Too true, perceived stuff ups are front page news while the work over and above what is contracted to deliver a required capability outside the initial scope goes unpublicised and acknowledged.
US Navy News and updates
- Thread starter AegisFC
- Start date
Too true, perceived stuff ups are front page news while the work over and above what is contracted to deliver a required capability outside the initial scope goes unpublicised and acknowledged.
SteelTiger 177
New Member
Does anyone know about the status of the Seafighter program if its still going or has it been absorbed into the Littoral Combat Ship program?I feel the LCS program should be terminated and resources reallocated to the DDX,CGX and Seafighter programs.
smaller ships such as LCS in the battlespace.
DARPA's new TERN programaimsfor eyes in the skyfromthe sea March 4, 2013
DARPA's new TERN program aims for eyes in the sky from the sea
DARPA's new TERN program aims for eyes in the sky from thè sea March 4, 2013
DARPA seeks proposals that would design, develop and demonstrate a MALE UAV and an associated automated launch and recovery system. The UAV would have to carry a 600-pound payload and have an operational radius of 600 to 900 nautical miles from its host vessel. The launch and recovery system would have to fit Littoral Combat Ship 2 (LCS-2)-class ships and other surface combat vessels as feasible. Key technical challenges include:
DARPA plans to roll out TERN in three phases over approximately 40 months, culminating in a full-scale launch and recovery demonstration. "We're trying to rethink how the ship, UAV and launch and recovery domains – which have traditionally worked in parallel –can synergistically collaborate to help achieve the vision of base-independent operations for maritime or overland missions," Patt said.
DARPA's new TERN programaimsfor eyes in the skyfromthe sea March 4, 2013
DARPA's new TERN program aims for eyes in the sky from the sea
DARPA's new TERN program aims for eyes in the sky from thè sea March 4, 2013
DARPA seeks proposals that would design, develop and demonstrate a MALE UAV and an associated automated launch and recovery system. The UAV would have to carry a 600-pound payload and have an operational radius of 600 to 900 nautical miles from its host vessel. The launch and recovery system would have to fit Littoral Combat Ship 2 (LCS-2)-class ships and other surface combat vessels as feasible. Key technical challenges include:
DARPA plans to roll out TERN in three phases over approximately 40 months, culminating in a full-scale launch and recovery demonstration. "We're trying to rethink how the ship, UAV and launch and recovery domains – which have traditionally worked in parallel –can synergistically collaborate to help achieve the vision of base-independent operations for maritime or overland missions," Patt said.
Last edited:
the USN will be conducting landing tests of XC-47B's from a CVN from next year
so UAS development will be accelerating from then if tests are successful
so UAS development will be accelerating from then if tests are successful
A MALE UAV like Predator has a 55-ft. wingspan so it's going to take some out-of-box thinking to devise a means to launch/recover something similar from LCS-2 spacious flight deck notwithstanding. Scaneagle is small enough to snare with a net but hard to see them doing this with TERN. Maybe they will consider a water recovery ala USVs.
Don't think so. They bring to many problems. Also you would need to stop to pick them up which would get to be a problem.
Me i always liked the flying flapjack. Almost no stall speed, tough as nails good range etc. That or the tilt rotor UAV they had.
fretburner
Banned Member
Any news on what mission module(s) the LCS-1 is deploying with?
kev 99
Member
Are any of the mission modules actually ready for deployement yet?
FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
The video, and pretty much every photo I've seen for the last couple years, shows the USS Freedom equipped with the two 30mm Mk44 Bushmasters that are part of the Surface Warfare module.
Yea i think thats it. The mine sweeping sled was supposed to be ready with the MH-60 but those it turns out lack the power to do the job. So..Not sure whats being taken.
fretburner
Banned Member
I saw the documentary "21st century warship" about a week ago, and it featured the LCS-1 (I think) with that 30mm Bushmasters. I guess they're deploying with the same exact stuffs + the camo paint job. Do those bushmasters have anti-air capability?
