Drones at sea: does the US Navy know what it is developing?

Drones at sea: does the US Navy know what it is developing?

Head of Force Command fleet US (US Navy's Fleet Forces Command) ordered to begin developing the concept of surface drones. This is a concept of operations for large and medium unmanned surface ships, the DefenseNews portal reports from Washington.


The bottom line is that the surface fleet will go to the practical stage of developing the concept of "organization, acquisition, training, equipment, support, implementation and operational integration" of unmanned surface ships.

Money is allocated for that (the amounts, however, have not yet been specified).

News arrived "after a long battle with Congress for securing funding" of these same unmanned surface ships, the newspaper notes. It should be noted, gentlemen, congressmen expressed a fair amount of skepticism about the fact that the navy generally “knows enough” about what it is developing to justify financing.

And yet, ultimately, the fleet was allocated funds for the acquisition of two large unmanned surface ships. True, the US Congress banned the command from equipping these ships with vertical launch installations, as the military had previously planned.

Operations Concepts (CONOPS) are designed to identify “initial operational capability” for medium and large unmanned vehicles, and only then to determine what these platforms will be designed for.

Previously, it looked like this: a medium surface drone is a vessel capable of transporting various modular cargoes. A large surface drone would have a vertical launch setup.

Medium unmanned surface ships initially had to focus on reconnaissance and surveillance operations, as well as electronic warfare, and large unmanned ships on surface combat operations and strike missions.

The command instructed a group of specialists to study a number of issues: platform control, compatibility and communication problems; basing; maintenance and support of new platforms; the need for this or that equipment (from sensors and computers to auxiliary systems), staff training and qualifications to support unmanned operations. The group was tasked with preparing the first draft by February 2020, and the final draft by September.
Photos used:
DARPA
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Tusv 3 January 2020 13: 19 New
    • 2
    • 14
    -12
    Well damn it is obvious. Fleet ships are the answer to Anadyr of the Caribbean crisis. And on Poseidon - let's get a space budget. Otherwise, the Russian Navy will not understand. Take offense
    1. Piramidon 3 January 2020 17: 20 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Quote: Tusv
      Anadyr of the Caribbean Crisis

      What it is?
      1. Avior 4 January 2020 02: 24 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Операция_«Анадырь»

        Delivery of nuclear missiles to Cuba
        What does anti-submarine drones have to do with it, I didn’t understand either
        There surface ships, cargo ships went
  2. Thrifty 3 January 2020 13: 36 New
    • 3
    • 4
    -1
    Even the concept, but unarmed, is not needed by the fleet, for the sense from the sky-ready ship is zero. First you need to create and test a prototype, but with at least some kind of weapon on board, let it be blocked, but a ship even without container launchers for missiles, and a combat unit of the fleet with a container launcher, are two huge differences.
    1. Robertocalos 3 January 2020 13: 41 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Launching an UAV with SD on board at sea is easier for terrorists to immediately give launch codes. Intelligence, monitoring, maybe even supply (although also controversial), but no weapons on the ship that are not able to protect themselves.
      1. Thrifty 3 January 2020 13: 44 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        So, first you need to drive it in their waters, and then, under the control of a warship, already take them to international waters for testing! No one says that they will only build it, and immediately they will be thrown to the military operation.
        1. Robertocalos 3 January 2020 14: 21 New
          • 0
          • 3
          -3
          The very fact of the appearance of a drone in weapons alone in the ocean is a danger to the owners of this ship. Unless Opper will hang from above, which, if anything, will drive away the pirates.
    2. Tusv 3 January 2020 13: 42 New
      • 0
      • 5
      -5
      Quote: Thrifty
      even the concept, but unarmed, is not needed by the fleet, for there is no sense in the sky-ready ship

      On Status six issued two submarines. The question is how to drive away American hunters. Oh this is the Arctic
    3. Avior 3 January 2020 13: 42 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      A scout who can call planes or helicopters to the place of detection is also a big deal
      If he is really combat-ready, of course
    4. TermNachTer 3 January 2020 14: 49 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      I have said more than once that in the USA it is not sailors, designers or production workers who decide what the fleet needs, but the financial lobby in Congress. “Lockheed” or someone else will earn a couple - three dozen lard, and the opinion of the fleet - they can turn it into a tube and shove it somewhere.
      1. SovAr238A 3 January 2020 15: 43 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: TermNachTER
        I have said more than once that in the USA it is not sailors, designers or production workers who decide what the fleet needs, but the financial lobby in Congress. “Lockheed” or someone else will earn a couple - three dozen lard, and the opinion of the fleet - they can turn it into a tube and shove it somewhere.


