Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Obi Wan Russell · Mar 30, 2009

Jeff Head said:
The Ohio class SSGN conversions launch SLCMs from their large SLBM tubes...so I think even a larger sub-launched UAV would work just fine as long as it didn't produce an intercontinental ballistic track.

...but we are getting off the carrier track, hehehe.

Anyhow, I think that the Type 45 mini-carrier conversion with modern UAVs or even several JSFs is intriguing...but wonder if they could really have the hanger facilities to service 4-6 JSFs.

Well I was jumping ahead a generation with the silo launched UCAV concept. I think it helps to know where you are going before you start on a journey! The hybrid destroyer/carrier concept for the operation of more conventional UCAVs likely to be deployed in the next decade or two could prove to be a useful interim 'proof of concept' vessels, demonstarting the usefulness and potential applications of ship based UCAVs in future combat situations. Because of their specialised nature, the procurement of this type of ship would be numerically small (hence the reference to the current Zumwalt class), whereas the following generation of UCAVs could be developed for fleetwide application aboard DDGs.

Aircraft are a carrier's main armament, essentially just another way of delivering a useful amount of explosive to the enemy's shore/ships/infrastructure etc. UCAVs are another variation on this theme. their potential size means they do not necessarily require a large deck carrier, though no one is seriously suggesting they are anything other than a supplementary system to traditional carrier forces rather than a replacement for them. Already destroyers and frigates around the world deploy helicopters with potent strike capability that can extend the reach of their parent ship beyond the horizon. Deploying UCAVs from such ships whether by mini flight deck or from silos is an evolutionary move as opposed to revolutionary IMHO, and one I look forward to with interest.

As to accomodating 6 JSFs, I think they would necessarily require a larger ship overall, but ship steel is cheap and air is free as they say...

Jeff Head · Mar 30, 2009

Obi Wan Russell said:
Well I was jumping ahead a generation with the silo launched UCAV concept. I think it helps to know where you are going before you start on a journey! The hybrid destroyer/carrier concept for the operation of more conventional UCAVs likely to be deployed in the next decade or two could prove to be a useful interim 'proof of concept' vessels, demonstarting the usefulness and potential applications of ship based UCAVs in future combat situations. Because of their specialised nature, the procurement of this type of ship would be numerically small (hence the reference to the current Zumwalt class), whereas the following generation of UCAVs could be developed for fleetwide application aboard DDGs.

Aircraft are a carrier's main armament, essentially just another way of delivering a useful amount of explosive to the enemy's shore/ships/infrastructure etc. UCAVs are another variation on this theme. their potential size means they do not necessarily require a large deck carrier, though no one is seriously suggesting they are anything other than a supplementary system to traditional carrier forces rather than a replacement for them. Already destroyers and frigates around the world deploy helicopters with potent strike capability that can extend the reach of their parent ship beyond the horizon. Deploying UCAVs from such ships whether by mini flight deck or from silos is an evolutionary move as opposed to revolutionary IMHO, and one I look forward to with interest.

As to accomodating 6 JSFs, I think they would necessarily require a larger ship overall, but ship steel is cheap and air is free as they say...

Very good points all around as always Obi...and the talk of UAVs through VLS cells is on topic...I guess I was refering more to the discussion about such a launch from a Ohio class causing a nuclear war.

Anyhow, I personally believe that we are still very far distant from any UAV performing a combat, air dominance role. Maybe never going to happen because of the 1) lag in comm between a controller and the aircraft if it is a remote controlled...and 2) the lack of true artificial intelligence capable in that role (now or in the forseeable future) and the inherant dangers if they ever become that good.

Anyhow, that's just my own opinion.

As to recon, fleet AEW, remote controlled ground support roles in the WOT (ie. Predators and Reapers)...all those roles are very appropriate in the here and now and I suspect that soon, from CVNs, CVs, CVHs, LHAs, LHDs, LPH type aircraft...amybe even LPDs...those roles will start being utilized...indeed, recon certainly already is.

