25 Feb 1966 - USS Queenfish (SSN 651) is launched

USS Queenfish (SSN-651), a Sturgeon-class attack submarine, was the second ship of the United States Navy to be named for the queenfish, a small food fish found off the Pacific coast of North America.

The contract to build Queenfish was awarded to Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company in Newport News, Virginia, on 26 March 1963 and her keel was laid down there on 11 May 1964. She was launched on 25 February 1966, sponsored by the Honorable Julia Butler Hansen (1907–1988), U.S. Representative from Washington's 3rd Congressional District (1960–1974), and commissioned on 6 December 1966 with Commander Jackson B. Richard in command.

Queenfish was launched one day ahead of the lead ship of her class, the Sturgeon, despite being laid down 18 months later, and as a result of a multi-million dollar bonus offered by the Navy to the Newport News shipyard.

Queenfish was deactivated on 21 September 1990, decommissioned on 8 November 1991 and stricken from the Naval Vessel Register on 14 April 1992. Her scrapping via the Nuclear-Powered Ship and Submarine Recycling Program at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard at Bremerton, Washington, began on 1 May 1992 and was completed on 7 April 1993.

Thanks to Stephen Hallquirst

Recommended link  Got Dolphins?

US Navy in Talks To Use Iceland's Keflavik Air Base Again

HELSINKI — The government of Iceland is engaged in a dialogue with the United States over the proposed future deployment of Navy P-8 Poseidon submarine "hunter" aircraft from a renovated Keflavik Air Base.

The US Navy, which withdrew aircraft assets and personnel from the airport in 2006, plans to spend an initial $22 million to renew hangar facilities and restore infrastructure at Keflavik as part of a project to house P-8 Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft for maritime patrol operations in the North Atlantic.

The capital investment plan is included in the US Defense Department’s 2017 fiscal budget. Under the proposal, the Navy would use Keflavík Air Base to house P-8 Poseidon aircraft as needed. In effect, this would give the Navy the capacity to establish regular patrol rotations at the base in the future.

Iceland’s prime minister, Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson, said the US plan would add a new tier of security to the defense of the North Atlantic island.

However, Gunnlaugsson added that in ongoing discussions the US has made no mention of locating a permanent force at Keflavik at the level that existed before 2006 when the Navy operated P-3 Orion planes to police North Atlantic waters around Iceland and Greenland.

At peak, about 2,500 US Navy and Air Force personnel were stationed at the Keflavík Naval Air Station.

"The US proposal for Keflavik is welcome, but we have had no talks about increased operations from there. Should more flights and operations happen, then this is already covered under our current defense agreements with the US," said Gunnlaugsson,

The Navy’s decision to withdraw from Iceland in 2006 happened against a backdrop that saw the US shift its operational focus in Europe away from the North Atlantic and toward the Mediterranean Sea.

Established in 1951, the Keflavik Naval Air Station became an important base for the US as it is strategically located midway between the United States’ East Coast and Europe. It allowed Navy P-3 Orion and fighter aircraft to patrol Arctic and sub-Arctic ocean waters in the North Atlantic between Greenland, Iceland and Britain.

Recent inter-government discussions with the US have focused increasing on Iceland’s concerns over a surge in the activity of Russian military aircraft and submarines in the air and waters around the island. Russian activity, according to Iceland, is now running at levels not witnessed since the end of the Cold War.

Under a treaty signed in 1951, the US continues to be responsible for the defense of Iceland, which has a small coast guard but no standing army or military organization. Since 2008, Iceland’s air space has been patrolled by NATO allies as part of the Icelandic Air Policing operation

Opinion: A New Era in Anti-Submarine Warfare

China and Russia’s submarine forces are flexing their prowess in the undersea domain by operating further from their respective country’s homeport – in some cases within striking distance of the United States.

 

Given the expansion in operations, anti-submarine warfare (ASW) platforms on both coasts of the United States will be required to monitor and defend the nation more frequently.

 

Foreign submarine operations near the homeland are not necessarily immediate threats, but do require careful thought as the Navy prepares to execute future ASW missions. As budget and naval policymakers continue to plan for the future, ASW must remain a high priority for either homeland or overseas defense. The good news is that the U.S. Navy has new platforms and technology coming online that can provide a significant advantage in the undersea domain.

 

CHINA

An undated photo of a Jin-class Type 94 nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). PLAN Photo

Adm. Sam Locklear, Commander, Pacific Command, earlier this year stated, “China’s advance in submarine capabilities is significant. They possess a large and increasingly capable submarine force.” China has expanded their undersea reach as evident in this year’s deployment of a Chinese nuclear submarine to the Indian Ocean. The deployment demonstrates extended submarine operations and the capability for China to deploy nuclear submarines within ballistic missile launch range of the United States, within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), or potentially closer to territorial waters. As China continues sustained undersea operations, proficiency will likely improve with time as well.

The expansion of China’s nuclear submarine fleet will also allow operations further from the Asia Pacific region in the coming years. China is in the process of building four new improved variants of the Shang class nuclear submarine and working on a robust diesel submarine fleet. Given China’s submarine capability to transit and operate in the Indian Ocean and with continued submarine growth, a future nuclear submarine deployment off the West Coast of the United States may occur in the next five years or possibly sooner.

 

The purpose of future submarine deployments may serve as a deterrence, presence or collection mission against the United States – creating an increased requirement for naval assets to monitor and ensure security for the nation. This development should not come as a surprise to those in the national security community. Senior policymakers and naval leaders should develop an operational and strategic plan in how to deal with Chinese submarine operations closer to the United States.

 

RUSSIA

Russian Borey-class (Project 955) ballistic nuclear missile submarine Yuri Dolgoruky during sea trials. RIA Novosti Photo

 

As China increases their submarine role in maritime operations, Russia is simultaneously increasing their Navy’s importance. “The navy, for our country, is her pride, strength and dignity,” Russia’s President Vladimir Putin last month said. “The power and strength of the Russian navy will only grow.”

The Russian submarine force is also set to grow.

 

In the next two years, Russia will begin construction on nine submarines. Russia has already commissioned two Borei class nuclear submarines and plans to build six more. This new submarine is a notable threat carrying sixteen SS-NX-32 Bulava intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and six SS-N-15 cruise missiles. In addition, the Russian navy plans to add seven Severodvinsk class nuclear attack submarines by 2020 with intentions for reaching a total of sixteen.

 

With Russia’s construction of new submarines and leadership touting naval strength, more submarine operations near the United States are possible. Since the end of the Cold War, Russia for the most part has been non-existent in operating nuclear submarines near the United States, but that may change. In 2012, a Sierra class nuclear submarine operated off the east coast of the U.S. – a trend that could continue in the future. In addition, Russia recently increased rhetoric against possible U.S. submarine operations. Russia publicly stated an IL-38 ASW aircraft chased away a U.S. nuclear submarine that was operating in the Barents Sea – a claim U.S. naval leaders quickly rebuked.

