US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Cooperative Engagement is not new at all.

CEC was first tested live on ships of the USS Eisenhower (CVN-69) battle group in 1995.

Then, early in 1998 Hue City (CG-66), USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) and USS Vicksburg (CG-69) received the production installation of CEC (Baseline 0) and performed operational tests of the system.

CEC Baseline 1 was then installed in USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69), USS Wasp (LHD-1), USS Anzio (CG-68) and USS Cape St. George (CG-71) in 1999 to 2000.

CEC Baseline 2 was installed in USS John F. Kennedy(CV-67), USS Hue City(CG-66) & USS Vicksburg (CG-69) in 2000.

Testing and installations have been ongoing ever since and there are many vessels in the US inventory, including Burke class DDGs, that already have CEC.

Even with the older New Threat upgrade to non-AEGIS vessels...like Taiwan's four Keelung Class (former US Kidd class) DDGs...they are able to be controlled and cooperate with the AEGIS vessels in a CEC environment. This is very powerful, allowing those vessels in some cases to not radiate and remain less detected, yet have their weapons controlled from US forces (E-2Cs, Ticonderoga, Burkes, etc.) and used against opposing forces.

It is clear that the US plans to upgrade all Burke Class DDGs to this capability...which have been going on in any case.

The ongoing improvement of the Burke class was designed into them. They are meant to last 35+ years and in that time the technologies and capabilities will increase and the Burke class needs to be able to incorporate the new developments.

The article is simply detailing something that has been planned all along. Had to be given the long lofe planned for these vessels. by the time the last Burke IIIs are coning off the line, the initial Burkes will be reaching the end of their service life. An extraordinarily successful and long standing program.
 
Last edited:
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
CEC very interesting but range of weapons limit collaboration ofc, by ex a ship at 100 km one other ( USN use SM-2MR Bl IIIB, 120 km ) can 't attack an aircraft fired a missile against this ship at 150 km.
In more US Strike Group get yet 4/5 MSC enough powerful don't need help mainly interesting for a ship alone or CM attacks at very long range.

2 questions, ships with CEC can collaborate up to what max distance ? and SN/SSGN can also ?
 
Last edited:
navyreco

navyreco

Senior Member
United States Coast Guard Investigating the use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems from Ships
8eZjW9c.jpg

For more than a decade, the U.S. military has employed unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS, to patrol the skies over targets and areas of interest, providing critical surveillance capabilities without putting pilots and crew in harm’s way. With the recent demonstration of hand-launched UAS on board a Sector Miami Fast Response Cutter, the Coast Guard is continuing its evaluation of UAS capabilities and potential incorporation into future cutter operations.
Click to expand...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


edit:
LOL at readers reaction on Twitter:
Joe Katzman ‏@joekatzman 14m14 minutes ago
@NavyRecognition @USCG they've been "investigating" for what? 10+ years now? Deploy some UAVs aboard, already.

I was surprised indeed that USCG does not use Drones already. Is it a budget issue ? (Or Big Navy won't let them ?)
 
Last edited:
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Marry Christmas BAE!
Army Awards AMPV to BAE Systems, Future Fights Loom
By PAUL McLEARY 8:12 p.m. EST December 23, 2014
ampv
(Photo: Staff)
CONNECT
TWEET
1
LINKEDIN
COMMENT
EMAIL
MORE
WASHINGTON — The US Army surprised no one by awarding BAE Systems a contract on Dec. 23 potentially worth $1.2 billion to begin building the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV).

BAE was the only contractor still in the running for the program after one-time competitor General Dynamics Land Systems pulled out of the competition in May, complaining that the requirements the Army drew up unfairly favored the tracked Bradley Fighting Vehicle derivative that BAE Systems was submitting.

The initial $382 million award calls for BAE to deliver 29 vehicles in five variants in a 52-month engineering, manufacturing and development phase that will lead to a contract to replace all of the obsolete 2,897 M113 vehicles in the Army's Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCT).

"Today's announcement sets in motion a long-awaited and important modernization effort for the Army" said Brig. Gen. David Bassett, the Army's program executive officer for Ground Combat Systems.

"The AMPV family of vehicles will fill critical force protection, survivability and mobility capability gaps inherent in today's Armored Brigade Combat Teams," Bassett said.

The award also provides an optional low-rate initial production phase. If awarded, the company would produce an additional 289 vehicles for a total contract value of $1.2 billion.

Eventually, the AMPV "will support the M1 Abrams and the M2/M3 Bradley to resupply the formation, conduct battle command functions, deliver organic indirect fires, provide logistics support and medical treatment, perform medical and casualty evacuation, and, most importantly, function as an integral part of the ABCT formation," said Col. Michael Milner, the Army's AMPV project manager.

A big issue with the aging M113 — which was terminated in 2007 — is that it was unable to fully keep pace with the service's armor formations. In a statement, the service contended that the new AMPV "will be able to move as rapidly as the supported primary combat vehicles during unified land operations over multiple terrain sets. The combined protection and automotive performance capabilities of the AMPV will enable units to operate more securely and efficiently in the same operational environment as the combat elements."

But the drama earlier this year between BAE, General Dynamics, the Army, and Capitol Hill is hardly over.

This contract only covers units at the brigade level and below within the ABCT. There are still another 1,922 M113s in use supporting Echelons Above Brigade (EAB) that the service eventually wants to replace.

And that's where GD has been focusing its lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill, hoping to place a version of its eight-wheeled Stryker vehicle in the role.

"The EAB level replacements may have different requirements than the current procurement, and have not yet been developed. The Army is currently assessing how it will address these emerging requirements," said Milner.

But these plans can all change once the Army finally has to reckon with the fiscal year 2016 budget, in which the sequestration cuts are scheduled to come back in full force.
Click to expand...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top