Destroyer maintenance tenders

 Spearhead class Expeditionary Fast Transport ship has recently been selected to replace 2 aging Hospital Ships and it got me thinking. What other neglected classes of ship could this ship also replace? I settled on the often forgotten Destroyer Tender. The EPF has more than enough space to convert its cargo bays into the maintenance facilities and crew accommodations required to support a larger ship. USNS Burlington (EPF-10) even completed a deployment in 2021 providing maintenance and tending services to ships deployed in 4th Fleet as a proof of concept deployment.

The last class of Destroyer Tenders in the US Navy were the Yellowstone class serving in fleet from 1980-1996, only 13 to 16 years, but providing a pivotal service to the fleet. One example is USS Yellowstone’s 1994 deployment where in 4 months her crew completed more than 3,400 jobs, totaling 119,088 man hours, through 17 major alongside repairs on various ships, including 45 fly away teams to other areas.

Much has been talked about on here and in the US about the declining US naval infrastructure being about to build the ships needed to reach the target 355 ship navy but little about how to sustain it. During a typical ship’s deployment, half way through the ship will conduct a multi-week mid-deployment CMAV (contracted maintenance availability) to fix things broken on deployment and conduct much needed preservation (a hit button issue today). Lack of large scale maintenance facilities overseas more than often means ships conducting these CMAVs or emergent repairs in predictable ports. (Example: in 5th fleet your only real option is Bahrain and maybe Jebel Ali, in 4th fleet it’s Guantanamo Bay unless you want to make the hike up to NAS Key West or Mayport FL). Having a class of Destroyer Tenders would allow more maintenance teams to reach more ships in more places.

This need for Destroyer Tenders is exacerbated in a time of war where a damaged ship’s only option for repair will be to return to the states (if it even can). Due to the few yards and drydocks that can accommodate navy ships, the US Navy in a time of war may very well need to make the tough decision between using its precious few yard space to repair a ship at the cost of building a new one. A recent example of a damaged ship needing to be returned to the states for repairs is the USS Cole (pictured being heavy lifted back). This is a service that may not be available to the fleet during wartime. Another example is following the USS Stark attack, where in the wake of the attack USS Acadia provided berthing, messing, and repair services to her. Imagine a scenario similar to the 2016 USS Mason attack off Yemen, but instead she was hit. The closest US base for her to pull in would have been Djibouti, however this base severely lacks the ability to repair ships. A quickly dispatched Destroyer Tender could rectify this.

Another important point that would highlight the importance of Destroyer Tenders is the hot button issue today of short handed crews and topside preservation. Ships today are underway more, longer, and with less crews than they have ever been in history. New ships entering the fleet (example: the Constellation class FFG will be nearly 500 feet long, 7000 tons with a crew of only 130ish, another example the Zumwalts are 15000 tons, 600 ft and have a crew of 150) will be even “optimally manned” (I.e. the politically correct term for “minimally manned”) even further stretching the capabilities of their crews which are already overworked. A class of Destroyer Tenders would help alleviate the maintainance burdens that these crews are experiencing.

Zumwalt: us navy stealth destroyer

Zumwalt-classAn artist rendering of the Zumwalt class destroyer DDG 1000, a new class of multi-mission U.S. Navy surface combatant ship designed to operate as part of a joint maritime fleet, assisting Marine strike forces ashore as well as performing littoral, air and sub-surface warfare.

The Zumwalt-Class Destroyer Fell Short of Expectations – The United States Navy’s Zumwalt-class destroyer was billed as the future of naval warfare. Designed to incorporate brand new stealth technology, and brand-new weapons systems, the Zumwalt was to replace the aging Arleigh Burke-class. Initially, the Navy was scheduled to procure 32 Zumwalts. But the program went rampantly overbudget while the new ship performed below expectations. The Navy withdrew support, asking Congress to stop procuring Zumwalts and instead build more of the familiar, reliable Arleigh Burke destroyers. Congress obliged and only three Zumwalts were ever delivered

Zumwalt-classAn artist rendering of the Zumwalt class destroyer DDG 1000, a new class of multi-mission U.S. Navy surface combatant ship designed to operate as part of a joint maritime fleet, assisting Marine strike forces ashore as well as performing littoral, air and sub-surface warfare.

