Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

[shark bait]

why bother? its an unnecessary extra cost. Technology and tactics have moved on from the days that was necessary.

[marktigger]

why bother? its an unnecessary extra cost. Technology and tactics have moved on from the days that was necessary.

very dangerous assumption

[shark bait]

but true, even in 2003 the Royal Navy were sending in robots to the mine field before sending in humans.

[marktigger]

in the 1980's the royal navy were sending robots into minefields! PAP 404? but they were also using clearence divers to

[shark bait]

not remotely comparable to modern systems. Times have changed, there is no longer a need to put humans into the minefield. Autonomy has surpassed the capabilities of humans, they're much cheaper to train, and much less likley to die.

[marktigger]

not remotely comparable to modern systems. Times have changed, there is no longer a need to put humans into the minefield. Autonomy has surpassed the capabilities of humans, they're much cheaper to train, and much less likley to die.

some how i don't think the last clearance diver has been born yet!

with that logic there is no need to put men in ships or in aircraft at all......However Technology isn't that reliable or flexible!

[shark bait]

Your right. The technology is available to make that happen, and they would do a better job.

But that's probably jumping a generation too much for the military to be comfortable with, today the biggest barrier is actually integrating autonomous systems in with the humans, which will be a lengthy process.

That why the MHC program is taking a very slow, gradual, low risk approach. The technology is available and its slowly integrating and embedding it into operations, and eventually once everything is worked out it will be the sole method. Its a fully reasonable approach.

[marktigger]

like to see a robot working in the murk the clearence divers were in in Kuwait following op granby!

[Ron5]

More recently, read the story about the unexploded bomb in Portsmouth harbor. Not much sign of robots.

[PAUL MARSAY]

Dont think we know as yet which direction we will go . My personal view it would be motherships and robotics of some sort . The 64 million dollar question is what capabilities will we add to the mothership .l

[shark bait]

Dont think we know as yet which direction we will go . My personal view it would be motherships and robotics of some sort . The 64 million dollar question is what capabilities will we add to the mothership .l

Agree with that Paul, I think its the direction things are heading. In that case capabilities should be kept simple and based on whats commercially available off the shelf. Let the off board systems to the hard work.

[shark bait]

Natural Environment Research Council are also funding developments in autonomous underwater vehicles, Royal Navy could also benefit with a spin off from their work, particularly for the Hydrographic part of their work.

Anyone know if they're involved?

[marktigger]

who says they aren't already?

I would suggest much of this kit is derived from military applications. But would also suggest a vessel like discovery would be a useful asset to the fleet......design it to be silent and put an asw tail on it and you could add to your passive asw capability. As well as providing Hydrographic support, HQ and ROV support to work in conjunction with conventional hunters

[PAUL MARSAY]

hi Mark , would that not add substantially to the cost and also might it result in it being deployed as a sub hunter rather than in its primary role . when I was considering extra capabilities I was thinking mainly of self defense to remove the need of having to escort the mothership.

[shark bait]

Not bad suggestion, in the civil off shore sector there are many experienced towed sonar operators, they're looking for oil instead of sub though.

The USNS used survey vessels to look for subs for a while, operating the Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System. They have now moved onto to a more complex SWATH hull.




Additional capability would of course be welcome, and perhaps worth exploration as an extension to the MHC program. However I suppose this kind of system is heading off into the unmanned domain.

Side note; I always wonder weather HMS Scott is that kind of survey vessel, sneaky surveying for subs.

[PAUL MARSAY]

sounds like a role for a revitalised RNR .

[marktigger]

hi Mark , would that not add substantially to the cost and also might it result in it being deployed as a sub hunter rather than in its primary role . when I was considering extra capabilities I was thinking mainly of self defense to remove the need of having to escort the mothership.

aren't allot of these vessels designed to be quiet any way?

they are Diesel electric with propellers and dynamic positioning

[PAUL MARSAY]

sorry Mark I dont know , I was mainly refering to minewarefare motherships and what defensive capabilities they should have or if any . I believe the hydrographic element could have a usefull asw role in submarine detection and that it should be seperate from the minewarfare capability. If they are silent they could take on the TAPS role.

[The Armchair Soldier]

France and UK continue partnership on MMCM programme, first two units to be built

Thales, BAE Systems and their partner SAAB, ECA Group and ASV Global welcome the confirmation by the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation (OCCAR) that the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) and French Defence Procurement Agency (DGA) will continue their collaboration for the combined United Kingdom and France MMCM (maritime mine counter measures) programme.

Initiated in 2010 under a cooperation agreement between France and the United Kingdom, the MMCM programme develops a prototype autonomous system for detection and neutralisation of sea mines and underwater improvised explosive devices (UWIEDs).

The agreement signed at Euronaval today between Harriet Baldwin, Minister for Defence Procurement in the UK and Laurent Collet-Billon, General Director for French Procurement Agency; is a key milestone in the UK-French co-operation and the commitment to jointly develop future unmanned naval systems.

The next stage of the programme will involve taking the first stage designs into a complete, manufactured system for assessment by the Royal Navy and the French Navy.

Read More: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... built.html

[ArmChairCivvy]

One of the few success stories in European defence industry co-operation, v welcome indeed.
- unlike in many other fields, the half "forced" consolidation in the missiles field has also returned great results

[marktigger]

good news but looks like "National Shipbuilding policy"= lets give everything to BaE

[ArmChairCivvy]

looks like "National Shipbuilding policy"

Have you had a sneak preview? My bet is that it will include elements to the opposite direction.

[Ron5]

One of the few success stories in European defence industry co-operation, v welcome indeed.
- unlike in many other fields, the half "forced" consolidation in the missiles field has also returned great results

French weak in MCM. UK strong.

French partner with UK, extract all UK know how.

French make products using UK know how. Sells.

UK loses.

Same old.

See also UK-French partnership on UAV's: UK strong on stealth. French weak. So UK politicians sign partnership against strong objections from Bae. French get UK knowledge for free. Yippee. Expect French only UAV for sale very soon.

Same old.

Only time it didn't work: UK strong on modern carrier design. French propose partnership: UK give CVF plans to French, maybe French buy UK parts to their new carrier, maybe. UK says plans cost 100 million. French fade away.

French very, very, bad partners. Only idiot UK politicians and civil servants have not realized this.

Germans will learn on tank partnership. As soon as French get German know how. French only tank will appear for sale.

[ArmChairCivvy]

UK says plans cost 100 million. French fade away.

I thought they paid up?

[marktigger]

One of the few success stories in European defence industry co-operation, v welcome indeed.
- unlike in many other fields, the half "forced" consolidation in the missiles field has also returned great results

French weak in MCM. UK strong.

French partner with UK, extract all UK know how.

French make products using UK know how. Sells.

UK loses.

Same old.

See also UK-French partnership on UAV's: UK strong on stealth. French weak. So UK politicians sign partnership against strong objections from Bae. French get UK knowledge for free. Yippee. Expect French only UAV for sale very soon.

Same old.

Only time it didn't work: UK strong on modern carrier design. French propose partnership: UK give CVF plans to French, maybe French buy UK parts to their new carrier, maybe. UK says plans cost 100 million. French fade away.

French very, very, bad partners. Only idiot UK politicians and civil servants have not realized this.

Germans will learn on tank partnership. As soon as French get German know how. French only tank will appear for sale.

Jaguar & Lynx other good examples