AMERICAN ASW

P-8A Poseidon, operated by Patrol Squadron (VP-16) in February, 2013. US Navy Photo

A future increase in submarine construction and operations by both countries are not the only development of concern in the undersea domain. Internationally, the development and use of unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) for military, education, and commercial use are expanding. In the military realm, developed countries are exploring UUV deployment from submarines that will create a new dynamic in the undersea domain. As autonomous technology becomes more mature, UUVs will also operate independently in areas of potential crisis or strategic importance. With a future increase in UUV operations, the ability to track UUVs in the undersea will be equally difficult and require improved sensor and processing capability.

 

To meet expanded foreign submarine operations and UUV technological advancements, the U.S. surface naval force employs state of the art ASW technology aboard numerous Arleigh Burke class destroyers. The SQQ-89A(V)15 Combat System, which will be aboard 64 destroyers by 2020, and the new Multi-Functional Towed Array (MFTA) are game changers in ASW operations. The combined capabilities alter how the surface navy searches and tracks submarines. With enhanced sensor capability and data processing, the surface naval forces have an increased role in integrated ASW operations. ASW surface ships can remain longer on station in comparison to aircraft and also provide real time command and control capability beyond that of a submarine.

 

In stride with the surface navy’s technological advancements, the aviation community has new platforms to meet the ASW mission. The MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopter and the P-8A Poseidon aircraft are to be fully integrated in the fleet by 2020. The new platforms are already providing an improved ASW capability in fleet operations. The MH-60R has been forward deployed in Japan and operating in the Asia Pacific region since 2012.

 

Additionally, the rotary aircraft has an enhanced active dipping sonar advertised to increase detection ranges from three to seven times compared to legacy systems.

 

Earlier this month six P-8A aircraft completed an inaugural and successful deployment to the Asia Pacific. The P-8A adds an improved sensor search capability by utilizing a multi-static active coherent (MAC) system, which is comprised of sonobuoys (source and receiver) and advanced processing. In addition to the new platforms and technological advancements, all ASW ships and aircraft in the future will employ the Mk 54 lightweight torpedo, which integrates several years of weapons technology. By 2020, these new improvements collectively in the surface and aviation communities will create a powerful ASW capability. However, the Navy must further improve requisite training to meet the new capabilities, and foster a fleetwide culture that prioritizes the ASW mission.

 

The CNO’s Sailing Directions offers, “The Navy will continue to dominate the undersea domain using a network of sensors and platforms.” The navy is building a fleet (sensors and platforms) with enormous ASW capability that will create an integrated ASW machine. Additionally, the CNO has articulated that warfighting is the Navy’s primary mission and people are the Navy’s foundation. To ensure the U.S. Navy succeeds in ASW, a focus on warfighting and people must occur in tandem.

TRAINING

Lt. Richard Ray discusses the bi-lateral U.S. and Republic of Korea Navy’s Surface Ship Anti-Submarine Warfare Readiness and Effectiveness Measure (SHAREM) exercise with Lt. Hyeoung Seok Noh, Republic of Korea Navy, in the combat information center aboard USS John S. McCain (DDG-56) on June 3, 2014. US Navy Photo

ASW is a complicated warfare area, and proficiency can only develop through extensive textbook and practical training, at both the officer and enlisted levels. In his book, Destroyer Captain, Adm. Jim Stavridis (retired) described that “submarines are like steel sharks – quiet, silent, and deadly. They are designed to hunt and kill. Occasionally, it becomes necessary to find and destroy them – to keep open sea-lanes of communication, to sweep an area and make it safe for Allied shipping.

 

Destroying a submarine is the hardest task in naval warfare.” Learning ASW takes time, training, and experience to fully understand how to plan and execute ASW operations. Of all the topics associated with ASW, oceanography (undersea environment) is the most difficult to grasp and essential in dominating the undersea domain.

 

When comparing the undersea with other warfare area such as anti-air warfare, the science and understanding of the ASW operating environment is a more complex tactical problem. Given the complexity of ASW, training personnel in mastering oceanography and anti-submarine operations must remain a high priority. For the last twenty years or more, ASW has not been a significant operational requirement as a result of the Cold War ending and a decade of fighting in the war on terrorism. A culture change from a primarily air warfare centric navy to an emphasis more in ASW must occur to improve proficiency among naval personnel at all ranks. This culture change must occur from the top down led by the Navy’s senior officers afloat and ashore.

 

Today and in the future, ASW will be required to deter and deny future foreign submarine operations against U.S. national interests at home and abroad. Combatant and Fleet Commanders must carefully balance the allocation of naval forces in both these areas to sustain undersea dominance. The navy’s new platforms and technologies in the surface and aviation communities increase the ability to detect, localize, and track submarines. These new platforms and technologies have established a new era of ASW operations from the days of the Cold War. As the U.S. Navy moves forward, officers and enlisted personnel must have the necessary training to operate the improved platforms and sensors given the potential rise in foreign submarine operations as well as unknown UUV technological advancements.

Russia Playing Politics With Alleged Submarine Confrontations

Confrontations—and alleged confrontations—between the Russian armed forces and those of the United States, Europe and Japan have been on the uptick in recent weeks. The encounters have paced a general decline in relations between Russia and the West over events in the Ukraine.

 

This month Russian media have reported two alleged anti-submarine warfare operations undertaken against American and Japanese submarines. The confrontations are reminiscent of similar events during the Cold War, in which submarines of the Soviet Union, the United States and her allies played a constant cat-and-mouse game against one another.

 

This time however, the rationale behind the incidents appears more complex, undertaken by Russia as often for internal reasons as for making a larger point to the international community.

 

According to Russian state media, on Aug. 7 a foreign submarine was allegedly expelled from Russian-controlled waters in the Barents Sea. A Northern Fleet spokesman stated that Russian anti-submarine forces, consisting of surface ships and an Ilyushin Il-38 Maymaritime patrol aircraft had chased off what was presumed to be a U.S. Virginia-class attack submarine.

 

A spokesman for European Command later denied that the event took place, saying that no U.S. submarines had been operating in the area.

 

The incident—as well as an incident a week earlier, in which a U.S. Air Force RC-135 V/W Rivet Joint aircraft was harassed in international airspace over the Baltic Sea—appears meant to send a message to Russia’s neighbors. The message to pro-NATO countries such as Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, is that Russia is more than capable of successfully confronting the U.S. presence in Europe and ejecting American forces if necessary.

 

Meanwhile, on the other side of Russia came a report last week about a similar incident involving a Japanese submarine. A report in the Russian business daily Kommersant, citing a source in the Defense Ministry, said Russian anti-submarine warfare units had forced a Japanese Oyashio-class submarine to cut short a patrol near the border between the two countries.

