美国军迷：我们应当在完成 DDG(X)项目的同时，重启朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰的建造，而非制造什么战列舰
正文翻译
Hear me out we should restart Zumwalt construction instead of building the battleships, along with finishing DDG(X)
听我说：我们应当重启朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰的建造，而非继续制造战列舰，同时完成 DDG(X)项目
Like, I am at best an amateur enthusiast who doesn't really know anything. I know this is probably a bad idea and am in part posting this to find out all the reasons why that I haven't thought of yet. It's mostly for fun. Just hear me out before you press the down vote button and remind me that I'm an idiot.
我最多也就是个业余爱好者，其实什么都不懂。我知道这主意可能不怎么样，甚至发出来就是为了看看还有哪些没想到的槽点。主要是图个乐子。还请各位高抬贵手，在点踩前听我把话说完，也不必特意提醒我是个傻瓜。
First off, I'm not convinced a large surface combatant is a bad idea in isolation. The Navy has been trying to get one for thirty years now and the Defiant class isn't too different from the strike cruiser idea from the late 80s. Where it is a bad idea is that the Arleigh Burke class is at the end its life and needs replacing and the battleships will take away yard space from aircraft carrier construction. However, building DDG(X) and pairing it with a new run of modified Zumwalt class ships would result in a task force that can pretty much do everything the battleships could do.
首先，我并不认为单就大型水面战斗舰的设想本身有什么问题。美国海军近三十年来一直在寻求建造这种舰艇，而无畏级与上世纪八十年代末提出的打击巡洋舰概念并无太大差异。真正的问题在于，阿利·伯克级已接近使用寿命末期亟需换代，而战列舰的建造会挤占航母的船坞资源。然而，如果建造 DDG(X)驱逐舰并搭配新一代改良型朱姆沃尔特级舰艇，组成的特遣舰队几乎能实现战列舰的所有作战功能。
The last time we thought about a guided missile battleship that I know of was USS Kentucky, the fifth Iowa class. I believe there were three main proposals for her.
据我所知，我们最近一次考虑建造导弹战列舰是第五艘衣阿华级——肯塔基号。当时主要有三种改造方案。
One replace turret 3 with two terrier launchers. That way she could shoot surface ships, shore facilities, and planes all at once.
方案一：用两座小猎犬导弹发射装置替换三号炮塔。这样她就能同时攻击水面舰艇、岸基设施和飞机。
Two install a bunch of Polaris missiles.
方案二：安装大量北极星导弹。
Three replace all weapons with four Talos and twelve Tartar launchers.
第三：将所有武器替换为四具塔洛斯导弹发射器和十二具鞑靼导弹发射器。
Option one is basically a next generation fast battleship. It beats up surface ships and defends aircraft carriers. We didn't need that because the Soviets didn't have the ability to wipe out our carriers and force a surface action, let alone any battleships to fight one. Option two is a strategic deterrent. Submarines do it better. Option three is a giant no-fun zone for enemy aircraft and nothing else. planes do it better, it's expensive, and it could also be done by cruisers.
第一种方案本质上是下一代高速战列舰。它能压制水面舰艇并护卫航空母舰。我们并不需要这种舰船，因为苏联既没有能力摧毁我们的航母并迫使水面交战，更没有战列舰可与之对抗。第二种方案是战略威慑。潜艇在这方面做得更好。第三种方案是为敌方飞机制造一个巨大的无趣区域，除此之外别无他用。飞机在这方面更出色，这种方案成本高昂，而且巡洋舰也能胜任。
The Defiant class pretty much tries to do all of these things. That seems to be the logic behind the design. It's a strategic deterrent with the hypersonic missiles and nuclear cruise missiles. It's a next generation fast battleship with the rail gun and any Naval Strike Missiles and ship to shore missiles that end up being installed. It's got a bunch of VLS cells to carry anti-aircraft missiles along with a bunch of laser cannons.
Defiant 级战舰几乎试图同时实现所有这些功能。这似乎是其设计背后的逻辑。凭借高超音速导弹和核巡航导弹，它成为一种战略威慑力量；借助轨道炮以及最终安装的任何海军打击导弹和舰对地导弹，它又是下一代高速战列舰；它配备了大量垂直发射系统单元用于携带防空导弹，还有若干激光炮。
In my extremely uninformed, massively amateurish, almost certainly mistaken opinion, if we accept the logic that ships need to do all three missions, a combination of modified Zumwalt class ships and DDG(X) could do it. From what I understand, the super-VLS for the fast and furious missiles only replaced turret one, and the space where turret two was is unoccupied. Even if you could only fit 16 VLS cells in there it'd have the same number as DDG(X). Alternatively, the gun house is still there, so why not make use of it and stick a lower-power railgun or a phaser in there. That would basically turn them into the replacement battleships they were intended to be. Sling rods at close shore targets, missiles for further away shore targets, fast bois for that guy who moved to another city without returning your copy of Metal Gear Solid, and if you really want a nuclear weapon on a ship just stick it in a tomahawk in a VLS cell where it belongs. If they want to go full US Navy they could even come up with a universal mounting point so the magnetic hole punch and the zzap kannon can be swapped out by fleet replenishment vessels. It's also probably the only class in the world that can do strategic deterrence as well due to its stealthy hull. Sure you know it's rolled up to your coastline, but you'll have a hard time getting a missile lock before it's leveled half your military bases, so you better not try anything. DDG(X) can come along for the ride to launch a Macross Missile Massacre against any flying fun police, and it can back up the Zumwalt against surface targets with any Naval Strike Missiles bolted to the deck. Both ships also should have enough electricity to be floating disco balls and throw a party for any drones that wander by.
在我这极为门外汉、十足业余、几乎必定有误的观点里，若我们接受舰船需承担全部三种任务的逻辑，那么改进型朱姆沃尔特级舰船与 DDG(X)的组合或许能胜任。据我所知，用于装载高速导弹的超级垂直发射系统仅替换了前炮塔，而后炮塔原位置至今闲置。即使只能在此处安装 16 个垂直发射单元，其数量也将与 DDG(X)持平。或者，炮塔结构尚存，何不加以利用，安装一门低功率电磁炮或相位武器？这实质上就能将它们改造成最初设想的替代战列舰：用轨道炮打击近岸目标，用导弹对付更远岸上目标，用高速导弹追击那些借了《合金装备》游戏光盘却迁居他乡不还的家伙；若真要在舰上配备核武器，只需将其装入战斧导弹安置在垂直发射单元——那才是它该待的地方。若他们想彻底展现美国海军风范，甚至可以设计通用接口，让磁轨炮与相位炮能由舰队补给舰随时换装。 这可能是世界上唯一一种凭借其隐形舰体实现战略威慑的舰级。是的，你清楚它已经悄然驶近你的海岸线，但在它夷平你半数军事基地之前，你很难锁定目标进行导弹攻击，所以最好别轻举妄动。DDG(X)可以随行护航，对任何胆敢靠近的空中执法者发动一场超时空要塞式的导弹暴雨，同时还能用甲板上的任何海军打击导弹支援《朱姆沃尔特》打击水面目标。这两艘军舰的电力都足以变成浮动迪斯科球，顺便用电子干扰为误入战区的无人机开个狂欢派对。
So yeah. In short, the Zumwalt does strategic deterrence and shoots up surface targets while DDG(X) establishes the no-fly zone and helps shoot up surface targets. The two working together can do everything the Defiant class can while having greater numbers of hulls and, perhaps most importantly, both can be built without using yards needed for aircraft carrier construction.
总而言之，《朱姆沃尔特》负责战略威慑和打击水面目标，而 DDG(X)则负责建立禁飞区并协助打击水面目标。两舰协同作战可完全覆盖《挑战者》级的所有功能，同时还能拥有更多舰体数量——最重要的是，两者都无需占用航空母舰建造所需的船坞资源。
Thanks for reading. You may now smash that down vote button and remind me that I'm an idiot.
感谢阅读。现在您可以猛击反对键，并提醒我真是个白痴了。
Hear me out we should restart Zumwalt construction instead of building the battleships, along with finishing DDG(X)
听我说：我们应当重启朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰的建造，而非继续制造战列舰，同时完成 DDG(X)项目
Like, I am at best an amateur enthusiast who doesn't really know anything. I know this is probably a bad idea and am in part posting this to find out all the reasons why that I haven't thought of yet. It's mostly for fun. Just hear me out before you press the down vote button and remind me that I'm an idiot.
我最多也就是个业余爱好者，其实什么都不懂。我知道这主意可能不怎么样，甚至发出来就是为了看看还有哪些没想到的槽点。主要是图个乐子。还请各位高抬贵手，在点踩前听我把话说完，也不必特意提醒我是个傻瓜。
First off, I'm not convinced a large surface combatant is a bad idea in isolation. The Navy has been trying to get one for thirty years now and the Defiant class isn't too different from the strike cruiser idea from the late 80s. Where it is a bad idea is that the Arleigh Burke class is at the end its life and needs replacing and the battleships will take away yard space from aircraft carrier construction. However, building DDG(X) and pairing it with a new run of modified Zumwalt class ships would result in a task force that can pretty much do everything the battleships could do.
