US Navy News and updates

[Hazdog]

I agree Oz, advantages to both IMO. FREMM offers substaially grater capabilities, range, weapons load etc. vs a hull already using SPY-1.

"Greater weapons load"? Where did you get that from, the FREMM frigates have a maximum of 32 VLS which would/could on transfer into a maximum (At very most) of 48 Mk41 VLS. There are better designs for the ASW and Multi-role capability. F5000 and Type 26 are designs that have multirole areas on board. They also include the Mk41 VLS system (Yes, T26 does use sea-ceptor).

Anyway, why complicate things by using an entirely different combat system than the standard in the USN.

Please reply,
H

 

[Ranger25]

"Greater weapons load"? Where did you get that from, the FREMM frigates have a maximum of 32 VLS which would/could on transfer into a maximum (At very most) of 48 Mk41 VLS. There are better designs for the ASW and Multi-role capability. F5000 and Type 26 are designs that have multirole areas on board. They also include the Mk41 VLS system (Yes, T26 does use sea-ceptor).

Anyway, why complicate things by using an entirely different combat system than the standard in the USN.

Please reply,
H

Haz.
Was merely looking at a baseline comparison of the Fridtjof Nansen class and the FREMM. FREMM has Greater beam, displacement, VLS capacity etc etc etc.

That's all.

In the end I would anticipate the USN delays a good 7+ years before they can put a hull into the water for the FFG program (LCS replacement) which would be unfortunate. Why not surge forward with an allied hull (which can be US built slow. the process. Why not show trust to Allies and build/buy there) to add needed capacity for the RFP

 

[the concerned]

Didn't the U.S. navy buy 2 British built replenishment ships I think it was the lioness stores ships.

 

[John Fedup]

It doesn't, I'm pretty sure the Jones act will prevent it.

Episode 524: Me and Mr. Jones : Planet Money : NPR

Just heard a news report that FEMA was requesting a temporary waiver on the Jones Act. The reason was to get badly needed fuel to areas effected by the recent hurricanes. This shows the act applies to commercial ships. It also seems to imply a lack of US built available ships for transporting fuel.

 

[StingrayOZ]

"Greater weapons load"? Where did you get that from, the FREMM frigates have a maximum of 32 VLS which would/could on transfer into a maximum (At very most) of 48 Mk41 VLS. There are better designs for the ASW and Multi-role capability. F5000 and Type 26 are designs that have multirole areas on board. They also include the Mk41 VLS system (Yes, T26 does use sea-ceptor).

Anyway, why complicate things by using an entirely different combat system than the standard in the USN.

Please reply,
H

I imagine if the US does go with FREMM it would be with US weapons, sensors and combat systems. It would only be the hull that would be the same.

The Nansen class are pretty compromised to get to their size. But that may be what the USN wants. Something that is too close to the Burkes may be seen as a threat, and well they already have burkes.

What they want is a lightly armed patrol frigate. FREMM, the national security cutter etc would be ideal.

I think the NSC might be easier to get the go ahead. Its smaller, its cheaper, it clearly has a different mission, low crewing, US design, already in service with the US.

But FREMM is bigger, it could be better suited to blue water missions. The Italians also have a quirky obsessions with guns. A 5" and a 76mm, with two 25 mm. These type of ships would be well suited to piracy, patrols etc.

 

[StobieWan]

There's no way the USN is going with a Eurofrigate - not in terms of concerns over DC or in the age of "America First.."

The NSC was expensive in production but the last copies to pop out were half a billion - hard to say how that stacks up against the LCS given various contract options but it might be semi-competitive. If you're letting go of the speed requirement for LCS then a planing monohull will be fine but it'll be a US design and build, of that I'm sure.

 

[ngatimozart]

Bryan Clark, senior fellow at the Centre for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, discusses the new USN frigates. Quite an informative interview and is pertinent to the RN T31e, RAN, RNZN and RCN future FFGs.

CSBA's Clark: US Navy's Future Frigate 'Needs to Be a Multi-Mission Capable Ship'

 

[Hazdog]

Bryan Clark, senior fellow at the Centre for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, discusses the new USN frigates. Quite an informative interview and is pertinent to the RN T31e, RAN, RNZN and RCN future FFGs.

CSBA's Clark: US Navy's Future Frigate 'Needs to Be a Multi-Mission Capable Ship'

Please check the link. It does not allow any use.

 

[Muar River]

I think this may be the link below

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/07/28/experts-question-the-navys-ideas-for-a-new-frigate/

It is an interesting article especially comments from Rear Adm Boxsall about the possible use of Aegis in a US frigate for the first time, common power plants and other commonalities.

 

[ngatimozart]

Please check the link. It does not allow any use.

Thanks and my apologies. Link is fixed now.

I think this may be the link below

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/07/28/experts-question-the-navys-ideas-for-a-new-frigate/

It is an interesting article especially comments from Rear Adm Boxsall about the possible use of Aegis in a US frigate for the first time, common power plants and other commonalities.

No it's not that article. It's a Defense & Aerospace Report video interview published on 14/08/2017.

 

[ngatimozart]

Interesting take on current USN surface force woes. James Holmes is a retired USN Captain and now teaches at the US Naval War College. I have his book "Red Star Over The Pacific" which I thoroughly recommend.

What Would the Athenians Think of Recent U.S. Navy Mishaps?

As Professor Holmes states, the Athenians were very strong on accountability. Socrates, arguably one of their greatest philosophers, was forced to partake of the hemlock drink after he'd been stitched up on trumped up charges. If the Athenian model for accountability was used today, a lot of pollies could've be up the proverbial creek.

 

[Ranger25]

USS McCain to be repaired in Japan

In an interesting move the damaged DDG will be transported to and repaired in Japan repairs will take approx one year and cost estimates are over 223$mil USd. ThenUSS Fitzgerald will be repaired by HII in the US.


After more than a month pier side in Singapore, the guided-missile destroyer USS John S. McCain (DDG-56) has left to be transported to Yokosuka, Japan for repairs, the Navy announced on Thursday.

McCain will be transported by the heavy-lift transport M/V Treasure from the Changi Naval Base to Japan.


https://news.usni.org/2017/10/05/uss-john-s-mccain-leaves-singapore-repairs-japan

 

[colay1]

Funds must be tight so the Navy is unwilling to spend the extra $100M to upgrade the USS Fitzgerald to Aegis Baseline 9.0.

I'm assuming that so long as there's another ship with AB 9.0 nearby in a CEC network then DDGs with earlier AEGIS versions will benefit from the former. It could be a concern though when it's sailing by it's lonesome.

https://news.usni.org/2017/10/16/u-...ald-baseline-9-aegis-combat-system#more-28800

USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) won’t be upgraded to the latest version of the Aegis Combat System when it completes its repairs following a collision with a merchant ship off of Japan, according to Naval Sea Systems Command...

Fitzgerald was already scheduled to undergo a midlife upgrade in Fiscal Year 2019, though the Navy intended to conduct a scaled-down availability that would cover hull, mechanical and electrical (HM&E) improvements but not a combat system upgrade to Baseline 9. Following the collision, despite the need to replace portions of the ship’s combat system, radar and electronics, the Navy decided to go along with its original decision to keep the ship in a legacy configuration instead of upgrading to Baseline 9.

“There are no additional DDG-51 Flight I ships planned to receive Baseline 9 upgrades. The USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) is capable of performing Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) operations and is planned to receive all FY19 scheduled alterations to include HM&E, [command, control, communications, computers, cyber and intelligence] and BMD upgrades during the restoration availability,” reads the statement.

The planned HM&E availability is estimated to cost about $170 million and will retain the legacy military computers instead of upgrading the destroyer with modern servers. The full mid-life upgrade for a destroyer would have cost around $270 million

In total, the final cost for the repair for Fitzgerald is estimated to run about $367 million and take more than a year.

 

[AegisFC]

None of the current BMD ships were to be upgraded to BL9, so it never was scheduled to get BL9.

 

[John Fedup]

Also, the USN likely wants this ship back in service ASAP.

 

[ASSAIL]

None of the current BMD ships were to be upgraded to BL9, so it never was scheduled to get BL9.

Both McCain and Fitzgerald are not young ships, 24 and 22 years old respectively so where is the cut off for fitting BL 9 and are any Flt 1s getting so fitted?

 

[spoz]

Both McCain and Fitzgerald are not young ships, 24 and 22 years old respectively so where is the cut off for fitting BL 9 and are any Flt 1s getting so fitted?

I thought I'd read in a Congressional Record Service briefing to Congress, quoting the USN, that they were planning on Flight IIA on only, but I can't now find the reference. It was probably in https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL33745.pdf, although it may have been https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf

 

[CB90]

Both McCain and Fitzgerald are not young ships, 24 and 22 years old respectively so where is the cut off for fitting BL 9 and are any Flt 1s getting so fitted?

Yes.

The first crop of ships to get BL 9 have all been Flt I DDGs (and of course some of the CGs).

Decisions not to fund BL 9 upgrades for ships usually is a mix of financial and operational use factors.

For example...pulling McCain and Fitzgerald to get the upgrade would not only have cost the upgrade...you would have taken them "off the line" from FDNF to get gutted and re-worked for a long time in CONUS before they were ready to be deployed again.

 

[AegisFC]

Both McCain and Fitzgerald are not young ships, 24 and 22 years old respectively so where is the cut off for fitting BL 9 and are any Flt 1s getting so fitted?

So far it has only been non-BMD Flight I's and some of the CG's that have BL9 retrofitted. The USN made a decision a few years back not to put it on the first batch of IIA's.
Now even though the BMD ships aren't getting BL9 they are still getting a full HM&E refit.

I thought I'd read in a Congressional Record Service briefing to Congress, quoting the USN, that they were planning on Flight IIA on only, but I can't now find the reference. It was probably in https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL33745.pdf, although it may have been https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf

The new construction IIA's get 9. The rest either get upgraded 7 (for now) or the next baseline after 9.

Yes.

The first crop of ships to get BL 9 have all been Flt I DDGs (and of course some of the CGs).

Decisions not to fund BL 9 upgrades for ships usually is a mix of financial and operational use factors.

For example...pulling McCain and Fitzgerald to get the upgrade would not only have cost the upgrade...you would have taken them "off the line" from FDNF to get gutted and re-worked for a long time in CONUS before they were ready to be deployed again.

Leaving the BMD ships alone is leading to some interesting problems. Think about certain parts of the 451 and 663 consoles...

 

[Ranger25]

Boeing pitching Block III upgrades for FA18

Boeing is proposing a block III upgrade to be done in conjunction with SLEP. Would add conformal tanks, stealth coatings, greater networking abilities.

No budget for this currrently though



https://www.defensenews.com/air/201...super-hornets-during-upcoming-life-extension/