UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Future ASW

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3281
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Future ASW

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 06 Feb 2019, 12:36

Not sure if this thread is good, but interesting fact.

Surprisingly @USNavy has decided to remove hard-kill torpedo defence from aircraft carriers Navy Lookout.


For me, it is not surprising. Underwater detection is difficult. Hence, it is also difficult for torpedo to detect/aim a ship. Soft kill will always be the first choice, so the Ship Torpedo Defense System Sea Sentor of UK is a good approach.

We may need further development to get effective anti-torpedo torpedo.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1643
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Poiuytrewq » 13 Feb 2019, 20:01

From Gavin Williamson's speech at RUSI:

With the threat from the Kremlin increasing in the North Atlantic, we’re spending an additional £33 million to improve our anti-submarine warfare capabilities.



Can anyone shed any light on where this was spent or where it is due to be spent?

It's not a lot of money and it would be good to think that's it's five 2087 sets for the GP T23's but I suspect it's not that impressive.

Any ideas?

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1639
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Future ASW

Postby Caribbean » 13 Feb 2019, 23:07

Could mean that the remaining 5 2050's get the upgraded transducers (around £250k a set), and/ or software and processor upgrades. Or maybe 2 - 3 2087 sets @ approx £10m per set (The first batch of 2087s was £340m for development and supply of 6 sets, batch 2 was £17m for supply of 2 extra sets in 2006). Please add a little for inflation. Perhaps a mix of CAPTAS-1 or -2 sets for some, plus 2050 upgrades etc. Really left-field? Blue Watcher or Kingklip and/ or Captas-1 for the RB2s :) Personally, I would like to see some of it spent on development of the first ASW USVs.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1643
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Poiuytrewq » 13 Feb 2019, 23:24

Even a hint from the DS for what it is due to be spent on would have been helpful.

Safe to say £33m isn't going to solve the North Atlantic Problem but every little helps :thumbup:

Aethulwulf
Member
Posts: 889
Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Aethulwulf » 13 Feb 2019, 23:30

Other possibilities include a small increase in the number of Merlins upgraded to HM2 standard - but this unlikely.

A more likely option is to add some ASW capabilities to the future Protector drone, such as sea spray radar and sonar buoys.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10669
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 14 Feb 2019, 09:45

Yeah, explaining why 2 yr delay to ISD would cost as much as £ 116 mln extra is difficult to explain by other means
- assuming the sqdrns the drones are destained for are not sitting around :) , twiddling their thumbs

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1643
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Poiuytrewq » 14 Feb 2019, 17:03

Those mission bays might just need to get a bit bigger.
echo_voyager_gallery1_960x600.jpg
Boeing Echo Voyager.
https://news.usni.org/2019/02/13/41119
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1355
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Timmymagic » 14 Feb 2019, 18:10

Poiuytrewq wrote:Those mission bays might just need to get a bit bigger.


T25 seems to be far more 'future proofed' than its competitors, but have we future proofed it enough? I suspect the cranes/davits in the mission bay won't come close to handling anything like the Echo Voyager.

Was the BAE UXV Combatant more sense in the long run (the runways either side were probably overkill with the development of V/STOL drones but the moonpool looks increasingly like a very sensible move.)

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3281
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Future ASW

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 15 Feb 2019, 00:34

Poiuytrewq wrote:Those mission bays might just need to get a bit bigger. ...Boeing Echo Voyager.
https://news.usni.org/2019/02/13/41119
Don't worry, they are "self deploying drones" because of their long range (although very slow). They will be carried on a ship as a cargo (Bay, Wave, and in particular Points), craned down to sea at safe water, and then self deploy.

They are 50t in weight (in air). See
https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... _sheet.pdf

At least, T31/T26 are unrelated. But, these "self-deploying long range drones" will be very important asset. For example, how about North Atlantic ASW?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10669
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 Feb 2019, 07:30

The linked article talks about the "unmanned wingman" for SSNs; carried by the SSN until needed.
- not too much smaller, but not self-deploying

Sign of times to come: can't be the active pinger (without getting 'killed')

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1643
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Poiuytrewq » 15 Feb 2019, 08:10

I see this as a very positive development.