 

The alleged incident occurred in the La Perouse Strait, known to Japan as the Soya Strait, a narrow passage between the northernmost Japanese island of Hokkaido and the Russian island of Sakhalin. The La Perouse Strait is a mere 43 miles across, and depth at the strait is approximately 60 meters. Japan claims an international water boundary of a mere three miles at the strait, instead of the usual 12, allegedly to allow nuclear-armed American warships crossing the strait to skirt and not enter Japanese waters.

 

The La Perouse Strait has been an important defensive bastion for Japanese submarines since the Cold War, when it was feared that Soviet forces would launch an invasion of Hokkaido from Sakhalin. In wartime, two or three Maritime Self-Defense Force submarines would guard the strait to prevent an amphibious invasion.

 

The Oyashio-class diesel attack submarines are older members of Japan’s submarine fleet, having been superseded by the newer Soryu class. The submarine involved would have been from the Maritime Self Defense Force base at Yokosuka.

 

On Wednesday, according to ITAR-TASS, the Russian government took the unusual step of denying a confrontation had actually took place. “The Japanese submarine detected in the La Perouse Strait on Wednesday did not violate international law and did not cross the Russian state border,” a source at the Russian General Staff reported. Why the story of a confrontation came to light in the first place is unknown.

 

The incident took place while Russian forces, including 1,000 ground troops, five Mi-8AMTSh armed transport helicopters, and 100 military vehicles staged an exercise on the Russian-held southern Kuril Islands. The southern Kurils, four islands seized from Japan by the Soviet Union at the end of World War II, are still claimed by Japan. Japan, where the islands are known as the Northern Territories, has tried to get Russia to return the islands for decades without avail. Japan protested the exercises, calling them “totally unacceptable.”

 

Japan also recently imposed sanctions on Russia for its part in events in the Crimea. The exercise, as well as the reported encounter with the Japanese submarine, are likely signals to Japan that Russia is still in control of the southern Kurils and can be a complicated neighbor, to put it mildly.

 

Another, more direct reason for these events is to divert attention within Russia from negative news harmful to the government of Vladimir Putin. Unlike the Cold War, in which the Soviet government did not have to compete internally with the Western narrative of world events, the Russian government must do so. The controlling relationship between Russian state media and Moscow makes it possible for the Putin government to promote alternatives to negative news and events.

 

The alleged expulsion of the Virginia-class submarine from the Barents Sea likely had another purpose as propaganda. The news broke in Russia on a Saturday, when it could dominate Russian news for the weekend. The following Tuesday, 12 August, was the 14th anniversary of the sinking of the Russian cruise missile submarine Kursk. Kursk sank with all 118 hands aboard in the Barents and the rescue effort by the government of then-president Putin was later criticized by many as inept. The anniversary was marked in Murmansk, Kursk, and several Northern Fleet bases with commemorative events.

 

Russia Today, in reporting the alleged expulsion, said “Such actions by the NATO undersea fleet have led to a number of navigation incidents in the Arctic”and then quoted a source in the Russian navy as stating that that, “A collision with (sic) U.S. nuclear submarine, Toledo, was one the main explanations of the Kursk submarine tragedy in 2000.” The net result was that the anniversary of the Kursk sinking was overshadowed by an incident that illustrated Russian strength.

 

Similarly, the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH 17 by Ukrainian separatists—and likely Russian complicity in the event—must now compete for attention against news reports of Russian forces defending their borders against American intruders. Creating incidents in which Russian strength is on display, offers a more positive alternative to reports of Russian ineptitude and involvement in the Crimea.

 

Confrontations between Russian and U.S., NATO and Japanese forces at sea will likely continue for the duration of the Putin administration. A major concern is that, aside from projecting the bellicosity of the Putin regime, such a confrontation could spark a major incident at sea. However, in an ironic twist, such events provide the West with an opportunity to study Russian military forces and detect strengths and weaknesses, as well as collect technical information on Russian equipment.

US Subs on Routine Patrol Missions Off Russian Shore – Admiral

The recent sighting of a Japanese submarine off Russia's Pacific coast is a rare one, unlike the presence of the US Navy’s subs, Admiral Viktor Fyodorov, former commander of the Russian Pacific Fleet, told RIA Novosti Thursday.

 

“There have hardly been any sightings of Japanese submarines near Russia’s maritime border, unlike American ones, which have been on routine patrol missions off the Kamchatka [peninsula] shore and the main base of Russia’s Pacific Fleet in Vilyuchinsk,” Adm. Fyodorov said.

 

This comment came after a report by Russia’s Kommersant daily, which cited a senior military official from the General Staff as saying earlier in the day that a Japanese submarine had been detected Wednesday in the La Perouse Strait, in between the southern part of the Russian island of Sakhalin and Japan's northern-most home island of Hokkaido.

 

The Russian admiral suggested the Japanese mission so close to the Russian waters was a sign that Tokyo had been beefing up its fleet to restore the Navy. The Imperial Japanese Navy was dissolved following World War II, with the Maritime Self-Defense Force being formed in its stead.

 

“A new status would allow Japanese subs to venture outside Japan’s marginal waters and effectively go to anywhere around the world,” Adm. Fyodorov told RIA Novosti.

 

In a similar incident, on August 7 Russia’s Northern Fleet antisubmarine forces detected and drove away a Virginia-class US submarine in the Barents Sea.

U.S. Ship Neutralizes Syrian Chemical Arms

A specially equipped U.S. ship has finished neutralizing all 600 metric tons of the most dangerous of Syria's chemical weapons components surrendered to the international community this year to avert threatened air strikes, the Pentagon said on Monday.

It said the Cape Ray, equipped with the U.S.-developed Field Deployable Hydrolysis System, neutralized 581.5 metric tons of DF, a sarin precursor chemical, and 19.8 metric tons of HD, an ingredient of sulfur mustard, while afloat in the Mediterranean.

The vessel will travel to Finland and Germany in the next two weeks to unload the resulting effluent, which will undergo treatment as industrial waste to render it safer, a Pentagon spokeswoman said.

It was the first time chemical weapons components had been neutralized at sea, the Pentagon said.

A number of countries are involved in eliminating the chemical stockpiles. The United States was selected to dispose of the worst of the chemical weapons components because it had recently developed a mobile version of the hydrolysis system it uses for neutralizing chemical stockpiles.

The system uses substances and mixtures such as water, sodium hydroxide and sodium hypochlorite to neutralize bulk amounts of chemical warfare agents, according to the U.S. Army's Edgewood Chemical Biological Center.

 

Earlier this year, the hydrolysis system was placed aboard the Cape Ray, a 648-foot (198-meter) vessel that is part of the U.S. Maritime Administration's ready reserve force of 46 ships.

The ship was held at Rota, Spain, for several months due to Syrian delays in handing over its declared stockpiles of chemical agents. The Cape Ray began neutralizing the chemicals after picking them up from Italy in late June.

 

On Monday morning, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel called Navy Captain Rich Dromerhauser aboard the MV Cape Ray to congratulate the ship's crew on finishing their unprecedented work. The secretary said that by ridding the world of these materials, they - as part of an ongoing international effort to eliminate the Syrian chemical weapons arsenal - have helped make an important and enduring contribution to global security.