        Well, what are you talking about all the time ...
        The Marine Corps flies on 50 year-old helicopters - and no lobby can match it with new and expensive ...
        Sivulf - the US Navy needed it very much, a luxury boat in everything.
        There are still no equal to her.
        But nifiga. no lobby helped ...
        stopped production
        1. TermNachTer 3 January 2020 16: 55 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          The fleet wanted 5 Nimits, and he got three Fords. Rather, they haven’t boiled it yet, so far they cannot “bring it to mind”. And what kind of Zamvolt destroyers - how much did they earn? What are 100 helicopters? Pennies, the question must be looked wider
          1. SovAr238A 3 January 2020 17: 35 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: TermNachTER
            The fleet wanted 5 Nimits, and he got three Fords. Rather, they haven’t boiled it yet, so far they cannot “bring it to mind”. And what kind of Zamvolt destroyers - how much did they earn? What are 100 helicopters? Pennies, the question must be looked wider


            What are you talking about again?
            What are 5 Nimites?

            The Nimitians began to build from the age of 81 and the first in 84 to test and 86 entered the military service.
            The American Navy wanted 50 summer ships in your opinion? so what?
            What would the grandfather be replaced by the grandmother?

            The fleet itself demanded change.
            And two have already been built, and for almost a year two more have been paid for in advance, CVN-80 (delivery to the fleet at 28) and CVN-81 (delivery at 32) according to the "fixed-price system"
            And each following is significantly cheaper than the previous one. 15-18%.
            A penny?

            About Zamvolt.
            When the shells "fix" - everything will be fine with them.
            At least new versions of long-range shells have already gone, which are much cheaper than the first and not so inferior to them in quality. The school of ammunition began a new round of development of its own, if you had watched the news more closely, you would have known about it.

            In all other respects, they have no problems with weapons. not with technology. everything is already practically debugged.
            1. TermNachTer 3 January 2020 17: 40 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              Do you speak English? Go to the state forums of the corresponding orientation and read what smart people write. Anyone can read the official nonsense, moreover, already translated into Russian, with two classes of education.
              1. SovAr238A 3 January 2020 17: 44 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: TermNachTER
                Do you speak English? Go to the state forums of the corresponding orientation and read what smart people write. Anyone can read the official nonsense, moreover, already translated into Russian, with two classes of education.


                I am 50 and still can explain in Russian how to communicate in Russian and in English ...

                So don’t suffer from a nonsense and give me a couple of links to English-speaking resources ...

                And yes. I have already looked through your texts - there is never anything technically correct in them. Some slogans and slogans.
                I look forward to links to normal English-language resources.

                so that I understand exactly how you speak English, and on what resources you draw information ...
                today, one wise guy called Dvina71 was already trying to teach me - I had to lay out English texts about the movement of troops in preparation for the exercises - he merged later.
                Although he also tried to teach me.

                Waiting for normal links from you ...
                Or will you also merge?
                1. TermNachTer 3 January 2020 17: 58 New
                  • 0
                  • 4
                  -4
                  Or maybe you also translate immediately? Move your brains or work poorly with your pens? And by the way - the last "Nimitz" put into operation in 2009 - "George Bush" is called. How old is it to him?
                  1. SovAr238A 3 January 2020 19: 53 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    Or maybe you also translate immediately? Move your brains or work poorly with your pens? And by the way - the last "Nimitz" put into operation in 2009 - "George Bush" is called. How old is it to him?


                    Well, the first is in 1975 ...
                    Him how many years old then?

                    And what ship did Ford go to replace?
                    Which ship does Kennedy replace?
                    Which ship will the Enterprise replace?

                    Have you ever heard about the transition to the strategy of "10 aircraft carriers"?
                    1. TermNachTer 3 January 2020 21: 08 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      Murderous logic - a 50-year-old aircraft carrier is bad, a 50-year-old helicopter is excellent. When the “Ford” will bring “to mind” he will also have normal year-olds.
                      1. SovAr238A 3 January 2020 23: 09 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Murderous logic - a 50-year-old aircraft carrier is bad, a 50-year-old helicopter is excellent. When the “Ford” will bring “to mind” he will also have normal year-olds.


                        It's all about your logic - you initially carry everything in kickbacks, cuts, in the lobby ..
                        Just because you can’t say anything else ...

                        And when they tell you that the world is a little different - you immediately start to turn on the "do not understand" mode ...
                      2. TermNachTer 4 January 2020 22: 09 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        That's just because I know how the state mechanism works, even the United States, even the Russian Federation, and in Ukraine is even worse, because I worked in the police for many years, and therefore I understand. Yes, serious thief from power was never planted, this is the prerogative of GB, but no one bothered me to see and understand.
      2. Gray brother 3 January 2020 20: 28 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: SovAr238A
        Marine Corps flies on 50 summer helicopters

        The ILC is a separate song - it is the only branch of the armed forces reporting directly to the US president, so he is forever armed with the oldest drekole.
  • Nyrobsky 3 January 2020 13: 41 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Everything that rides can be stopped, everything that flies can be brought down, everything that floats (walks) can be drowned - but all this costs unmeasured money, and this is the essence of this project in them. The Pentagon again needs a lot of money.
  • prodi 3 January 2020 13: 52 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    floating drone - for the routine search of submarines by squares and as a minesweeper.
    Nothing more is needed
  • knn54 3 January 2020 14: 09 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Obviously, it is against Russia. For large ships. On which hundreds of sailors serve are too vulnerable. Society perceives human losses very painfully. And for the fleet, this is an irreparable loss of specialists.
  • Lord of the Sith 3 January 2020 14: 22 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Heh, more drones, all sorts of different.

    Let them do it! You’ll get used to fighting behind the monitor screen while drinking coffee, your asses will grow up and finally swim with fat, as a result of which you will finally forget how to fight on the battlefield.
  • paul3390 3 January 2020 14: 35 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    It’s interesting - when will they have realized the concept of, say, an unmanned president? Or is there the Minister of Defense ..
    1. Pashhenko Nikolay 3 January 2020 14: 58 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      They have an unmanned President. Still uncontrollable))
  • amr
    amr 3 January 2020 15: 23 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    people step forward! they’re sawing the budget, they’re not sawing, BUT they are introducing new weapons faster and more productively than us ..
    Enviously !! - After all, this is not just an indicator of re-equipment - it is an indicator of the power of the industry!
    1. Gray brother 3 January 2020 20: 33 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: amr
      people step forward! they’re sawing the budget, they’re not sawing, BUT they are introducing new weapons faster and more productively than us ..

      I don’t know what you have there, but the Vanguard is in service with us.
      1. SovAr238A 3 January 2020 23: 13 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Gray Brother
        Quote: amr
        people step forward! they’re sawing the budget, they’re not sawing, BUT they are introducing new weapons faster and more productively than us ..

        I don’t know what you have there, but the Vanguard is in service with us.


        How many people did the Vanguard give work to?

        And how many people does an aircraft carrier give to work?
        1. Gray brother 4 January 2020 07: 50 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: SovAr238A
          And how many people does an aircraft carrier give to work?

          And here is the "work"? This weapon and its main task is to kill people or Americans.
  • Monar 3 January 2020 16: 03 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    What's the problem? On the sea for movement it is not necessary to consider the third coordinate. Even parking is easier. Get close enough to the port. And there is a regular tugboat. No landing strip and glide path. And sea drones appeared before airplanes. Torpedoes only by the criterion of disposability are not suitable. wink
    There is only one problem in the sea-okane. Seaworthiness. Which implies dimensions. Hence the price of such a device. As with an airplane, a meter-wide wingspan for starters will not work. Even the pure "iron" of the sea is more expensive.
    1. Vladimir_2U 4 January 2020 05: 13 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Your untruth! Shells even when they started to fly into the sky!
      Quote: Monar
      Torpedoes only by the criterion of disposability are not suitable.

      And the cores were launched many times!
      1. Monar 4 January 2020 05: 39 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Yeah. With Munchausen riding. He taxied.
        1. Vladimir_2U 4 January 2020 05: 47 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Look, you see! laughing
  • Kerensky 3 January 2020 16: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And why the surface and large? Strange ... He doesn’t need large internal volumes .. Speed ​​characteristics may not be impressive either - speed is not the main thing for patrolling. Discovered, identified, reported ...
    1. Monar 3 January 2020 16: 37 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Well, a small boat just throws a storm. Well, if not to the bottom. ) Again, the radius of action. And a stock of tanning salons.
      Drive under water? Limpdom without nuclear nucleon will not last long. Yes, and much more expensive with the same payload will work.
      1. Kerensky 3 January 2020 16: 48 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Alex.
        Well, a small boat just throws a storm.

        Less windage means less problems. You can plunge and wait out the storm in the depths.
        Drive under water? Limpdom without nuclear nucleon will not last long.

        And there will be a lot of expense? A pair of sensors, a bit of taxiing work, and the VVD for ascent ...
        Yes, and much more expensive with the same payload will work.

        And why is that? This observer robot can be given at least a spherical shape. Flounder about yourself in the area "swaying water" in bad weather. Use currents to patrol.
        1. Monar 3 January 2020 17: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Less windage means less problems.
          Apart from the waves?
          You can plunge and wait out the storm in the depths.
          Ballast tanks, cylinders for compressed air. Compressors .... This is about you
          And there will be a lot of expense?
          And the "pair of sensors" no longer passes. This is not even a high resolution camera. There are more sizes.
          Well, the most problematic. Communication Sense of the entire armada of balls under water, if during a multi-day storm they can’t transmit anything?
          Well, about the current. Are you sure that they will deliver the "balls" exactly where they are most needed?
          1. Kerensky 3 January 2020 19: 04 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Ballast tanks, cylinders for compressed air. Compressors ....

            A lot of semi-submerged board need to take ballast? So the consumption of the VVD will be small.
            Well, the most problematic. Communication Sense of the entire armada of balls under water, if during a multi-day storm they can’t transmit anything?

            Who is stopping them from releasing the buoy, and pulling it back after the session?
            Well, about the current. Are you sure that they will deliver the "balls" exactly where they are most needed?

            Where will they be needed? I understand that the main task is to patrol the veil through the districts, observing secrecy (passive mode).
            As you say, "balls" are quite suitable for this. Detect, identify, collect the elements of the target and transfer to headquarters.
            1. Monar 3 January 2020 19: 38 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              With a small displacement, semi-submersion during a storm will not save.
              Buoy - again, an additional mass of "iron". Cable cable. Drives ...
              Well, your semi-submerged ball in Antilles will bark. Then along the Gulf Stream. Back to drag still specifically to keep the fleet?
              the main task is to patrol the veil through the districts, observing secrecy (passive mode).
              And then in general, why the idea with "balls" and the flow? Threw underwater (like the so-called correctly) buoys. And that’s it.
              1. Kerensky 3 January 2020 20: 26 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                With a small displacement, semi-submersion during a storm will not save.

                What about a 100 meter dive?
                Well, your semi-submerged ball in Antilles will bark. Then along the Gulf Stream. Back to drag still specifically to keep the fleet?

                His task is to patrol in a given area. There he must be held. Preferably at the boundary of the currents. And there are at least solar panels with electric motors, at least inflatable sails with a pump operating from the sea. The program will cope ... And the operator, using the same storm, can shift the curtain (grid) of drones hundreds of miles in the right direction.
                Our drones can .... ts-ss!
  • bald 3 January 2020 16: 15 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I would like to know whether the congressional skepticism is crazy (of which I doubt there are exceptions), or, the budget is not rubber, and crude rubber, until you temper it, will give a negative result - money down the drain, let it not all. Anyway, now it’s necessary ... I’m silent, let’s think that it’s more important in advance.
  • eklmn 3 January 2020 16: 57 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    In the same place, in DefenseNews, it is written that the Congress / Pentagon will consider and discuss the concept, but money for construction is unlikely.
    “But the Department of Defense probably drew attention to the program, which, using investments in this type of unmanned technology, as an excuse to cancel the refueling of the aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman, which will lead the aircraft carrier to decommissioning after 25 years of its life cycle, instead of 50.”
    ““ The Truman refueling relationship shed light on the USV, ”the source said. “It is important to remember that in 2019 there was zero LUSV in the budget. Then in 2020 there were 10 of them in the amount of $ 3 billion compared to FYDP. Such a build will attract attention in any budget.
    “Due to the uncertainty of the operations concepts, requirements, technical maturity of the LUSV, including many [unique features], the contrast between the proven aircraft carrier and its air wing and unproven unmanned surface ships is absolute.”
    1. SovAr238A 3 January 2020 23: 30 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: eklmn
      “It is important to remember that in 2019 there was zero LUSV in the budget. Then in 2020 there were 10 of them in the amount of $ 3 billion

      Maybe because. what before this test were funded under the DARPA programs?
      1. eklmn 4 January 2020 02: 42 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        DARPA has tested (and continues to test) Sea Hunter.
        But there is nothing here, but they want 10. Congress is right, which is skeptical about the idea. I allocated money for the concept (well, a little). In the fall of 2020, the Pentagon will report.
        By the way, Sea Hunter safely and independently crossed the Atl.Ocean. It seems only one refueling.
  • mikstepanenko 3 January 2020 19: 56 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And then Russian hackers who hacked the system and launched missiles at the aircraft carrier will be to blame.)))
  • amr
    amr 5 January 2020 14: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Gray Brother
    I don’t know what you have there, but the Vanguard is in service with us.

    get hold of us and Satan and Governor .... but to the point ??? and sho many whom we showed Kuzkin mother ????
    Can the ruble be freely convertible around the world? Or are we using iPhones tossed the whole world ?? even our software from Tetris to Kaspersky and that one in America, because business is going on in America, but it isn’t going on here !!!
    That Vanguard of his own in one place ....