US Navy News and updates
- Thread starter AegisFC
- Start date
Chatfield had a number of commands, including HC-5 and HSC-25. She also commanded a reconstruction task force in Afghanistan and was the type commander of the HSC Wing in PACFLT. That’s two, arguably three, operational commands and a pretty important type command; and at least as good as many male officers.
I'm not sure on the tally but apparently there is not a single female or black, three star or above, remaining. Can anyone confirm or deny this? It's disturbing if true.
Now we are seeing white males, labelled as "not loyal enough" to POTUS, by rightwing bloggers, being removed.
Now we are seeing white males, labelled as "not loyal enough" to POTUS, by rightwing bloggers, being removed.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Apparently significant work still remains to get a carrier test for the MQ-25. Boeing better get moving as this is very important. Rumours are appearing that the F/A XX jet will only have a 25% range increase (TWZ article). As per my comment in the US defence thread, delayed and/or over budget programs are at risk for cancellation as per IOTUS latest instruction.
MQ-25 tanker drone flight this year will require 'ton of work,' warns NAVAIR head - Breaking Defense
MQ-25 tanker drone flight this year will require 'ton of work,' warns NAVAIR head - Breaking Defense
And the new FFG continues to lag. The USN should have stayed the course with minimal changes to the already successful FREMM line
First Constellation Frigate Only 10% Complete, Design Still Being Finalized
The late and over-budget Constellation class design is still in flux, with only 15% commonality with the frigate it's based on, not 85% as planned.
www.twz.com
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes indeed, I meant to post this right after my 3765 post but forgot to click the "post reply" button. See my recent post in the US defence thread about an apparently new directive by team Trump to review delayed and over budget programs.And the new FFG continues to lag. The USN should have stayed the course with minimal changes to the already successful FREMM line
First Constellation Frigate Only 10% Complete, Design Still Being Finalized
The late and over-budget Constellation class design is still in flux, with only 15% commonality with the frigate it's based on, not 85% as planned.
I've referenced it before, there is a very good paper on the "fallacy of the existing design".
Basically there is a point when the changes in mission / role related systems, or the evolution of systems required for a role, become incompatible with the legacy, or selected reference design.
Examples, the Spruance was fine as an ASW platform, and as a DDG, it's update with Armoured Box Launches, then a 61 cell Mk-41 for Tomahawk was successful, but AEGIS was to far. I'm not saying the Ticonderogas were a failure, I'm saying they were compromised, had, and have, many issues because a larger, bespoke platform would have been better and over their 30 plus year lifespan, better value for money, possibly even cheaper.
Look at the various Flights of Burke's. The Flight IIA was good, it was balanced, but then compare the Flight III to the ships being built by Sough Korea and Japan and you can see to compromises accepted by not going for a new design for the dramatically (generationally) improved systems.
Look outside the US, Australia, went for the F-100 when attempts to turn the G&C International Frigate into a Flight IIA Burke (but with a smaller crew and more economical propulsion plant). It was seen as perfectly adequate, decided that the RAN would never need the extra missiles, there would be no need for major upgrades, nor the margins to facilitate them, an "existing design" was the best value for money.
Now the flow on is the Hunter is being extensively redesigned because it's much larger hull can't fit every thing the RAN needs because the Hobart's were too small and too few. The Hunter, remember is based on the Type 26, a much larger, newer design the FREMM that the Constellation is based on, the FREMM that was rejected by the RAN as too small to be adapted to meet Australia's needs.
Now Australia has pivoted and cut three Hunters from the program in favour of upto eleven GP frigates, one of which, the evolved Mogami, is FREMM sized.
Could any sane person imagine cramming the systems we now know you need for a full FFG into a Mogami or a MEKO 200?
That is what the Constellation is, an attempt the get a light DDG on the cheap, by cramming systems into what was a balanced design that could be built as either an ASW platform, a GP platform, or an AD platform, but not all three, never all three.
Basically there is a point when the changes in mission / role related systems, or the evolution of systems required for a role, become incompatible with the legacy, or selected reference design.
Examples, the Spruance was fine as an ASW platform, and as a DDG, it's update with Armoured Box Launches, then a 61 cell Mk-41 for Tomahawk was successful, but AEGIS was to far. I'm not saying the Ticonderogas were a failure, I'm saying they were compromised, had, and have, many issues because a larger, bespoke platform would have been better and over their 30 plus year lifespan, better value for money, possibly even cheaper.
Look at the various Flights of Burke's. The Flight IIA was good, it was balanced, but then compare the Flight III to the ships being built by Sough Korea and Japan and you can see to compromises accepted by not going for a new design for the dramatically (generationally) improved systems.
Look outside the US, Australia, went for the F-100 when attempts to turn the G&C International Frigate into a Flight IIA Burke (but with a smaller crew and more economical propulsion plant). It was seen as perfectly adequate, decided that the RAN would never need the extra missiles, there would be no need for major upgrades, nor the margins to facilitate them, an "existing design" was the best value for money.
Now the flow on is the Hunter is being extensively redesigned because it's much larger hull can't fit every thing the RAN needs because the Hobart's were too small and too few. The Hunter, remember is based on the Type 26, a much larger, newer design the FREMM that the Constellation is based on, the FREMM that was rejected by the RAN as too small to be adapted to meet Australia's needs.