Secretary Hagel expressed his gratitude for the crew's service, dedication, and expertise, noting that with the world watching, they performed flawlessly every step of the way - despite a very long deployment, and a complex operation that required careful coordination with our international partners. The secretary commended the crew for conducting every aspect of the mission in a highly professional manner, with strict adherence to safety and with no impact to the surrounding environment, and said that they should all be very proud of what they've accomplished to help reduce the threat posed by chemical weapons.

 

The U.S. Maritime Administration also released a statement proudly supporting the international effort to destroy Syrian chemical weapons and agents by providing the MV Cape Ray and its all-volunteer U.S. Merchant Marine crew to support this critical mission. One of MARAD’s 46 Ready Reserve Force (RRF) ships that stand ready to provide rapid movement of equipment and supplies during times of national and humanitarian emergencies, this vessel and its crew illustrate the important contribution that RRF ships and mariners make in supporting U.S. national and economic security. Since 1775, the U.S. Merchant Marine has proudly answered when and where called upon, and the crew of the Cape Ray will continue its work to ensure both protection of the environment and all those aboard.

Sen. Mc Cain: Raytheon’s Tomahawk important to avoid use of ground troops

 

Raytheon's operations in Tucson should stay busy as the U-S sends more sophisticated weapons into battle, instead of ground troops.

That's the message Arizona Senator John McCain brought to Raytheon workers Tuesday as he spoke at the Raytheon Center in Rita Ranch.

The Senator says weapons like the Tomahawk cruise missile, built in Tucson will stay a key part of the U.S. military and he sees plenty of potential for Raytheon in other sophisticated systems.
       
Raytheon is Tucson's largest private employer so keeping Raytheon, and its workers busy is important to the economy.  Senator John McCain told workers there he foresees plenty of demand for what Raytheon builds.

Raytheon says the Tomahawk Cruise missile has been used more than 2000 times in combat in places like Iraq and Libya.  Its ability to launch from ships and submarines, fly a thousand miles and hit with precision makes it a favorite for maximum impact, with minimal risk.
      
Senator John Mc Cain helped reverse the U.S. Navy's decision to stop Tomahawk production here.  He told Raytheon workers it made no sense to stop building Tomahawks until a replacement is ready.
       
The Senator's calling for more air power to help the Kurds fight Islamic extremists in Iraq with only enough US ground troops to make sure aircraft and missiles hit their targets.

He says, “We would just have to have some but not a massive injection of ground troops.  But we do need and we have got right now boots on the ground in the form of Special Forces and Forward Air Controllers to identify these targets and to help with the Iraqis as they fight against ISIS."

The Israeli made Iron Dome anti missile system has been protecting Israel's cities against Hamas rockets.
        
Now Raytheon will help make Iron Dome systems and market them internationally.
        
Mc Cain says he helped secure money to make that happen.

"It is my understanding and it's still my understanding that that 225 million additional Iron Dome missiles will be co-produced and obviously that co-production will be here. I intend to follow up on that to be sure that is specifically the agreement that we have with the Israelis."

Senator Mc Cain says he will fight efforts to ground the A-10.  He says it's still the best plane to protect US troops, and essential to keeping Davis-Monthan a strong part of Arizona's economy.

Navy drone flies alongside fighter jets

 

The movement of jets aboard an aircraft carrier flight deck is often compared to a ballet, with sailors in multicolored shirts guiding fighter pilots and their jets in a tightly choreographed dance.

 So what happens if you add a robot to the human performers?

 The Navy attempted to answer that question Sunday aboard the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, where, for the first time, the service's prototype of an unmanned stealth plane, the X-47B, took off and landed on a carrier flight deck alongside traditional fighter jets.

Standard Missile Shows Versatility with “Juliet” Flight Test

During flight test “Juliet,” the Navy examined the missile's ability to intercept a subsonic, low- altitude target over land. Juliet is one of 10 follow-on operational test and evaluation (FOT&E) events planned for SM-6's missile performance and demonstration.
 

 "This event demonstrated SM-6's ability to detect and engage a slow moving target in the presence of complex land clutter," said Jim Schuh, Anti-Air Warfare Missiles technical director at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab, which is among the Navy's SM-6 partners. "It is another victory for this very versatile weapon."
 

 The SM-6 provides an over-the-horizon engagement capability when launched from an Aegis warship. It uses the latest in hardware and software missile technology to provide needed capabilities against evolving threats.
 

 "This is an important achievement for Naval warfare," said Capt. Michael Ladner, Program Executive Office, Integrated Warfare Systems 3.0 Program Manager. "SM-6 is undoubtedly the most advanced anti-air missile the Navy has ever produced and delivered to our Sailors."
 

 The SM-6 is the sixth variant of the Standard Missile family developed for the Navy with Raytheon Missiles Systems. Last June, Raytheon was awarded a $275 million contract modification covering SM-6's all-up round production and its spares. The SM-6 program has been in development for seven years and achieved Initial Operational Capability in November 2013. It is now undergoing FOT&E, which is projected to be completed during the second quarter of FY16.
 

 PEO IWS is an affiliated Program Executive Office of the Naval Sea Systems Command.  IWS is responsible for spearheading surface ship and submarine combat technologies and systems, and for implementing Navy enterprise solutions across ship platforms

NAVSEA: North Dakota Attack Boat Investigation Complete

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) has concluded an investigation into questionable third party components of its latest Virginia-class attack boat — North Dakota (SSN-784) — clearing the way for the submarine to commission in late October, NAVSEA told USNI News on Thursday.

 

“To date, all necessary inboard and outboard components have been inspected and all required repairs have been completed,” read a statement provided to USNI News.

 

NAVSEA inspected 58 components — mostly in the bow and stern sections — of the $2.6 billion attack boat and conducted an unspecified number of repairs, according to the statement.

 

“These components included stern planes and rudder rams, retractable bow plane cylinders, hydraulic accumulators, high pressure air charging manifolds, torpedo tube interlocks and shaft/link assemblies, weapons shipping and handling mechanisms, and other miscellaneous parts,” NAVSEA statement.

“The submarine was certified for sea trials and is tracking towards the Aug. 31 contractual delivery date.”

 

NAVSEA said other Block III Virginias would also be inspected. Neither the Navy nor Virginia-class prime contractor — General Dynamics Electric Boat —would identify the vendor to USNI News.

 

Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) — responsible for most construction of the bow and stern sections — referred comment on the program to NAVSEA and Electric Boat.

 

The commissioning delay and investigation are rare missteps in what is arguably the Navy’s best-run shipbuilding program in decades.

 

North Dakota is the first of the Block III boats. The revised design feature 40 percent of the bow retooled to accommodate a new water-backed Large Aperture Bow (LAB) sonar array and the addition of two Multiple All Up Round Canisters that can each hold six Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM).

 

The redesign was led by Electric Boat and constructed by Newport News as part of the teaming agreement between the two yards for the Virginia-class construction.

