What-If LCS Flight II: Littoral Combat Ship Improvement

[carr]

... variable depth sonar in the LCS-1 ...

Of course, if you've gone as far as adding on-board sensors in the form of the VDS, wouldn't it make sense to give serious consideration to a hull mounted lo/multi frequency sonar?

Of course, if you add VDS, Mk32, and hull mounted sonar, you'll have to increase manning, laundry, mess, berthing, weight, maintenance, spare parts, etc. That tremendous internal volume that's "available" is going to start disappearing quickly! All those items you listed near the begining of this thread don't come with free manning and support requirements. This ship is going to quickly turn into, ... Oh, I don't know... an FFG Perry!

[carr]

..

[navydavesof]

Bob posted something interesting about the variable depth sonar in the LCS-1 thread.

You point it out like it's a rare event. I'll have you know that all my posts are interesting. Interesting flies out of my butt when I pass gas!

So, should we go ahead and add ED-209 onto the ship's armament, too? While LCS-2 is unstable in heavy seas which makes supporting helos without RAST pretty hard (hint hint what might be on the model ) it seems like it will be the one able to increase its mission capability of LCS without adding ballast or otherwise jeopardizing the stability of the ship. The 30,000lbs you cited for the growth margin is not much. That's the weight of a Mk2 stockless battleship anchor. Whenever an LCS-1 model comes out it will be fun to WHIFF, too, but the LCS-2 is going to make a good WHIFF ship, especially with the different options we seem to have to increasing the ship's abilities.

Concerning adding a bow mounted sonar to the ship like SQS-53 I would say not, because it's the big-boy deep water sonar, but instead maybe what the Perrys have might be more appropriate to help compliment the capabilities.

[Russ2146]

April 16, 2011: The U.S. Navy is big on sonobuoys again. Another 65,000 were recently ordered. While sonobuoy technology has not changed a lot recently, the way sonobuoys are used has. This is all about taking advantage of new software, and cheap, but massive, computer power, to provide an edge against non-nuclear (and very quiet) submarines operating in coastal waters. The most effective way of hunting down subs is via helicopters or maritime patrol aircraft equipped with homing torpedoes and sonobuoys. The latter are nearly a meter (three feet) long, 120mm in diameter and weigh about 18 kg (40 pounds). They are used once, by dropping them into the water. The U.S. has two basic types of air dropped sonobuoys. The AN/SSQ-101 floats upright, sending sonar signals into the water, and transmitting any data bouncing back, to the aircraft overhead.
The AN/SSQ-36B collects other data (bathythermograph, conductivity, temperature, and depth), which it transmits. The data analysis systems look for faint patterns left by submarines slowly moving through coastal waters.
New pattern analysis software was developed, and quiet diesel-electric subs from allies were used to test and refine the system. The data analysis computers are located in the aircraft, nearby ships, or even back at land bases (via data transmission via satellite). Once the sub is located, the aircraft or helicopter drops a homing torpedo, that will seek out (with the help of the pattern analysis) and attack the sub.

[carr]

..

[carr]

..

[Russ2146]

Well, I imagine they could lay them from helicopters, data link back to the ship, data link the pattern analysis back to the birds and so on. The ship would have more space for the computers than the S-3. Given the propensities of certain potential adversaries, a self destuct mechanism would probably be needed to achieve no potential for reverse engineering.

[carr]

..

[navydavesof]

Considering that sonobouys have been used from the Cold War (used heavily) on, can you imagine how many of those things must be littered on the bottom of the ocean floor?!

There was a badass line in Hunt for Red October that went something like this:

"The Soviet Navy has dropped enough sonobouys in the North Atlantic for a man to walk from Greenland to Iceland to Scotland without getting his feet wet, Mr. Ambassador! How about we cut the crap."

[Russ2146]

I think the point is that anything new in the buoys should be protected by self-destruct with the last gasp of the battery.

Apparently, the new found usefulness of these bouys does not lie in the buoys themselves but in the computer software and the developments in "pattern analysis", which locates the diesel-electrics via anomolies in passively measured environmental characteristics, which the passage of the sub changes by its movement, no matter how silent it might be.

[navydavesof]

I think the point is that anything new in the buoys should be protected by self-destruct with the last gasp of the battery.

