Perhaps the scenario isn't entirely realistic and is basically supplying "difficult" decisions to the contestants rather than likely real world outcomes? The availability of T45 is certainly a problem, but how did they determine that the t23 , a sub hunter, was sunk by a Russian sub? Was that wargamed in dome sort of simulation (a good simulation) or just a decision point that could be used for dramatic effect?
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
justinterested
Member
The T23 was busy helping survivors of a Russian research vessel that had hit some rocks. This was hypothesised as a deliberate action to distract the T23.
Many of the situations simulated so far have strong messages for us in Australia. That is, to name a few, our lack of tier 1 navy vessels, lack of missile numbers and poor defence of military sites and cities. Also our two LHD's have been sidelined for at least the last two weeks already with propulsion problems and HMAS Choules recently returned from deployment and its crew is on leave, meaning the navy would struggle to respond to an immediate crisis.
Last edited:
Meanwhile, in other news, Type 45 seems to have sprouted a set of launchers which may or may not be counter UAS:
www.navylookout.com
Royal Navy destroyer HMS Dauntless fitted with unidentified new launchers - Navy Lookout
During August, HMS Dauntless was fitted with new equipment on her upper deck, likely counter-drone interceptors. This has not been officially confirmed as the RN will not comment on the matter. The fit closely matches an urgent requirement put to industry in March and comes as the destroyer...
www.navylookout.com
Which "claim"?
Major £8.4bn investment advances UK nuclear deterrent and backs British industry - GOV.UK Major £8.4bn investment advances UK nuclear deterrent and backs British industry
Royal Navy’s newest hunter-killer submarine debuts at sea as HMS Agamemnon begins trials Royal Navy’s newest hunter-killer submarine debuts at sea as HMS Agamemnon begins trials
OldTex
Well-Known Member
In its first major step towards a hybrid navy the Royal Navy has established its first squadron for autonomous boats (as reported by Navy Lookout). This squadron is equipped with 20 Kraken K3 USVs. It provides the basis for littoral naval operations (subject to suitable payloads being developed rapidly for the USVs) as well as developing new CONOPS and TTPs needed for such a hybrid navy.
Navy Lookout has also published articles covering Navantia UK's proposed design for LUSVs, Kongsberg's proposal for the Type 92 LUSV and a more general article on the pathway to a hybrid navy. The question still remains as to how quickly these larger vessels can be developed, built and introduced into service in meaningful numbers.
Navy Lookout has also published articles covering Navantia UK's proposed design for LUSVs, Kongsberg's proposal for the Type 92 LUSV and a more general article on the pathway to a hybrid navy. The question still remains as to how quickly these larger vessels can be developed, built and introduced into service in meaningful numbers.
OldTex
Well-Known Member
The Kongsberg/Thales proposal for the Type 92 ASW LUSV has a great deal to offer, IMHO. As a 1st iteration, equipped with either CAPTAS4 or CAPTAS1 and remotely operated, it can provide additional coverage in the North Atlantic in conjunction with existing manned ASW frigates (as few as they are in the RN). This provides real life operational data regarding the vessel and its systems, as well as providing the opportunity to develop CONOPS and TTPs. A 2nd iteration could potentially be providing greater autonomy to the individual vessels IOT increase the area of operation. This could be independent of a manned ASW vessel, but with remote operators providing oversight and able to take control when required. This would be when the hybrid fleet does start to provide effective mass. A 3rd iteration could see the provision of independent weapons systems that could allow the ASW LUSV to prosecute an identified hostile contact without recourse to a manned ASW vessel. These weapons could be ship launched torpedoes or perhaps even a cold launched ASROC equivalent with Stringray type LWTs. To achieve that progression the first step needs to be taken and that is to get 6-8of the base vessels with 4-6 of the sonar systems (with appropriate control systems, operational and maintenance manpower) and start seeing what works and what doesn't.
Towards the end of one of the greatest SF books of all time, Rendezvous with Rama, a man with a pair of wire cutters disables a nuclear weapon sent to destroy Rama without those who launched it being able to intervene. I’m not sure what is to prevent exactly the same thing happening with a USV. Or, more prosaically, some critical component fails with the vessel miles from support. Of course there will be redundant systems - but it is fact that you cannot engineer out all risk. You have to expect the unexpected. If there is human onboard, or near at hand, it is very conceivable that such problems could be fixed or a work around implemented. Without that person?
OldTex
Well-Known Member
That is just one of the risks that need to be addressed and work on IOT move to the next iteration of USVs. But even having personnel on board won't stop unexpected massive failures. As an example there was the case (many years ago) of a USN ship undergoing sea trials with a new ship management system. The system had a "blue screen of death" shutdown which disabled the entire ship, requiring the use of a satellite phone to summon tugs to tow the ship back to port. The USVs will not be immune to system failures but the most likely and most critical ones can be foreseen and mitigated, any that happen after need to be investigated, remedied and the systems updated appropriately (just like all computer systems etc)