BTW, I posted this pic on the:

Large Deck Amphibious Vessel Thread

Thought you might be interested and that it would be a good pic here. Here's two US Navy LHDs acting in Operation Iraqi Freedom with full decks of Harriers:

Obi Wan Russell · Mar 31, 2009

Jeff Head said:
Very good points all around as always Obi...and the talk of UAVs through VLS cells is on topic...I guess I was refering more to the discussion about such a launch from a Ohio class causing a nuclear war.

Anyhow, I personally believe that we are still very far distant from any UAV performing a combat, air dominance role. Maybe never going to happen because of the 1) lag in comm between a controller and the aircraft if it is a remote controlled...and 2) the lack of true artificial intelligence capable in that role (now or in the forseeable future) and the inherant dangers if they ever become that good.

Anyhow, that's just my own opinion.

As to recon, fleet AEW, remote controlled ground support roles in the WOT (ie. Predators and Reapers)...all those roles are very appropriate in the here and now and I suspect that soon, from CVNs, CVs, CVHs, LHAs, LHDs, LPH type aircraft...amybe even LPDs...those roles will start being utilized...indeed, recon certainly already is.

BTW, I posted this pic on the:

Large Deck Amphibious Vessel Thread

Thought you might be interested and that it would be a good pic here. Here's two US Navy LHDs acting in Operation Iraqi Freedom with full decks of Harriers:

[qimg]http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircraftcarriers/wasp8.jpg[/qimg]

Always a sight that gladdens my heart... flat tops with 'toy' planes on deck, ready to ruin the day of those who think they can drag us all back to the dark ages (ie down to their level). The only thing missing from the Gators is a ski jump at the bow IMHO. The Marine pilots want them, but the Navy brass are dead set against them lest the politicians start to ask why they have to fork out cash for all this 'catapult nonsense' and for CVNs! Now if someone gets round to fitting the proposed Cerberus palletized radar system to the V22 Osprey, the Gators will be truly capable of independent operation with well balanced air groups (F-35B, V-22AEW and SH-60 Sea Hawks), taking the pressure off the CVNs to a degree, and mitigating aginst the possible extra strain on the fleet if rumours of further reductions come true.

Jeff Head · Mar 31, 2009

Obi Wan Russell said:
Now if someone gets round to fitting the proposed Cerberus palletized radar system to the V22 Osprey, the Gators will be truly capable of independent operation with well balanced air groups (F-35B, V-22AEW and SH-60 Sea Hawks), taking the pressure off the CVNs to a degree, and mitigating aginst the possible extra strain on the fleet if rumours of further reductions come true.

Agreed 110%...except I would add an ASW variant of the V-22 to that mix.

That's something both the gator flat tops and[/iu] the CVNs could use. Would give their airborn ASW some legs and loiter...not quite as long as the S-3, but a lot longer than the Seahawks.

Obi Wan Russell · Mar 31, 2009

Jeff Head said:
Agreed 110%...except I would add an ASW variant of the V-22 to that mix.

That's something both the gator flat tops and[/iu] the CVNs could use. Would give their airborn ASW some legs and loiter...not quite as long as the S-3, but a lot longer than the Seahawks.

Would an ASW variant of the V-22 have MAD, Passive Sono bouys AND a dipping sonar or just the first two? I'd imagine in the hover-mode a V-22 would generate quite a lot more noise which subs can detect from some distance away. Of course once the Osprey has a fix on the sub it has no chance of escape from a helicopter let alone a tilt rotor. Again if the ASW systems could be palletised like the AEW Cerberus system then the Ospreys could be re roled as required, when in transit to a trouble spot the Osprey sqn can carry out both ASW and AEW to protect the battle group, and when in theatre can be switched to troop carrying duties as necessary.

TerraN_EmpirE · Mar 31, 2009

Adding Either F35bravo's with Buddy store's or a Tanker version of the v22 could increase time of mission and range of operations bringing the Marine Air closer too the fight from farther away.