Also, how many helos will deploy with her? 2 MH-60 Romeos?
The Mk44 is intended for ASuW only. The mount doesn't look like it's got enough elevation capability to even bother with.
It should also be noted that this is NOT the Surface Warfare module the LCS was supposed to have, this is a Surface Warfare module. It's basically taking some gear that had known capabilities and throwing it together so the LCS could have something onboard that they could call a "module".
Looks like she's only taking one helo on deployment.
fretburner
Banned Member
Right. It was supposed to have the NLOS-LS (or something) on top the the main gun and the 30mm cannons. And now they're looking at, the Spike or Griffin in place of the NLOS LS - losing out on the 25km range promise of the NLOS-LS. But I guess, anything is better than nothing.
Yes, it appears to be a practical compromise after they were left holding the bag after the Army NLOS fiasco. The Navy initiated the search for a Griffin replacement a couple of years back but AFAIK nothing specific,has been disclosed. Boeing released it's concept for a LCS missile a while back but with little details. The wheels are moving but not fast enough for some... I doubt nothing short of a LRASM will satisfy them.
This is the trial here I think?
USS Monsoon Patrol Coastal (PC) Griffin Test Video - YouTube
I'm curious as to why they simply didn't adopt naval launchers for the Hellfire missile? It's a more capable missile than Griffin, has already been tested and integrated on naval vessels, is likely to already have weapons magazines on the LCS given it's carried by the MH-60R and is already in the USN inventory...
Both Hellfire and Griffin would be interim solutions and lower acquisition and integration costs likely favored the Griffin..
"Just enough for less" as DID describes it, makes sense for an interim system.
Raytheon’s Griffin Mini-Missiles
...The Griffin’s estimated range is similar to the larger AGM-114 Hellfire: about 3.5 miles if surface-launched without a booster motor, rising to 12.5 miles or more if fired from an aerial platform at altitude. That’s fine for aerial platforms, as Griffin A/B offers them the ability to carry more Griffins than Hellfires, and achieve similar reach and precision, with less collateral damage.
There are still targets like tanks that will demand a larger AGM-114 Hellfire missile, and targets like buildings may demand a full-size AGM-65 Maverick missile or LJDAM bomb. In many cases, however, the Griffin offers a “just enough, for less” solution.
"Just enough for less" as DID describes it, makes sense for an interim system.
Raytheon’s Griffin Mini-Missiles
...The Griffin’s estimated range is similar to the larger AGM-114 Hellfire: about 3.5 miles if surface-launched without a booster motor, rising to 12.5 miles or more if fired from an aerial platform at altitude. That’s fine for aerial platforms, as Griffin A/B offers them the ability to carry more Griffins than Hellfires, and achieve similar reach and precision, with less collateral damage.
There are still targets like tanks that will demand a larger AGM-114 Hellfire missile, and targets like buildings may demand a full-size AGM-65 Maverick missile or LJDAM bomb. In many cases, however, the Griffin offers a “just enough, for less” solution.
I don't really agree with DiD all that often, the specs on Griffin are much lower than those on Hellfire and as to integration and acquisition costs, Hellfire is already in the inventory and has previously been integrated on US naval vessels and surface launch applications. Griffin is not in the USN inventory, doesn't yet have a developed launcher and isn't integrated on any ship, in any capacity... They've had to develop a launcher for service at sea, distinct magazines for the weapons at sea as well as integrating it onto LCS.
Can't see introducing yet another missile into USN service, would be cheaper? I agree both are interim measures, but the ships are still going to sea. Why would you put the most capable weapon you've got on the ship?
RAM has an anti surface capability while Giffin, although less capable, is cheaper and is being developed to be compatable with the RAM launcher. The embarked Romeos, I assume will have Hellfire leaving the Griffin as a defence against swarms of light craft closer in.