 

Despite the delay, North Dakota will most likely still deliver ahead of its 66-month construction schedule.

 

The final Block II boat— USS Minnesota (SSN-783) — delivered 11 months early.

NAVSEA’s full Thursday statement to USNI News follows:

 

The commissioning of PCU NORTH DAKOTA (SSN 784) was postponed from May to address material issues with vendor-assembled and delivered components.

 

To date, all necessary inboard and outboard components have been inspected and all required repairs have been completed.

 

There were a total of 58 components investigated aboard PCU NORTH DAKOTA (SSN 784).
These components included stern planes and rudder rams, retractable bow plane cylinders, hydraulic accumulators, high pressure air charging manifolds, torpedo tube interlocks and shaft/link assemblies, weapons shipping and handling mechanisms, and other miscellaneous parts.

 

The submarine was certified for sea trials and is tracking towards the August 31 contractual delivery date. The commissioning is scheduled for October 25. All other Block III submarines are being inspected and any issues found will be adjudicated.

Turkey grants US warship permission to enter Black Sea

 

PLEASE NOTE - THIS ARTICE IS PUBLISHED BY PUTIN MOUTHPIECE RT.COM

Turkey has given a US Navy Warship the green light to pass through the Bosphorus within the next two days as tensions in Ukraine’s Crimea region continue to divide world powers.
 

Turkish sources, speaking with the Hurriyet Daily News on Wednesday, declined to elaborate on the name of the US warship. The same officials told the daily on condition of anonymity that the ship in question was not the USS George H.W. Bush nuclear aircraft carrier as suggested in some news reports, as it did not meet the standards specified by the 1936 Montreux Convention in terms of weight.
 

The US vessel to pass through the straits will meet the convention’s standards, the sources said.
 

On Wednesday, the Russian Black Sea Fleet Staff confirmed to the Itar-Tass news agency that a US destroyer was expected to enter the Black Sea later this week.
 

On Sunday, Tass reported that the guided-missile frigate USS Taylor, one of two Navy ships assigned to the Black Sea during the Sochi Winter Olympics was still in the Turkish Black Sea port of Samsun. The frigate was deployed on February 5 along with the amphibious command ship, USS Mount Whitney. According to the Montreux Convention, warships of countries which do not border the Black Sea cannot remain in the waters for longer than 21 days. While the USS Mount Whitney left on February 25, the USS Taylor remained at the Turkish port, ostensibly for repairs after running aground on February 12.
 

Meanwhile, it was reported on Tuesday that two Russian warships entered the Black Sea through the Bosphorus. The 150 'Saratov' landing ship and the 156 'Yamal' assault ship crossed the strait around 05:30 GMT, en route to the Black Sea, the Anadolu Agency (AA) reported.
 

No coastguard boats were seen escorting the ships. The Ukrainian Hetman Sahaydachny followed shortly thereafter, crossing the Dardanelles Strait off Turkey's west coast. Two coastguard vessels were reported by AA to be escorting the ship.
 

The vessel, which had participated in NATO-led Ocean Shield and Atalanta counter-piracy operations, reportedly docked near Odessa port on Wednesday, says the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine.

 

The traffic through the Turkish straits comes as tensions between the West and Russia over recent events in Crimea, a Ukrainian peninsula located on the northern coast of the Black Sea, continue to simmer.
 

Russia currently leases a military wharf and shore installations in the Crimean port of Sevastopol. The Ukrainian government agreed to extend Russia’s lease on the territory in 2010, allowing the Russian Black Sea Fleet to effectively stay in Crimea until 2047.
 

Five Russian naval units are currently stationed in the port city of Sevastopol, including the 30th Surface Ship Division, the 41st Missile Boat Brigade, the 247th Separate Submarine Division, the 68th Harbor Defense Ship, and the 422nd Separate Hydrographic Ship Division.
 

On Wednesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the military personnel of the Black Sea Fleet are “in their deployment sites" and “additional vigilance measures were taken to safeguard the sites.”
 

“We will do everything to prevent bloodshed," he said, speaking ahead of his first face-to-face meeting with his US counterpart, John Kerry, since the crisis erupted.

 

Over a week after the government of Viktor Yanukovich was toppled by violent street protests, fears of deepening political and social strife have been particularly acute in Ukraine’s pro-Russian east and south.
 

One day after voting to oust Yanukovich, a newly reconfigured parliament did away with a 2012 law on minority languages, which permitted the use of two official languages in regions where the size of an ethnic minority exceeds 10 percent.
 

Apart from the Russian-majority regions affected by this law, Hungarian, Moldovan and Romanian also lost their status as official languages in several towns in Western Ukraine.
 

Authorities in the Ukrainian Autonomous Republic of Crimea – where over half the population is ethnically Russian – requested Moscow’s assistance following the legal downgrade of the Russian language.
 

Western states have accused Russia of militarily intervening in Crimea and called on Russian troops to return to their Black Sea bases. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) recently dispatched military observers to Kiev. The observers from the pan-European security body are en route to Crimea, where they will monitor the situation on the ground.
 

On Wednesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated President Putin’s previous words that Russian troops had not actually been deployed from their bases in Crimea. Lavrov said that forces with unmarked uniforms which had taken de-facto control over Crimea are self-defense units that are not under Russia’s auspices.
 

"If they are the self-defense forces created by the inhabitants of Crimea, we have no authority over them," Lavrov told a news conference in Madrid after a meeting with Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo.
 

"They do not receive orders [from us]," he said.
 

On Saturday, the Russian Federation Council – the upper house of the Federal Assembly of Russia – approved President Vladimir Putin’s request to send the country’s military forces to Ukraine to ensure peace and order in the region “until the socio-political situation in the country is stabilized.”

According to the bilateral agreement concerning Russia's Black Sea Fleet military bases in Crimea, Moscow is allowed to have up to 25,000 troops in Ukraine.

U.S. Navy eyes greater presence in Arctic

The U.S. Navy is mapping out how to expand its presence in the Arctic beginning about 2020, given signs that the region's once permanent ice cover is melting faster than expected, which is likely to trigger more traffic, fishing and resource mining.

 

"The Arctic is all about operating forward and being ready. We don't think we're going to have to do war-fighting up there, but we have to be ready," said Rear Admiral Jonathan White, the Navy's top oceanographer and navigator, and director of the Navy's climate change task force.

 

"We don't want to have a demand for the Navy to operate up there, and have to say, 'Sorry, we can't go,'" he said.

 

The Navy this week released an "aggressive" update to its 2009 Arctic plan after a detailed analysis of data from a variety of sources showed that seasonal ice is disappearing faster than had been expected even three years ago.

 

The document said the Bering Strait was expected to see open water conditions about 160 days a year by 2020, with the deep ocean routes of the Transpolar transit route forecast to be open for up to 45 days annually by 2025.

