• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Who needs sailors anyway?

Navy_Pete said:
They have the same kind of Martech initial training and specialization we went to; they just kept HT as a specialization. I think they split after the equivalent to our QL3, so everyone does a basic rounds package and has a baseline understanding of basic marine engineering and safety for electrical, mechanical and structural, then goes from there.

They actually went down the same path as we did and got rid of shiprights, then added it back in. They specifically recommended we not do that, but we did anyway (to break up the 'stoker mafia').

Still no firm timeline for getting HT/shipwright specialization in place, as it's been 5-7 years for a while, but at least is approved and actively worked on. When we get there though, our trades will essentially line up again.

Which is good, because T26 design and SOPs are based around the RN trades. That includes having DC specialists with the much (much) smaller DC organization, which we are even more limited in after going with AEGIS. Not having HTs actually in place has been passed back to the RCN as a risk for crewing CSC so hopefully that change doesn't stall further. Until we actually have people trained and out of the pipeline it's only a plan.

The hard part there is we are taking so long to do it that the legacy HTs are largely retired or retiring, so we will likely have a hard time finding instructors.
Click to expand...
I am sure a bunch will come back as contractors, while they extract their pound of flesh from DND.

I am not sure where people think we are going to get a new combatant from? Certainly not the US yards. At best we might get a couple ships from European yards, but then be faced with a large training issue on top of all the current training/manpower issues we currently have. Plus I doubt we have the budget to fully arm the fleet with new missiles.
 
Colin Parkinson said:
I am sure a bunch will come back as contractors, while they extract their pound of flesh from DND.

I am not sure where people think we are going to get a new combatant from? Certainly not the US yards. At best we might get a couple ships from European yards, but then be faced with a large training issue on top of all the current training/manpower issues we currently have. Plus I doubt we have the budget to fully arm the fleet with new missiles.
Click to expand...
I'd be pretty happy to just have the current program roll out as planned, but still don't see how in the medium term we aren't tying up the MCDVs and maybe a few CPFs to run AOPs, JSS, and keep staffing the CPFs that we can afford to keep fixing and subs. I don't see 15 CSCs being delivered, but 12 would be good.

I think people who think a whack of different orphan ships is a good idea have never completed a 'know your ship' package, done any of the other platform specific quals, or tried to support multiple classes. Mixing in another class of ship may not double the work, but it's definitely not a small, incremental increase to the LOE. Currently working in an LCMM job that supports the entire surface and subsurface fleet, and the learning curve is enormous anytime something comes up on a different class you aren't familiar with. When you have to find a manual and drawings and figure out how the system specifically works, what standards it's built to etc 'does this replacement part work' is not a simple question to answer.
 
If we need to fill a "gap" right now, then order 3 KS-III with the VLS right now, with another 3 to be delivered after that. We could likley man two of the subs and they would give us some real teeth and would be able to keep at sea longer. One of those in the Red Sea would make the Iranians uncomfortable.
 
Colin Parkinson said:
If we need to fill a "gap" right now, then order 3 KS-III with the VLS right now, with another 3 to be delivered after that. We could likley man two of the subs and they would give us some real teeth and would be able to keep at sea longer. One of those in the Red Sea would make the Iranians uncomfortable.
Click to expand...
Surface fleet 'We have crewing problems'
Sub fleet 'Hold my beer, amateurs!'
 
More on robots

1705781606502.png

Independence LCS as mothership with two autonomous OSVs (Ranger and Mariner) off her starboard quarter and two autonomous ISRVs (Sea Hunter and Seahawk) to port. Ranger is the roboship that launched an SM6 from a 40 foot seacan.

www.leidos.com

U.S. Navy deployment puts Leidos autonomy on display

A task group including four unmanned surface vessels developed by Leidos reached Sydney Harbor this week after crossing the Pacific Ocean for the first time.
www.leidos.com www.leidos.com

www.leidos.com

Leidos selected by U.S. Navy to operate and sustain medium unmanned vessels

Leidos to manage, operate and maintain the U.S. Navy’s Overlord and medium USVs.
www.leidos.com www.leidos.com

www.leidos.com

Leidos to develop autonomous uncrewed aerial resupply system for U.S. Marine Corps

Leidos was recently awarded a new prime contract to develop an uncrewed aircraft system that can autonomously resupply forward-deployed ground forces.
www.leidos.com www.leidos.com
 
Silly thoughts for the weekend....