首先，我并不认为单就大型水面战斗舰的设想本身有什么问题。美国海军近三十年来一直在寻求建造这种舰艇，而无畏级与上世纪八十年代末提出的打击巡洋舰概念并无太大差异。真正的问题在于，阿利·伯克级已接近使用寿命末期亟需换代，而战列舰的建造会挤占航母的船坞资源。然而，如果建造 DDG(X)驱逐舰并搭配新一代改良型朱姆沃尔特级舰艇，组成的特遣舰队几乎能实现战列舰的所有作战功能。
The last time we thought about a guided missile battleship that I know of was USS Kentucky, the fifth Iowa class. I believe there were three main proposals for her.
据我所知，我们最近一次考虑建造导弹战列舰是第五艘衣阿华级——肯塔基号。当时主要有三种改造方案。
One replace turret 3 with two terrier launchers. That way she could shoot surface ships, shore facilities, and planes all at once.
方案一：用两座小猎犬导弹发射装置替换三号炮塔。这样她就能同时攻击水面舰艇、岸基设施和飞机。
Two install a bunch of Polaris missiles.
方案二：安装大量北极星导弹。
Three replace all weapons with four Talos and twelve Tartar launchers.
第三：将所有武器替换为四具塔洛斯导弹发射器和十二具鞑靼导弹发射器。
Option one is basically a next generation fast battleship. It beats up surface ships and defends aircraft carriers. We didn't need that because the Soviets didn't have the ability to wipe out our carriers and force a surface action, let alone any battleships to fight one. Option two is a strategic deterrent. Submarines do it better. Option three is a giant no-fun zone for enemy aircraft and nothing else. planes do it better, it's expensive, and it could also be done by cruisers.
第一种方案本质上是下一代高速战列舰。它能压制水面舰艇并护卫航空母舰。我们并不需要这种舰船，因为苏联既没有能力摧毁我们的航母并迫使水面交战，更没有战列舰可与之对抗。第二种方案是战略威慑。潜艇在这方面做得更好。第三种方案是为敌方飞机制造一个巨大的无趣区域，除此之外别无他用。飞机在这方面更出色，这种方案成本高昂，而且巡洋舰也能胜任。
The Defiant class pretty much tries to do all of these things. That seems to be the logic behind the design. It's a strategic deterrent with the hypersonic missiles and nuclear cruise missiles. It's a next generation fast battleship with the rail gun and any Naval Strike Missiles and ship to shore missiles that end up being installed. It's got a bunch of VLS cells to carry anti-aircraft missiles along with a bunch of laser cannons.
Defiant 级战舰几乎试图同时实现所有这些功能。这似乎是其设计背后的逻辑。凭借高超音速导弹和核巡航导弹，它成为一种战略威慑力量；借助轨道炮以及最终安装的任何海军打击导弹和舰对地导弹，它又是下一代高速战列舰；它配备了大量垂直发射系统单元用于携带防空导弹，还有若干激光炮。
In my extremely uninformed, massively amateurish, almost certainly mistaken opinion, if we accept the logic that ships need to do all three missions, a combination of modified Zumwalt class ships and DDG(X) could do it. From what I understand, the super-VLS for the fast and furious missiles only replaced turret one, and the space where turret two was is unoccupied. Even if you could only fit 16 VLS cells in there it'd have the same number as DDG(X). Alternatively, the gun house is still there, so why not make use of it and stick a lower-power railgun or a phaser in there. That would basically turn them into the replacement battleships they were intended to be. Sling rods at close shore targets, missiles for further away shore targets, fast bois for that guy who moved to another city without returning your copy of Metal Gear Solid, and if you really want a nuclear weapon on a ship just stick it in a tomahawk in a VLS cell where it belongs. If they want to go full US Navy they could even come up with a universal mounting point so the magnetic hole punch and the zzap kannon can be swapped out by fleet replenishment vessels. It's also probably the only class in the world that can do strategic deterrence as well due to its stealthy hull. Sure you know it's rolled up to your coastline, but you'll have a hard time getting a missile lock before it's leveled half your military bases, so you better not try anything. DDG(X) can come along for the ride to launch a Macross Missile Massacre against any flying fun police, and it can back up the Zumwalt against surface targets with any Naval Strike Missiles bolted to the deck. Both ships also should have enough electricity to be floating disco balls and throw a party for any drones that wander by.
在我这极为门外汉、十足业余、几乎必定有误的观点里，若我们接受舰船需承担全部三种任务的逻辑，那么改进型朱姆沃尔特级舰船与 DDG(X)的组合或许能胜任。据我所知，用于装载高速导弹的超级垂直发射系统仅替换了前炮塔，而后炮塔原位置至今闲置。即使只能在此处安装 16 个垂直发射单元，其数量也将与 DDG(X)持平。或者，炮塔结构尚存，何不加以利用，安装一门低功率电磁炮或相位武器？这实质上就能将它们改造成最初设想的替代战列舰：用轨道炮打击近岸目标，用导弹对付更远岸上目标，用高速导弹追击那些借了《合金装备》游戏光盘却迁居他乡不还的家伙；若真要在舰上配备核武器，只需将其装入战斧导弹安置在垂直发射单元——那才是它该待的地方。若他们想彻底展现美国海军风范，甚至可以设计通用接口，让磁轨炮与相位炮能由舰队补给舰随时换装。 这可能是世界上唯一一种凭借其隐形舰体实现战略威慑的舰级。是的，你清楚它已经悄然驶近你的海岸线，但在它夷平你半数军事基地之前，你很难锁定目标进行导弹攻击，所以最好别轻举妄动。DDG(X)可以随行护航，对任何胆敢靠近的空中执法者发动一场超时空要塞式的导弹暴雨，同时还能用甲板上的任何海军打击导弹支援《朱姆沃尔特》打击水面目标。这两艘军舰的电力都足以变成浮动迪斯科球，顺便用电子干扰为误入战区的无人机开个狂欢派对。
So yeah. In short, the Zumwalt does strategic deterrence and shoots up surface targets while DDG(X) establishes the no-fly zone and helps shoot up surface targets. The two working together can do everything the Defiant class can while having greater numbers of hulls and, perhaps most importantly, both can be built without using yards needed for aircraft carrier construction.
总而言之，《朱姆沃尔特》负责战略威慑和打击水面目标，而 DDG(X)则负责建立禁飞区并协助打击水面目标。两舰协同作战可完全覆盖《挑战者》级的所有功能，同时还能拥有更多舰体数量——最重要的是，两者都无需占用航空母舰建造所需的船坞资源。
Thanks for reading. You may now smash that down vote button and remind me that I'm an idiot.
感谢阅读。现在您可以猛击反对键，并提醒我真是个白痴了。
评论翻译
Even_Paramedic_9145
The Navy simply couldn’t make up their mind and accept tradeoffs with DDG(X), which is why we have this supposed BBG(X). They basically said they do not see contemporary hulls the size of Zumwalt or similar as having the growth margin necessary for future systems. Navy design in recent times basically always trends to a ship that is either do-everything or do-everything-lite when it comes to the frontline blue-water vessels, and not specialized roles like an explicit air-warfare destroyer, or an explicit stand-off vessel. They end up designing essentially a bigger or smaller Burke, and when you’re planning for 30-40 year lifecycles, a bigger hull makes more sense.
海军在 DDG(X)项目上始终无法下定决心并接受取舍，这正是所谓 BBG(X)出现的根源。军方明确表示，他们认为当代舰艇——包括朱姆沃尔特级或类似尺寸的船体——缺乏承载未来系统所需的升级空间。近年来海军在设计前沿远洋战舰时，基本都倾向于打造"全能型"或"轻量全能型"战舰，而非专精特定任务的舰种，比如专职防空的驱逐舰或专职远程打击的舰艇。最终设计出的不过是放大或缩小的伯克级，而考虑到 30-40 年的服役周期，更大的船体显然更具扩展性。
They’re probably going for a high-low mix of larger multirole fleet steamers while smaller, potentially unmanned ships work the peripheral.
未来很可能形成高低搭配的格局：由大型多功能主力舰担任核心，小型舰艇（可能采用无人化设计）则负责外围作战。
_spec_tre
It seems like the incapability to accept tradeoffs is like half of the reasons behind the USN being crippled
美军陷入困境的原因，恐怕一半在于难以接受必要的取舍
plarealtalk
The Navy simply couldn’t make up their mind and accept tradeoffs with DDG(X), which is why we have this supposed BBG(X). They basically said they do not see contemporary hulls the size of Zumwalt or similar as having the growth margin necessary for future systems.
海军就是无法下定决心，在 DDG(X)项目上做出权衡取舍，于是才有了所谓的 BBG(X)计划。他们基本上表明，他们认为像"朱姆沃尔特"级那样尺寸的当代舰体不具备未来系统所需的发展空间。
That is what has been stated, but left unsaid is how much of the displacement in these battleships are allocated for systems that are of questionable need/composition -- a main railgun seems questionable, and the dual five inch guns are a bit bizarre as well. Seeking 12 CPS cells and 128 Mk 41 cells seems a little bit greedy as well.
