Future Carrier (Including Costs)
The following 4 users liked this post by ORAC:
"Presumably just civil use whilst the RN use the deep port at Mare Harbour. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/harl...-port-project/
Harland & Wolff preferred bidder on Falklands port project"
It's for the Sea Lion Oil Field development - the new operator - the Israeli company Navitas - are ramping up activity for the planned start up in around 2026. They've been hiring locally and are out to tender on accommodation, offices etc
Harland & Wolff preferred bidder on Falklands port project"
It's for the Sea Lion Oil Field development - the new operator - the Israeli company Navitas - are ramping up activity for the planned start up in around 2026. They've been hiring locally and are out to tender on accommodation, offices etc
"Although some way off and requiring much higher power than DragonFire, evolved LDEWs may become the only viable counter to future ballistic and hypersonic missile threats. British industry has an unhappy track record of successful innovations and developments that were not commercially exploited or operationalised due to a lack of investment. "
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Flowcopter Ltd and Skylift UAV have both been handed contracts by the Royal Navy for "a long endurance maritime ISR Uncrewed Air System". "trials activity will consist of operating a UAS airborne with a payload that senses or transmits radio frequencies (RFP)."
https://www.flowcopter.com/applications
https://www.skyliftuav.co.uk/
https://www.flowcopter.com/applications
https://www.skyliftuav.co.uk/
Thread Starter
Quod Erat Demonstrandum - the largest NATO exercise since the end of the Cold War has included a carrier group protecting amphibious forces.
820 NAS have been good enough to remind everyone that they provide ASW (in conjunction with frigates, submarines, and MPA), and air defence (obviously in conjunction with the F-35B Lightning and AAW destroyers) for the entire task group, not just the carrier as the media fools seem to insist:
The Carrier Strike Group seems to have been right up North, in a fjord:
Of course the incoming aircraft over Norwegian territory might also be taking a direct route to attack the forces in the fjords.
Here is a NATO video dated 5 March 2024:
HMS Prince of Wales can be seen from 2:15:
In the North Sea Exercise Joint Warrior has been taking place. The exercises involved 14 countries with nearly 50 vessels. This includes aircraft carriers, destroyers, frigates, patrol vessels, minehunters, submarines, and auxiliary ships. There were 100 fast jets, 30 helicopters, and various surveillance, patrol, and air-to-air refuelling aircraft. Their mission? Within the Steadfast Defender exercise scenario, they had to dominate the seas and the skies in the high north so that amphibious landings could be executed.
NATO task groups come together off Norway coast - Royal Navy - 14 March 24
Two potent task groups proved their strength to defend Arctic waters and shorelines from threats when they came together as part of NATO exercises.
The UK Carrier Strike Group, led by HMS Prince of Wales, was joined by a NATO Amphibious Task Group and a range of aircraft off the coast of Norway as part of Exercise Nordic Response.
The formation of more than 10 ships from eight nations gave the men and women on board the chance to practise close manoeuvres - overcoming language barriers and different ways of operating at sea.
In a show of might for NATO and it partners, the exercise allowed the vessels and their aircraft to demonstrate their ability to defend allied territory while simultaneously defending themselves from potential enemies.
Taking part were: Royal Navy ships HMS Prince of Wales, frigate HMS Portland, Royal Fleet Auxiliary tanker Tidespring and amphibious landing ship RFA Mounts Bay; Spanish frigate ESPS Almirante Juan de Borbon; German replenishment ship FGS Bonn; Norwegian frigate HNoMS Otto Sverdrup, corvette HNoMS Gnist, patrol vessels HNoMS Olav Tyrggvason and HNoMS Magnus Lagabote; Norwegian coast guard ship KV Bjornoya; Dutch support ship HNLMS Karel Doorman; Italian aircraft carrier ITS Giuseppe Garibaldi; French frigate FS Normadie; and US destroyer USS Paul Ignatius.
Karel Doorman and Giuseppe Garibaldi were acting as part of the amphibious group, supporting marines and operating support helicopters. The carrier group was acting in the defence of the amphibious group.
As noted elsewhere on a thread dedicated to the topic of the carrier and sea control:
A. Sea Control (ASW, air defence/AAW, and anti surface warfare) is a major mission for the carrier and the carrier group. It was during the Second World War and the Cold War, and it is again now in a renewed era of peer adversaries and contested seas.
