Dan109
Posts: 175
Joined: 4/27/2017
Status: offline
|
Additional MCM updates -
---------------------------------------
CUSV #2731 - The current MCM sensor for the CUSV, L-3 Klein 5000, is improperly modeled. http://higgshydrographictek.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Klein_5000V2.pdf shows a range of 250m and detection examples of 150m, however the DB has it at 0.5nm range. Further, I could only find one article showing the L-3 had been tested with the Textron CUSV, https://www.marinelink.com/news/maritime/l3-klein-side-scan-sonar-systems, however numerous articles are stating that the Navy is testing with its tried and true AN/AQS-20A and AN/AQS-24 series. The L-3 simply doesn't meet Naval requirements. http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_print.asp?cid=2100&tid=425&ct=2&page=1 https://defensesystems.com/articles/2017/04/24/uiss.aspx - Therefore the L-3 should be removed from the CUSV and replaced with the AN/AQS-20, 24A, and 24B (will need different versions of the CUSV in the database as only one can be carried at the same time).
Further, I haven't been able to find any details on the specifics of the UISS, which is the Unmanned Influence Sweeping System. Because there are no stats in the database describing detailed differences between sweeping systems, like Mk106 vs OASIS vs Generic Mag/Acous Mine Sweep, I don't yet have a current recommendation for this change. The Generic Sweeper does seem to trigger any mine, although its too close an severely damages the CUSV - thats not a DB issue however, I've address that in another issues/observations thread regarding mines.
Nevetheless, the UISS (or whatever sweeper) cannot be carried simultaneously with a sonar suite. The CUSV is a 'multi single-mission' (like the LCS) platform requiring several different DB objects, because surface ships dont have loadouts. Therefore there should be different CUSV Versions:
a. CUSV - cargo loadout of 2tn, 2sqm, and 4 personnel - this is for the ISR mission of the CUSV, but its been stated that CUSV can be driven and used manually
b. CUSV - Generic Acous/Mag Mine Sweep (until details of the UISS can be known)
c. CUSV - AN/AQS-20A Towed Sonar
d. CUSV - AN/AQS-24A Towed Sonar
e. CUSV - AN/AQS-24B Towed Sonar
f. CUSV - no cargo, nothing towed, but ROV docking capacity for Knifefish UUVs - CUSV models a-e should not have a dock for UUVs
All of the above missions for the CUSV are mutually exclusive and therefore should have unique DB entries.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MH-60S #2794 #3713
In above DB Request post, I asked for the AN/ASQ-235 Archerfish AMNS and the AN/AES-1 Airborne Laser Mine Detection system to be added to the MH-60S. I'd like to clarify loadout request additions for the MH-60S.
a. 1x ALMDS, 1x 120 USG Drop Tank
b. 1x AMNS, 1x 120 USG Drop Tank
c. 1x ALMDS, 1x AMNS
d. 2x AMNS
These combinations will allow the proper flexibility needed for the MH-60S to work in conjunction with the CUSV or other surface based MCMs, due to the Navy's findings that the MH-60S is unable to tow the AN/ASQ-20A,24A/B or any influence mine sweeping device.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AN/AQS-20A #2471 - Interesting unclassified find - http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/permits/nswc_pcd_ea2012.pdf - available only because this was a public safety environmental impact statement, not a military capabilities report - nevertheless, in section 2.3.1.1 shows the AN/AQS-20 having a FWD Sonar, used "to minimize collisions with sub-surface objects", uh, namely mines IMO. Current CMANO model, with Side Sonar only, leaves an awful gap so that the CUSV towing one can actually run right into a mine. Not good. I'll leave it to you guys on how to model this sonar, with this detailed info. I would say the side sonars are the true synthetic aperture sonars, designed for detection and classification, but so the FWD sonar should be able to detect a mine, or "an object" like a whale, and change course, and assume its a mine until classified.
As the AN/AQS-24A,B,C are made by the same manufacturer, I think its perfectly safe to assume that these sonar systems have the same FWD capability.