虽然官方已公布这些数据，但未言明的是：这些战舰的排水量中有多少分配给了需求存疑的系统配置？主电磁轨道炮的必要性值得商榷，双联五英寸舰炮的配置也略显奇特。而追求 12 个 CPS 垂发单元加 128 个 Mk41 垂发单元的组合，似乎也显得过于贪心了。
A 128 Mk-41 VLS or even G-VLS ship (or replacing some of that count with CPS if they really desired it), with IEPS, a sensible main gun setup, flag facilities, upsized SPY-6, could absolutely be done in a clean sheet hull design of 15,000t or slightly more, without needing a gargantuan ship over 35,000t.
一艘配备 128 个 Mk-41 垂直发射系统或 G-VLS（若确实需要，可用部分 CPS 替换部分数量）、采用综合电力系统、合理主炮配置、旗舰设施、扩大版 SPY-6 雷达的舰艇，完全可以在 1.5 万吨或稍大的全新船体设计中实现，根本不需要超过 3.5 万吨的庞然巨舰。
Heck even if they wanted 128 Mk-41 cells and 12 CPS cells, they could have omitted the ridiculous gun setup and achieved it in a smaller 20,000t hull.
见鬼，就算他们想要 128 个 Mk-41 发射单元和 12 个 CPS 发射单元，也完全可以通过舍弃那套荒谬的炮塔配置，在更小的 2 万吨级船体上实现。
iPon3
The dual five inch (in two mounts?) with associated magazine and feed in addition to the railgun confused me the most.
最让我困惑的是双联五英寸舰炮（两座炮塔？）及其配套弹库与供弹系统，再加上电磁轨道炮的配置。
Is the idea just to double the firing rate of the usual naval gun by putting two on? What is it intended to be used for, close-in defence against cheap attritable platforms?
这种设计只是为了通过双联装将常规舰炮射速提升一倍吗？其预期用途究竟是什么——对抗低成本消耗型平台的近程防御？
TyrialFrost
DDG(X) as a Air Warfare Destroyer with Surface warfare capabilities.
DDG(X) 作为一款具备水面战能力的防空驱逐舰。
Zumwalt(X) as a hypersonic heavy hitter with Surface warfare capabilities.
朱姆沃尔特(X) 作为一款具备水面战能力的高超音速重型打击舰。
New Frigate with anti submarine focus and surface warfare capabilities.
专注于反潜作战并具备水面作战能力的新型护卫舰。
Sounds like a great mix, which is how you know the Navy will never do it.
听起来是个绝佳的组合，正因如此，你才会知道海军永远不会采纳这个方案。
Bu11ism
Zummy + DDG(X) + Constellation was supposed to be a layup, but the Navy instead decided to pull their pants down and shit on the ball.
朱姆沃尔特+DDG(X)+星座级本应是轻松得分的机会，海军却偏偏要脱裤子在球上拉屎。
dasCKD
Hypersonic heavy hitters are pointless. Just because China was briefly into the idea of leaning on ship-based anti-ship missiles as a core striking option of plaN naval flotillas doesn't mean it was or is a good idea and if they could make good carriers in the 2000s the type 022 would never have been created.
高超音速重型武器毫无意义。中国曾短暂依赖舰载反舰导弹作为海军舰队核心打击手段，但这不代表过去或现在这是个好主意；如果他们能在 2000 年代造出优秀的航母，022 型导弹艇根本不会诞生。
If you want to launch a hypersonic missile at an enemy vessel you go carrier (vastly better magazine depth, better ability to perform organic recon, no need to chase down prey that are as fast as you) or submarine (sneak close to your victim and dive away before ASW helis and planes can find you and give you a miserable day).
如果你想向敌方舰艇发射高超音速导弹，要么选择航母（拥有更出色的弹药装载深度、更强的自主侦察能力，且无需追逐与己方航速相当的猎物），要么选择潜艇（悄悄接近目标后迅速下潜，在反潜直升机与飞机锁定你之前脱离危险区域）。
ratdeboisgarou
The hypersonics on Zumwalt are for hitting land targets, and there is no carrier aircraft that could carry them.
朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰上的高超音速武器主要用于打击陆地目标，目前没有舰载飞机能够携带它们。
plarealtalk
Not a bad writeup, but this doesn't require a "hear me out".
这篇写得不错，但这并不需要"我有一言"这样的开头。
Most common sense permutations of surface combatant procurements would make more sense for the USN than what the Trump class battleship idea (and there's a good chance the USN will end up reverting to a ship that ends up closer to DDG(X) when/if Trump leaves the White House, but with inevitable delays compared to their original plans, which was already behind desired schedule).
就水面作战舰艇的采购方案而言，大多数合理的排列组合对美国海军来说，都比"特朗普级"战列舰的构想更有意义（并且很可能在特朗普离开白宫后，美国海军最终还是会回归到更接近 DDG(X)方案的舰艇，但这将不可避免地导致进度延误，原计划本就已落后于预期进度）。
Ralph090
I said "hear me out" because of all the flak I see the Zumwalt class get. I had assumed the idea of restarting them would be met with more hostility as a result and I would need to put in some effort into explaining my reasoning. I'm glad to hear the idea isn't completely off the wall.
我用"我有一言"开头，是因为我看到朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰饱受批评。我原以为重启该级舰建造的想法会招致更多反对，因此需要花些力气来解释我的理由。很高兴听到这个想法并非完全异想天开。
I agree about what's likely to end up happening. I also wouldn't be surprised if the Constellation class gets restarted as well.
我赞同最终可能出现的情况。即使星座级护卫舰也重启建造，我也不会感到意外。
plarealtalk
The issues with the Zumwalt class were a reflection of some questionable subsystem choices, funding cuts, a small production run, which snowballed into a three ship production run of a highly compromised ship whose raison d'etre that shaped much of its design (the two AGS guns) were not viable to begin with.
“朱姆沃尔特”级驱逐舰的问题源于几个方面：某些子系统选择存在争议、经费削减、小规模生产，这些因素最终导致只建造了三艘性能严重妥协的舰艇，而其设计初衷（即两门先进舰炮系统）从一开始就缺乏可行性。
You describe a modified Zumwalt class, which presumably would try to replace some of the poor choice subsystems with more common sense ones, in which case it would be very similar to one of the main options considered for the CG(X) program back in the day and widely considered a sensible idea at the time.
你所描述的改良版“朱姆沃尔特”级，可能会将部分设计欠妥的子系统替换为更合理的配置，这样的话，它将与当年 CG(X)项目考虑的主要方案之一非常相似，当时这种思路被普遍认为是明智的选择。
krakenchaos1
Thanks for reading. You may now smash that down vote button and remind me that I'm an idiot.
感谢阅读。您现在可以尽情点击反对票，并提醒我我是个傻瓜。
You know out of all of the essay long rants here this is actually pretty sane. Granted the bar was near the floor to begin with lol.
在所有冗长的长篇大论中，这篇观点其实相当理性。当然，起点本来就很低就是了，哈哈。
I'll admit I'm not too sure on this, but it seems like the retrofit is to increase the Zumwalt class' ship to shore capabilities. I'd assume that it would still be possible to use the Conventional Prompt Strike system in an anti ship role, but oddly enough I haven't found any articles that explicitly mention that. This makes a lot more sense than 2x155mm main battery in 2026, but it's still a rather niche role that no one else really does.
我得承认我并不十分确定，但这似乎是为了增强朱姆沃尔特级的对岸打击能力。我猜想常规快速打击系统应该仍能用于反舰任务，但奇怪的是，我还没找到任何明确提及这一点的文章。与在 2026 年使用两门 155 毫米主炮相比，这显然更有道理，不过这种角色仍然相当小众，目前确实没有其他人真正承担。
The probably more important consideration is that this all really depends on how much of the infrastructure still exists to build and redesign the Zumwalt class. The transition from the 155mms to the additional missile tubes is not perfectly efficient, and it might just be better to start with a fresh design.
可能更重要的考虑是，这一切都取决于建造和重新设计朱姆沃尔特级的基础设施保留了多少。从 155 毫米舰炮转换为额外的导弹发射管并不是完美的效率提升，也许最好还是从一张白纸开始重新设计。
NuclearHeterodoxy
I'd assume that it would still be possible to use the Conventional Prompt Strike system in an anti ship role, but oddly enough I haven't found any articles that explicitly mention that.
我猜常规快速打击系统或许仍能用于反舰作战，但奇怪的是我还没找到任何文章明确提及这点。
I would assume the same were it not for the fact the US recently revealed CPS/Dark Eagle uses a 13kg payload of flechettes rather than a blast-frag or shaped penetrator warhead. You could conceivably use it to wreck anything on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier, or to disable comms and radars on the superstructure, but you aren't going to be blasting any large holes near the waterline with flechettes.
要不是美国最近透露 CPS/暗鹰导弹使用的是 13 公斤箭霰弹战斗部，而非爆破破片或聚能侵彻弹头，我本会持相同看法。理论上它确实能摧毁航母飞行甲板上的任何目标，或是让上层建筑的通信和雷达系统瘫痪，但仅靠箭霰弹显然无法在水线附近炸出大洞。
Conceivably, in the future there could be a dedicated antiship missile compatible with the Mk57 VLS.