B. Sea Control is difficult to achieve without carrier aviation. Geography, Mathematics, and Physics show that attacking aircraft are best dealt with using fighters to kill the archers, not the arrows, and that the best chance of stopping anti ship missiles is to engage the launch platform. Similarly constant helicopter ASW operations are best supported by a big deck with multiple helicopters, and Physics shows that modern long range sonars need to work in conjunction with dipping sonar to achieve their potential - and vice versa.
820 NAS have been good enough to remind everyone that they provide ASW (in conjunction with frigates, submarines, and MPA), and air defence (obviously in conjunction with the F-35B Lightning and AAW destroyers) for the entire task group, not just the carrier as the media fools seem to insist:
The Carrier Strike Group seems to have been right up North, in a fjord:
Of course the incoming aircraft over Norwegian territory might also be taking a direct route to attack the forces in the fjords.
Here is a NATO video dated 5 March 2024:
HMS Prince of Wales can be seen from 2:15:
In the North Sea Exercise Joint Warrior has been taking place. The exercises involved 14 countries with nearly 50 vessels. This includes aircraft carriers, destroyers, frigates, patrol vessels, minehunters, submarines, and auxiliary ships. There were 100 fast jets, 30 helicopters, and various surveillance, patrol, and air-to-air refuelling aircraft. Their mission? Within the Steadfast Defender exercise scenario, they had to dominate the seas and the skies in the high north so that amphibious landings could be executed.
NATO task groups come together off Norway coast - Royal Navy - 14 March 24
Two potent task groups proved their strength to defend Arctic waters and shorelines from threats when they came together as part of NATO exercises.
The UK Carrier Strike Group, led by HMS Prince of Wales, was joined by a NATO Amphibious Task Group and a range of aircraft off the coast of Norway as part of Exercise Nordic Response.
The formation of more than 10 ships from eight nations gave the men and women on board the chance to practise close manoeuvres - overcoming language barriers and different ways of operating at sea.
In a show of might for NATO and it partners, the exercise allowed the vessels and their aircraft to demonstrate their ability to defend allied territory while simultaneously defending themselves from potential enemies.
Taking part were: Royal Navy ships HMS Prince of Wales, frigate HMS Portland, Royal Fleet Auxiliary tanker Tidespring and amphibious landing ship RFA Mounts Bay; Spanish frigate ESPS Almirante Juan de Borbon; German replenishment ship FGS Bonn; Norwegian frigate HNoMS Otto Sverdrup, corvette HNoMS Gnist, patrol vessels HNoMS Olav Tyrggvason and HNoMS Magnus Lagabote; Norwegian coast guard ship KV Bjornoya; Dutch support ship HNLMS Karel Doorman; Italian aircraft carrier ITS Giuseppe Garibaldi; French frigate FS Normadie; and US destroyer USS Paul Ignatius.
Karel Doorman and Giuseppe Garibaldi were acting as part of the amphibious group, supporting marines and operating support helicopters. The carrier group was acting in the defence of the amphibious group.
As noted elsewhere on a thread dedicated to the topic of the carrier and sea control:
A. Sea Control (ASW, air defence/AAW, and anti surface warfare) is a major mission for the carrier and the carrier group. It was during the Second World War and the Cold War, and it is again now in a renewed era of peer adversaries and contested seas.
B. Sea Control is difficult to achieve without carrier aviation. Geography, Mathematics, and Physics show that attacking aircraft are best dealt with using fighters to kill the archers, not the arrows, and that the best chance of stopping anti ship missiles is to engage the launch platform. Similarly constant helicopter ASW operations are best supported by a big deck with multiple helicopters, and Physics shows that modern long range sonars need to work in conjunction with dipping sonar to achieve their potential - and vice versa.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 16th Mar 2024 at 19:42.
ORAC,
BBC has some info re such projects which are organic to the US Army and US Navy for such things.
Perhaps some cut and paste on the drawings could prove a lucrative return for the UK designers.
US Army ships are headed to Gaza now.
This was done in Kuwait and used for years and has been done in Military Training Operations in South Korea.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68534370
BBC has some info re such projects which are organic to the US Army and US Navy for such things.
