US Navy News and updates

[Boagrius]

Yes, what I am wondering is whether or not it would be possible for a surface vessel (Arleigh Burke/Tico) escorting a CVN to directly protect the CSG from ASBM attack via the use of SM3, or whether they would need to be positioned much further forward between the ASBM launcher and the CSG to “catch” the ASBM in its exo-atmospheric “coast” phase.

 

[Ananda]

has always been my understanding that SM-3 targets missiles in the boost and coast phase

It's also my understanding. Just that Video seems Raytheon shown that SM3 (as in that video for anti balistics) also has capabilities to Target warhead in terminal phase.

Just wondering since the other videos that seems shown trial of SM3 shown the intercept is in lower atmosphere, thus not in terminal phase.
In fact I don't know if any trial from any other missiles shown capabilities to intercept balistics missiles warheads in terminal phase.

 

[John Fedup]

Another step in CVN Ford’s road to deployment, the testing of communication links to other USN ships.

US Navy Prepares to Connect Newest Carrier to Other Warships

The Gerald Ford is in the Atlantic with the Harry Truman.

www.defenseone.com

 

[Albedo]

Just wondering since the other videos that seems shown trial of SM3 shown the intercept is in lower atmosphere, thus not in terminal phase.
In fact I don't know if any trial from any other missiles shown capabilities to intercept balistics missiles warheads in terminal phase.

Enhanced SM-6 adds terminal phase BMD to repertoire - Australian Defence Magazine

Enhanced SM-6 adds terminal phase BMD to repertoire

www.australiandefence.com.au

This was the third time that the SM-6 missile successfully engaged a ballistic missile target in its terminal phase, with previous tests conducted in August 2015, and then again in late 2016.

A statement from the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) described intercepts during the terminal phase as the most “difficult and the least desirable of the phases because there is little margin for error and the intercept will occur close to the intended target”.

The other BMD missile in the Raytheon stable, SM-3, differs from SM-6 in that it uses non-explosive ‘hit-to-kill’ technology that intercepts ballistic missile targets during the mid-course of their trajectory.

Presuming the ballistic missile targets used have a realistic re-entry vehicle/warhead, then the successful SM-6 tests did validate intercepting ballistic missile warheads in terminal phase. I'd imagine terminal phase interception would be more difficult for the hit-to-kill SM-3 compared to the explosive SM-6 so even if the SM-3 could do it, the SM-6 would be preferred.

 

[spoz]

Another step in CVN Ford’s road to deployment, the testing of communication links to other USN ships.

US Navy Prepares to Connect Newest Carrier to Other Warships

The Gerald Ford is in the Atlantic with the Harry Truman.

www.defenseone.com

I somehow don't think the CO meant that they were testing the actual connectivity including the grooming of data links , that would have been done long ago before she went to sea , but rather than she can operate successfully with other units from a management (process and procedures) and tactical perspective.

 

[gowthamn]

I thought the US Navy does not have the ability to attack an incoming ballistic missile during the boost phase. The MDA's (Missile Defense Agency) website says that they don't and Lasers might be able to achieve it some day.

 

[Ananda]

Got this photo from US Military Photo sites. Nice picture of Ford Class with Nimitz Class in operation together. Seems Ford now being used nearly close to full operational level.

 

[John Fedup]

This article discusses the merits of building smaller nuclear powered naval vessels. Some good points are made and emerging new modular reactor designs (Nuscale) may prove to be cost effective. However, the radiation hazard fro battle damage will still be an issue to consider. The Navy’s New Battlefield Needs Small Nuclear-Powered Warships

 

[John Fedup]

The USN has taken delivery on two block 3 SHs. Several features from the advanced Superhornet concept have made their way into block 3. One feature that didn't is the enhanced F414 engine. Note the Boeing hype about financial incentives for cash strapped COVID victim nations looking for deals. Guess we know who's at the top of that list.

Boeing Delivers First Next-Gen Super Hornets to Navy

Boeing Delivers First Next-Gen Super Hornets to Navy

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

 

[the concerned]

I always thought one of the issues with the f18e is that for its weight it is underpowered..

 

[John Fedup]

The SuperHornet doesn’t have the raw power of land based fighters but it is not bad. It is comparable to the F-35C and I believe it carries more ordinance than a Rafale. It doesn’t have the interceptor performance that the Tomcat had. Kinematic performance compares reasonably well against a J-15. The future Chinese naval fighter FC-31 may be more formidable. I can’t believe there will be a navalized J-20 as some sites have suggested due to its size and weight.