335 berths in 16 hulls for 152 crew and 183 mission specialists.
316 airline seats for additional passengers

Over 12,000 m2 of flexible storage (5000 m2 of Weather Deck/Flight Deck)
Volume equivalent to 352 TEU-40 (weight limited to 3000 tonnes total)
3-6 MH-60 Crewed Helos
9 MQ-8B Armed UAVs

Self Defence

33x SeaRAM
3x 57mm
6x 30mm

24x NSM
72x Hellfire

Strike/LRAD

216 Strike Length VLS cells mounted in Lockheed Martin Mk70 Payload Delivery Systems (PDS)
4 Cells per PDS equivalent to 1x TEU-40
8-9 PDS per MUSV-FSV Alya McCall

4 Crewed Vessels
3 Fighting Vessels
1 MRT/TCV Vessel

12 MUSVs
6 ISR
6 Cargo FSVs.

Flotilla max speed (target) 40 knots.






CrewSpecialistsBerthsPax
####
1LCS-02Independence4235770
2LCS-02Independence4235770
3LCS-02Independence4235770
4EPF-MRTSpearhead2678104312
5MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
6MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
7MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
8MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
9MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
10MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
11MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
12MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
13MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
14MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
15MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
16MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
Total152183335312

HangarMission BayWeather DeckCapacityCapacity
m2m2m2TonnesTEU-40*
1LCS-02Independence3511410103021080
2LCS-02Independence3511410103021080
3LCS-02Independence3511410103021080
4EPF-MRTSpearhead0190038054564
5MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
6MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
7MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
8MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
9MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
10MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
11MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
12MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
13MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
14MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
15MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
16MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
Total1053613054323005352

CapacityMissilesMissilesMissilesGunsGunsHelosHelos
VLS CellsNSMSeaRAMHellfire57mm30mmMH-60MQ-8B
1LCS-02Independence0811241213
2LCS-02Independence0811241213
3LCS-02Independence0811241213
4EPF-MRTSpearhead00000000
5MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
6MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
7MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
8MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
9MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
10MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
11MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
12MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
13MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
14MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
15MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
16MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
Total2162433723639
 
Kirkhill said:
Silly thoughts for the weekend....

335 berths in 16 hulls for 152 crew and 183 mission specialists.
316 airline seats for additional passengers

Over 12,000 m2 of flexible storage (5000 m2 of Weather Deck/Flight Deck)
Volume equivalent to 352 TEU-40 (weight limited to 3000 tonnes total)
3-6 MH-60 Crewed Helos
9 MQ-8B Armed UAVs

Self Defence

33x SeaRAM
3x 57mm
6x 30mm

24x NSM
72x Hellfire

Strike/LRAD

216 Strike Length VLS cells mounted in Lockheed Martin Mk70 Payload Delivery Systems (PDS)
4 Cells per PDS equivalent to 1x TEU-40
8-9 PDS per MUSV-FSV Alya McCall

4 Crewed Vessels
3 Fighting Vessels
1 MRT/TCV Vessel

12 MUSVs
6 ISR
6 Cargo FSVs.

Flotilla max speed (target) 40 knots.