-------------------------------------------------------------
ESB Expeditionary Sea Base #2684 - Helicopter Specific Magazines need to be created and allocated for this unit - The magazines should hold several dozen SeaFox AMNS. and enough sweeper/sonar equipment for 4 MH-53Es. Regarding the 4 MH-53Es, the database only allows 2 MH-53Es (large aircraft) which is incorrect. This Navy article describes 4 operating spots for MH-53Es. http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Media/News/Article/980312/the-navys-expeditionary-sea-base-strengthening-naval-power-at-sea/
The magazines should also accommodate MH-60S AMCM aircraft, although I have yet to find an article showing an MH-60S MCM mission on the ESB - its perfectly rational to allow such. Therefore it should also contain 8x AMLDS and a few dozen AN/AQS-235 ArcherFish loadouts.
Also, the ESB only has 2x SmallDavit/Dock capacity for CUSVs - the ESB is gigantic - it surely can support 4-8 CUSVs - Having 1x Davit is fine to reduce launch capacity but several CUSVs can fit on that dock. I've see 1/2 LAV Battalion parked on the dock of an ESD (the ESB's cousin without a flight deck)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Updates to LCS - this is a bit complex, due to the multi-mission package capabilities of the LCS
Base LCS Capabilities - http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/its-all-in-the-package-the-littoral-combat-ships-mission-modules-016450/
Therefore base LCS has NO VDS SONAR, but has a mine detection sonar apparently. Base LCS having no sonar is one reason Congress is freaking out about the LCS's single-mission role per package. Also the 30mm cannons are not part of the base package, only the ASuW package.
LCS AWS Package - current Helicopter package needs to increase a larger variety of torpedoes to accommodate the MH-60R Helo. It will also need the VDS (the current one is ok) and AN/SQR-20 Multi-Function Towed Array (MFTA) https://defensesystems.com/articles/2016/11/01/lcs.aspx http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2100&tid=412&ct=2 This package doesn't get the 30mm, thats only for the ASuW. AWS package also has a new lightweight towed torpedo decoy(LWT), but I can't find details on it.
LCS ASuW Package - http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2100&tid=437&ct=2 this package contains the 30mm, but no ASW sonar whatsoever.
LCS MCM Package - no ASW sonar, no 30mm, No missiles - just the MCM Package which is defined here - All of the gear however it external to the LCS MCM DB entry (Helos, CSUVs, KnifeFish, etc) - however an LCS Helo Magazine will need to be created foe the LCS MCM Package DB Entry - it will need 2x ALMDS and a few dozen ALMN AN/AQS-235s. http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2100&tid=425&ct=2
The 'Minor-Modified LCS' appears to be the current decision for improving all LCS base package capabilities - OTH NSM/JSM missiles, MFTA, Torp Decoys - but this is meshing with the SSC Requirements (for the post 32 LCS production ships) which would have even more capabilities - and all of this stuff won't happen until +2018, so we can wait for more info on this to solidify. Here is a good article on it https://whitefleet.net/2016/12/11/examining-the-us-navys-lcs-based-frigate/
I even watched the Congressional Hearing on the LCS in December - wow, what a mess this ship is!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
#645 Echo Voyager
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2016-03-10-Boeing-Unmanned-Undersea-Vehicle-Can-Operate-Autonomously-for-Months
The Pier/Dock/Davit=ROV/UUV size means that it can dock inside a CUSV. I don't think so. Too big to even dock in an LCS. As its got enough battery to operate for "months", I don't think it was designed to dock with any ship to be honest. I would simply set it to Pier docking only. Also, I am not sure that the 3000m ROV Operating radius is for. Not allowed to operate more than 3lm from mothership?? WEll, if so, no problem, as it should never have a mothership - its fully independent.
-------------------------------------------------------
AN/DVS-1 Coastal Battlefield Reconnaissance & Analysis (COBRA)
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2100&tid=1237&ct=2
http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=56748
This is new and needs to be added to the database. From the difference sources of what it can do, I would say it should be modelled like the ALMDS, being able to detect mines in very shallow water and surf conditions, but also be like a ground radar - all very short range, maybe 0.2nm.
It also needs to be available as a loadout for the MQ-8B and MQ-8C UAVs, #3458, #3455, #3456, #4031 - As well, 2x AN/DVS-1 objects need to be added to the LCS MCM Heli Magazine object (requested above), so their UAVs have the payload built into the MCM package. Not needed for standard MC-8b/c use throughout the fleet.
That's it for now, think I'm done with MCM for a while :)
< Message edited by Dan109 -- 6/1/2017 7:37:05 PM >
|
Printable Version
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread