Which non-catapult/cable carrier capable UAV? Towards Scavenger

Drones to get Aircraft Carrier Test

The Royal Navy is to start trialling unmanned drones launched from aircraft carriers, Defence Minister Philip Dunne says. Drones are only used by the RAF in Afghanistan at present but Mr Dunne said they will be tested on aircraft carriers from next year. Initially the drones will be tested for surveillance use by the navy, such as searching for pirates off the coast of Somalia.

Mr Dunne said: "We are about to embark on a concept of use demonstration trial to see whether for surveillance purposes a maritime system could be deployed in the future. It is not presently anything past a demonstration phase. I think it is perhaps not a surprise that we are thinking of some trialling, some capability for future use.".............

Mr Dunne's comments raise the possibility that the new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers may have drones operating off their decks before any manned aircraft. This is because the first carrier is due to come into service in 2019 before the new joint strike fighters become available. There have been rumours the Government was thinking of introducing unmanned drones at sea. But it presents a number of difficulties such as landing the aircraft on a moving deck.

Mr Dunne said that drones would become more advanced, but added the Government had no intention of developing systems that did not require some form of human control. He said the Government had no intention of using drones for surveillance use outside of the military, such as keeping tabs on illegal fishing. The minister added: "There is a system that will be going through a concept demonstration next year. The uses of that will be for the Royal Navy to decide if they decide to procure a system in due course."......

Interesting. Was that a MIOS or SKIOS issue? Or Harrier? Suggests that someone hadn't framed the contract (or the spares provision under the contract) to account for squadrons at sea. Not that we'll ever be able to have "one of everything just in case" again - but does highlight the importance of knowing how you're going to operate and thinking it through if you're going down the CLS path.

Hi ORAC,
I was listening to a Parliamentary Select Committee meeting that raised the issue of carrier borne UAV's. A retired Air vice Marshall was advocating these aircrafct as the future but the Navy was saying to launch a UAV with anything like a decent payload will require catapult launch and arrestor wire recovery. Wed have neither.

The Air Marshall was adamant we can use drones for surveillance and i am sure he is correct but can we launch a UAV with enough fuel and the required payload from a ship and also recover it?

I have seen plenty of small UAV's launched from ships but these latest aircraft are huge and getting bigger. I have always maintained that this choice of carrier is and was bonkers, we cannot launch these larger UAV's and even with what we have, we will also not be able to recover them unless we use a crash net.

The RAF are adamant we can, they are adamanat we can cope without MPA, the Navy are saying we are overstretched and are in what appears to be total disagreement, they want MPA, they also wanted the conventional carrier.

My thoughts are that the Navy stars that are in disagreement will be replaced with folks that say the words that want to be heard.

I believe that the possibility of using on Type 45 and 26 was also mooted, so we are probably talking either small aircraft in the ScanEagle class, or possibly rotary. I very much doubt anything meaty is being contemplated just yet.

However, I think it is right that we should be trialling the concept. Any early capability would likely be limited, but there is a lot of development work going on on UAV's of all sorts, so who knows what capabilities might become available during the service life of the new ships?

LF

Hi LF,
I totally agree and we are indeed trialling a number of differing types and are also using our RFA's to launch these aircraft.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...UAV_ND1011.jpg

But if we want to look to the future and maybe consider what will replace manned aircraft or perhaps have an option then is this the way forward and if so did we indeed make the right choices when we opted for the carriers we are now building and should we have resisted this last U turn? http://www.aviationweek.com/media/im...ropGrumman.jpg

Back to the present: was there really any chance of the RN getting the Hawkeye and Grayhound even if CVF had gone ahead as CTOL?

As for the preference for STOVL supposedly expressed by Their Lordships, I think we ought to remember the problem of the art of the achievable. I still think we need to have embarked fixed wing aircraft before Queen Elizabeth/Prince Of Wales/F35B arrive in service - even if it is only a few borrowed AV8Bs attached to NFSF(FW). If ETPS can safely and economically operate small numbers of foreign jets (such as the Alpha Jet or Grippen) then why cannot NFSF(FW) operate say a couple of borrowed AV8Bs to give us a jet for UK based RN fixed wing jocks to fly, to embark on deck, and to contribute to trials and development of landing aids and other equipment? Would this not be an easier and simpler thing to do that the proposal I made here (over a few posts/pages)?


Or embark foreign ones, talking of which back on 17 December 2010, vecvechookattack wrote:

Why is this not happening? Would embarking foreign Harriers be too embarrassing for the Government? Yet the need for training future carrier personnel is acknowledged by the commisioning of facilities like this - so why not provide some live training at sea for deck crews at al?

Due to our skintness

I think it is cheaper to embed the pilots and selected deck crew on US and French carriers (given that we already run exchanges and already have a 50 year defence pact with France) then have them flow into instructor spots in those two navies so by the time we get to 2018 we've had several people aboard large carriers and Marine core gators. Rather than doing a work up from scratch.