 

The document includes dozens of specific tasks and deadlines for Navy offices, including calling for better research on rising sea levels and the ability to predict sea ice thickness, assessment of satellite communications and surveillance needs, and evaluation of existing ports, airfields and hangars.

 

It also puts a big focus on cooperation with other Arctic nations and with the U.S. Coast Guard, which is grappling with the need to build a new $1 billion ice-breaking ship.

 

The Navy is conducting a submarine exercise in the Arctic next month, and plans to participate in a joint training exercise with the Norwegian and Russian military this summer.

 

White said the Navy's new projection was aimed at answering "the billion dollar question" of how much it would cost to prepare for an increased naval presence in the Arctic, and trying to determine what investments were needed when.

 

"We're trying to use this road map to really be able to answer that question," White said, noting that early smaller-scale investments could help avert bigger bills in the future,

 

He said efforts were under way now in the Navy to identify specific requirements for weather-hardened ships and other equipment, land-based infrastructure, and etter bandwidth for satellite and shore-based communications capabilities.

 

The Office of Naval Research and the Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency are already funding numerous Arctic-focused projects with industry, White said, predicting increased public-private projects in recent years.

 

He said he realized U.S. military budgets are under pressure, but hoped the plan would help undergird Arctic-related budget requests in coming years by showing lawmakers that the Navy had carefully studied and evaluated its options.

 

"As far as I'm concerned, the Navy and Coast Guard's area of responsibility is growing," White said. "We're growing a new ocean, so our budget should be growing in line with that."

 

The Navy's plan does not alter any current funding, but calls for identification of future ships and other weapons by the third quarter of fiscal 2014, which ends September 30, in time to be considered for future budget deliberations.

 

"Our challenge over the coming decades is to balance the demands of current requirements with investment in the development of future capabilities," Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert wrote in an introduction. "This roadmap will ensure our investments are informed, focused, and deliberate as the Navy approaches a new maritime frontier."

 

The Navy has long operated submarines in the region, and flies surveillance and unmanned aircraft as needed, but by 2020 it plans to boost the number of personnel trained for Arctic operations. By 2030, as the Arctic Ocean becomes increasingly ice-free, the Navy said it would have the training and personnel to respond to crises and national security emergencies.

 

The Navy's updated road map noted that the Arctic has significant oil, gas and mineral resources, including some rare earth minerals now supplied mainly by China, and estimated hydrocarbon resources of over $1 trillion.

 

Those resources are attractive to big multinational corporations and other countries, but they face big financial, technical and environmental risks due to the harshness of the environment, and the unpredictable weather, White said.

 

"If we do start to see a rush, and people try to get up there too fast, we run the risk of catastrophes," he said, urging a more gradual, measured move into the region by the private sector. "Search and rescue in the cold ice-covered water of the Arctic is not somewhere we want to go."

US Navy Launches Massive Ford-Class Carrier Test

The U.S. Navy is starting a 26-month test and technology integration phase for the recently christened USS Gerald R. Ford, the first in a series of next-generation Ford-class aircraft carriers slated for commissioning in 2016.

 

 

The testing plans for the 77,000-ton USS Ford are prolonged and more labor intensive because the first-in-class ship includes a wide range of new systems and technologies, said Rear Adm. Tom Moore, Program Executive Officer, Carriers.

 

 

"We're in the infancy stages of the 26-month test program. The test program is a little bit longer than it was for Nimitz-class carriers because of the number of new developmental systems on board. The early returns are that the program is going well," Moore said.

 

 

The Ford program has been the subject of scrutiny and criticism by lawmakers, analysts and watchdog groups for cost growth and reliability issues of some of its technologies. Navy officials point out that at least $3.3 billion of the Ford's $12.8 billion cost are part of what's called non-recurring engineering costs to design and produce a first-in-class ship with new technologies.

 

 

The Ford-class carriers are slated to replace the existing Nimitz-class carriers on a one-for-one basis in coming years as the Nimitz carriers come to the end of their service life. Since carriers have a life span of up to 50-years of service, Ford-class carriers are slated to remain in service until the year 2110, Moore said.  

 

 

With this future in mind, the Ford-class carriers are being built with three times the electrical power generating capacity compared to Nimitz-class carriers, Moore said. The USS Ford will have four 26-megawatt generators bringing a total of 104 megawatts to the ship. This helps support the ship's developing systems such as its Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launch System, or EMALS, and provides power for future systems such as lasers, and rail-guns, Moore added.

 

 

The ships are engineered with a redesigned island, slightly larger deck space and new weapons elevators in order to achieve a 33-percent increase in sortie-generation rate. The new platforms are built to launch more aircraft and more seamlessly support a high-op tempo.

 

 

The new weapons elevators allow for a much more efficient path to move and re-arm weapons systems for aircraft. The elevators can take weapons directly from their magazines to just below the flight deck, therefore greatly improving the sortie-generation rate by making it easier and faster to re-arm planes, Moore said.

 

 

He added that a decision was made to delay the launch by about four months in order to allow the shipbuilders -- Newport News Shipbuilding, a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries -- extra time to get more integration work done on the dry dock before putting the ship into the water.

 

 

"We've got four of the nine 1,100-ton air conditioning plants. We have 29 of 33 fire pumps up and running and we have tested the electric plant. We're doing diesel engine testing. We've turned over about 100 compartments to the ship's force who is now working on board the ship," Moore explained.

 

 

The USS Ford's EMALS, or electro-magnetic catapult system is being tested and built for the ship. Unlike previous Nimitiz-class carriers which use a steam-catapult, EMALS uses an electro-magnetic field and a series of cascading magnets to propel and then launch aircraft, Moore explained.

 

 

"By having this electrical pulse come down, you are pulling the aircraft down to the catapult to launch it. You can dial in the precise weight of the aircraft. As you accelerate the aircraft down the catapult, you can accelerate it to the precise speed it needs to launch," Moore said.

 

 

Unlike steam catapults which use pressurized steam, a launch valve and a piston to catapult aircraft, EMALS uses a precisely determined amount of electrical energy. As a result, EMALS is designed to more smoothly launch aircraft while reducing stress and wear and tear on the airframes themselves, he added.

 

 

"By the time the aircraft gets to the catapult it is at the right speed. Minimizing stress on the airframe, over time, reduces maintenance," Moore added.

 

 

On the ship, EMALS will be engineered such that any of the ship's four catapults will be able to draw power from any one of three energy storage groups on the ship, he said.

 

 

Although the catapult troughs for the USS Ford's EMALS system are now being built and integrated with the overall system, the technology has been in the process of extensive testing at a Naval Air Warfare Center facility in Lakehurst, N.J. 
 

The EMALS catapults there have launched 200 aircraft flights from their system, including launches of an F/A-18 Super Hornet and F-35.  In addition, the catapults there have launched more than 1,500 dead loads where they put a weight on a sled and shoot that off with the system.

 

 

Meanwhile, on the ship, the below-deck EMALS equipment has been installed. This consists of a series of transformers and rectifiers designed to convert and store electrical power through a series of motor generators before brining power to the launch motors on the catapults, Moore explained.

