US Navy News and updates

[the concerned]

Surely by the time you adapt any foreign frigate design's to US navy specifications they aren't going to be any cheaper than building more arleigh Burke destroyers. To me this would be the best approach rather than waste money looking to a frigate that doesn't work in the US navy's fight plans just increase the destroyer programme

 

[swerve]

I agree with your summation and doubts about this approach. Essentially what they are looking for could be 'theoretically' covered by a number of euro designs (and even the Australian future frigate .... noting my previous tounge in cheek comment in this regard) but there is going to be a degree of rework on weapons and systems. So basically there will be development cost.

As noted by others I cannot see Congress agreeing to this unless they can prove US content in the design.

They are in a bit of a pickle on this one as the time (and cost) to design and construct a 'new' vessel is going to be a factor IMHO. This may be why regenerating old ships (FFG's) may be considered.

I am watching with interest

Well, there's always the Norwegian navy's Fridtjof Nansen class.SPY-1F radar, ESSM, LM2500 GT . . .

 

[colay1]

One of the strengths of LCS is it's ability to launch and operate a variety of unmanned undersea, surface and airborne platforms. Unmanned systems are only going to play ever increasing roles going forward so a LCS-derived frigate may have an advantage in this regard.

 

[John Fedup]

This link describes the ongoing OBOGS problems which have now spread to the F-35A. It would be interesting to see data about non-US jets. I have not seen anything articles mentioning this issue with regards to Gripen, Rafale, or Typhoon. Is this because they aren't occurring or not being made public? Do these aircraft use similar OBOGS or something different? As the link mentions, with the F-35A now in this club, there will be a huge increase in effort to get this sorted.

Now That The F-35A Is Also Having Oxygen Issues A Solution Is More Likely - The Drive

 

[Ranger25]

USN set to test JSOW- ER

USN is moving forward with plans to test the JSOW-ER

Powered JSOW (JSOW-ER)
A Hamilton-Sundstrand TJ-150 turbojet engine for a powered JSOW is being tested. The powered variant name is JSOW-ER, where "ER" is for "extended range". JSOW-ER will increase range from 130 to 560 kilometres (70 to 300 nmi)

A significant boost to range especially for Maritime Strike missions. The JSOW can also target moving surface targets and adds Link 16. IOC of BLOC III was 6/16.


U.S. Navy To Flight Test Quadruple-Range JSOW-ER | AWIN_Defense content from Aviation Week

 

[Ranger25]

DARPA/Boeing sea trails of XLUUV

The DARPA project for an XLUUV has begun sea trials this week. The Echo Voyager is a 50 ton XLUUV designed for months of undersea autonomous missions. Goal will be to make it combat capable

According to Phantom Works at Boeing the goal is for the XLUUV to be able to "drop things and fire missiles"

We are combining Boeing’s preeminent [unmanned underwater vehicle] maritime engineering team with our nation’s leading shipbuilder and Navy technical services company to get operational vehicles to the Navy years ahead of the standard acquisition process,” said Darryl Davis, president of Boeing Phantom Works.


Boeing: Boeing Begins Deep Sea Adventure

 

[alexsa]

One of the strengths of LCS is it's ability to launch and operate a variety of unmanned undersea, surface and airborne platforms. Unmanned systems are only going to play ever increasing roles going forward so a LCS-derived frigate may have an advantage in this regard.

Both a strength and weakness as the ships are severely weight constrained by their design with a focus on speed.

The vessel can swing role but can only do that role with 'light' offensive and defensive systems for other roles. The USN can absorb this given the size of ther fleet but if the module is not available these ships have the combat capability of a patrol vessel with limited AAW self defence.

The problem as the moment is some of the modules are not in service.

 

[colay1]

Both a strength and weakness as the ships are severely weight constrained by their design with a focus on speed.

The vessel can swing role but can only do that role with 'light' offensive and defensive systems for other roles. The USN can absorb this given the size of ther fleet but if the module is not available these ships have the combat capability of a patrol vessel with limited AAW self defence.

The problem as the moment is some of the modules are not in service.

I was just commenting that a frigate based on LCS would likely have an advantage out of the gate in integrating various unmanned systems compared to others.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

USN is moving forward with plans to test the JSOW-ER

Powered JSOW (JSOW-ER)
A Hamilton-Sundstrand TJ-150 turbojet engine for a powered JSOW is being tested. The powered variant name is JSOW-ER, where "ER" is for "extended range". JSOW-ER will increase range from 130 to 560 kilometres (70 to 300 nmi)

A significant boost to range especially for Maritime Strike missions. The JSOW can also target moving surface targets and adds Link 16. IOC of BLOC III was 6/16.


U.S. Navy To Flight Test Quadruple-Range JSOW-ER | AWIN_Defense content from Aviation Week

They've been working on JSOW-ER for literally a decade. And it completed it's first free-flight test in 2009 RAYTHEON COMPLETES FREE FLIGHT OF JOINT STANDOFF WEAPON EXTENDED RANGE
I guess the program has been a low priority.

