US Navy News and updates

John Fedup said:
Some preliminary information on what the next US SSN(x) might be. Seems the plan is to return to a high end SSN similar to Seawolf. The emphasis will more ASW which makes sense given the increasing threat from new Chinese and Russian SSNs not to mention a wide range of new SSKs from numerous navies both friendly and otherwise.

www.navalnews.com

U.S. Navy Outlines the Next-Generation Attack Submarine SSN(X) Program - Naval News

The U.S. Navy has received $1 million dollars from Congress to start research and development in FY2021 for a successor to the current Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN).
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
Click to expand...
Vs Seawolf class it will if correct have cruise missile launch tubes.
vs Virginia class it will be wider and have more torpedoes.
vs both it will be part Tesla. Current generation nuclear subs use steam off the reactor to drive the shaft of the propeller. Starting with the Columbia class SSBN the USN is pushing to move from this mechanism to an electric drive for obvious reasons if you have ever driven or nearly been hit by an EV. They are scary quiet. For a Submarine the quieter the better.
 
This article mentions a successful test of a hypersonic guide vehicle for army and navy use. It references potential use on SSGN boats and the Zumwalt class but no mention on ships with MK41 launchers:
www.navalnews.com

Lockheed Martin Tests New U.S. Navy’s Hypersonic Strike System - Naval News

The Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman team successfully conducted a significant live fire hypersonic strike system test in support of the U.S. Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) and U.S. Army’s Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) programs.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
 
John Fedup said:
This article mentions a successful test of a hypersonic guide vehicle for army and navy use. It references potential use on SSGN boats and the Zumwalt class but no mention on ships with MK41 launchers:
www.navalnews.com

Lockheed Martin Tests New U.S. Navy’s Hypersonic Strike System - Naval News

The Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman team successfully conducted a significant live fire hypersonic strike system test in support of the U.S. Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) and U.S. Army’s Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) programs.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
Click to expand...
hypersonic glide vehicle
I assume they're gonna rip off the gun mounts on the Zumwalts and mount deck launchers similar to the old Tomahawk armored box launchers on the Iowa-class BBs. They likely didn't mention Mk41 equipped ships because the All Up Rounds , at 34.5", ain't gonna fit. And they really don't have a lot of open deck space to add something like the ABL. Be interesting to see how many missiles they'll be able to fit in the SSGN missile tubes. And, they're gonna need to justify the cost of converting the Ohio SSGN tubes for a relatively short service life. Likely to long to fit into the Virginia Payload Tubes
 
Yes, new tubes for the Ohio SSGNs doesn’t seem like a wise investment unless they could be transferred to a possible Columbia SSGN but even this is questionable as 10 SSBNs need to be built first.
 
John Fedup said:
This article mentions a successful test of a hypersonic guide vehicle for army and navy use. It references potential use on SSGN boats and the Zumwalt class but no mention on ships with MK41 launchers:
www.navalnews.com

Lockheed Martin Tests New U.S. Navy’s Hypersonic Strike System - Naval News

The Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman team successfully conducted a significant live fire hypersonic strike system test in support of the U.S. Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) and U.S. Army’s Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) programs.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
Click to expand...
Not to be pedantic, but I believe it was a test of the first stage rocket booster rather than the HGV itself. AFAIK the US hasn't tested a payload-representative HGV just yet.
 
Last edited:
The rail gun is one of those things that would have been nice if it could, but turned out that it can't. From my point of view the entire project was mostly an experiment that would have been really nice if it worked out. Moreover, it was built on doctrine that may have already expired and at a time when experimentation was ok, which it no longer is.
 
One result of the rail gun program was the actual projectile design which can be utilized by powder guns so a bit of a payback.
 
DDG-X is now a thing.
www.defensenews.com

US Navy creates DDG(X) program office after years of delays for large combatant replacement

The Navy stood up a program office to manage the acquisition, design and fielding of the new DDG(X) – the most concrete move the service has made in more than a decade of trying to figure out what its next large surface combatant will be.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

So They officially have an office for the DDGx which is the real step one. Generally I expect the end product to resemble the Zumwalt but with a more modern Aegis system. As the name implies this will likely be more destroyer than cruiser yet given both price and technical capabilities I think the Separate Cruiser class is done.
 