Jeff Head · Mar 31, 2009

Obi Wan Russell said:
Would an ASW variant of the V-22 have MAD, Passive Sono bouys AND a dipping sonar or just the first two? I'd imagine in the hover-mode a V-22 would generate quite a lot more noise which subs can detect from some distance away. Of course once the Osprey has a fix on the sub it has no chance of escape from a helicopter let alone a tilt rotor. Again if the ASW systems could be palatalized like the AEW Cerberus system then the Ospreys could be re roled as required, when in transit to a trouble spot the Osprey sqn can carry out both ASW and AEW to protect the battle group, and when in theatre can be switched to troop carrying duties as necessary.

I think that the Osprey would be able to carry all three and have plenty of room for a good weapons load out as well.

Having a squadron or two of these aircraft on an America LHA(R), or on a CVN, with modular mission capability would be awesome, and I believe very doable if it were thought out and designed from the inception that way.

But even having an ASW squadron alone on a CVN (who already would have the E2-Cs, or having a dedicated squadron of each on an LHA(R), would be an immense improvement in the overall capability of the VTOL carriers.

TerraN_EmpirE said:
Adding Either F35 bravo's with Buddy store's or a Tanker version of the v22 could increase time of mission and range of operations bringing the Marine Air closer too the fight from farther away.

I believe they probably could create a tanker Osprey too...and buddy stores for a F-35B would be interesting as to just how much extra fuel they could carry while taking off from an LHA(R) or LHD.

Have to do the math on that...may not be enough to have it make sense.

Obi Wan Russell · Apr 1, 2009

The reason I'm leaning towards palletized mission equipment for the Osprey is because I was brought up on the idea of flexible technology, by which I mean a childhood spent watching a lot of sci fi shows where the designers of the fantastic machines were self confessed frustrated engineers. Before anyone scoffs at the idea, remember Star Trek 'invented' the Cell phone and Patrick McGoohan's 'The Prisoner' routinely depicted cordless telephones, and many other aspects of modern society we take for granted. Many Gerry Anderson series had aircraft comparable to the Osprey in many of the roles being contemplated now. And don't get me started on One of my favourite shows of all time, the re imagined series of Battlestar Galactica, not least because it starred an aircraft carrier in space!

The V-22 Osprey has had a long, bumpy and expensive gestation, and I'd rather separate the costs of the mission equipment from the platform in order to keep further costs from sinking the V-22 program. Palletized AEW radar like Cerberus can be installed quickly into other platforms at relatively short notice in theory, such as Merlin or Sikorsky S-92 helicopters, or for land based use into fixed wing aircraft like Greyhounds, Turbo Trackers or Hercules, providing supplementary AEW cover if required (not necessarily for the USN, just giving examples off the top of my head). When ASW helicopters first came into service in the late 50s (specifically I'm referring to the S-55/Westland Whirlwind) they were fitted with Sonar equipment which could be removed aboard ship in a few hours and re-roled for troop carrying duties as required. Later generations of naval helicopters seem to have lost this flexibility as more sophisticated sensors were developed, so palletizationstrikes me as a way to regain this early flexibility.

TerraN_EmpirE · Apr 1, 2009

In retrospect A f35B buddies Stores Would be a terrible Idea but, a V22 with a palletized mission payloads could be modified too suit all three missions and maybe even replace the navy's aging C3 greyhounds for Carrier Delivery's.

Obi Wan Russell · Apr 1, 2009

TerraN_EmpirE said:
In retrospect A f35B buddies Stores Would be a terrible Idea but, a V22 with a palletized mission payloads could be modified too suit all three missions and maybe even replace the navy's aging C3 greyhounds for Carrier Delivery's.

Well if a carrier equipped with F-35Bs is required to carry out AAR with it's own assets, it's either the Lightning or the Osprey. The lightning can carry a respectable payload, all of which can be devoted to the tanking role for that mission as they will be close to the carrier in most circumstances. Most postwar carrier aircraft have had the option of buddy tanking, the Harrier family being a notable exception. If you have Ospreys aboard ship, then fine it adds another string to their bow and releases more Lightnings for the strike and AD roles, otherwise you are just going to have to manage with what you have.

Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

Jeff Head

General

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

Jeff Head

General

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King

Jeff Head

General

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master