Callaghan-class Cruiser

The U. S. Navy has, in many senses, squandered the past two decades trying to build a new surface combatant. First, the ludicrous COEA SC-21 of the 1990s delivered merely three of the dysfunctional Zumwalt-class. Then the CG(X) project proposed a nuclear-powered 25,000-ton monstrosity, far too expensive for congress to accept. By now, the Navy could only rely on Flight-III Arleigh Burkes to serve as partial replacements for the Ticonderoga-class, with the next-generation DDG(X) not expected to enter service until 2030. But there was no reason why the U. S. could not produce an effective Ticonderoga replacement around the late 2010s. The Callaghan-class cruiser is my interpretation of how such a ship might turn out. In 2011, NAVSEA began drawing up designs for a new large surface combatant, primarily in reaction to the understanding that the upcoming AN/SPY-6 AMDR radar would push the Arleigh Burke hull to its limits. To comfortably accommodate AMDR and other emerging technologies, NAVSEA emphasized the need for additional weight-carrying, cooling and electrical power-generating capacities on the new ship. Compared to the Burkes and Ticonderogas, the Callaghan would be significantly larger and stealthier. The final design is set on a 178m/584 ft long hull with angled surfaces and a clean, uncluttered superstructure. An integrated power system, using both diesel and gas turbine generators, was adapted the Zumwalt class to provide propulsion and massive amounts of electrical power for its various subsystems, while also reducing acoustic and thermal signatures. For its primary role of air and missile defense, the cruiser’s main sensor is Raytheon’s 14-ft diameter AMDR radar mounted high above the bridge. Replacing the earlier mess of radar dishes are various X and D band target illumination and surface search arrays, built into a stealthy composite mast. All of these radars, plus optical sensors and a sonar suite, were managed via AEGIS baseline 10 alongside spacious comm