The USS Ford is able to generate 13,800 volts of electrical power, more than three times the 4,160 volts that a Nimitz-class carrier generates, Moore said.

 

 

The EMALS system is also engineered to work in tandem with the USS Ford's new Advanced Arresting Gear, or AAG. Unlike the existing hydraulic system used on current aircraft carriers, AAG is a mechanical electrical system with a cable that spins a water twister, Moore explained.

 

 

Similar to EMALS, the AAG is also designed to reduce stress on the airframe during the landing process.

 

 

"The idea is to provide a smoother run out and slow down in a more constant manner. What AAG will do is allow you to have a reduction in the force on the airframe as you arrest the plane," Moore said.

 

 

Once this 26-month test phase is complete, the USS Ford is scheduled to go through what's called builder trials and acceptance trials designed to make sure everything works before the ship enters service. The acceptance trials involve an independent inspection and survey of the ship, Moore said.

 

 

Once that takes place, the Navy will take the ship for a six to eight month post-shakedown period and certify the flight deck.

 

 

Moore said he expects the USS Ford to be ready to deploy as part of a battle group by late 2018 or early 2019.

 

PLA Navy would lose 40% of its fleet to sink a US carrier: report

China would have to sacrifice up to 40% of its People's Liberation Army Navy fleet in an attempt to sink a super aircraft carrier like the USS Gerald R Ford in a campaign, according to a report from the Moscow-based Military-Industrial Courier. 

China currently possesses several effective weapons systems that could be used against a US carrier battle group, including its DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles and 12 guided-missile destroyers. The country's two Type 051C and six Type 052C destroyers are all equipped with anti-ship missiles such as the YJ-83, C-805 and YJ-62, and they would also pose a serious threat against US carriers within the Asia-Pacific region. In addition, China has purchased four Sovremenny-class destroyers equipped with Moskit SSM P-270 anti-ship missiles from Russia, the report said. 

Aside from the Liaoning, the country's first aircraft carrier, the PLA Navy currently has 15 Type 054A frigates carrying HQ-16 surface-to-air missile within its vertical launching system. With the capability to defend the Chinese fleet against the US carrier-based aircrafts, Type 054A is able to sink enemy vessel with its C-803 anti-ship missile as well. 

If a US carrier battle group were to enter the waters of the Chinese coast, the PLA Navy could also deploy its 10 Type 056 corvettes and 40 Type 022 missile boats to fight in guerrilla warfare at sea against the US Navy, the report said. Both vessels able to launch anti-ship missiles such as YJ-83 and C-803 and the United States Navy would loses 10% of its strength in the region if one of its carriers were to be sunk.

However, the PLA Navy would not be able to sink a US aircraft carrier easily. According to the Forbes magazine, several countermethods have been developed by the US Navy to defend its aircraft carriers from Chinese attacks. While long-range unmanned aerial vehicles are able to destroy Chinese missile facilities, F-35 fighters with a combat range of 200 and 300 nautical miles enables the US ships to fight without entering the Chinese coastline.

The Military-Industrial Courier estimated that between 30%-40% of China's total naval strength would be lost to simply destroy one US carrier. Meanwhile, the biggest weakness for the US Navy in a potential conflict with the PLA Navy would be how to deploy its 11 carriers, 88 surface combat vessels, 55 Littoral Combat Ships and 31 amphibious assault ships to the Western Pacific in a short period of time, the report said.

US to deploy new destroyer against China's Anti-Access strategy

The primary function of US Navy Zumwalt-class stealth destroyers in future plans for Asia Pacific regional strategy will be to counter the anti-access/area-denial capabilities of China, reports party mouthpiece Global Times. 

The second vessel of its kind began service in the US Navy on Oct. 19, and is expected to be deployed to the Asia Pacific theater in 2014.

The new surface combat vessel is considered the future of the US Navy by admiral Jonathan Greenert, chief of naval operations, and will play an important role in supporting president Barack Obama's Asia Pivot Strategy. The 15,000-ton USS Elmo Zumwalt DDG-1000's stealth design is able to reduce radar and sonar detection to the lowest levels of any destroyer in the world. It would be able to engage against Chinese warships in a littoral combat environment.

Although it has yet to appear, it is very likely that the following destroyer will sport the deadliest weapon system to date: an electronic rail gun that fires using electromagnetic pulses. In addition, current vessels are also equipped with a Peripheral Vertical Launch System, capable of reducing damage from a missile battery explosion. Together with the F-35 and the US missile defense program, this destroyer will be integrated into the new AirSea Battle doctrine under the US Pacific Command.

The ship is not invincible from the Chinese point of view. "I can send several dozen small fishing boats loaded with explosives, floating and wobbling in the water, toward the Zumwalt, place the explosives onto its hull [and blow many holes in the hull], said rear admiral Zhang Zhaozhong of the PLA Navy during an interview with national broadcaster China Central Television. "It will be finished then. The Zumwalt is no good!" he said

Submarine Albany enters naval shipyard

The submarine Albany went around the corner to Portsmouth on Wednesday for its midlife overhaul, traveling a short distance for a long stretch away from base.

 

The Albany, a nuclear-powered, fast-attack submarine homeported in Norfolk, will spend approximately 29 months at Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth. The scheduled work involves removing the shaft and sonar dome for maintenance and modernization of its combat systems, a shipyard spokesman said.

 

The overhaul also will incorporate some firsts for the shipyard, spokesman Jeff Cunningham said. The yard created a toolroom close to where the work on the submarine is being done, he said. That’s been the practice for aircraft carriers, but because of the layout of the shipyard, it wasn’t done for submarines in the past.

 

The team also has incorporated additional management training to streamline the project, Cunningham said.

 

The Albany was commissioned in 1990, the 43rd nuclear-powered, fast-attack submarine in the Los Angeles class and the fifth to carry the name of the New York state capital.

Local submarines chosen for first female crew members

Two Navy submarines built in part in Rhode Island and based in Groton, Conn., have been chosen as the first U.S. attack submarines that will have women in their crews, the Navy announced Tuesday.

 

The Virginia and the Minnesota, members of the Virginia class of nuclear submarines, will each have three female officers beginning no later than January 2015, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus announced in a statement.

 

U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, of Rhode Island, a member of the Armed Services Committee, applauded the announcement. "I think it's a strong, positive step forward," he said in an interview. "It will increase the talent available to operate" Virginia-class submarines.

 

The three female officers on each of the submarines will share a three-person stateroom in a part of the boat reserved for officers, according to Lt. Timothy Hawkins, a spokesman for the submarines based at Naval Submarine Base New London, in Groton.

 

They will share bathroom and shower facilities with male officers, but the facilities will be scheduled so that they are for men part of the time and women at other times, Hawkins said. That same arrangement is used aboard Ohio-class ballistic- and guided-missile submarines, larger boats that already have women on their crews.