可以设想，未来或许会出现适配 Mk57 垂直发射系统的专用反舰导弹。
wrosecrans
FWIW, I agree with "Zumwalt II" as a good plan.
平心而论，我认为"朱姆沃尔特 II 型"是个不错的方案。
The Zumwalt program as a whole was a badly planned incoherent mess. But by all accounts,. the basic hull itself is a good design. Yoink the big guns, redesign the deckhouse with best available off the shelf modern radar. Add more VLS tubes, and think about maybe adding a railgun in the future if they actually turn out to be worth it.
整体而言，朱姆沃尔特级项目规划混乱且缺乏连贯性。但各方面评价都显示，其基础舰体本身设计优良。应当拆除大型舰炮，采用现有最先进的现成雷达重新设计上层建筑，增加更多垂直发射单元，并考虑未来若电磁轨道炮被证实具备实战价值时加装该武器系统。
You can constrain a Zumwalt II acquisition program to be allowed to redesign only a few specific things, using off the shelf systems for anything big, and get hulls started almost immediately that are bigger and roomier than a Burke. DDGX apparently wants to design absolutely everything from scratch, so leave that cooking as a project in the background to start making their first hull in ~ten years or whatever and enter service in 15 or so.
你可以对"朱姆沃尔特 II 型"采购项目加以限制，仅允许重新设计少数特定系统，大型系统均采用现成设备，这样就能迅速开工建造比伯克级更大更宽敞的舰体。DDGX 项目显然想要从头设计所有系统，那就让它作为远景项目慢慢推进，预计十年左右开始建造首舰，大约十五年后服役。
Given that we have built at least a couple of Zumwalt hulls, we already know our current shipyards are physically big enough to handle it. We get a moderately stealthy, fairly big thing, with a decent amount of missiles and a radar and a helicopter, and half the crew size of a Burke to justify the expensive machinery CapEx with lower OpEx. Yay.
考虑到我们已经建造了至少两艘朱姆沃尔特级舰体，可以确定现有造船厂的物理规模完全能够胜任。这样我们将获得一艘兼具适度隐身性、较大体量、充足导弹配置、完善雷达系统和直升机搭载能力的舰艇，同时船员规模仅为伯克级的一半——通过降低运营成本来平衡昂贵的机械资本支出。皆大欢喜。
helloWHATSUP
Even if you could only fit 16 VLS cells in there it'd have the same number as DDG(X). Alternatively, the gun house is still there, so why not make use of it and stick a lower-power railgun or a phaser in there
即便你只能在上面安装 16 个垂直发射单元，那也和 DDG(X)的数量相同。或者，炮塔仍然存在，何不利用它安装一门低功率的电磁炮或相位炮呢？
FWIW, the railgun that they propose to use on the Defiant was originally designed for the Zumwalt, so all the systems need to run the railgun are already there.
仅供参考，他们提议用于"无畏"级的电磁炮最初是为朱姆沃尔特级设计的，因此运行该电磁炮所需的所有系统都已齐备。
And here's how the hypersonic missile silos would look like on the zumwalt:
而高超音速导弹发射井在朱姆沃尔特级上的配置会是这样的：
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/u-s-navys-hypersonic-missile-will-give-zumwalt-class-new-capability/
So 4 missiles vs 12 on the Defiant.
也就是说朱姆沃尔特级配备 4 枚导弹，而"无畏"级配备 12 枚。
Magikarp_to_Gyarados
Each tube can pack 3 missiles, according to reporting from the United States Naval Institute: https://news.usni.org/2025/01/15/first-zumwalt-to-wrap-missile-tube-install-michael-monsoor-to-deploy-to-westpac
根据美国海军协会的报道，每个导弹发射管可装载三枚导弹：https://news.usni.org/2025/01/15/first-zumwalt-to-wrap-missile-tube-install-michael-monsoor-to-deploy-to-westpac
USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000) is back in the water after the installation of four missile tubes that will eventually carry the Conventional Prompt Strike weapon
“朱姆沃尔特”号驱逐舰（DDG-1000）已完成四个导弹发射管的安装工作并重新下水，这些发射管最终将用于搭载“常规快速打击”武器。
The 16,000-ton destroyer has been at HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Miss., since 2023 undergoing the modernization to replace its forward 155mm gun mount with the tubes that will field three missiles a piece for a total of up to 12.
这艘 1.6 万吨的驱逐舰自 2023 年起就在亨廷顿·英格尔斯工业公司位于密西西比州帕斯卡古拉的造船厂进行现代化改造，其前部 155 毫米舰炮座将被导弹发射管取代，每个发射管可容纳三枚导弹，总计最多可装备 12 枚。
The big question I have: how difficult would it be to re-design the Zumwalt platform to accommodate SPY-6 and AEGIS?
我最大的疑问是：重新设计朱姆沃尔特级平台以适配 SPY-6 雷达和宙斯盾系统会有多困难？
Currently, Zumwalt destroyers use SPY-3 mainly for short range defense, since the ship was meant for land attack, not fleet air defense. The weight of adding SPY-6 arrays high up on the deckhouse, plus associated computer equipment, is going to have some implications for the stability of the ship at sea.
目前，朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰主要使用 SPY-3 雷达进行近程防御，因为该舰原本设计用于对陆攻击而非舰队防空。在甲板室高处加装 SPY-6 雷达阵列及相关计算机设备会增加重量，这将对舰船的海上稳定性产生一定影响。
TyrialFrost
Zumwalt platform to accommodate SPY-6 and AEGIS
适配 SPY-6 雷达和宙斯盾系统的朱姆沃尔特级平台
Isnt that what they just did with the ford class carrier spy-3 -> spy-6, and already have underway with the ZUES upgrade program for the Zumwalt.
福特级航母不正是这样做的吗？将 SPY-3 雷达升级为 SPY-6，并且已经启动了针对朱姆沃尔特级的 ZUES 升级计划。
Ralph090
I remember reading somewhere that the Zumwalts are astonishingly stable and can handle heavy seas better than pretty much any other ship in the fleet, so I don't think it would have too much of an impact. No idea about the rest of it, though.
我记得读过相关资料，朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰的稳定性令人惊叹，在恶劣海况下的表现几乎胜过舰队中任何其他舰船，因此我不认为这会产生太大影响。不过，其他方面我就不得而知了。
Oceanmechanic
Per that navy presentation that's been floating around, Zumwalt's new CPS missiles were fit to the ship using the Advanced Payload Module which holds 3 per tube.
根据流传的海军演示资料，朱姆沃尔特号的新型常规快速打击导弹是通过可容纳 3 枚导弹的先进载荷模块安装到舰上的。
So she's carrying 12 missiles across the 4 APMs she was refit for, the same load as the Defiant.
因此该舰在改装后配备的 4 个先进载荷模块中共携带 12 枚导弹，与"挑战者"级的载弹量相当。
TyrialFrost
4 cells, tripacked with 12 CPS missiles
4 单元，采用三联装配置可装载 12 枚 CPS 导弹
AaronNevileLongbotom
The big mistakes that we need to avoid right now in terms of shipbuilding are options that take too long, options that cost too much, and options that are trapped in old paradigms. We don’t have a lot of time if we want to merely maintain a navy at this point given our fleets age, our economy can only support so much and we might be ending the days of spending our way to superiority, plus things are changing fast so we should be thinking about what threats we have and working from there as opposed to trying to do more or what we’ve been doing.
当前造船领域我们必须避免的重大失误包括：耗时过长的方案、成本过高的方案，以及固守陈旧模式的方案。考虑到我们舰队的老化程度、经济承载力的限制，以及可能正在终结的"砸钱换优势"时代，若仅想维持现有海军规模，我们的时间已然不多。加之局势瞬息万变，我们更应聚焦现实威胁来规划发展路径，而非延续扩张惯性或重复过往做法。
The Trump class Battleship may fall into making all of those mistakes, with cost estimates and timelines not looking promising and a hoped for rail gun that could turn into yet another cost boondoggle that is ultimately just putting new tech in an old turret. Having said that, the ideas proposed by OP have already proven themselves to be a non starter since they have already been too costly, too slow, and too unfit for purpose. Maybe the problem is that we only get excited for expensive stuff. It’s cultural at this point, and we won’t fix that quickly enough to keep our Navy from moving down a peg in the midterm.
特朗普级战列舰可能正重蹈所有这些覆辙，成本估算和工期都令人堪忧，而备受期待的轨道炮或许会演变成又一场代价高昂的烂尾工程——最终不过是在旧炮塔里塞入新技术。话虽如此，楼主提出的方案早已被证明是空中楼阁，因为它们既成本过高，进度拖沓，又远不切实际。或许问题在于我们只对烧钱的项目充满热情。这已然成为一种文化现象，而我们难以迅速扭转这种风气，恐怕只能坐视海军实力中期内下滑一格。
The3rdBert
I would guess that is largely what will happen.
我猜想这很大程度上会是未来的发展方向。
ParkingBadger2130
Its crazy how we are STILL going to have arguments over what an Arleigh Burke replacement should look like 10-15 years from now.
