US Navy News and updates

[colay]

For a long time now I was curious why a platform that was supposed to be so dependent on stealth for survivability would even consider Sea Avenger. Even GA acknowledged that was not their strong suit. Seems they were vindicated in persevering and now I think they may have an edge as the low-cost/low-risk contender.

 

[CB90]

What d'you across the pond think about this? It looks as though it's the typical scenario of a solution being driven by cost requirements.

JROC's just the requirement filter. As much as I liked where UCAS was supposed to be headed, "transformational" alone doesn't get funded when you jump from R&D science projects to operational programs. What does get funded is something that will meet what the COCOM asked for in its requirement statements.

And my guess is that "they" have been asking for better/more dedicated ISR for a long, long time now, particularly in something organic to the CVW.
My other guess would be that TLAMs, network/space vulnerability concerns, and more importantly, a look at "strategy" killed the counter A2/AD strike aspects of it.
Range is concerning, but autonomous aerial refueling is a relatively easy fix (relative to starting a new platform) as an evolutionary development.

In other words, I would guess the original requirement for a solution that required UCAS probably just went away in a national strategy review.

 

[AegisFC]

The USN has decided to scrap the USS Miami instead of repairing it after the arson incident.

Navy drops plans to repair fire-damaged submarine USS Miami, citing budget restraints - Washington Post

Also DDG-1002 will have a steel superstructure and hangar not composite like its sisters.

Navy switches from composite to steel | Navy Times | navytimes.com

 

[StobieWan]

Why the switch I wonder? Why build the third and last ship with a radically different deckhouse in terms of materials - seems an unusual change, particularly for one ship in a small class.

 

[colay]

Why the switch I wonder? Why build the third and last ship with a radically different deckhouse in terms of materials - seems an unusual change, particularly for one ship in a small class.

The cost saving in switching to steel must have been compelling though no figure is given. The Navy says neither stability nor RF stealth are compromised. I'm surprised that HI declined to bid for the new deckhouse, maybe they thought the Navy was bluffing?

 

[Volkodav]

The cost saving in switching to steel must have been compelling though no figure is given. The Navy says neither stability nor RF stealth are compromised. I'm surprised that HI declined to bid for the new deckhouse, maybe they thought the Navy was bluffing?

Reduce costs and their may be a case to revive the design for future use, i.e. a Ticonderoga replacement.

I am very interested to see how they go on trials and then perform in service. If their all electric propulsion offers the sort of advantages the UK experienced with the Darings there should be a significant reduction in operating costs vs a Flight III Burke.

 

[Blackshoe]

Obviously the higher-ups believed Freedom's CO's camo proposal merited their approval. We'll see soon enough if the paint scheme is adopted for the rest of the LCS Fleet.

There's a lot of advantages that the higher-ups could have wanted out of painting FREEDOM that aren't necessarily tactical in nature. Like it covers up the ugly smudge from the diesel exhaust; as an example, the USSR (among others) did the same thing for the Albatros/GRISHA-class corvettes. And any tactical benefits aren't likely to come from the CMC and an OS throwing something together.

The study that CB90 linked to noted that they did have a camouflage pattern that worked well in the littorals called Measure LC, but it looks nothing like what FRE is painted.

could new paint tech somehow reduce effectiveness of night vision sensors?

Probably/possibly, but at what costs? Paint like that isn't going to be cheap. Visual isn't a primary way of detecting ships anymore, and painting the ship doesn't help you to minimize external shipboard cues (wake, bio-luminescence, background lighting, etc). There might be some merit to a paint scheme on defeating EO-guided ASCMs, but it's going to be a lot of money for very negligible tactical gain.

 

[Belesari]

Got ya. I've always had problems when trying to combine or edit things somehow always manage to make it not count as a quote or some such.

You couldn't combine these into one post? You've been around long enough to know the rules on one-liners. They might occasionally be appropriate when responding to questions or the like but for non-analytical personal opinions like these, all they do is take up space. Please, please aspire to a better level of quality in your posts. It will do nothing but help both the discussion and your own understanding.

 

[Belesari]

Why the switch I wonder? Why build the third and last ship with a radically different deckhouse in terms of materials - seems an unusual change, particularly for one ship in a small class.

That was the first thing I thought also. From reading the article cost and legal/builder issues were involved. They state however that the change won't affect much. Also that the change was possible because the trimmed off wight elsewhere if so where I wonder?

 

[colay]

Why do CVNs on their way back to their home port after their regular deployment offload all their ordnance (up to 5000 tons) to an accompanying munitions ship?

 

[CB90]

Why do CVNs on their way back to their home port after their regular deployment offload all their ordnance (up to 5000 tons) to an accompanying munitions ship?

Huh...I figured this would be treading into sensitive territory, but the public affairs types have been blabbing this one for a while now:
Stennis Sailors Offload Ordnance at Sea | Stennis74

Basically, in the event of a "real" crisis, it's actually possible that the carrier on station could have gone through their magazine (at least for certain types of munitions) and be in need of a source of ready rounds.