 

[SpazSinbad]

This link describes the ongoing OBOGS problems which have now spread to the F-35A. It would be interesting to see data about non-US jets. I have not seen anything articles mentioning this issue with regards to Gripen, Rafale, or Typhoon. Is this because they aren't occurring or not being made public? Do these aircraft use similar OBOGS or something different? As the link mentions, with the F-35A now in this club, there will be a huge increase in effort to get this sorted.

Now That The F-35A Is Also Having Oxygen Issues A Solution Is More Likely - The Drive

All reports about the different aircraft affected make it clear the cause/causes of the problems are not immediately obvious whilst much effort has gone into finding causes for the various aircraft for some years/months in the case of the Hornet family/T-45C and recently some F-35As at LUKE AFB. Good info from Honeywell about their OBOGS packages seen in the F-35s, F-22s & Typhoon amongst several others is here: https://aerocontent.honeywell.com/a..._Brochures-documents/Life_Support_Systems.pdf (4Mb)

File size restrictions make posting info from this PDF problematic. I can post a bunch of text with diagrams or point to two other forums which have similar info.

 

[alexsa]

I was just commenting that a frigate based on LCS would likely have an advantage out of the gate in integrating various unmanned systems compared to others.

Sorry why? Integration is a systems issue and any vessel capable of deploying unmanned systems may be 'integrated' if the installed systems permit it. A range of vessel are being mooted for the use of unmanned systems and some are actually being deployed on vessel other that the LCS so I see no advantage to this platform in this respect.


In the volume of space available (noting the weight limitation) the LCS does have an advantage at this point in time, however, new designs in the mix (such as T26) will offer multi-mission bays that offer similar capability albeit on a much bigger hull.

 

[colay1]

I was thinking a FG based on LCS could leverage all the work and investments that had been done previously so it would be a lower-risk solution that could be delivered to the fleet sooner and at lower cost. Also it benefits from having a hot production line.

No doubt a foreign vessel could be designed to meet Navy specs. Will an existing design readily accommodate the requirements? Or will they have to go back to the blackboard? I just think a LCS-derived frigate has a head start in this race.

 

[Ranger25]

I was thinking a FG based on LCS could leverage all the work and investments that had been done previously so it would be a lower-risk solution that could be delivered to the fleet sooner and at lower cost. Also it benefits from having a hot production line.

No doubt a foreign vessel could be designed to meet Navy specs. Will an existing design readily accommodate the requirements? Or will they have to go back to the blackboard? I just think a LCS-derived frigate has a head start in this race.

USN assessment continues. I think the most sense will be to go with one of the two upgraded LCS hulls. Both meet to core requirements for the new FFG



https://news.usni.org/2017/04/12/na...ate-competition-expanding-anti-air-capability

 

[John Fedup]

Here's a link to a report on the USN's progress on lasers, EMRG and HVP programs. One has to really like the EMRG's impressive velocities which in turn produces the huge KE imparted to the projectiles, all powder free.

https://news.usni.org/2017/06/15/re...-railgun-hypervelocity-projectiles#more-26178

 

[alexsa]

I was thinking a FG based on LCS could leverage all the work and investments that had been done previously so it would be a lower-risk solution that could be delivered to the fleet sooner and at lower cost. Also it benefits from having a hot production line.

No doubt a foreign vessel could be designed to meet Navy specs. Will an existing design readily accommodate the requirements? Or will they have to go back to the blackboard? I just think a LCS-derived frigate has a head start in this race.

Again why? ...... it is a systems issue. There is nothing stopping they same combat system, or a derivative of it, being put in another hull. An what packages has LCS got in place. The surface warfare package ..... which would be a standard fit on the 'frigate based' option which simply up guns the platform.

The Mine warfare and ASW packages are still not in place.

Unmanned systems are being rolled out on a range of platforms suggesting LCS has no advantage here.

The biggest advantage of the LCS is it is in production now!

 

[colay1]

I concede your point. I await the release of the RFP to see what the Navy actually seeks in it's new FG.

 

[colay1]

I hope this guy has a good excuse for his behavior. Not a joking matter.

Navy finds USS Shiloh sailor it thought had fallen overboard - Business Insider

Sailor thought dead after falling overboard was actually hiding out in the ship's engine room

A sailor on the USS Shiloh who was presumed dead after falling overboard was actually hiding out in one of the ship's engine rooms for the past week, David Larter of Navy Times reports...

 

[swerve]

They'll start with psychiatric evaluation, I expect. That's not sane behaviour.

 

[colay1]

They'll start with psychiatric evaluation, I expect. That's not sane behaviour.

Agreed. I'm wondering what he did for food and water?
Has there been any consideration given to tagging crew members with some sort of mini transmitter that would track their respective movements and sound the alarm if anyone were to fall overboard? Or would it be impractical?

 

[John Fedup]

AIS MOB devices are available but the cost to equip a large crew on vessels which are very seaworthy as opposed to say sailing yachts, where MOB probability is high, is rather prohibitive. The sailor in the article might well have just thrown a AIS MOB device overboard.