疯狂的是，未来 10 到 15 年内，我们仍将就阿利·伯克级驱逐舰的替代方案争论不休。
Anyways, a battleship is not needed? Why does the US need a battleship? To fight Whom? China? If you haven't been paying attention, the current admin isnt even interested in that anymore, and we still got quite a few years before the next one even has a chance to change policy. If the US was determined to fight over Taiwan sure, but it looks like we'll be instead bullying nations closer to our appetite, like Venezuela and the what not.
无论如何，需要战列舰吗？美国为何需要战列舰？为了与谁作战？中国？如果你没注意，当前政府甚至对此已不感兴趣，而下届政府至少要等上好几年才有机会改变政策。如果美国决意介入台湾（地区）问题，那或许说得通，但看起来我们更倾向于欺凌那些更符合我们口味的国家，比如委内瑞拉等等。
OlivencaENossa
Hemispheric Control is the new policy trend. Friend.
控制（西）半球已成为新的政策风向，我的朋友。
SirThoreth
If we do, can we add a damn CIWS system for close-in defense? The current Zumwalts lack both Phalanx and SeaRAM.
如果我们这样做的话，能不能至少加个近防炮系统？现在的朱姆沃尔特级既没有密集阵也没有海拉姆。
iPon3
I thought the Defiant was intended to use directed energy weapons in that final intercept role (along with soft kill measures). There are other modern warships with self defence VLS missiles which don't mount any sort of CIWS (my first thought is my own country's Formidable-class but I assume the La Fayette it's based on is similar)
我以为无畏级本打算在最终拦截任务中使用定向能武器（以及软杀伤措施）。还有其他现代战舰配备了自卫用的 VLS 导弹，却完全没有安装任何类型的近防炮（我首先想到的是我们自己国家的可畏级，但我估计其原型拉斐特级也差不多）。
SirThoreth
Yes, Defiant class is supposed to fit lasers, but it's also been described as being planned to also fit the SeaRAM.
没错，无畏级确实计划装备激光武器，但据说也计划安装海拉姆。
I think of the CIWS as the last line of defense, and the Zumwalt has neither lasers nor CIWS in its current incarnation, and every VLS tube carrying ESSMs is one not carrying SM-6 or Tomahawks, etc.
我认为密集阵近防武器系统是最后一道防线，而当前构型的朱姆沃尔特驱逐舰既没有激光武器也没有近防系统。每个装载 ESSM 防空导弹的垂直发射系统单元，就意味着少装一枚 SM-6 远程导弹或战斧巡航导弹。
van_buskirk
A DDG(X) Flight II baselined for CPS with no guns would go so hard.
以通用高超音速滑翔体（CPS）为基准设计、不安装舰炮的 DDG(X)驱逐舰二期方案将极具威力。
Aurailious
I thought DDG(X) was Zumwalt without the weird hull.
我以为 DDG(X)就是去掉奇特船体的朱姆沃尔特级。
Fp_Guy
Suprance DDG's hull was used to create the Tico CG which led to the lessons learned to build the Burke DDG
斯普鲁恩斯级驱逐舰的船体被用于提康德罗加级巡洋舰，这为后来建造伯克级驱逐舰提供了宝贵的经验教训。
Zumwalt DDG can give us Zumwalt CG which will give us the lessons needed for a new DDG.
朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰能为我们提供朱姆沃尔特级巡洋舰的经验教训，这有助于我们为新型驱逐舰汲取必要的知识。
Ralph090
We were originally planning to do that with the CG(X) program in the 2000s, but it was cancelled in 2010.
我们本计划在 21 世纪初通过 CG(X)项目实现这一目标，但该项目于 2010 年被取消。
edgygothteen69
I'm sorry but is this a shitpost? You're talking about Terrier, Talos, and Tartar missiles. These haven't been in service for decades. This is old technology, pre-VLS technology. I'm confused how you could simultaneously know what these systems are while also not knowing that better systems (VLS) and missiles (SM-6, etc.) exist.
我很抱歉，但这难道是在发垃圾帖吗？你说的是“小猎犬”、“黄铜骑士”和“鞑靼人”导弹。这些武器已经几十年没有服役了。这是老旧技术，垂直发射系统出现之前的技术。我不明白你怎么会既知道这些系统存在，同时又不知道有更好的系统（垂直发射系统）和导弹（比如 SM-6 等）呢。
Ralph090
Keep going. The Three Ts are there to provide context on what the US Navy thought would be the potential mission of a guided missile battleship in the 50s, which was the last time the idea was considered as far as I know. They were looking into converting USS Kentucky into one, which was an Iowa class battleship that was never finished. One idea was a general purpose next generation fast battleship with guns and Terrier missiles, one was a strategic deterrent with Polaris nuclear ballistic missiles, and one was a dedicated anti-aircraft ship with Talos and Tartar missiles. The Defiant class pretty much picks up where they left off and tries to do all three. Deterrence is the hypersonic missiles and nuclear cruise missiles, the next generation fast battleship is the railgun and anti-ship missiles, and the anti-aircraft ship is the VLS cells and lasers.
继续往下看。"三 T"方案揭示了上世纪 50 年代美国海军对导弹战列舰潜在任务的设想，据我所知，这是该构想最后一次被正式讨论。当时他们曾考虑将未完工的"艾奥瓦"级战列舰肯塔基号进行改造。第一种方案是配备舰炮与"小猎犬"导弹的通用型下一代高速战列舰，第二种是搭载"北极星"核弹道导弹的战略威慑平台，第三种则是装备"黄铜骑士"与"鞑靼人"导弹的专职防空舰。如今的"无畏级"基本继承了这些思路并试图融合三者：高超音速导弹与核巡航导弹承担威慑任务，电磁轨道炮与反舰导弹延续高速战列舰理念，而垂直发射系统单元与激光武器则接替了防空舰的职责。
My argument is it would be better to keep going with DDG(X) and restart Zumwalt class construction based on USS Zumwalt's refit to complement DDG(X). A modified Zumwalt can do the deterrence with its hypersonic missiles and be the next generation fast battleship by installing a railgun in place of turret 2, which I believe is currently empty space in USS Zumwalt, while DDG(X) can be the anti-aircraft ship and back up the Zumwalt class in surface warfare. Both could also be fitted with lasers due to their modern power plants. Also, the Zumwalt's stealthy hull makes a surface ship more viable as a deterrence because it'll be harder to hit before it fires its missiles even if you know it's there. A big part of why I think this could be a good idea is that it allows the Navy to do all three things with ships that can be built in smaller yards and thus won't delay aircraft carrier construction the way the Defiant class will.
我的观点是，继续推进 DDG(X)项目并基于"朱姆沃尔特"号驱逐舰的改装重新启动朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰建造计划，以补充 DDG(X)的能力，这样会更好。改进型朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰能够凭借其高超音速导弹发挥威慑作用，并在二号炮塔位置（我认为目前在"朱姆沃尔特"号上是空置空间）安装电磁轨道炮，成为下一代高速战舰；而 DDG(X)则可以作为防空舰，在水面作战中支援朱姆沃尔特级。两款舰艇都配备了现代化的动力系统，因此也都可以加装激光武器。此外，朱姆沃尔特级的隐身船体设计使水面舰艇作为威慑平台更具可行性，因为即使在敌方知晓其存在的情况下，它在发射导弹前也更难被击中。我认为这是一个好主意的关键原因在于，它能让海军通过可在较小船厂建造的舰艇同时实现这三重目标，从而不会像"挑战者"级那样拖延航空母舰的建造进度。
That said it is a bit shitposty since the idea will never be seen by the actual Navy brass, let alone even remotely considered. That's why I put in the terrible jokes. Also I expected even mentioning the Zumwalt class to cause most people to see red.
不过这个想法确实有点像是在胡说八道，因为海军高层根本不会看到这个方案，更别提认真考虑了。所以我才在讨论中加入了些蹩脚的笑话。而且我早就料到，光是提到朱姆沃尔特级就足以让大多数人火冒三丈了。
The Navy simply couldn’t make up their mind and accept tradeoffs with DDG(X), which is why we have this supposed BBG(X). They basically said they do not see contemporary hulls the size of Zumwalt or similar as having the growth margin necessary for future systems. Navy design in recent times basically always trends to a ship that is either do-everything or do-everything-lite when it comes to the frontline blue-water vessels, and not specialized roles like an explicit air-warfare destroyer, or an explicit stand-off vessel. They end up designing essentially a bigger or smaller Burke, and when you’re planning for 30-40 year lifecycles, a bigger hull makes more sense.
海军在 DDG(X)项目上始终无法下定决心并接受取舍，这正是所谓 BBG(X)出现的根源。军方明确表示，他们认为当代舰艇——包括朱姆沃尔特级或类似尺寸的船体——缺乏承载未来系统所需的升级空间。近年来海军在设计前沿远洋战舰时，基本都倾向于打造"全能型"或"轻量全能型"战舰，而非专精特定任务的舰种，比如专职防空的驱逐舰或专职远程打击的舰艇。最终设计出的不过是放大或缩小的伯克级，而考虑到 30-40 年的服役周期，更大的船体显然更具扩展性。
They’re probably going for a high-low mix of larger multirole fleet steamers while smaller, potentially unmanned ships work the peripheral.