CrewSpecialistsBerthsPax
####
1LCS-02Independence4235770
2LCS-02Independence4235770
3LCS-02Independence4235770
4EPF-MRTSpearhead2678104312
5MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
6MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
7MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
8MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
9MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
10MUSV-FSVAlya McCall0000
11MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
12MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
13MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
14MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
15MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
16MUSV-ISRSea Hunter0000
Total152183335312

HangarMission BayWeather DeckCapacityCapacity
m2m2m2TonnesTEU-40*
1LCS-02Independence3511410103021080
2LCS-02Independence3511410103021080
3LCS-02Independence3511410103021080
4EPF-MRTSpearhead0190038054564
5MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
6MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
7MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
8MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
9MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
10MUSV-FSVAlya McCall003273058
11MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
12MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
13MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
14MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
15MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
16MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000
Total1053613054323005352

CapacityMissilesMissilesMissilesGunsGunsHelosHelos
VLS CellsNSMSeaRAMHellfire57mm30mmMH-60MQ-8B
1LCS-02Independence0811241213
2LCS-02Independence0811241213
3LCS-02Independence0811241213
4EPF-MRTSpearhead00000000
5MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
6MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
7MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
8MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
9MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
10MUSV-FSVAlya McCall320000000
11MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
12MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
13MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
14MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
15MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
16MUSV-ISRSea Hunter00000000
Total2162433723639
Click to expand...
This would likely work in a littoral fight, but since we have a lot of big blue water to cross to get to a littoral fight, it's not practical for the RCN.

Genuine question: Have you ever crossed an ocean by ship?

The transit from Esquimalt to Hawaii is 5-7 days, Hawaii to Japan/Guam takes near two weeks. Two to three weeks across a big, somewhat predictable ocean is an eternity for uncrewed systems. That's three weeks before entering theatre, where you might spend months/years waiting to use those systems, systems that need a lot of regular maintenance.
 
Furniture said:
This would likely work in a littoral fight, but since we have a lot of big blue water to cross to get to a littoral fight, it's not practical for the RCN.

Genuine question: Have you ever crossed an ocean by ship?

The transit from Esquimalt to Hawaii is 5-7 days, Hawaii to Japan/Guam takes near two weeks. Two to three weeks across a big, somewhat predictable ocean is an eternity for uncrewed systems. That's three weeks before entering theatre, where you might spend months/years waiting to use those systems, systems that need a lot of regular maintenance.
Click to expand...

I don't know. Does Seattle to Dutch in a typhoon count? Mucking around in the Bering Sea? Trawlers and factory ships.

www.marinetraffic.com

Ship OCEAN PHOENIX (Fish Factory) Registered in USA - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 6413924, MMSI 366588000, Call sign KCAK

Vessel OCEAN PHOENIX is a Fish Factory, Registered in USA. Discover the vessel's particulars, including capacity, machinery, photos and ownership. Get the details of the current Voyage of OCEAN PHOENIX including Position, Port Calls, Destination, ETA and Distance travelled - IMO 6413924, MMSI...
www.marinetraffic.com
www.marinetraffic.com

Ship AMERICAN TRIUMPH (Trawler) Registered in USA - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 7738412, MMSI 366047000, Call sign KTHZ

Vessel AMERICAN TRIUMPH is a Trawler, Registered in USA. Discover the vessel's particulars, including capacity, machinery, photos and ownership. Get the details of the current Voyage of AMERICAN TRIUMPH including Position, Port Calls, Destination, ETA and Distance travelled - IMO 7738412, MMSI...
www.marinetraffic.com
www.marinetraffic.com

Ship NORTHERN JAEGER (Factory Trawler) Registered in USA - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 7334826, MMSI 366046000, Call sign WNBG

Vessel NORTHERN JAEGER is a Factory Trawler, Registered in USA. Discover the vessel's particulars, including capacity, machinery, photos and ownership. Get the details of the current Voyage of NORTHERN JAEGER including Position, Port Calls, Destination, ETA and Distance travelled - IMO 7334826...
www.marinetraffic.com
 
Kirkhill said:
I don't know. Does Seattle to Dutch in a typhoon count? Mucking around in the Bering Sea? Trawlers and factory ships.