Perhaps some cut and paste on the drawings could prove a lucrative return for the UK designers.
US Army ships are headed to Gaza now.
This was done in Kuwait and used for years and has been done in Military Training Operations in South Korea.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68534370
Presumably just civil use whilst the RN use the deep port at Mare Harbour.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/harl...-port-project/
Harland & Wolff preferred bidder on Falklands port project
Harland & Wolff has announced that it has been awarded preferred bidder status for the Falkland Islands Port Replacement Project (FIPASS).
The project will involve the construction, transportation and installation of four floating pontoons of circa 90 metres each in length.
The project is expected to generate between £100m and £120m revenue over a two-year period commencing in FY24.
The company will use it expansive facilities across the UK to provide optionality and de-risk the fabrication of these pontoons.
https://www.harland-wolff.com/news/d...ility-project/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/harl...-port-project/
Harland & Wolff preferred bidder on Falklands port project
Harland & Wolff has announced that it has been awarded preferred bidder status for the Falkland Islands Port Replacement Project (FIPASS).
The project will involve the construction, transportation and installation of four floating pontoons of circa 90 metres each in length.
The project is expected to generate between £100m and £120m revenue over a two-year period commencing in FY24.
The company will use it expansive facilities across the UK to provide optionality and de-risk the fabrication of these pontoons.
https://www.harland-wolff.com/news/d...ility-project/
Last edited by SASless; 17th Mar 2024 at 15:00.
A problem is Harland and Wolff are very dependent on financing - the Govt had to guarantee their latest loan 100% I understand. Its basically a subsidy for N Ireland
Slipped out 2 days before Christmas. The guys who run H&W are masters at getting public funding for their N Ireland ventures. They started out as a tiny oil company"In order to ensure that the proposed loan facility is compliant with relevant rules where UKEF is to provide a 100% guarantee to UK commercial lending banks, UKEF will appoint an independent 3rd party to ascertain an appropriate premium over SONIA. This process will commence in January 2024.
View from Vox
Harland & Wolff has secured government approval to progress negotiations for a £200m guaranteed loan facility with UKEF. The news prompted a strong reaction from markets, sending HARL shares 24% higher in early trade. HARL said its current cash reserves plus expected cashflows from existing contracts in 2024 will be sufficient to cover its working capital requirements until the new loan facility is completed. Following the government green light, Harland will now firm up the bank syndicate, appoint a lead arranger and commence documentation in relation to the credit and guarantee agreements as well as security package that will be offered. It is likely the security package will entail providing the lending banks with a first charge on all of HARL 's assets, similar to what was provided to Riverstone Credit Partners in March 2022.
This transaction will be subject to approval by the Government, final approval of the financing terms, and Investment Committee approvals of the lending banks."
" As the business environment became increasingly competitive the yard began to have difficulty in generating enough business to meet overhead expenses. The yard was last profitable in 2015 and the following year it had an operating loss of £6 million.[size=8333px] [/size]In 2018, the parent company Fred. Olsen & Co. restructured and decided to place Harland and Wolff up for sale. No buyer emerged and on 5 August 2019 the company announced that they would cease trading and entered formal administration.[size=8333px] [/size]Subsequently, on 1 October 2019, it was announced that the shipyard had been bought for £6 million by the London-based energy firm, InfraStrata."
Slipped out 2 days before Christmas. The guys who run H&W are masters at getting public funding for their N Ireland ventures. They started out as a tiny oil company"In order to ensure that the proposed loan facility is compliant with relevant rules where UKEF is to provide a 100% guarantee to UK commercial lending banks, UKEF will appoint an independent 3rd party to ascertain an appropriate premium over SONIA. This process will commence in January 2024.
View from Vox
Harland & Wolff has secured government approval to progress negotiations for a £200m guaranteed loan facility with UKEF. The news prompted a strong reaction from markets, sending HARL shares 24% higher in early trade. HARL said its current cash reserves plus expected cashflows from existing contracts in 2024 will be sufficient to cover its working capital requirements until the new loan facility is completed. Following the government green light, Harland will now firm up the bank syndicate, appoint a lead arranger and commence documentation in relation to the credit and guarantee agreements as well as security package that will be offered. It is likely the security package will entail providing the lending banks with a first charge on all of HARL 's assets, similar to what was provided to Riverstone Credit Partners in March 2022.