Just need to increase the speed now and it would open up a world of possibilities.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10669
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 Feb 2019, 08:16

An SSN can not only carry the "wingman"
"the Navy is also exploring the possible use of Large Diameter Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (LDUUVs) as another rapid acquisition program. The LDUUV would be a vehicle launched from either a Virginia-class fast attack submarine or from a surface ship. LDUUVs could perform similar missions as the XLUUV, however, the LDUUV would need to remain relatively close to the mother ship instead of operating autonomously like the XLUUV."
but can also act as a petrol station, to recharge the batteries. An SSK might be more challenged.

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1930
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Repulse » 15 Feb 2019, 08:23

donald_of_tokyo wrote:They will be carried on a ship as a cargo (Bay, Wave, and in particular Points), craned down to sea at safe water, and then self deploy.


+ the following FLSS wording on the RN site:

Littoral strike ships are vessels which can command an assault force from anywhere in the world – carrying everything from helicopters and fast boats to underwater automated vehicles and huge numbers of troops.


This, plus adding additional ASW sensors make a lot of sense. Early days but having 3-4 FLSS fulfilling this hybrid multi-role function, and spending money on these capabilities, would be higher up on my priority list, coupled with reducing the cost of the T31 (making it smaller and focused on being a Littoral Escort - e.g. no hangar) or just scrap the T31 and buy another T26.
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1643
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Poiuytrewq » 15 Feb 2019, 08:34

donald_of_tokyo wrote: They are 50t in weight (in air)
What surface vessel does RN/RFA have that could actually deploy the voyager?

The Points/Bays/Waves cranes can't lift 50t.

Too big for Hunts/Sandowns.

I don't think Diligence had anything more than a 40t crane.

Of course the cranes could be upgraded but at present I can't think of any RN/RFA surface vessel with a deck crane that has a SWL high enough to lift it.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10669
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 Feb 2019, 09:13

Poiuytrewq wrote:I don't think Diligence had anything more than a 40t crane.


Would this one do:


The service contract renews in 2022; "we" can always stipulate an addition/ upgrade, but the 93m vessel is equipped with a 50 ton crane plus a 20 ton knuckle boom deck feeder crane.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3281
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Future ASW

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 15 Feb 2019, 10:39

RNZN Canterbury (sea lift ship) carries TWO 50t cranes to handle her 2 LCMs. The 50t size is not prohibitively large. For example, Australian "round table" LSL, Tobruk, had a 70t crane. So, it is doable.

On the other hand, the UUV is of the first generation, and in many cases it will grow rapidly. For example, if we make it faster, the size will be easily doubled. May be a flo-flo ship better, which is also not so rare in civilian world. So, this is also doable.

SW1
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby SW1 » 15 Feb 2019, 13:27

If you were going to deploy something that size why not put it in the dock of a bay or Albion.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3281
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Future ASW

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 15 Feb 2019, 14:10

Are their docks deep enough to carry the Echo Voyager?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3399
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Lord Jim » 15 Feb 2019, 15:35

I suppose they could come up with some sort of launching cradle that is floated out.

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 491
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
Location: United States of America

Re: Future ASW

Postby Halidon » 15 Feb 2019, 16:17

Lord Jim wrote:I suppose they could come up with some sort of launching cradle that is floated out.

Creates complexity and adds risk. Doable, but debatable whether it's a superior solution to adding an adequate crane to an Amphib or building a UUV tender.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10669
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 Feb 2019, 17:04

Halidon wrote:adding an adequate crane to an Amphib or building a UUV tender.


AKA submarine tender, of the old.
- now that the SSNs don't (in the main) need one

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 491
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
Location: United States of America

Re: Future ASW

Postby Halidon » 15 Feb 2019, 17:08

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Halidon wrote:adding an adequate crane to an Amphib or building a UUV tender.


AKA submarine tender, of the old.
- now that the SSNs don't (in the main) need one

"Need" no, though they sure could benefit from them. Technically, same with the UUVs. You could put a mobile crane on a sufficiently specc'ed pier and operate from there, but they'd certainly benefit from a support vessel.

SW1
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby SW1 » 15 Feb 2019, 17:17

https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... _sheet.pdf

This would suggest it has a total depth of 8.5ft.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10669
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 Feb 2019, 18:21

AKA submarine tender, of the old.
- now that the SSNs don't (in the main) need one


"Need" no, though they sure could benefit from them.


I'll try to reword it: A less diminished need, that is now coming back?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3399
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Lord Jim » 15 Feb 2019, 18:32

How about a converted tanker like in the Spy who loved me!! :D


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: andrew98, Clive F, RB211 and 19 guests