www.marinetraffic.com

Ship OCEAN PHOENIX (Fish Factory) Registered in USA - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 6413924, MMSI 366588000, Call sign KCAK

Vessel OCEAN PHOENIX is a Fish Factory, Registered in USA. Discover the vessel's particulars, including capacity, machinery, photos and ownership. Get the details of the current Voyage of OCEAN PHOENIX including Position, Port Calls, Destination, ETA and Distance travelled - IMO 6413924, MMSI...
www.marinetraffic.com
www.marinetraffic.com

Ship AMERICAN TRIUMPH (Trawler) Registered in USA - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 7738412, MMSI 366047000, Call sign KTHZ

Vessel AMERICAN TRIUMPH is a Trawler, Registered in USA. Discover the vessel's particulars, including capacity, machinery, photos and ownership. Get the details of the current Voyage of AMERICAN TRIUMPH including Position, Port Calls, Destination, ETA and Distance travelled - IMO 7738412, MMSI...
www.marinetraffic.com
www.marinetraffic.com

Ship NORTHERN JAEGER (Factory Trawler) Registered in USA - Vessel details, Current position and Voyage information - IMO 7334826, MMSI 366046000, Call sign WNBG

Vessel NORTHERN JAEGER is a Factory Trawler, Registered in USA. Discover the vessel's particulars, including capacity, machinery, photos and ownership. Get the details of the current Voyage of NORTHERN JAEGER including Position, Port Calls, Destination, ETA and Distance travelled - IMO 7334826...
www.marinetraffic.com
Click to expand...
If your goal is to move ships up the coast one way, then invest heavily in maintenance once they arrive, sure.

Also, it isn't a Typhoon in the Eastern Pacific, and it definitely isn't a Typhoon north of 30 degrees North.
 
Furniture said:
If your goal is to move ships up the coast one way, then invest heavily in maintenance once they arrive, sure.

Also, it isn't a Typhoon in the Eastern Pacific, and it definitely isn't a Typhoon north of 30 degrees North.
Click to expand...
The Gulf of Alaska Low just…is.
 
After seeing the struggles of equipment operating continuously for week with ongoing maintenance, just massively skeptical of a lot of these claims.

The 'unmanned' ship thing is interesting, it's usually 'it's unmanned, except when we're doing a,b,c, and d. Oh, and e, f and g. Sometimes h'. As soon as you add 'except' you need to have all the hotel services and other equipment to make it survivable for people.

If it's truly autonomous, you can do things like make the atmosphere hypoxic so nothing can burn, and get rid of a lot of equipment that is only there because you have people onboard. Not having things like toilets, laundry, kitchens, fresh water etc and all the HVAC gets rid of a lot of complexity and maintenance.

As long as you accept it's potentially disposable and completely unsecure, it's a great idea for sensors. Weeks on the ocean (or under the ocean) is a much harsher environment than a day or two flying at altitude though so there is a good reason we have air drones and not many marine drones.
 
Navy_Pete said:
After seeing the struggles of equipment operating continuously for week with ongoing maintenance, just massively skeptical of a lot of these claims.

The 'unmanned' ship thing is interesting, it's usually 'it's unmanned, except when we're doing a,b,c, and d. Oh, and e, f and g. Sometimes h'. As soon as you add 'except' you need to have all the hotel services and other equipment to make it survivable for people.

If it's truly autonomous, you can do things like make the atmosphere hypoxic so nothing can burn, and get rid of a lot of equipment that is only there because you have people onboard. Not having things like toilets, laundry, kitchens, fresh water etc and all the HVAC gets rid of a lot of complexity and maintenance.

As long as you accept it's potentially disposable and completely unsecure, it's a great idea for sensors. Weeks on the ocean (or under the ocean) is a much harsher environment than a day or two flying at altitude though so there is a good reason we have air drones and not many marine drones.
Click to expand...
I agree that the claims about the capabilities of these autonomous systems (like pretty much any other product being flogged) are exaggerated. Also 100% agree that the more capabilities you try to add to these systems the more expensive and liable to break down/require human support they become.