This transaction will be subject to approval by the Government, final approval of the financing terms, and Investment Committee approvals of the lending banks."
" As the business environment became increasingly competitive the yard began to have difficulty in generating enough business to meet overhead expenses. The yard was last profitable in 2015 and the following year it had an operating loss of £6 million.[size=8333px] [/size]In 2018, the parent company Fred. Olsen & Co. restructured and decided to place Harland and Wolff up for sale. No buyer emerged and on 5 August 2019 the company announced that they would cease trading and entered formal administration.[size=8333px] [/size]Subsequently, on 1 October 2019, it was announced that the shipyard had been bought for £6 million by the London-based energy firm, InfraStrata."
Last edited by Asturias56; 17th Mar 2024 at 11:51.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
A big scoop by @UKDefJournal - HMS BULWARK seems highly unlikely to return to sea, despite prior MOD promises to do so. With HMS ALBION going into reserve, if true, this means UK will not have an active LPD fleet for first time in nearly 60yrs.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-...unless-needed/
HMS Bulwark unlikely to return to sea ‘unless needed’
Assault ship HMS Bulwark was to replace her sister ship this year, however, it has now been revealed that the vessel will be “maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required“.
The information came to light in a statement from James Cartlidge, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, when asked about the future of the vessel.
“I can confirm HMS BULWARK will be regenerated from extended readiness and maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required.”
However, the Ministry of Defence had previously promised “HMS Bulwark will remain in dock to complete phase 2 ahead of her final phase 3 recertification package, before returning to fleet in the summer of 2023.”
This commitment outlined a clear timeline and specific steps for the maintenance and upgrade of HMS Bulwark, with the anticipation of the ship returning to operational service.
The latest statement from James Cartlidge, however, suggests a very different approach to HMS Bulwark’s operational status. By stating that HMS Bulwark will be “regenerated from extended readiness and maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required,” it introduces a conditional element to the ship’s return to service. This phrase implies that the ship’s future deployment is not as straightforward or guaranteed as previously communicated.
Instead of a firm commitment to reintegrate HMS Bulwark into the fleet by a specific date, the emphasis is now on maintaining the vessel in a state of readiness, contingent upon the need for its deployment.
An anonymous source within the Royal Navy told me:
“What we’re actually seeing with HMS Bulwark is extended readiness, just under a different name. Despite previous announcements about returning to service, I think most people knew that was unlikely. The reality is that the ship is unlikely to be deployed for any significant operations. The notion of being ready ‘if required’ subtly but unmistakably points to this being the case.”
Both HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark made headlines when leaked plans suggested the one or both of the ships would be axed but after a period of outrage from within defence, the media and the public, it was announced that both vessels would be kept, although one would have assumed, operational.
In short, HMS Bulwark’s return to sea is contingent upon an apparent necessity, indicating that the vessel will be maintained in port in a state of readiness without a definitive plan for regular deployment.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-...unless-needed/
HMS Bulwark unlikely to return to sea ‘unless needed’
Assault ship HMS Bulwark was to replace her sister ship this year, however, it has now been revealed that the vessel will be “maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required“.
The information came to light in a statement from James Cartlidge, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, when asked about the future of the vessel.
“I can confirm HMS BULWARK will be regenerated from extended readiness and maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required.”
However, the Ministry of Defence had previously promised “HMS Bulwark will remain in dock to complete phase 2 ahead of her final phase 3 recertification package, before returning to fleet in the summer of 2023.”
This commitment outlined a clear timeline and specific steps for the maintenance and upgrade of HMS Bulwark, with the anticipation of the ship returning to operational service.
The latest statement from James Cartlidge, however, suggests a very different approach to HMS Bulwark’s operational status. By stating that HMS Bulwark will be “regenerated from extended readiness and maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required,” it introduces a conditional element to the ship’s return to service. This phrase implies that the ship’s future deployment is not as straightforward or guaranteed as previously communicated.
Instead of a firm commitment to reintegrate HMS Bulwark into the fleet by a specific date, the emphasis is now on maintaining the vessel in a state of readiness, contingent upon the need for its deployment.