The Zumwalt-Class Destroyer Fell Short of Expectations – The United States Navy’s Zumwalt-class destroyer was billed as the future of naval warfare. Designed to incorporate brand new stealth technology, and brand-new weapons systems, the Zumwalt was to replace the aging Arleigh Burke-class. Initially, the Navy was scheduled to procure 32 Zumwalts. But the program went rampantly overbudget while the new ship performed below expectations. The Navy withdrew support, asking Congress to stop procuring Zumwalts and instead build more of the familiar, reliable Arleigh Burke destroyers. Congress obliged and only three Zumwalts were ever delivered. 

The Zumwalt was an ambitious project, full of innovative technology. For starters, the Zumwalt was a stealth ship. Despite being 40 percent larger than the Arleigh Burke, the Zumwalt has a radar cross-section (RCS) comparable to a fishing boat. The key to such a deceptive RCS is the Zumwalts hull design. The Zumwalt’s hull grows narrower above the waterline, in a tumblehome style. The tumblehome was common on wooden warships and had a flare of popularity with steel warships in the late 19th century. But when three of four Russian tumblehome battleships were lost in the Russo-Japanese War, the design was declared ineffective for modern warfare and fell out of style for nearly one hundred years. Now, stealth-seeking modern navies are reintroducing the shape to meet low-RCS requirements. 

In addition to the tumblehome design, the Zumwalt has a composite deckhouse, which encases the ship’s sensory and electronic equipment in low RCS material. Between the tumblehome hull and the composite deckhouse, the Zumwalt’s RCS is about 50 times harder to detect on radar than older destroyers. And the Zumwalt is quiet—with an acoustic signature more similar to a Los Angeles-class submarine than a surface warship.     

However, the applicability of the Zumwalt’s stealth has been called into question. The Zumwalt was designed to provide Naval Surface Fire Support with a focus on land attacks. So, the Zumwalt was meant to operate in typically crowded, near-shore waters where ships can be tracked visually. And the Zumwalt, naturally, was intended to fire its impressive arsenal—meaning, that once the ship started firing, its stealth properties would be compromised. .

Yj21 Chinese Anti ship ballistic missile

 Hi, What Are You Looking For?

China’s YJ-21 Anti-Ship Missile Test Warns Washington: Taiwan Isn’t Ukraine – China’s test of a new anti-ship missile may be sending America a message: Taiwan isn’t Ukraine.

Chinese leaders may fear that Ukraine’s success in frustrating Russia’s invasion – partly based on military aid from NATO nations – will encourage Taiwan into believing that U.S. support will allow it to defeat a Chinese invasion.

“Beijing is worrying that the unlimited U.S. military assistance to Ukraine and a recent American congressional group tour to Taiwan might make Taipei believe Washington may provide the same help in the event of a conflict between the mainland and Taiwan,” Chinese military expert Zhou Chenming, told the South China Morning Post.

As a matter of military technology, attention will be paid to the video of the mysterious YJ-21 anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM), released by the Chinese government for the first time. Perhaps more notable was that the YJ-21 – or Eagle Strike 21 – was launched from a new Type 055 cruiser. China already has land-based anti-ship ballistic missiles – the notorious DF-21 and DF-26 “carrier killer” weapons – as well as an air-launched ASBM on the H-6 bomber.

Not surprisingly, these ASBMs deeply worry the U.S. Navy. With ranges of more than a thousand miles, they soar high into the atmosphere before releasing a warhead at hypersonic (faster than Mach 5) speed that may be too fast for shipboard anti-missile defenses to stop.

An ASBM capable of being launched by surface ships would be a powerful weapon. Unlike land-based missiles that are fixed platforms, or aircraft with limited range and vulnerability to bad weather, surface ships provide mobile launch platforms. An ASBM-equipped Chinese task force, for example, could penetrate into the Indian Ocean, or into the South Pacific to threaten Australia. Mounted on the 13,000-ton Type 055, a heavily armed destroyer that is actually bigger than a U.S. Navy Aegis cruiser, the YJ-21 could threaten U.S. and coalition ships across the Pacific.