未来很可能形成高低搭配的格局：由大型多功能主力舰担任核心，小型舰艇（可能采用无人化设计）则负责外围作战。
_spec_tre
It seems like the incapability to accept tradeoffs is like half of the reasons behind the USN being crippled
美军陷入困境的原因，恐怕一半在于难以接受必要的取舍
plarealtalk
The Navy simply couldn’t make up their mind and accept tradeoffs with DDG(X), which is why we have this supposed BBG(X). They basically said they do not see contemporary hulls the size of Zumwalt or similar as having the growth margin necessary for future systems.
海军就是无法下定决心，在 DDG(X)项目上做出权衡取舍，于是才有了所谓的 BBG(X)计划。他们基本上表明，他们认为像"朱姆沃尔特"级那样尺寸的当代舰体不具备未来系统所需的发展空间。
That is what has been stated, but left unsaid is how much of the displacement in these battleships are allocated for systems that are of questionable need/composition -- a main railgun seems questionable, and the dual five inch guns are a bit bizarre as well. Seeking 12 CPS cells and 128 Mk 41 cells seems a little bit greedy as well.
虽然官方已公布这些数据，但未言明的是：这些战舰的排水量中有多少分配给了需求存疑的系统配置？主电磁轨道炮的必要性值得商榷，双联五英寸舰炮的配置也略显奇特。而追求 12 个 CPS 垂发单元加 128 个 Mk41 垂发单元的组合，似乎也显得过于贪心了。
A 128 Mk-41 VLS or even G-VLS ship (or replacing some of that count with CPS if they really desired it), with IEPS, a sensible main gun setup, flag facilities, upsized SPY-6, could absolutely be done in a clean sheet hull design of 15,000t or slightly more, without needing a gargantuan ship over 35,000t.
一艘配备 128 个 Mk-41 垂直发射系统或 G-VLS（若确实需要，可用部分 CPS 替换部分数量）、采用综合电力系统、合理主炮配置、旗舰设施、扩大版 SPY-6 雷达的舰艇，完全可以在 1.5 万吨或稍大的全新船体设计中实现，根本不需要超过 3.5 万吨的庞然巨舰。
Heck even if they wanted 128 Mk-41 cells and 12 CPS cells, they could have omitted the ridiculous gun setup and achieved it in a smaller 20,000t hull.
见鬼，就算他们想要 128 个 Mk-41 发射单元和 12 个 CPS 发射单元，也完全可以通过舍弃那套荒谬的炮塔配置，在更小的 2 万吨级船体上实现。
iPon3
The dual five inch (in two mounts?) with associated magazine and feed in addition to the railgun confused me the most.
最让我困惑的是双联五英寸舰炮（两座炮塔？）及其配套弹库与供弹系统，再加上电磁轨道炮的配置。
Is the idea just to double the firing rate of the usual naval gun by putting two on? What is it intended to be used for, close-in defence against cheap attritable platforms?
这种设计只是为了通过双联装将常规舰炮射速提升一倍吗？其预期用途究竟是什么——对抗低成本消耗型平台的近程防御？
TyrialFrost
DDG(X) as a Air Warfare Destroyer with Surface warfare capabilities.
DDG(X) 作为一款具备水面战能力的防空驱逐舰。
Zumwalt(X) as a hypersonic heavy hitter with Surface warfare capabilities.
朱姆沃尔特(X) 作为一款具备水面战能力的高超音速重型打击舰。
New Frigate with anti submarine focus and surface warfare capabilities.
专注于反潜作战并具备水面作战能力的新型护卫舰。
Sounds like a great mix, which is how you know the Navy will never do it.
听起来是个绝佳的组合，正因如此，你才会知道海军永远不会采纳这个方案。
Bu11ism
Zummy + DDG(X) + Constellation was supposed to be a layup, but the Navy instead decided to pull their pants down and shit on the ball.
朱姆沃尔特+DDG(X)+星座级本应是轻松得分的机会，海军却偏偏要脱裤子在球上拉屎。
dasCKD
Hypersonic heavy hitters are pointless. Just because China was briefly into the idea of leaning on ship-based anti-ship missiles as a core striking option of plaN naval flotillas doesn't mean it was or is a good idea and if they could make good carriers in the 2000s the type 022 would never have been created.
高超音速重型武器毫无意义。中国曾短暂依赖舰载反舰导弹作为海军舰队核心打击手段，但这不代表过去或现在这是个好主意；如果他们能在 2000 年代造出优秀的航母，022 型导弹艇根本不会诞生。
If you want to launch a hypersonic missile at an enemy vessel you go carrier (vastly better magazine depth, better ability to perform organic recon, no need to chase down prey that are as fast as you) or submarine (sneak close to your victim and dive away before ASW helis and planes can find you and give you a miserable day).
如果你想向敌方舰艇发射高超音速导弹，要么选择航母（拥有更出色的弹药装载深度、更强的自主侦察能力，且无需追逐与己方航速相当的猎物），要么选择潜艇（悄悄接近目标后迅速下潜，在反潜直升机与飞机锁定你之前脱离危险区域）。
ratdeboisgarou
The hypersonics on Zumwalt are for hitting land targets, and there is no carrier aircraft that could carry them.
朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰上的高超音速武器主要用于打击陆地目标，目前没有舰载飞机能够携带它们。
plarealtalk
Not a bad writeup, but this doesn't require a "hear me out".
这篇写得不错，但这并不需要"我有一言"这样的开头。
Most common sense permutations of surface combatant procurements would make more sense for the USN than what the Trump class battleship idea (and there's a good chance the USN will end up reverting to a ship that ends up closer to DDG(X) when/if Trump leaves the White House, but with inevitable delays compared to their original plans, which was already behind desired schedule).
就水面作战舰艇的采购方案而言，大多数合理的排列组合对美国海军来说，都比"特朗普级"战列舰的构想更有意义（并且很可能在特朗普离开白宫后，美国海军最终还是会回归到更接近 DDG(X)方案的舰艇，但这将不可避免地导致进度延误，原计划本就已落后于预期进度）。
Ralph090
I said "hear me out" because of all the flak I see the Zumwalt class get. I had assumed the idea of restarting them would be met with more hostility as a result and I would need to put in some effort into explaining my reasoning. I'm glad to hear the idea isn't completely off the wall.
我用"我有一言"开头，是因为我看到朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰饱受批评。我原以为重启该级舰建造的想法会招致更多反对，因此需要花些力气来解释我的理由。很高兴听到这个想法并非完全异想天开。
I agree about what's likely to end up happening. I also wouldn't be surprised if the Constellation class gets restarted as well.
我赞同最终可能出现的情况。即使星座级护卫舰也重启建造，我也不会感到意外。
plarealtalk
The issues with the Zumwalt class were a reflection of some questionable subsystem choices, funding cuts, a small production run, which snowballed into a three ship production run of a highly compromised ship whose raison d'etre that shaped much of its design (the two AGS guns) were not viable to begin with.
“朱姆沃尔特”级驱逐舰的问题源于几个方面：某些子系统选择存在争议、经费削减、小规模生产，这些因素最终导致只建造了三艘性能严重妥协的舰艇，而其设计初衷（即两门先进舰炮系统）从一开始就缺乏可行性。
You describe a modified Zumwalt class, which presumably would try to replace some of the poor choice subsystems with more common sense ones, in which case it would be very similar to one of the main options considered for the CG(X) program back in the day and widely considered a sensible idea at the time.
你所描述的改良版“朱姆沃尔特”级，可能会将部分设计欠妥的子系统替换为更合理的配置，这样的话，它将与当年 CG(X)项目考虑的主要方案之一非常相似，当时这种思路被普遍认为是明智的选择。
krakenchaos1
Thanks for reading. You may now smash that down vote button and remind me that I'm an idiot.
感谢阅读。您现在可以尽情点击反对票，并提醒我我是个傻瓜。
You know out of all of the essay long rants here this is actually pretty sane. Granted the bar was near the floor to begin with lol.
在所有冗长的长篇大论中，这篇观点其实相当理性。当然，起点本来就很低就是了，哈哈。
I'll admit I'm not too sure on this, but it seems like the retrofit is to increase the Zumwalt class' ship to shore capabilities. I'd assume that it would still be possible to use the Conventional Prompt Strike system in an anti ship role, but oddly enough I haven't found any articles that explicitly mention that. This makes a lot more sense than 2x155mm main battery in 2026, but it's still a rather niche role that no one else really does.
我得承认我并不十分确定，但这似乎是为了增强朱姆沃尔特级的对岸打击能力。我猜想常规快速打击系统应该仍能用于反舰任务，但奇怪的是，我还没找到任何明确提及这一点的文章。与在 2026 年使用两门 155 毫米主炮相比，这显然更有道理，不过这种角色仍然相当小众，目前确实没有其他人真正承担。
The probably more important consideration is that this all really depends on how much of the infrastructure still exists to build and redesign the Zumwalt class. The transition from the 155mms to the additional missile tubes is not perfectly efficient, and it might just be better to start with a fresh design.
可能更重要的考虑是，这一切都取决于建造和重新设计朱姆沃尔特级的基础设施保留了多少。从 155 毫米舰炮转换为额外的导弹发射管并不是完美的效率提升，也许最好还是从一张白纸开始重新设计。
NuclearHeterodoxy
I'd assume that it would still be possible to use the Conventional Prompt Strike system in an anti ship role, but oddly enough I haven't found any articles that explicitly mention that.
我猜常规快速打击系统或许仍能用于反舰作战，但奇怪的是我还没找到任何文章明确提及这点。
I would assume the same were it not for the fact the US recently revealed CPS/Dark Eagle uses a 13kg payload of flechettes rather than a blast-frag or shaped penetrator warhead. You could conceivably use it to wreck anything on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier, or to disable comms and radars on the superstructure, but you aren't going to be blasting any large holes near the waterline with flechettes.
要不是美国最近透露 CPS/暗鹰导弹使用的是 13 公斤箭霰弹战斗部，而非爆破破片或聚能侵彻弹头，我本会持相同看法。理论上它确实能摧毁航母飞行甲板上的任何目标，或是让上层建筑的通信和雷达系统瘫痪，但仅靠箭霰弹显然无法在水线附近炸出大洞。
Conceivably, in the future there could be a dedicated antiship missile compatible with the Mk57 VLS.
可以设想，未来或许会出现适配 Mk57 垂直发射系统的专用反舰导弹。
wrosecrans
FWIW, I agree with "Zumwalt II" as a good plan.
平心而论，我认为"朱姆沃尔特 II 型"是个不错的方案。
The Zumwalt program as a whole was a badly planned incoherent mess. But by all accounts,. the basic hull itself is a good design. Yoink the big guns, redesign the deckhouse with best available off the shelf modern radar. Add more VLS tubes, and think about maybe adding a railgun in the future if they actually turn out to be worth it.
整体而言，朱姆沃尔特级项目规划混乱且缺乏连贯性。但各方面评价都显示，其基础舰体本身设计优良。应当拆除大型舰炮，采用现有最先进的现成雷达重新设计上层建筑，增加更多垂直发射单元，并考虑未来若电磁轨道炮被证实具备实战价值时加装该武器系统。
You can constrain a Zumwalt II acquisition program to be allowed to redesign only a few specific things, using off the shelf systems for anything big, and get hulls started almost immediately that are bigger and roomier than a Burke. DDGX apparently wants to design absolutely everything from scratch, so leave that cooking as a project in the background to start making their first hull in ~ten years or whatever and enter service in 15 or so.
你可以对"朱姆沃尔特 II 型"采购项目加以限制，仅允许重新设计少数特定系统，大型系统均采用现成设备，这样就能迅速开工建造比伯克级更大更宽敞的舰体。DDGX 项目显然想要从头设计所有系统，那就让它作为远景项目慢慢推进，预计十年左右开始建造首舰，大约十五年后服役。
Given that we have built at least a couple of Zumwalt hulls, we already know our current shipyards are physically big enough to handle it. We get a moderately stealthy, fairly big thing, with a decent amount of missiles and a radar and a helicopter, and half the crew size of a Burke to justify the expensive machinery CapEx with lower OpEx. Yay.
考虑到我们已经建造了至少两艘朱姆沃尔特级舰体，可以确定现有造船厂的物理规模完全能够胜任。这样我们将获得一艘兼具适度隐身性、较大体量、充足导弹配置、完善雷达系统和直升机搭载能力的舰艇，同时船员规模仅为伯克级的一半——通过降低运营成本来平衡昂贵的机械资本支出。皆大欢喜。
helloWHATSUP
Even if you could only fit 16 VLS cells in there it'd have the same number as DDG(X). Alternatively, the gun house is still there, so why not make use of it and stick a lower-power railgun or a phaser in there
即便你只能在上面安装 16 个垂直发射单元，那也和 DDG(X)的数量相同。或者，炮塔仍然存在，何不利用它安装一门低功率的电磁炮或相位炮呢？
FWIW, the railgun that they propose to use on the Defiant was originally designed for the Zumwalt, so all the systems need to run the railgun are already there.
仅供参考，他们提议用于"无畏"级的电磁炮最初是为朱姆沃尔特级设计的，因此运行该电磁炮所需的所有系统都已齐备。
And here's how the hypersonic missile silos would look like on the zumwalt:
而高超音速导弹发射井在朱姆沃尔特级上的配置会是这样的：
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/u-s-navys-hypersonic-missile-will-give-zumwalt-class-new-capability/
So 4 missiles vs 12 on the Defiant.
也就是说朱姆沃尔特级配备 4 枚导弹，而"无畏"级配备 12 枚。
Magikarp_to_Gyarados
Each tube can pack 3 missiles, according to reporting from the United States Naval Institute: https://news.usni.org/2025/01/15/first-zumwalt-to-wrap-missile-tube-install-michael-monsoor-to-deploy-to-westpac
根据美国海军协会的报道，每个导弹发射管可装载三枚导弹：https://news.usni.org/2025/01/15/first-zumwalt-to-wrap-missile-tube-install-michael-monsoor-to-deploy-to-westpac
USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000) is back in the water after the installation of four missile tubes that will eventually carry the Conventional Prompt Strike weapon
“朱姆沃尔特”号驱逐舰（DDG-1000）已完成四个导弹发射管的安装工作并重新下水，这些发射管最终将用于搭载“常规快速打击”武器。
The 16,000-ton destroyer has been at HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Miss., since 2023 undergoing the modernization to replace its forward 155mm gun mount with the tubes that will field three missiles a piece for a total of up to 12.
这艘 1.6 万吨的驱逐舰自 2023 年起就在亨廷顿·英格尔斯工业公司位于密西西比州帕斯卡古拉的造船厂进行现代化改造，其前部 155 毫米舰炮座将被导弹发射管取代，每个发射管可容纳三枚导弹，总计最多可装备 12 枚。
The big question I have: how difficult would it be to re-design the Zumwalt platform to accommodate SPY-6 and AEGIS?
我最大的疑问是：重新设计朱姆沃尔特级平台以适配 SPY-6 雷达和宙斯盾系统会有多困难？
Currently, Zumwalt destroyers use SPY-3 mainly for short range defense, since the ship was meant for land attack, not fleet air defense. The weight of adding SPY-6 arrays high up on the deckhouse, plus associated computer equipment, is going to have some implications for the stability of the ship at sea.
目前，朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰主要使用 SPY-3 雷达进行近程防御，因为该舰原本设计用于对陆攻击而非舰队防空。在甲板室高处加装 SPY-6 雷达阵列及相关计算机设备会增加重量，这将对舰船的海上稳定性产生一定影响。
TyrialFrost
Zumwalt platform to accommodate SPY-6 and AEGIS
适配 SPY-6 雷达和宙斯盾系统的朱姆沃尔特级平台
Isnt that what they just did with the ford class carrier spy-3 -> spy-6, and already have underway with the ZUES upgrade program for the Zumwalt.
福特级航母不正是这样做的吗？将 SPY-3 雷达升级为 SPY-6，并且已经启动了针对朱姆沃尔特级的 ZUES 升级计划。
Ralph090
I remember reading somewhere that the Zumwalts are astonishingly stable and can handle heavy seas better than pretty much any other ship in the fleet, so I don't think it would have too much of an impact. No idea about the rest of it, though.
我记得读过相关资料，朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰的稳定性令人惊叹，在恶劣海况下的表现几乎胜过舰队中任何其他舰船，因此我不认为这会产生太大影响。不过，其他方面我就不得而知了。
Oceanmechanic
Per that navy presentation that's been floating around, Zumwalt's new CPS missiles were fit to the ship using the Advanced Payload Module which holds 3 per tube.
根据流传的海军演示资料，朱姆沃尔特号的新型常规快速打击导弹是通过可容纳 3 枚导弹的先进载荷模块安装到舰上的。
So she's carrying 12 missiles across the 4 APMs she was refit for, the same load as the Defiant.
因此该舰在改装后配备的 4 个先进载荷模块中共携带 12 枚导弹，与"挑战者"级的载弹量相当。
TyrialFrost
4 cells, tripacked with 12 CPS missiles
4 单元，采用三联装配置可装载 12 枚 CPS 导弹
AaronNevileLongbotom
The big mistakes that we need to avoid right now in terms of shipbuilding are options that take too long, options that cost too much, and options that are trapped in old paradigms. We don’t have a lot of time if we want to merely maintain a navy at this point given our fleets age, our economy can only support so much and we might be ending the days of spending our way to superiority, plus things are changing fast so we should be thinking about what threats we have and working from there as opposed to trying to do more or what we’ve been doing.
当前造船领域我们必须避免的重大失误包括：耗时过长的方案、成本过高的方案，以及固守陈旧模式的方案。考虑到我们舰队的老化程度、经济承载力的限制，以及可能正在终结的"砸钱换优势"时代，若仅想维持现有海军规模，我们的时间已然不多。加之局势瞬息万变，我们更应聚焦现实威胁来规划发展路径，而非延续扩张惯性或重复过往做法。
The Trump class Battleship may fall into making all of those mistakes, with cost estimates and timelines not looking promising and a hoped for rail gun that could turn into yet another cost boondoggle that is ultimately just putting new tech in an old turret. Having said that, the ideas proposed by OP have already proven themselves to be a non starter since they have already been too costly, too slow, and too unfit for purpose. Maybe the problem is that we only get excited for expensive stuff. It’s cultural at this point, and we won’t fix that quickly enough to keep our Navy from moving down a peg in the midterm.