 

"No modification is necessary for the Virginia-class submarines that were selected," Hawkins said.

Each of the two subs will have one female supply officer and two female officers who are nuclear-trained and will work in a variety of departments onboard, such as engineering, navigation and weapons, Hawkins said.

 

Female supply officers already served aboard Navy surface vessels, so they will be selected as more seasoned officers to mentor the other two, more junior officers, Hawkins said. He said that, typically, the junior officers will be ensigns when assigned to the submarine, while the supply officer will be a lieutenant junior grade or a lieutenant.

 

It will take until near the end of next year for the officers to report to the subs because the junior officers need to undergo a year of nuclear training before reporting for duty.

 

"There's a number of women in the training pipeline that have yet to receive their assignment," Hawkins said. "Only upon passing are you assigned the next step."

 

Women had been barred from serving on submarines until the Navy changed its policy in April 2010. Since that time, the Navy has assigned 43 women to six Ohio-class boats: the ballistic-missile submarines Wyoming, Louisiana and Maine; and the guided-missile submarines Florida, Georgia and Ohio.

 

Virginia-class submarines are built by General Dynamics Electric Boat in cooperation with Newport News Shipbuilding. Hull sections and interior components are built at Electric Boat's shipyard in Quonset Point, then barged to either Electric Boat's Groton shipyard or Newport News, in Virginia, depending upon which of the partners has been assigned final assembly of the boat.

 

Navy Moves Smaller Coastal Craft To Persian Gulf As We Pull Big Ships

Once again, the US Navy is moving more warships to the Persian Gulf. This time, though, we’re not sending an extra aircraft carrier or another task force. This is arguably a de-escalation of possible tensions with Iran. In a nutshell, the Navy is replacing big ships with small ones.

The three new ships – Tempest, Squall, and Thunderbolt – are Cyclone-class PCs, which stands not for “personal computer” or “politically correct” but “patrol, coastal.” They are relatively small vessels – 179 feet long, 380 tons displacement, and boasting just 28 crew. They are well-suited to shallow waters, protecting oil rigs, and working with our Arab allies’ modest fleets. Another two PCs, Hurricane and Monsoon, will join the Bahrain-based 5th Fleet next year, leaving just three in US home waters to do (primarily) counter-drug operations for 4th Fleet out of Mayport, Florida. Meanwhile, however, the Navy’s cutting back on aircraft carriers, destroyers, and even minesweepers on duty in the Gulf.
 

That’s not to say the Cyclones can’t fight. In fact, the five already homeported in Bahrain are being upgunned with Raytheon-made Griffin missiles, the same relatively short-ranged weapon being added to the controversial Littoral Combat Ships. (The newly arriving PCs will get their Griffins later). Last year, the Navy just happens to have successfully tested the Griffin against small fast-attack craft, the favored watergoing weapon of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.

“We’re just installing the Griffin missile system on the patrol craft now. That’s a laser-guided rocket that will help counter any kind of swarm tactic,” said Capt. Joseph Naman, commander of 5th Fleet’s coastal patrol craft, in a conference call this morning with reporters. “I would take the PC over a swarm [of fast-attack boats]. Pound for pound the punch is much harder.”

 Three Navy coastal patrol craft arrived in the Persian Gulf this morning aboard a transoceanic transport ship

Loading up small craft with heavy machineguns and rocket-propelled grenades is a cheap way to put firepower on the water, but they may not hit much of anything. “The speedboats with the guns and the guys hanging off with RPGs, all those [weapons] are unguided, all those are not stabilized,” Naman explained. In the Gulf, “we’re normally seeing about one to three-foot [waves] on a good day and maybe five to seven-foot seas on some of the interesting days we have.” That’s bad news for the Revolutionary Guard gunner trying to eyeball his target from a jouncing deck. By contrast, even before the Griffins are installed, the Cyclones have two 25-milimeter quick-firing cannon and a multitude of machineguns, all on stabilized mounts to keep them on target in rough seas.

 The coastal patrol craft USS Tempest in the Persian Gulf.

That’s still a lot less firepower than the bigger and more-expensive-to-operate warships that the Cyclones are effectively replacing. This spring, the Pentagon announced the Navy would halve the number of aircraft carriers patrolling the Persian Gulf at any given time from two to one – which also cuts in half the accompanying cruisers, destroyers, and submarines – because it simply could not afford to sortie the carrier strike groups under the budget cuts known as sequestration. (The uncertainty over a stopgap spending measure called the Continuing Resolution, since resolved, was also a major factor).

The Navy’s also cutting back on patrols by its workhorse Arleigh Burke DDG-51 destroyers, Capt. Naman said. “The slight decline in DDGs closely correlates to our decline in forces in Iraq and our drawdown in Afghanistan,” he told reporters. To support the wars on land, the fleet has been making longer and more frequent deployments over the last decade, to the point that both ships and their crews are getting tired. Now, said Naman, “we’re trying to stretch [out] the time between deployments a little bit longer so we can do the maintenance on the ships we need to.” (But sequester complicates maintenance as well).

“It doen’t mean we’re going to do away with the DDGs,” Naman emphasized. But as the patrol craft flotilla increases from five historically to eight now and 10 next year, he said, “we’re picking up a lot of the missions they were doing.”

 Tugboats move the newly arrived USS Tempest into harbor in Bahrain.

Most of those missions are low-profile cooperation with the Gulf Cooperation Council states – Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, the UAE, and the big brother, Saudi Arabia. Building up local partners is the best long-term bulwark against Iran, and those partners’ own fleets consist largely of smaller coastal craft much more similar to the Cyclones than to the Arleigh Burkes. Those international missions include training exercises – “there’re over 15 of them we do every year with the GCC nations,” said Naman – and protecting offshore or coastal installations such as the ports, oil rigs, and desalinization plants on which the region’s economy depends. In the shallow waters of the Gulf, small can be beautiful, Naman said: “We can go more places with the PC than we can with the DDG based on the draft alone.”

A mission the Cyclones can’t perform, however, is minesweeping. The Navy doubled the number of Avenger-class mine counter-measures (MCM) ships in the Gulf from four to eight last year amidst Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, but now it’s sending the extra four Avengers home again. “They made a conscious decision to bring additional MCMs over here temporarily,” said Naman. “It wasn’t a homeport shift; it was a deployment….We have moved some portion of those back; the remaining ones will go back this fall.”

In the long run, the mine-clearing mission will fall to the Littoral Combat Ship, which will also hunt submarines and Iranian-style small attack boats. (The LCS will have plug-and-play “mission modules” to tailor it for each of the three threats). While the Navy has made major progress on LCS’s costs, it’s still working out both tactics and technology for the highly unconventional new ships.

Both variants of the Littoral Combat Ship are also about eight times larger than a coastal patrol craft (3,000 tons displacement versus 380). So even in the future, the Navy will likely need both types for different missions in different depths of water. For now, until the LCS becomes fully operational, it’s up to the Cyclones to patrol the shallows.