 

[the concerned]

I thought the fc-31 was powered by a version of the mig-29 engine so probably won't be all that. Fair enough airframe design is in the right direction.

 

[ngatimozart]

I thought the fc-31 was powered by a version of the mig-29 engine so probably won't be all that. Fair enough airframe design is in the right direction.

According to Wikipedia the first 2 prototypes were powered by the Russian RD-93 which powers the Mig29. The PRC had developed their own version of that engine, the WS-13 which has a bit more thrust, and are believed to be working on an improved variant. The problem is that we don't know how far advanced they are and if they have managed to resolve their metallurgy problems yet. I know Wikipedia isn't a good source, but it will have to do at the moment.

 

[John Fedup]

Nothing surprising in this link about China's ability to build ships faster. The recently announced strike at BIW and delays caused by COVID aren't helping the USN's new ship build rate either.

In War, Chinese Shipyards Could Outpace US in Replacing Losses; Marine Commandant - Breaking Defense

“Replacing ships lost in combat will be problematic," Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger writes in a forthcoming paper. "Our industrial base has shrunk while peer adversaries have expanded their shipbuilding capacity. In an extended conflict, the United States will be on the losing end of a...

breakingdefense.com

 

[Air Force Brat]

The SuperHornet doesn’t have the raw power of land based fighters but it is not bad. It is comparable to the F-35C and I believe it carries more ordinance than a Rafale. It doesn’t have the interceptor performance that the Tomcat had. Kinematic performance compares reasonably well against a J-15. The future Chinese naval fighter FC-31 may be more formidable. I can’t believe there will be a navalized J-20 as some sites have suggested due to its size and weight.

The FC-31/J-35 is indeed presently powered by RD-93's, at present we have the two known prototypes, although there are rumors of a "third bird", no much a threat at this stage, and frankly development has been truncated by a lack of desire by the PLAAF/PLANAF, though it would make sense as a naval fighter, and you are quite correct in stating there's certainly no clear pathway for J-20 aboard ship... not impossible, but certainly unlikely and lots of obstacles that place it in the "very difficult" realm...

 

[aussienscale]

The USN has taken delivery of its first operational CMV-22B Osprey, they will be replacing the C-2A(R) Greyhounds that have provided the COD mission for the USN since the mid 60's. The end of an era with the C-2's, but the beginning of an improved capability.

This will have a lot of interesting flow ons, firstly the fact that they are not required to Cat or Trap, opening up more operational use of the systems, but also this will be the first time that a COD mission will be able to be performed at sea on anything other than an aircraft carrier.

The ability to carry the F-35 power pack, under sling loads, and improved range.

Cheers

 

[ngatimozart]

It appears that the USN has lost control of it's future fleet planning with SECDEF and the Pentagon taking over planning. Apparently SECDEF was not happy with the admirals plans and said that they needed to plan for the real world, not what the believed that they should have.

Pentagon Leaders Have Taken Lead in Crafting Future Fleet from Navy - USNI News

The Navy has lost much of its power on deciding what its future fleet will look like, with a Pentagon-led effort set to produce secretary of defense directives to the service by the end of the summer on what the fleet’s future plans should include. This Future Navy Force Study is replacing the...

news.usni.org

 

[Mochachu]

Nothing surprising in this link about China's ability to build ships faster. The recently announced strike at BIW and delays caused by COVID aren't helping the USN's new ship build rate either.

In War, Chinese Shipyards Could Outpace US in Replacing Losses; Marine Commandant - Breaking Defense

“Replacing ships lost in combat will be problematic," Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger writes in a forthcoming paper. "Our industrial base has shrunk while peer adversaries have expanded their shipbuilding capacity. In an extended conflict, the United States will be on the losing end of a...

breakingdefense.com

Mod edit: Text deleted, as post was reported as trolling.

 

[spoz]

Well, that certainly wasn’t the pattern of work that I have seen in the US shipyards over nearly 40 years association with them.

 

[John Fedup]

This article describes some of the political, demographic, and economic problems facing the USN in the coming years. The economic pressures are obvious but the generational attitudes towards US foreign policy and defence and what this means for the USN must be concerning to those preparing future defence requirements. The reference to the RN’s decline is striking. Don’t think a 100 ship USN will ever happen but a 355 ship fleet isn’t happening either if 10 Ford CVNs are still on.

The 100-Ship Navy - War on the Rocks

Naval officers pray at the altar of “more ships.” We demand more of them, fantasize about new ways to use them, and assume that the fleet will only grow.

warontherocks.com