特朗普级战列舰可能正重蹈所有这些覆辙，成本估算和工期都令人堪忧，而备受期待的轨道炮或许会演变成又一场代价高昂的烂尾工程——最终不过是在旧炮塔里塞入新技术。话虽如此，楼主提出的方案早已被证明是空中楼阁，因为它们既成本过高，进度拖沓，又远不切实际。或许问题在于我们只对烧钱的项目充满热情。这已然成为一种文化现象，而我们难以迅速扭转这种风气，恐怕只能坐视海军实力中期内下滑一格。
The3rdBert
I would guess that is largely what will happen.
我猜想这很大程度上会是未来的发展方向。
ParkingBadger2130
Its crazy how we are STILL going to have arguments over what an Arleigh Burke replacement should look like 10-15 years from now.
疯狂的是，未来 10 到 15 年内，我们仍将就阿利·伯克级驱逐舰的替代方案争论不休。
Anyways, a battleship is not needed? Why does the US need a battleship? To fight Whom? China? If you haven't been paying attention, the current admin isnt even interested in that anymore, and we still got quite a few years before the next one even has a chance to change policy. If the US was determined to fight over Taiwan sure, but it looks like we'll be instead bullying nations closer to our appetite, like Venezuela and the what not.
无论如何，需要战列舰吗？美国为何需要战列舰？为了与谁作战？中国？如果你没注意，当前政府甚至对此已不感兴趣，而下届政府至少要等上好几年才有机会改变政策。如果美国决意介入台湾（地区）问题，那或许说得通，但看起来我们更倾向于欺凌那些更符合我们口味的国家，比如委内瑞拉等等。
OlivencaENossa
Hemispheric Control is the new policy trend. Friend.
控制（西）半球已成为新的政策风向，我的朋友。
SirThoreth
If we do, can we add a damn CIWS system for close-in defense? The current Zumwalts lack both Phalanx and SeaRAM.
如果我们这样做的话，能不能至少加个近防炮系统？现在的朱姆沃尔特级既没有密集阵也没有海拉姆。
iPon3
I thought the Defiant was intended to use directed energy weapons in that final intercept role (along with soft kill measures). There are other modern warships with self defence VLS missiles which don't mount any sort of CIWS (my first thought is my own country's Formidable-class but I assume the La Fayette it's based on is similar)
我以为无畏级本打算在最终拦截任务中使用定向能武器（以及软杀伤措施）。还有其他现代战舰配备了自卫用的 VLS 导弹，却完全没有安装任何类型的近防炮（我首先想到的是我们自己国家的可畏级，但我估计其原型拉斐特级也差不多）。
SirThoreth
Yes, Defiant class is supposed to fit lasers, but it's also been described as being planned to also fit the SeaRAM.
没错，无畏级确实计划装备激光武器，但据说也计划安装海拉姆。
I think of the CIWS as the last line of defense, and the Zumwalt has neither lasers nor CIWS in its current incarnation, and every VLS tube carrying ESSMs is one not carrying SM-6 or Tomahawks, etc.
我认为密集阵近防武器系统是最后一道防线，而当前构型的朱姆沃尔特驱逐舰既没有激光武器也没有近防系统。每个装载 ESSM 防空导弹的垂直发射系统单元，就意味着少装一枚 SM-6 远程导弹或战斧巡航导弹。
van_buskirk
A DDG(X) Flight II baselined for CPS with no guns would go so hard.
以通用高超音速滑翔体（CPS）为基准设计、不安装舰炮的 DDG(X)驱逐舰二期方案将极具威力。
Aurailious
I thought DDG(X) was Zumwalt without the weird hull.
我以为 DDG(X)就是去掉奇特船体的朱姆沃尔特级。
Fp_Guy
Suprance DDG's hull was used to create the Tico CG which led to the lessons learned to build the Burke DDG
斯普鲁恩斯级驱逐舰的船体被用于提康德罗加级巡洋舰，这为后来建造伯克级驱逐舰提供了宝贵的经验教训。
Zumwalt DDG can give us Zumwalt CG which will give us the lessons needed for a new DDG.
朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰能为我们提供朱姆沃尔特级巡洋舰的经验教训，这有助于我们为新型驱逐舰汲取必要的知识。
Ralph090
We were originally planning to do that with the CG(X) program in the 2000s, but it was cancelled in 2010.
我们本计划在 21 世纪初通过 CG(X)项目实现这一目标，但该项目于 2010 年被取消。
edgygothteen69
I'm sorry but is this a shitpost? You're talking about Terrier, Talos, and Tartar missiles. These haven't been in service for decades. This is old technology, pre-VLS technology. I'm confused how you could simultaneously know what these systems are while also not knowing that better systems (VLS) and missiles (SM-6, etc.) exist.
我很抱歉，但这难道是在发垃圾帖吗？你说的是“小猎犬”、“黄铜骑士”和“鞑靼人”导弹。这些武器已经几十年没有服役了。这是老旧技术，垂直发射系统出现之前的技术。我不明白你怎么会既知道这些系统存在，同时又不知道有更好的系统（垂直发射系统）和导弹（比如 SM-6 等）呢。
Ralph090
Keep going. The Three Ts are there to provide context on what the US Navy thought would be the potential mission of a guided missile battleship in the 50s, which was the last time the idea was considered as far as I know. They were looking into converting USS Kentucky into one, which was an Iowa class battleship that was never finished. One idea was a general purpose next generation fast battleship with guns and Terrier missiles, one was a strategic deterrent with Polaris nuclear ballistic missiles, and one was a dedicated anti-aircraft ship with Talos and Tartar missiles. The Defiant class pretty much picks up where they left off and tries to do all three. Deterrence is the hypersonic missiles and nuclear cruise missiles, the next generation fast battleship is the railgun and anti-ship missiles, and the anti-aircraft ship is the VLS cells and lasers.
继续往下看。"三 T"方案揭示了上世纪 50 年代美国海军对导弹战列舰潜在任务的设想，据我所知，这是该构想最后一次被正式讨论。当时他们曾考虑将未完工的"艾奥瓦"级战列舰肯塔基号进行改造。第一种方案是配备舰炮与"小猎犬"导弹的通用型下一代高速战列舰，第二种是搭载"北极星"核弹道导弹的战略威慑平台，第三种则是装备"黄铜骑士"与"鞑靼人"导弹的专职防空舰。如今的"无畏级"基本继承了这些思路并试图融合三者：高超音速导弹与核巡航导弹承担威慑任务，电磁轨道炮与反舰导弹延续高速战列舰理念，而垂直发射系统单元与激光武器则接替了防空舰的职责。
My argument is it would be better to keep going with DDG(X) and restart Zumwalt class construction based on USS Zumwalt's refit to complement DDG(X). A modified Zumwalt can do the deterrence with its hypersonic missiles and be the next generation fast battleship by installing a railgun in place of turret 2, which I believe is currently empty space in USS Zumwalt, while DDG(X) can be the anti-aircraft ship and back up the Zumwalt class in surface warfare. Both could also be fitted with lasers due to their modern power plants. Also, the Zumwalt's stealthy hull makes a surface ship more viable as a deterrence because it'll be harder to hit before it fires its missiles even if you know it's there. A big part of why I think this could be a good idea is that it allows the Navy to do all three things with ships that can be built in smaller yards and thus won't delay aircraft carrier construction the way the Defiant class will.
我的观点是，继续推进 DDG(X)项目并基于"朱姆沃尔特"号驱逐舰的改装重新启动朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰建造计划，以补充 DDG(X)的能力，这样会更好。改进型朱姆沃尔特级驱逐舰能够凭借其高超音速导弹发挥威慑作用，并在二号炮塔位置（我认为目前在"朱姆沃尔特"号上是空置空间）安装电磁轨道炮，成为下一代高速战舰；而 DDG(X)则可以作为防空舰，在水面作战中支援朱姆沃尔特级。两款舰艇都配备了现代化的动力系统，因此也都可以加装激光武器。此外，朱姆沃尔特级的隐身船体设计使水面舰艇作为威慑平台更具可行性，因为即使在敌方知晓其存在的情况下，它在发射导弹前也更难被击中。我认为这是一个好主意的关键原因在于，它能让海军通过可在较小船厂建造的舰艇同时实现这三重目标，从而不会像"挑战者"级那样拖延航空母舰的建造进度。
That said it is a bit shitposty since the idea will never be seen by the actual Navy brass, let alone even remotely considered. That's why I put in the terrible jokes. Also I expected even mentioning the Zumwalt class to cause most people to see red.
不过这个想法确实有点像是在胡说八道，因为海军高层根本不会看到这个方案，更别提认真考虑了。所以我才在讨论中加入了些蹩脚的笑话。而且我早就料到，光是提到朱姆沃尔特级就足以让大多数人火冒三丈了。
很赞 5
收藏