US Navy News and updates

[Ranger25]

Ocean Glider returned

Chinese forces returned a U.S. Navy buoyancy glider to the service, the Pentagon announced in an early Tuesday morning statement.

The crew of U.S. guided missile destroyer USS Mustin (DDG-89) recovered the glider from the crew of the People’s Army Liberation Navy Dalang III vessel that took the unmanned glider from waters near the Philippines last week.

“Today, the People’s Liberation Army Navy vessel 510 returned a U.S. Navy Ocean Glider Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV) to the United States, near the location where it had been unlawfully seized on Dec. 15.,” said Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook in the statement.
“USS Mustin received the vehicle for the U.S. in international waters approximately 50 nautical miles northwest of Subic Bay.”

More here
https://news.usni.org/2016/12/20/china-returns-u-s-navy-unmanned-glider

 

[cdxbow]

yep, it has an immediate impact on ROVs (and I'm including all AUV, UUV, USV, UASW, UASuW tech under the ROV parent child umbrella) that are tethered or untethered

if I owned an autonomous ROV I'd be making it a UXO as well

I would be a little more subtle than something that went bang, perhaps software that could worm it's way into the PRC systems and compromise them after they examine it. They have shown they will 'take the bait', perhaps a good opportunity for some cyberwarfare.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Chinese forces returned a U.S. Navy buoyancy glider to the service, the Pentagon announced in an early Tuesday morning statement.

The crew of U.S. guided missile destroyer USS Mustin (DDG-89) recovered the glider from the crew of the People’s Army Liberation Navy Dalang III vessel that took the unmanned glider from waters near the Philippines last week.

“Today, the People’s Liberation Army Navy vessel 510 returned a U.S. Navy Ocean Glider Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV) to the United States, near the location where it had been unlawfully seized on Dec. 15.,” said Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook in the statement.
“USS Mustin received the vehicle for the U.S. in international waters approximately 50 nautical miles northwest of Subic Bay.”

More here
https://news.usni.org/2016/12/20/china-returns-u-s-navy-unmanned-glider

I would hope the Navy is smart enough not to connect the drone to any networked system to exam it. it was in unwanted hands long enough to insert intrusive software.

 

[gf0012-aust]

the press call them drones - they are not

they are classified as either an AUV or a ROV. Untethered AUV's in the military are usually classed as UUVs

unfort for the press, anything that doesn't have meat in the seat = drone. just like frigates are battleships and APC's are tanks

the one china seized is a Slocum Glider and is classed as an AUVG (the G is for Glider)

The Australian Govt uses the same glider for IMOS work
ANFOG Glider Fleet &#58&#58 Home

Slocum Glider specifics

Slocum Electric Glider - AUVAC

 

[gf0012-aust]

all a bit confusing ... sep reports are stating that its a SeaGlider. again, used by AustGov as part of IMOS work.

SeaGliders are a bit fugglier

the pictures shown are for a SOG SeaGlider

specs:

SOG Seagliders - AUVAC

 

[gf0012-aust]

there's a part of me that wishes that he'd been captain of the Enterprise

https://news.usni.org/2016/12/21/in...230426561&mc_cid=05215828c0&mc_eid=d7b25005c6

 

[colay1]

No, they weren't trying to defect. Funny but a concern for ship security as apparently no one was the wiser.

https://news.usni.org/2016/12/22/tr...tally-ship-uss-dwight-d-eisenhower#more-22995

 

[ASSAIL]

The link provides a very insightful view of how the USN and USMC have manager their force structures and budgets in a very challenging fiscal environment.
It also gives us an indication for the way forward for the USN.
As for ship building programmes, it should be compulsory reading for all politicians as to how their interference or lack of commitment can drastically affect future force structures.
I found it good background viewing. Secretary Mabus' comments re LCS really get underway at minute 2330.

https://youtu.be/n1UEUse4z1c

 

[gf0012-aust]

The link provides a very insightful view of how the USN and USMC have manager their force structures and budgets in a very challenging fiscal environment.
It also gives us an indication for the way forward for the USN.
As for ship building programmes, it should be compulsory reading for all politicians as to how their interference or lack of commitment can drastically affect future force structures.
I found it good background viewing. Secretary Mabus' comments re LCS really get underway at minute 2330.

https://youtu.be/n1UEUse4z1c

it should be compulsory listening - it's also going to inform the LCS and green energy brigade who have adopted party political lines rather than warfighting lines on the decisions made.

his other 2 I/V's are also worth listening to

 

[Boagrius]

Quick question for those in the know. Was reading up on the new 3M22 Zircon and Brahmos II missiles and it got me thinking about what a liability the radar horizon has become for surface vessels nowadays.

Is NIFC-CA with E2D cued SM2/6 shots seen as the best hard kill response here? Strikes me that OTH targeting would be a must for such fast sea skimmers.

Also makes me think that some sort of organic AEW capability may become mandatory for even smaller navies - perhaps UAS based. Even a navalised JLENS type system might suffice... had it worked out(?)