As far as I'm concerned you follow the KISS principle. Keep them simple, cheap and attritible. That allows you to deploy them in volume as well as giving you the freedom to pivot to other solutions when required. To take an Army example you could spend a lot of money to make an autonomous LAV that does most/all the things a manned LAV can do but when you realize that a LAV is no longer suitable for your requirements it's just as difficult to pivot away from the U-LAV as it is from a manned LAV due to the sunk costs.
 
The funny bit is those have existed for a few decades, and have been proven to work fine in a very limited scope and known restrictions. DRDC prototyped and proved some that we didn't do anything with, and they were cheap enough that if you didn't recover one wasn't the end of the world.

People want to develop these all singing and dancing ships that end up costing more than normal ships, and have longer downtime because you can't do maintenance on them while in operation, so you have to do it all when they are alongside (so means you need more to get the same operational coverage). And the price tag is enough that people don't want to lose them, or the tech to be protected, which usually means people.

I think there is a use for them for sure; I'd much rather have some kind of UUV however many miles away from me listening for subs that could pop up and give an early warning as subs are terrifying, but building an 'optionally crewed' mine sweeper that you want to put people on it to do some of the stuff it needs to do in a minefield because it costs too much to lose kind of defeats the purpose.

Also arming a ship that is controlled by AI is kind of terrifying; they can't even make chatbots that don't turn into incel edgelords when exposed to the world, and I really don't want Terminator to turn into a prediction.
 
SeaKingTacco said:
But, why would you bother?
Click to expand...
They last a few weeks loitering in an area and pop up to the surface for pickup when their battery gets low that you can hand carry. Cheap easy sensor net that doesn't need underwater cables, crew rest etc., and don't weigh 15 tonnes at 20m like the Thales sail boat solution, which would need special launch/deployment/storage setup. ALso probably won't be too fussed if someone decides to grab it as salvage, which you could easily do the the sailboat which may have some more sensitive tech in the sensors and also much higher unit cost.

Autonomous ship salvage rights on the open ocean sounds like an interesting new legal frontier though; what is preventing from anyone that sees it declaring it abandoned? Maybe I could finally get that letter of marque I dreamed of as a kid!
 
While the USVs operate autonomously, the on-scene commander retains the “freedom to act within the commander’s intent,” he said, which then prompts some questions the Navy must sort: How does the service program that into its USVs? Where is the balance between machine automation and operator in the loop?
Click to expand...

news.usni.org

Navy ‘Hell Hounds’ Squadron Crafting Missions for Small, Lethal Drone Fleet - USNI News

CORONADO, Calif. – The Navy on Friday took another step toward creating a surface fleet seamlessly integrated with uncrewed vessels by formally establishing its second unmanned surface drone unit. The new unit, the “Hell Hounds” of Unmanned Surface Vessel Squadron 3, has received the first four...
news.usni.org news.usni.org

Where is the balance between machine automation and operator in the loop? Isn't that a question that the Navy has already answered?

When a helicopter, or a boat is launched the pilot or cox'n has limited authority. Those limits may be broad or tight depending on a variety of assumptions made by the command authority about the competence of the pilot or cox'n.

On board, commands such as "Weapons Free" or even "Carry On" imply delegation of authority.

Wouldn't managing UxVs fall within the same spectrum?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kirkhill
Mucking around in the Irish Sea - Critical Infrastructure
Replies
1
Views
276
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Navy_Pete
    • Sad
Japanese minesweeper Ukushima engine room fire
Replies
2
Views
714
Oldgateboatdriver
Oldgateboatdriver
Kirkhill
    • Like
Multi Domain Task Force - Canada
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
Kirkhill
US Navy News
Replies
13
Views
8K
dimsum
dimsum
Kirkhill
    • Insightful
    • Like
Analysis of US Wishlists 2025
Replies
0
Views
4K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Back
Top