US Navy News and updates

[MrConservative]

I have read elsewhere speculation that the Babcock/OMD design for the type 31e could be a reason why Huntington Ingalls have gone silent over the last year rather than offering their 4923 Frigate design based off the NSC. It maybe that the author was just reading the tea leaves and drawing an assumption or that they have also more plausibly used the $15m finalist design study from the DoD to beef up the 4923 design proposal which came through even prior to the FFG(X) project getting the green light.

 

[John Fedup]

I thought any bid offered had to be based on a proven design. Perhaps a page from Canada's CSC playbook has been copied, i.e. change the rule in mid-stream. I am not complaining as the T26 is the best choice for the RCN and perhaps for the USN as well. The pricing will be an issue however.

 

[MrConservative]

I thought any bid offered had to be based on a proven design. Perhaps a page from Canada's CSC playbook has been copied, i.e. change the rule in mid-stream. I am not complaining as the T26 is the best choice for the RCN and perhaps for the USN as well. The pricing will be an issue however.

Keeping it under $1 Billion would be difficult, but if they could do that it would be one hell of a ship.

 

[John Fedup]

Agree. Perhaps a group meeting of T26 supply chain partners discussing how much margin could be trimmed should they see sales going from 32 to 52 might help. I realize all ships will have varying kit but there should be some significant common items, e.g. RR MT30s, MTU diesels, etc. LM could offer a customized version of their CMS330 specified for our CSC for the USN ships that should be cost competitive assuming the USN would find it suitable. This would be in line with their intent to be a supplier to the program.

 

[Mattshel]

Agree. Perhaps a group meeting of T26 supply chain partners discussing how much margin could be trimmed should they see sales going from 32 to 52 might help. I realize all ships will have varying kit but there should be some significant common items, e.g. RR MT30s, MTU diesels, etc. LM could offer a customized version of their CMS330 specified for our CSC for the USN ships that should be cost competitive assuming the USN would find it suitable. This would be in line with their intent to be a supplier to the program.

I suspect COMBATSS21 and CMS 300 are very similar, both being Lockheed Martin products and all.

 

[ngatimozart]

I suspect COMBATSS21 and CMS 300 are very similar, both being Lockheed Martin products and all.

Would be nice if they are, because CMS 330 is being installed on the two RNZN ANZAC FFHs.

 

[ASSAIL]

I couldn’t let this one pass

See more editorial cartoons at The Week

 

[Redlands18]

I couldn’t let this one pass

See more editorial cartoons at The Week

Impressed with the amount of effort the Cartoonist put into a reasonably accurate drawing of a Burke Class DDG,

 

[John Fedup]

I couldn’t let this one pass

See more editorial cartoons at The Week

Brilliant and to the point for sure.

 

[John Fedup]

This link describes some near contact between a Russian destroyer and a US cruiser. Interesting location, perhaps Putin is trying to impress his new best friend Xi.

VIDEO: Russian Destroyer Put U.S. Cruiser at Risk - USNI News

 

[John Fedup]

I guess stuff will always happen when doing hot work aboard a ship but this yard certainly seems to have a safety issue given the number of incidents.

CO: USS Fitzgerald at Risk From Poor Shipyard Fire Safety - USNI News

 

[Ranger25]

This link describes some near contact between a Russian destroyer and a US cruiser. Interesting location, perhaps Putin is trying to impress his new best friend Xi.

VIDEO: Russian Destroyer Put U.S. Cruiser at Risk - USNI News

I had the same thoughts after their Summit and Xi’s press conference. Still amateur hour for the Russian Navy


And for the TASS version, of course the US CG maneuvered in front of the Russian Destroyer, the video seems to be clear.

US Navy calls Russian military’s actions in East China Sea ‘unprofessional’

 

[Ranger25]

No surprise here but in a recent symposium the USN PEO for surface ships has stated the next Gen Large Surface combat ship will greatly resemble the DDG1000 line. Using the Zumwalt as a test bed for everything from the integrated power system to the VLS layout and Hull. The DDG51 production is slated to end in 2024 with the Next Gen starting in 2025 as a goal


Navy: Next Large Surface Combatant Will Look A Lot Like Zumwalt - USNI News

 

[ngatimozart]

The USN has released its final RFP for the FFG(X). The GFE the Navy will supply is:

• A fixed-face Raytheon Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) that will serve as the primary air search radar.
• At least 32 Mark 41 Vertical Launch System cells that could field Standard Missile 2 Block IIICs or RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSM) and a planned vertically launched anti-submarine warfare weapon.
• COMBATSS-21 Combat Management System based on the Aegis Combat System.
• Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) datalink that would allow the frigate to share targeting information with other ships and aircraft.
• Space, weight and cooling for 8 to 16 Over-the-Horizon Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles
• An aviation detachment that includes an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter and an MQ-8C Firescout Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
• AN/SQQ-89(V)15 Surface Ship Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Combat System
• AN/SQS-62 Variable Depth Sonar.
• SLQ-32(V)6 Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 2 electronic warfare suite with allowances to include SEWIP Block 3 Lite in the future.
• Space, weight and cooling reservation for a 150-kilowatt laser.