Apparently, the new found usefulness of these bouys does not lie in the buoys themselves but in the computer software and the developments in "pattern analysis", which locates the diesel-electrics via anomolies in passively measured environmental characteristics, which the passage of the sub changes by its movement, no matter how silent it might be.

This is an interesting concept. Back when my capability included the Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare units (MIUW), we would take our 34' patrol boats out and drop a bunch of sonobouys in straight lines. The sonobouys would then transmit raw sensor information back to our land-based element in a tactical operation center (TOC), and the computers there would process the information. I don't think the sonobouys did any processing of their own. They only gathered raw information.



On a fun note, once in a while they could receive commands to go active, and we could hear the sounds radiating off the water. The capability was dropped after a while. I am willing to bet that in addition to the budget being too low for us to be deploying sonobouys and not being able to get them back the sounds of our boats dominated what they reported back. We were able to recover a few of them, but jerry-rigging floatation devices to them got in the way of them working right.

So, unless these sonbouys worked differently I think the ASW craft is the one that does the information processing, and the sonobouy itself is only a sensor package that gathers information. As for a self destruct mechanism, I know that with exercise torpedoes if we cannot recover them in a certain time they will scuttle and sink. Who knows how many of those the Russians have recovered over the years.

[carr]

..

[Russ2146]

Bob,
Yeah, I know the source needs to be taken with a grain of salt, but...

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/ ... 80202.aspx

"February 2, 2008: The U.S. Navy is taking advantage of new software, and cheap, but massive, computer power, to provide an edge against non-nuclear (and very quiet) submarines operating in coastal waters. The most effective way of hunting down subs is via helicopters or maritime patrol aircraft equipped with homing torpedoes and sonobuoys.
The data analysis systems look for faint patterns left by submarines slowly moving through coastal waters. This takes into account the underground geography, and the activity of undersea animals and plants. The number and pattern of deployed sensors would also be taken into account. New pattern analysis software was developed, and quiet diesel-electric subs from allies were used to test and refine the system. The data analysis computers are located in the aircraft [Not likely to be a Helicopter], nearby ships, or even back at land basis (via data transmission via satellite). Once the sub is located, the aircraft or helicopter drops a homing torpedo, that will seek out (with the help of the pattern analysis) and attack the sub."

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/ ... 10416.aspx

"April 16, 2011: The U.S. Navy is big on sonobuoys again. Another 65,000 were recently ordered.

The U.S. has been scrambling to develop the ability to detect the new generation of quiet diesel-electric subs. You won't hear any official pronouncements about progress in this area, for obvious reasons. There is progress, and just how much won't be publicly known until these new anti-submarine methods are used in combat. But the increased orders for sonobuoys, and the known progress in sonobuoy data analysis, is an indicator of where the best solutions are being found."

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship ... wcncpt.htm
http://www.dodsbir.net/Sitis/archives_d ... mark=38010
http://www.dodccrp.org/events/9th_ICCRT ... /3/148.pdf

[carr]

..

[Russ2146]

More food for thought:

http://www.informationdissemination.net ... swarm.html

[carr]

..

[Seasick]

In a crowed sea space especially in the gulf the problem with a pop up attack is that there are too many potential targets for a "fire-and-forget" type munition. Friendly fire hits are a real possibility. Iran shot one of their own ships in the Iran-Iraq war. In operation Praying Mantis the USN found a few interesting ways to decoy active homing missiles with a device from a high school physics experiment.

[Timmy C]

David,

Just a thought for you ... The LCS was intended to fight in shallow water (hence the name).

Is it to "fight" in shallow waters or merely to "operate" and conduct combat missions in the littorals? If interpreting the latter, missions could encompass a whole range of activities in which the threats to the ship itself may not be the main issue -for example, the function as a special ops delivery platform in the fight against shore-based terrorists.

[navydavesof]

NO WAY!!!

I completely and totally forgot that I had drawn this!!! Way back in 2006 when I was doing artwork for a bunch of different NECC commands and Norfolk and Little Creek based ships I was approached by the LCS guys to draw an action scene of LCS murdering a sub. So I drew up a concept drawing for change requests. I just have to share!

This was back when they said it was going to be an FFG replacement that would actively hunt subs. As you can see, the picture is of an angry-ass towed sonar array breaking an Akula SSN in half with great gusto.

[carr]

..