An anonymous source within the Royal Navy told me:
“What we’re actually seeing with HMS Bulwark is extended readiness, just under a different name. Despite previous announcements about returning to service, I think most people knew that was unlikely. The reality is that the ship is unlikely to be deployed for any significant operations. The notion of being ready ‘if required’ subtly but unmistakably points to this being the case.”
Both HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark made headlines when leaked plans suggested the one or both of the ships would be axed but after a period of outrage from within defence, the media and the public, it was announced that both vessels would be kept, although one would have assumed, operational.
In short, HMS Bulwark’s return to sea is contingent upon an apparent necessity, indicating that the vessel will be maintained in port in a state of readiness without a definitive plan for regular deployment.
Is too much being read into this?
Which of the three Defence Ouputs are we talking about:
Defence Policy - Clearly Not Applicable
Defence Capability - Already Available
Defence Operations - "maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required"
AFAIK under the Defence Operating Model:
Which of the three Defence Ouputs are we talking about:
Defence Policy - Clearly Not Applicable
Defence Capability - Already Available
Defence Operations - "maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required"
AFAIK under the Defence Operating Model:
Operate is about conducting Military Operations when required by Ministers Operations are one of the three Defence Outputs and are Defence’s unique the UK’s National Security Objectives as defined by Policy and Strategy.
Is too much being read into this?
Which of the three Defence Ouputs are we talking about:
Defence Policy - Clearly Not Applicable
Defence Capability - Already Available
Defence Operations - "maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required"
AFAIK under the Defence Operating Model:
Which of the three Defence Ouputs are we talking about:
Defence Policy - Clearly Not Applicable
Defence Capability - Already Available
Defence Operations - "maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required"
AFAIK under the Defence Operating Model:
Thread Starter
Talking of speed/time/distance considerations - this news article about ongoing events in a small part of the Red Sea is worth reading: For U.S. carrier pilots, a vexing mission hunting down Houthi missiles and drones - NBC News
The U.S. pilots also have other tasks: to defend the Navy flotilla in the Red Sea from incoming Houthi anti-ship missiles or drones, come to the aid of commercial vessels under threat and fly over the area to demonstrate that the Red Sea is safe for civilian navigation.
“We will be airborne, and then, if tasked, we will shift our positioning to protect ships that are in distress if called upon," Keating said. "Our presence is the important thing that reinforces that it’s safe to operate in the South Red Sea.”
Presence and proximity - again!
Here is a running list of engagements against Houthi anti ship attacks in the Red Sea. As you can see the Super Hornets from the USS Dwight DEisenhower have splashed quite few UAVs and anti ship missiles, particularly when these things have been launched in large numbers. Without carrier based fighters how much more likely is it that some would have got through the defences, how many more merchant vessels would have been hit, how many more would have suffered damage that led to them sinking, and how many more merchant seamen would have been killed or injured?
Defence in depth is for winners.
The Super Hornets from Ike were not the first shipborne aircraft to splash UAVs. USMC Harriers aboard the USS Bataan were the first to achieve kills. I suppose this underlines the importance of all shipborne aircraft.
The U.S. pilots also have other tasks: to defend the Navy flotilla in the Red Sea from incoming Houthi anti-ship missiles or drones, come to the aid of commercial vessels under threat and fly over the area to demonstrate that the Red Sea is safe for civilian navigation.
“We will be airborne, and then, if tasked, we will shift our positioning to protect ships that are in distress if called upon," Keating said. "Our presence is the important thing that reinforces that it’s safe to operate in the South Red Sea.”
Presence and proximity - again!
Here is a running list of engagements against Houthi anti ship attacks in the Red Sea. As you can see the Super Hornets from the USS Dwight DEisenhower have splashed quite few UAVs and anti ship missiles, particularly when these things have been launched in large numbers. Without carrier based fighters how much more likely is it that some would have got through the defences, how many more merchant vessels would have been hit, how many more would have suffered damage that led to them sinking, and how many more merchant seamen would have been killed or injured?
Defence in depth is for winners.
The Super Hornets from Ike were not the first shipborne aircraft to splash UAVs. USMC Harriers aboard the USS Bataan were the first to achieve kills. I suppose this underlines the importance of all shipborne aircraft.
