of DD(X) Deckhouse



CHINA LAKE, Calif., Aug. 15, 2005 -- The DD(X) National Team, led by Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC), has reached another significant milestone by completing fabrication and radar cross-section testing on the integrated deckhouse test article.

Built out of carbon fiber, the integrated deckhouse test article is a one-of-a-kind technology demonstrator consisting of the forward and aft sections of the deckhouse, including an aft face that is fully populated with antennas that were supplied by potential subcontractors.

"The radar cross section is a critical element in the stealth attributes of DD(X) and the excellent test results from this engineering development model confirm we continue to meet and exceed the planned targets and objectives," said Brian Cuccias, Northrop Grumman vice president and DD(X) program manager. "The radar cross-section tests verify the Flight 1 deckhouse will meet its portion of the overall radar cross-section budget. We are extremely satisfied with the DD(X) program's successes to date and look forward to implementing these advanced technologies for our Navy and Marine Corp partners."

The tests, which took more than one year to prepare for, were performed at the Etcheron Valley Range facility at the Naval Air Warfare Center, in China Lake, Calif. The test team included employees from Northrop Grumman and Raytheon Company, as well as representatives from the U.S. Navy's PMS 500 program office and Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock division.

"This is the first time anything like the integrated deckhouse test article has ever been attempted and the results are extraordinary, particularly that something of this scale and complexity was built and worked the first time," said Barry Heaps, director of Northrop Grumman's Gulfport Composites Center for Excellence. "All in all, the onsite team of Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Navy personnel adjusted very well to the rigors of the high desert and the aggressive work schedule and all have our appreciation for a job well done."

In partnership with the U.S. Navy, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon Company, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems are leading a premier National Team to design DD(X) -- a revolutionary multi-mission destroyer. DD(X) technologies are currently in an advanced state of development and are destined to influence ship-design efforts around the world for the remainder of this century. The National Team, which includes more than 100 U.S. companies from 45 states, understands the importance of the rapidly maturing DD(X) Program to our nation, and is proud of the historic role this vessel will play in the advancement of ship and ship-systems design. The DD(X) National Team has successfully reached nearly a dozen incremental design-review milestones, highlighting the DD(X) National Team's commitment to staying on schedule and on cost, as well as the maturity and discipline of the program's approach to integrating unprecedented advanced technologies into the platform.

That's some BS right there.  It doesn't matter how low the radar signature is, it's still a big boat floating on the water!  It will be detected.  It's too much money and not enough firepower.

But the lower the radar-detectable portions are to the water, and the higher the observation devices, the further out you can see and they cant see you.

Kharn

Quoted: That's some BS right there.  It doesn't matter how low the radar signature is, it's still a big boat floating on the water!  It will be detected.  It's too much money and not enough firepower.

Yes, it most certainly does matter how low the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is.  Lower RCS reduces my probability of detection, which means I can avoid detection until I am much closer to my enemy.  Lower RCS reduces my vulnerability to radar guided weapons and greatly enhances the capabilities of my passive and active electronics systems.

I will argue about the money or the firepower however...you are right on!

Quoted: Yes, it most certainly does matter how low the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is.  Lower RCS reduces my probability of detection, which means I can avoid detection until I am much closer to my enemy.  Lower RCS reduces my vulnerability to radar guided weapons and greatly enhances the capabilities of my passive and active electronics systems.

Yes, it will help.  But a DDX is a BIG ship estimated at 600 feet long (2 football fields) and 12,000 tons.  Even a WW2 radar tower will detect that hunk of metal on the water.

the money or the firepower however...you are right on!

Thanks.

Quoted: Quoted: Yes, it most certainly does matter how low the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is.  Lower RCS reduces my probability of detection, which means I can avoid detection until I am much closer to my enemy.  Lower RCS reduces my vulnerability to radar guided weapons and greatly enhances the capabilities of my passive and active electronics systems. Yes, it will help.  But a DDX is a BIG ship estimated at 600 feet long (2 football fields) and 12,000 tons.  Even a WW2 radar tower will detect that hunk of metal on the water. the money or the firepower however...you are right on! Thanks.

Shape determines radar signature as much as material.  Saying any radar can pick up a "hunk of metal" is folly.

Shok

I would bet a million dollars the Chinese will know where that thing is 100% of the time.  Make it as stealthy as you want, it won't matter one bit.

Quoted: I would bet a million dollars the Chinese will know where that thing is 100% of the time.  Make it as stealthy as you want, it won't matter one bit.

Just what are they going to do about it.

Quoted: Shape determines radar signature as much as material.  Saying any radar can pick up a "hunk of metal" is folly.

The ideas are fine if the DDX was smaller. Take for example a B2, it's not much bigger than two F15's.  The DDX is estimated to be two football fields long and weighing in at 12,000 tons.  Commercial radar will find that, commercial magnetometers will find that, the military sensors will definitely find it.

I know the concept works, and it will make the ship "look" smaller to enemy sensors.  That means the missiles will veer off to hit something else more substantial such as the supply ship carrying the food and munitions... ouch.

Quoted: Quoted: I would bet a million dollars the Chinese will know where that thing is 100% of the time.  Make it as stealthy as you want, it won't matter one bit. Just what are they going to do about it.

Send the kill code to the IBM computers that run the DDX.

Then send 1000 Harpoon knock-offs to sink it.

Send the kill code to the IBM computers that run the DDX. Then send 1000 Harpoon knock-offs to sink it.

Haha! I think they'll just drop a Nuke in the general location of the DDX for effect. So I say just stick better defensive/offensive munitions on existing ships.

You'd think we would have learned from too many failed high-tech (high $$$$), "where's my mission" programs. ANd yes, I count the F-22, MV-22, and F-35 as failures until they prove they really have been worth the money.