 

[gf0012-aust]

Quick question for those in the know. Was reading up on the new 3M22 Zircon and Brahmos II missiles and it got me thinking about what a liability the radar horizon has become for surface vessels nowadays.

Is NIFC-CA with E2D cued SM2/6 shots seen as the best hard kill response here? Strikes me that OTH targeting would be a must for such fast sea skimmers.

Also makes me think that some sort of organic AEW capability may become mandatory for even smaller navies - perhaps UAS based. Even a navalised JLENS type system might suffice... had it worked out(?)

its one of the reasons for an increasing use of organic UAS as well as "joint" UAS - they provide the ability to act (ie contribute) as arrays, and in old parallels, as a form of radar picket - except that nowadays the airborne arrays are C5ISR and not just AEW focussed

 

[Boagrius]

its one of the reasons for an increasing use of organic UAS as well as "joint" UAS - they provide the ability to act (ie contribute) as arrays, and in old parallels, as a form of radar picket - except that nowadays the airborne arrays are C5ISR and not just AEW focussed

Makes sense. What UAS assets actually exist or are in the pipeline to provide the AEW/OTH targeting capability though? Not aware of any substantial programs to this effect in the west.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Makes sense. What UAS assets actually exist or are in the pipeline to provide the AEW/OTH targeting capability though? Not aware of any substantial programs to this effect in the west.

gets down to definitions

eg any UAS that can be handled by a JSF could technically become an extended shooter, or a remote bearer

trials have been done over the last few years.

it also depends on the sensor fitout - C4ISR and C5ISR by association are AEW contributors

 

[Boagrius]

gets down to definitions

eg any UAS that can be handled by a JSF could technically become an extended shooter, or a remote bearer

trials have been done over the last few years.

it also depends on the sensor fitout - C4ISR and C5ISR by association are AEW contributors

I just think it's interesting because a UAS that could be organic to, say, a skimmer or two per CSG/SAG and provide long endurance 360 degree OTH targeting ala a true AEW asset (while plugging into the overall C5ISR network) could be really valuable. Surprised nothing of this sort has been fielded yet?

 

[CB90]

I just think it's interesting because a UAS that could be organic to, say, a skimmer or two per CSG/SAG and provide long endurance 360 degree OTH targeting ala a true AEW asset (while plugging into the overall C5ISR network) could be really valuable. Surprised nothing of this sort has been fielded yet?

Because an AEW asset capable of OTH targeting also needs to be large enough to be capable of OTH targeting.

Still need fairly high power for the array, good resolution for fire control (demands large array size), and lots of computer power for the radar program. And if you want it touching your C5I network in any way, you're going to want a man somewhere in the loop to prevent it from feeding in garbage.

Until you can shrink all that down into something smaller than an E-2D (or at least something small enough to not need CATOBAR), you basically haven't changed anything.
Even more challenging to put it on a non-carrier (or carrier-lite) surface ship.

 

[ngatimozart]

Because an AEW asset capable of OTH targeting also needs to be large enough to be capable of OTH targeting.

Still need fairly high power for the array, good resolution for fire control (demands large array size), and lots of computer power for the radar program. And if you want it touching your C5I network in any way, you're going to want a man somewhere in the loop to prevent it from feeding in garbage.

Until you can shrink all that down into something smaller than an E-2D (or at least something small enough to not need CATOBAR), you basically haven't changed anything.
Even more challenging to put it on a non-carrier (or carrier-lite) surface ship.

I wonder if such a capability could fit within the footprint of the V-22 Osprey. Certainly AESA's are heliborne now and EO/IO turrets etc., would be within the Ospreys capability.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I wonder if such a capability could fit within the footprint of the V-22 Osprey. Certainly AESA's are heliborne now and EO/IO turrets etc., would be within the Ospreys capability.

for that kind of power - not within a single platform, which is why the experimentation of flying arrays.

there's still the issue of turning multiple physical antennas into a virtual array

eg low freq, power and gain issues

 

[ngatimozart]

for that kind of power - not within a single platform, which is why the experimentation of flying arrays.

there's still the issue of turning multiple physical antennas into a virtual array

eg low freq, power and gain issues

Ok, thanks.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Ok, thanks.

think about how an AESA works compared to a PESA

the transmitter, power, gain issues are amplified (no pun intended) as you are merging multiple bearers/physical antennas into a virtual array/antenna

 

[Boagrius]

Because an AEW asset capable of OTH targeting also needs to be large enough to be capable of OTH targeting.

Still need fairly high power for the array, good resolution for fire control (demands large array size), and lots of computer power for the radar program. And if you want it touching your C5I network in any way, you're going to want a man somewhere in the loop to prevent it from feeding in garbage.

Until you can shrink all that down into something smaller than an E-2D (or at least something small enough to not need CATOBAR), you basically haven't changed anything.
Even more challenging to put it on a non-carrier (or carrier-lite) surface ship.

Gotcha. So it sounds like the solution may lie in a more distributed ISR approach going forward. Certainly a pressing dilemma for smaller navies I would have thought..