Now Australia has pivoted and cut three Hunters from the program in favour of upto eleven GP frigates, one of which, the evolved Mogami, is FREMM sized.
Could any sane person imagine cramming the systems we now know you need for a full FFG into a Mogami or a MEKO 200?
That is what the Constellation is, an attempt the get a light DDG on the cheap, by cramming systems into what was a balanced design that could be built as either an ASW platform, a GP platform, or an AD platform, but not all three, never all three.
Terran
Well-Known Member
They couldn’t. It’s that simple. They were forced to buy an off the shelf hull but the ship they need is completely different in mission role and doctrine that the FREMM. Same for any other hull type. They needed a clean sheet but felt they didn’t have the time for that so they rushed to build off a derivative of an Existing frigate hull.And the new FFG continues to lag. The USN should have stayed the course with minimal changes to the already successful FREMM line
First Constellation Frigate Only 10% Complete, Design Still Being Finalized
The late and over-budget Constellation class design is still in flux, with only 15% commonality with the frigate it's based on, not 85% as planned.
The French Italian combat control system
Doesn’t meet US requirements or standards, the missile systems are completely different. FREMM has ASW sensors and systems that the U.S. wasn’t interested in.
So the Navy bought the wrong ship to they have to turn it into the right one.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The FREMM design was selected as a fast forward solution for a USN frigate. The goal was to retain 85% commonality. According to this TWZ article, the number is 15% and the final design hasn't been completed. How much slower would a totally new design have been? This is probably going to be a bigger C-F than the LCS.
First Constellation Frigate Only 10% Complete, Design Still Being Finalized
First Constellation Frigate Only 10% Complete, Design Still Being Finalized
Defiant Drone Ship Gets Closer To Months-Long DARPA At Sea Demonstration
USX-1 Defiant, which will sail without humans ever being onboard, is now undergoing initial trials ahead of its long-endurance cruise.
www.twz.com
Great promise for sure.
Rather than it being a shipyard-led prime, it was the government and their system integrator working together to procure all the materials and to pivot when things got tough and get the ship delivered, which is more how we used to do ships in the [19]80s than how we do ships nowadays.”
That may be most interesting to me, perhaps we need more of this in shipbuilding and less commercial shipyard
Terran
Well-Known Member
The Problem is 85% commonality was impossible. Even the French and Italian FREMMs only have a fraction of that.
The Italian design was built to NATO standards not USN standards. That may sound contrary but NATO ship standards are actually a bit looser than USN standards. Think of the NATO standards are a guideline.
The equipment wasn’t ever going to meet Made in America requirements requiring substantial substitution. But Fincantieri assumed they could get wavers on all of it.
So They the Fincantieri Marine made a bunch of assumptions and low balled the bid. The USN looked at its offers the F100 class was never going to work and was first eliminated. Two LCS derived designs were going to need a major overhaul and might work if the Navy was willing to significantly lower expectations. Congress demanded an existing design base so the USN basically looked at what was offered and figured that they could in theory gut the FREMM into a ship that meets their requirements. Like taking a Lamborghini Uras and turning it into a limousine. Really they needed to either get a ship that was in design at the time or start from scratch.
In the comments section of the article I would point to the Member GintaPPE1000.
His contention is that the USN really needed the Type 26 program and muscle it into something far closer to USN needs. Similar to the River or Hunter classes.
I am also in the comments.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
A FEYES frigate, could have been an awesome solution for a batch 2 T-26 based on River, Hunter, City, and US input. Sadly, Trump has made any future collaborations on major programs impossible any time soon, if ever.
Terran
Well-Known Member
The time to cancel and redux the FFG(X) was 2020. A restart now would add another 5 years to the program wasting more money in canceling fees, disposing of the incomplete hull and the contracting redesign phase on a new hull base.
Fitting AEGIS to a frigate not designed from the ground up with is is never going to be a simple or efficient process.
You can probably fit a Cummins V8 in a Honda Civic, but why would you.
Terran
Well-Known Member
Even then it’s not enough. F100 and Hobart class are already Aegis equipped but the USN wanted more range and growth potential. they saw the potential for that in the FREMM but everything else was in the way.
So they are stripping the Civic to the platform dropping the latest Cummins V8 on it and building a completely new pickup truck from it.
The Austere aegis design, that lost out to what became the Burke, was a Spruance hull form with an F-100 style superstructure, three (instead of four) propulsion GTs, a 76mm Mk-75 gun and (I believe) 90 Mk-41 VLS, oh, no hangar.
Anything that has AEGIS has to be big. Anything that isn't big enough will be compromised in some important way.
Navy Axes Its Hypersonic Anti-Ship Cruise Missile Plans
The Navy has said for years that the HALO program is essential, but now it is reevaluating its plans based on cost concerns.
www.twz.com
One money pit removed. Hope the money will be used to build up existing missile inventory. Missile numbers are just so important. I'd take 500 LSARM's over 20 hypersonic missiles
How does this effect such programs in Australia under development between those nations
www.defensenews.com
Pentagon announces hypersonic testing pact with UK, Australia
The agreement, which falls under AUKUS Pillar II, aims to leverage the three nations’ combined hypersonics funding, facilities and experience.
www.defensenews.com