John Fedup said:
One result of the rail gun program was the actual projectile design which can be utilized by powder guns so a bit of a payback.
Click to expand...
Or not.
The article suggests the price per round might be part of the problem. But, the ~$85K per round is around 1/10 the cost of the cancelled Zumwalt's AGS LRAP round. Of course there is also undefined system integration costs
www.military.com

It May Be the End of the Line for the Navy's Hypervelocity Projectile

The meter-long projectile was first developed exclusively as a round for the Navy's experimental railgun.
www.military.com www.military.com
"... An overview of the White House's fiscal 2022 budget request notes that the gun-launched guided projectile, previously called the hypervelocity projectile, has been canceled, for a savings of $5.9 million.

"[The Department of the Navy] terminated the Gun-Launched Guided Projectile Research and Development effort," the document states. "Potential reinvestment in the program will be reevaluated after an ongoing Strategic Capabilities Officer demonstration effort in Terminal Defense Analysis is complete."..."
Click to expand...
 
Part of what drove the LRAP price astronomically high was simply killing production of the AGS with the Zumwalt class being curtailed to 3 units. Bit of Chicken and the Egg.
Seems like the only way the Navy is getting new shells is if the contractors do all the R&D and basically start exporting.
 
Terran said:
Part of what drove the LRAP price astronomically high was simply killing production of the AGS with the Zumwalt class being curtailed to 3 units. Bit of Chicken and the Egg.
Seems like the only way the Navy is getting new shells is if the contractors do all the R&D and basically start exporting.
Click to expand...
True, when you eliminate 90% of the potential platforms for a high technology system you have truly lost any possible economy of scale. The USN might have been able to mitigate a portion of that loss of systems if they had integrated BAE's suggested AGS-Lite into the Arleigh Burke Flt III upgrades
 
FormerDirtDart said:
True, when you eliminate 90% of the potential platforms for a high technology system you have truly lost any possible economy of scale. The USN might have been able to mitigate a portion of that loss of systems if they had integrated BAE's suggested AGS-Lite into the Arleigh Burke Flt III upgrades
Click to expand...
This inclusion of sunk costs into prices of not-yet-made products is very misleading, and it is a mistake to close down production of platforms due solely to sunk costs, which were already expended.
 
Boeing’s other air refuelling tanker seems to be progressing without all the negativity surrounding the KC-46. The drone test jet mated with a SH for the first transfer. More test drones are under construction and carrier testing will start next year. Working versions hopefully happening sometime in 2025. This will be a huge improvement for fighter operations and increasing security for the carrier by further distancing away from the enemy.
breakingdefense.com

Drone Refuels Manned Aircraft For First Time: Navy - Breaking Defense

The Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray prototype successfully refueled a Navy Super Hornet fighter in mid-air during a Friday test.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
 
A summary of LCS issues…32 apparently of which 9 are significant, 5 for the Freedom class and 4 for the Independence class. A single class purchase could have reduced this number by 50% with no loss in capability as there isn’t much anyway. A shame the USN couldn’t have conceived the Constellation class as a better idea than the LCS back in the day. Three or four more Zumwalts with more missiles would have been better LCS along with extra Virginias.
www.defenseone.com

Navy Finds 32 Problems with Littoral Combat Ships

Study reveals “key reliability issues” and maintenance averaging up to two weeks per month to fix.
www.defenseone.com www.defenseone.com
 
According to this link, a leaked memo says the USN must choose one program from DD(x), SSN(x) or NGAD fighter. Tough call, the latter two really are critical so the choice is likely one of them. A rejection of a new fighter would threaten the size of the future carrier fleet IMO.
www.defensenews.com

Memo reveals US Navy must pick between future destroyer, fighter or sub for FY23 plan

The service may have to pick just one of three major modernization programs on the horizon to fund, and postpone the other two due to budget limitations.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
 
The USN might still be able to get more out of the existing Arleigh Burkes with optimizing its AEGIS system for missile defense. I am not sure if and how much the navy needs another fighter, but attack subs would seem more effective/optimized for countering surface threats due to stealth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top