It also wants simpler methodologies for upgrading with no hull cuts or dry docking and the same for the upgrading of hull mounted subsurface and towed sonar sensors. The Navy is looking at US$800 million per ship with at least 20 ships being ordered, although the first contract will be for a tranche of 10 ships. Technical proposals are to be submitted by 22/8/2019 and cost proposals by 26/9/2-19. The contract winner will be selected fiscal year 2020 (1/10/2019 - 30/9/2020). Navy Issues Final RFP for FFG(X) Next-Generation Frigate - USNI News

However, the Navy maybe pushing the brown smelly stuff uphill both in terms of cost and in the time scale that it requires the ships, because of the critters in Congress sticking their noses into the works. If the Navy "tries to contract for any auxiliary equipment, such as pumps, or propulsion equipment or shipboard cranes not manufactured in the United States. In other words, those components must be manufactured in the United States, or Congress won’t fund them." The Navy opposes this because it increases the cost and lengthens the time required getting the ships into service because of redesign time, costs and lack of commonality with the wider USN fleet. So Congress critter pork barrelling yet again. Why doesn't that surprise me, considering the dysfunctional mess that's been Congress for the last 8 or so years. The US Navy’s new frigate program is careening toward a roadblock

 

[hauritz]

The USN has released its final RFP for the FFG(X). The GFE the Navy will supply is:

• A fixed-face Raytheon Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) that will serve as the primary air search radar.
• At least 32 Mark 41 Vertical Launch System cells that could field Standard Missile 2 Block IIICs or RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSM) and a planned vertically launched anti-submarine warfare weapon.
• COMBATSS-21 Combat Management System based on the Aegis Combat System.
• Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) datalink that would allow the frigate to share targeting information with other ships and aircraft.
• Space, weight and cooling for 8 to 16 Over-the-Horizon Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles
• An aviation detachment that includes an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter and an MQ-8C Firescout Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
• AN/SQQ-89(V)15 Surface Ship Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Combat System
• AN/SQS-62 Variable Depth Sonar.
• SLQ-32(V)6 Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 2 electronic warfare suite with allowances to include SEWIP Block 3 Lite in the future.
• Space, weight and cooling reservation for a 150-kilowatt laser.

It also wants simpler methodologies for upgrading with no hull cuts or dry docking and the same for the upgrading of hull mounted subsurface and towed sonar sensors. The Navy is looking at US$800 million per ship with at least 20 ships being ordered, although the first contract will be for a tranche of 10 ships. Technical proposals are to be submitted by 22/8/2019 and cost proposals by 26/9/2-19. The contract winner will be selected fiscal year 2020 (1/10/2019 - 30/9/2020). Navy Issues Final RFP for FFG(X) Next-Generation Frigate - USNI News

However, the Navy maybe pushing the brown smelly stuff uphill both in terms of cost and in the time scale that it requires the ships, because of the critters in Congress sticking their noses into the works. If the Navy "tries to contract for any auxiliary equipment, such as pumps, or propulsion equipment or shipboard cranes not manufactured in the United States. In other words, those components must be manufactured in the United States, or Congress won’t fund them." The Navy opposes this because it increases the cost and lengthens the time required getting the ships into service because of redesign time, costs and lack of commonality with the wider USN fleet. So Congress critter pork barrelling yet again. Why doesn't that surprise me, considering the dysfunctional mess that's been Congress for the last 8 or so years. The US Navy’s new frigate program is careening toward a roadblock

When they say "a planned vertically launched anti-submarine warfare weapon" are they talking about ASROC or are they developing a new system?

ASROC has been around since the sixties. There are more modern systems available that may do a better job.

Type 07 Vertical Launch Anti-submarine rocket - Wikipedia

 

[seaspear]

In comparing the Hunter class and the FFG(X) the Hunter class was acclaimed for its accoustic stealth internally that reduced or eliminated shipborne noise even to the extent of plumbing for the toilets ,this made it a more expensive ship so does it suggest that the U.S.N views asw operations differently to other nations ?

 

[Stampede]

This link describes some near contact between a Russian destroyer and a US cruiser. Interesting location, perhaps Putin is trying to impress his new best friend Xi.

VIDEO: Russian Destroyer Put U.S. Cruiser at Risk - USNI News

Seriously close.
Good visibility and sea conditions.
Cannot put this down to negligence, but rather a statement of intent on behalf of the Russian ship to stir the pot on the high seas.
Was this a local decision of the Russian ships captain, or orders from higher up.
No ones impressed or intimidated by such antics.

Trust it's a one off!

Regards S

 

[ngatimozart]

Seriously close.
Good visibility and sea conditions.
Cannot put this down to negligence, but rather a statement of intent on behalf of the Russian ship to stir the pot on the high seas.
Was this a local decision of the Russian ships captain, or orders from higher up.
No ones impressed or intimidated by such antics.

Trust it's a one off!

Regards S

I would suggest that the orders came from well above the CO's pay grade. No CO would undertake such a manoeuvre without authorisation in 40 copies, because it would be an instant career killer with them being busted to civilian before the next watch turned too. The XO and OOW would probably be following them as well. probably no more promotion for the CO's immediate superiors as well. Navies don't have a sense of humour about things like that, especially if involves an international incident.

 

[ngatimozart]

BAE have said that the Type 26 will not be part of the FFG(X) program because the ship is not in service as stipulated by the program requirements. Also the US shipbuilding industry is having problems recruiting and retaining workers creating a lack of stability in the workforce. I think that this points to a larger problem not just in the US, but here in NZ as well with many young people going to university for degrees, whilst few are pursuing apprenticeships, creating a shortage of qualified and experienced tradies across the board.

 

[John Fedup]

BAE have said that the Type 26 will not be part of the FFG(X) program because the ship is not in service as stipulated by the program requirements. Also the US shipbuilding industry is having problems recruiting and retaining workers creating a lack of stability in the workforce. I think that this points to a larger problem not just in the US, but here in NZ as well with many young people going to university for degrees, whilst few are pursuing apprenticeships, creating a shortage of qualified and experienced tradies across the board.

Young people not opting for apprenticeships is common to all 5eyes countries I suspect. Frankly, some university degrees are simply not good value for money and many of these students would be better off pursuing apprenticeships.