Quoted: Quoted: Yes, it most certainly does matter how low the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is.  Lower RCS reduces my probability of detection, which means I can avoid detection until I am much closer to my enemy.  Lower RCS reduces my vulnerability to radar guided weapons and greatly enhances the capabilities of my passive and active electronics systems. Yes, it will help.  But a DDX is a BIG ship estimated at 600 feet long (2 football fields) and 12,000 tons.  Even a WW2 radar tower will detect that hunk of metal on the water. the money or the firepower however...you are right on! Thanks.

Just like that big hunk of B-2 flying around.  Please go back to your video games.

Quoted: Quoted: Yes, it most certainly does matter how low the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is.  Lower RCS reduces my probability of detection, which means I can avoid detection until I am much closer to my enemy.  Lower RCS reduces my vulnerability to radar guided weapons and greatly enhances the capabilities of my passive and active electronics systems. Yes, it will help.  But a DDX is a BIG ship estimated at 600 feet long (2 football fields) and 12,000 tons.  Even a WW2 radar tower will detect that hunk of metal on the water. the money or the firepower however...you are right on! Thanks.

Most of the ship will be underwater.  That portion that remains above the surface will by constructed using low observable materials and manufacturing techniques.  I can assure you that the radar and EO/IR signature will be quite small.  So small in fact that potential enemy platforms will have to come within range of the DD(X) defensive fire to detect it.  Cruise missiles fired at it will be much more susceptable to DD(X) defensive measures because of the low RCS.

BTW...what is a "radar tower"?  

Quoted: [ Most of the ship will be underwater.  That portion that remains above the surface will by constructed using low observable materials and manufacturing techniques.  I can assure you that the radar and EO/IR signature will be quite small.  So small in fact that potential enemy platforms will have to come within range of the DD(X) defensive fire to detect it.  Cruise missiles fired at it will be much more susceptable to DD(X) defensive measures because of the low RCS. BTW...what is a "radar tower"?

Stop breaking the armchair commando discussion rules by using things like "facts".  Those pesky buggers only tend to stifle thoughtful discussion.  Honestly, I expected something a little more ass-chewey out of a former (or is prior a better word?) SWO.

Quoted: Quoted: Shape determines radar signature as much as material.  Saying any radar can pick up a "hunk of metal" is folly. The ideas are fine if the DDX was smaller. Take for example a B2, it's not much bigger than two F15's.  The DDX is estimated to be two football fields long and weighing in at 12,000 tons.  Commercial radar will find that, commercial magnetometers will find that, the military sensors will definitely find it. I know the concept works, and it will make the ship "look" smaller to enemy sensors.  That means the missiles will veer off to hit something else more substantial such as the supply ship carrying the food and munitions... ouch.

Or a decoy?  Hmmm

Shok

Quoted: It may be 'stealthy' but the replemishment ships ain't… You will need to keep watching the CHICOM AGI's… Back to the 'Good Old Days'! ANdy

There is something else the replenishment ships ain't - operating in the littorals.  At least not within 25 miles or so of Indian country.  Also, a ship of that size/crew complement should need replenished far less often than a short-legged DD, CG, or DDG.

Quoted: Quoted: [ Most of the ship will be underwater.  That portion that remains above the surface will by constructed using low observable materials and manufacturing techniques.  I can assure you that the radar and EO/IR signature will be quite small.  So small in fact that potential enemy platforms will have to come within range of the DD(X) defensive fire to detect it.  Cruise missiles fired at it will be much more susceptable to DD(X) defensive measures because of the low RCS. BTW...what is a "radar tower"?   Stop breaking the armchair commando discussion rules by using things like "facts".  Those pesky buggers only tend to stifle thoughtful discussion.  Honestly, I expected something a little more ass-chewey out of a former (or is prior a better word?) SWO.

I am taking a measure approach with this young padawan.  He lacks the draft to compete with the grownups now...but who can say?  One day he too might grow up and gain all the knowledge of a ROTORHEAD!!!

Quoted: Quoted: That's some BS right there.  It doesn't matter how low the radar signature is, it's still a big boat floating on the water!  It will be detected.  It's too much money and not enough firepower. Yes, it most certainly does matter how low the Radar Cross Section (RCS) is.  Lower RCS reduces my probability of detection, which means I can avoid detection until I am much closer to my enemy.  Lower RCS reduces my vulnerability to radar guided weapons and greatly enhances the capabilities of my passive and active electronics systems. I will argue about the money or the firepower however...you are right on!

I agree with you if we are fighting China. If we are up against other threats, LO tech doesn't mean much.

IMO, put SPY-3 on the DDGs and CGs. Retrofit the AGS on the surface combatants already out there. JMO.

Quoted: Most of the ship will be underwater.

I have other problems with this. Draft being one of them. Torpedoes being another.

I can assure you that the radar and EO/IR signature will be quite small.

Which is good, but I've seen CGs, DDGs, DDs, and FFGs who have to operate extremely close to the shore. The draft combined with it being freaking huge, limits its utility in those circumstances.

So small in fact that potential enemy platforms will have to come within range of the DD(X) defensive fire to detect it.

Which only matters if the enemy wishes to live. Some enemies don't care.

Cruise missiles fired at it will be much more susceptable to DD(X) defensive measures because of the low RCS.

Again I agree if we are fighting China or another substantial Navy.

The other problem I have is the enormous cost. They're talking about building a max of 12 of these at 3 billion a piece. We could have 36 DDGs for that price. ~30 smart DDGs. I'm a believer in quantity having a quality all its own. Also we have a rapidly dwindling surface fleet. We just can't afford $3billion warships, IMO.

Another pic....