I'm sure the Houthi's believe they've only got to get lucky once to hit something very valuable
https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/43934/documents/217782/default
Somewhat underwhelming. Particularly the third squadron not standing up until 2033......
Somewhat underwhelming. Particularly the third squadron not standing up until 2033......
The following users liked this post:
N_a_B, thank you for drawing this to our attention.
Given the grindingly slow acquisition rate 2033 sadly seems realistic especially given negotiations for a/c 49-75 are still on going.
A slight ray of sunshine amid the gloom.
Also two more have been delivered to Marham since the date of the letter.
Given the grindingly slow acquisition rate 2033 sadly seems realistic especially given negotiations for a/c 49-75 are still on going.
A slight ray of sunshine amid the gloom.
We have already implemented the first increased recruitment of the required engineering workforce across the RN and RAF. The Operational Conversion Unit continues to graduate F-35B pilots into the Force at a sufficient rate. Additionally, the Force has trained a new tactical weapons instructor and 6 flying instructors, which has provided additional instructor depth.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Ooops…
…During a mandatory test on board 🇩🇰HDMS Niels Juel (alongside in Naval Station Korsør) a Harpoon missile booster activated and cannot currently be deactivated.
There is a risk the missile may launch and air and sea space around the area has been closed.
Danes have form for this - in 1982 an older variant of Harpoon was accidentally launched from the frigate HDMS Peder Skram. It flew 21km, destroyed 4 cottages and damaged 130 other buildings fortunately with no loss of life….
https://www-forsvaret-dk.translate.g..._x_tr_pto=wapp
…During a mandatory test on board 🇩🇰HDMS Niels Juel (alongside in Naval Station Korsør) a Harpoon missile booster activated and cannot currently be deactivated.
There is a risk the missile may launch and air and sea space around the area has been closed.
Danes have form for this - in 1982 an older variant of Harpoon was accidentally launched from the frigate HDMS Peder Skram. It flew 21km, destroyed 4 cottages and damaged 130 other buildings fortunately with no loss of life….
https://www-forsvaret-dk.translate.g..._x_tr_pto=wapp
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Naval kamikaze drone MUSKIE M18 presented in the US. It has a range of 925km, payload capacity 450kg, length of 5,5m and speed 90km/h. An installed Starlink can also be seen on the drone.
In general, from its characteristics, purpose and appearance, it is clear that the drone was created under the impression of the Ukrainian MAGURA V5 naval kamikaze drone.
https://www.navalnews.com/event-news...-attack-drone/
Maritime Tactical Systems, Inc. (MARTAC), an innovator in Maritime Autonomous Surface Vessels (ASVs), is proud to unveil the latest product in our portfolio, the MUSKIE M18 (M18) ASV. The M18 is an 18 foot (5.5m) low-cost, attritable system for use on one-way missions. The M18 configuration is designed as a high-performance, monohull ASV capable of burst speeds of 50+ kts, open ocean cruising ranges up to 500 nautical miles, and a payload capacity up to 1000 pounds (450 kg).
Recently procured by the United States Department of Defense (DoD), the M18 was designed and developed from concept to empower operators to execute missions accommodating a variety of payloads, kinetics and kill systems in a low-cost platform that allows for broad acquisition and adoption of an asymmetric capability against conventional naval assets…..
In general, from its characteristics, purpose and appearance, it is clear that the drone was created under the impression of the Ukrainian MAGURA V5 naval kamikaze drone.
https://www.navalnews.com/event-news...-attack-drone/
Maritime Tactical Systems, Inc. (MARTAC), an innovator in Maritime Autonomous Surface Vessels (ASVs), is proud to unveil the latest product in our portfolio, the MUSKIE M18 (M18) ASV. The M18 is an 18 foot (5.5m) low-cost, attritable system for use on one-way missions. The M18 configuration is designed as a high-performance, monohull ASV capable of burst speeds of 50+ kts, open ocean cruising ranges up to 500 nautical miles, and a payload capacity up to 1000 pounds (450 kg).
Recently procured by the United States Department of Defense (DoD), the M18 was designed and developed from concept to empower operators to execute missions accommodating a variety of payloads, kinetics and kill systems in a low-cost platform that allows for broad acquisition and adoption of an asymmetric capability against conventional naval assets…..