Whereas, a CVN sitting at home in CONUS isn't going to need a magazine full of offensive weaponry (not really likely to be tasked to go drop tons of JDAMs in the Western Hemisphere).

Also has a side benefit of valuable practice doing an infrequently performed but potentially vital task.

 

[colay]

I actually stumbled upon a National Geograpbic TV documentary featuring the USS Ronald Reagan whose crew spent 3 days transferring 10,000,000 lbs of bombs and missiles to an accompanying transport vessel on the way home from deployment. My first guess was it might have something to do with safety issues in port, second thought was similar to your reasoning.

 

[RobWilliams]

Positive news for the USN, work is under way to increase the purchase of Virginia class boats from 30 to 51.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/08/28/navy-wants-to-grow-virginia-class-sub-fleet.html

The U.S. Navy wants to expand the size of its planned fleet of Virginia-class submarines by 21 ships, service officials said.

The Navy's fleet of fast attack Virginia-class submarines, designed to replace the now-retiring Los Angeles class of submarines, is currently listed in the Pentagon's Acquisition Program Baseline, or APB, as a 30-ship program.

However, the Navy's Fiscal Year 2014 30-Year Shipbuilding Plan calls for continued construction of the Virginia-class attack submarines out to 2033, leading to a total fleet size of 51 ships, said Capt. David Goggins, the Navy's program manager for Virginia-class submarines.

"We are working with the Pentagon to update the APB to increase the size of the class from 30 to 51 or another number," Goggins said.

Merging the program's baseline numbers with what's specified in the Navy's shipbuilding plan is an effort that has been underway for months, Navy officials explained.

Great boats, good to hear that the planning for an increased fleet has been in the pipeline for a while now. Interesting to read about the development of the boat and the payload options/configurations down the line.

5th US destroyer (USS Stout) is positioned in the Eastern Med, but this increase to 5 is only temporary because USS Mahan was held on station and USS Stout is down to replace USS Mahan on station, what with Syria and all.

US Sends 5th Destroyer To Eastern Med | Defense News | defensenews.com

Currently got USS Ramage, USS Barry & USS Gravely there as well as the Mahan, the article does point out that although the Nimitz is in the region "it is not linked to potential Syria options at this time.”

Sensible enough, would make the military mission - if ordered - seem much larger in scale than what people are trying to make out Syria will be.

http://seawavesmagazine.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/newport-news-shipbuilding-redelivers.html?spref=tw

CVN-71 (USS Theodore Roosevelt) has been handed back over to the USN after it's RCOH (Refuelling and Complex Overhaul)

 

[AegisFC]

The Virginia program appears to be a poster child how TO run a ship/sub building program. They are regurarly coming in under price and ahead of schedule.

I hope Stout has better luck this time around than when it participated in ops around Libya. :lol2

 

[RobWilliams]

Indeed, the prices and shedules are only getting better and considering the performance of the boat, you guys would have to be mental to end the run at 30 boats IMO if - IIRC - there was a high ranking USN offier months ago saying they had a requirement for ~50 boats to cover their standing tasks?

What happened with Libya? I know she participated in TLAM strikes but that's about it

 

[AegisFC]

A few weeks before the TLAM strikes against Libya pretty much the entire chain of command was replaced.

 

[ASSAIL]

The Virginia program appears to be a poster child how TO run a ship/sub building program. They are regurarly coming in under price and ahead of schedule.

Fantastic programme and great boats. Now all you need to do is sell or lease 6 to Australia because these are exactly what we need as the Collins replacement. Only problem is that the political class fail to distinguish between nuc weapons and nuc powerhwell

 

[John Newman]

Fantastic programme and great boats. Now all you need to do is sell or lease 6 to Australia because these are exactly what we need as the Collins replacement. Only problem is that the political class fail to distinguish between nuc weapons and nuc powerhwell

Yes Please!

Had Australia embraced nuclear power and an nuclear industry many many years ago, today we might well be discussing replacing the RAN's 'old' LA Class boats with 'new' Virginia class boats.

Oh well........

 

[protoplasm]

Yes Please!

Had Australia embraced nuclear power and an nuclear industry many many years ago, today we might well be discussing replacing the RAN's 'old' LA Class boats with 'new' Virginia class boats.

Oh well........

The interesting thing is that the S9G core is designed to last for the life of the boat so you don't need to crack it open, just keep it going for the life of the sub. That would make it alot easier to sustain an SSN where you don't already have the entire industry setup to fuel/defuel.

 

[AegisFC]

Fantastic programme and great boats. Now all you need to do is sell or lease 6 to Australia because these are exactly what we need as the Collins replacement. Only problem is that the political class fail to distinguish between nuc weapons and nuc powerhwell

I would be all for it. Reading the GAO reports available online one of the things keeping the class from being even CHEAPER is that the yards are basically building them at idle speed(!) and that full rate production would knock a few more percentage points off the price of the subs.