Given that the F35 is a supersonic combat jet and far bigger than the harrier I suspect that a lot of the handling procedures and other elements are going to have to be cribbed off the US and French who have experience with large carriers whereas ours went in 1976 or so. Surely it's better to get the experience from experienced users who have been continously putting the theory into practice so there's a trained experienced cadre that had direct access to US/French experts while they relearnt all the skills that we used to have.

What's the point in continually refining harrier tactics et all when the replacement jet is a multi-role supersonic strike aircraft with an electronics fit more in keeping with the kit thats on US and French combat jets as opposed to the GR harrier?

We have 36 fixed wing pilots in the FAA from memory and I think we currently have 18 on exhange with more to go out. I also remember reading about a couple of meterlogical officers having been seconded to a CVN also

so by the time we get to 2018 we've had several people aboard

Not quite the same as having a few jets embarked ourselves and everyone in the carrier getting experience.

It will be from scratch for most of the personnel involved. Why do you think so many people have expressed safety concerns (such as those mentioned here)?

The lack of adequately training personnel could delay the carrier coming into service by another three or four years, the Navy commander has said.

Another officer has told The Telegraph that the loss of carrier deck handling skills could prove "disastrous" with fatal accidents caused by inexperienced ratings.

and..

With the loss of the aircraft carriers Ark Royal and Illustrious there is little employment for highly specialised deck crew that safely fly and recover aircraft.

The senior officer's concerns that have been passed on to the head of the Navy, are that with the "skills wastage and inability to ramp up level of skills" the new carriers cannot be brought in "in the timescale envisaged".

"I believe it would not be possible given the reduction in the Navy and difficulty of retraining these skills that they can be brought in time scales envisaged.

"The experienced people who we would put on ships are all leaving because they don't have work. This situation is considerably worrying."

Surely basics are basics - Harrier or F35B? Things like handling live aircraft on a moving deck at sea, making sure that the ship is heading in the right direction and speed to launch or recover aircraft, and lots of other whole ship aspects.

To my mind, we also need to think of crises that may occur this decade. The current mantra seems to be cut back, make do, ignore risks, get defeated. Yet despite the cuts, our politicians seemed determined to make noises with respect to possible crises involving Syria or Iran.

Yours is about the most sensible post I've seen on here so far. I've suggested before if people go to SLD and read the f-35 marine interviews, it will give an idea to where UK is heading IMHO

(In response to WE Branch Fanatic) ...because while they make those noises, they continue to give the great unwashed/uncaring the impression that we still 'can' rather than letting them know the true state we're in.

maybe the Chinese will sell/lease us their training carrier eventually

I wouldn't worry about skill fade on the bridge. We had the Invincible class for 30 years, and they never managed to get the wind right once.

Also - so long as these ratings that are hell bent on creating fatalities on deck only kill themselves then we should be good. ;)

None whatsoever. The E2 comes in at $230m, add on the extra's and its unfordable. The E2 has been tested with a ski jump and the engine upgrade since would improve it capabilities in STOBAR. But give the UK's history of re-using ancient radars over and over, in re-used aircraft I can't believe they would be willing to spend $20million. The Merlins are 'free'.

Personally I think developing something like the a-160 hummingbird is a better long term strategy. I hope Boeing persist with it. 20 hours at 250FL and $20million each, impressive if they can get it reliable.

Home for Christmas: 9 Flattops at Norfolk

With the returns from deployment of the carrier DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER and her escorting cruiser HUE CITY on Dec. 19, and the amphibious ships IWO JIMA and NEW YORK on Dec. 20, the piers at Norfolk’s naval base are about as full up as they’ll ever be.

Five aircraft carriers, four big-deck amphibious assault ships, a full cast of “small boy” surface warships, along with nuclear submarines and support ships, are crowding the base, giving a comfortably snug feeling to the waterfront. Similar scenes — although not with the gathering of flattops seen here — are taking place at other fleet concentration areas like San Diego and Pearl Harbor.......

http://blogs.defensenews.com/interce...-ZN152-189.jpg

From bottom to top, front to back:

Aircraft carrier DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (CVN 69)

Aircraft carrier GEORGE H. W. BUSH (CVN 77)

Aircraft carrier ENTERPRISE (CVN 65)

Amphibious assault ship BATAAN (LHD 5)

Aircraft carrier ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN 72)

Aircraft carrier HARRY S TRUMAN (CVN 75)

Amphibious assault ship WASP (LHD 1)

Amphibious assault ship KEARSARGE (LHD 3)

Amphibious landing platform dock NEW YORK (LPD 21)

A T-AKE dry cargo ammunition ship

Amphibious assault ship IWO JIMA (LHD 7)

and various cruisers, destroyers, frigates and submarines of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet.

Also across Hampton Roads but not in these photos are two other carriers at Newport News Shipbuilding: THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71), now finishing up a three-and-a-half-year refueling overhaul, and the new GERALD R. FORD (CVN 78), first ship of a new class of carriers, that will launch in mid-2013.....

Loving that the 11 Arleigh Burkes and 3 Ticonderogas are simply 'small boys'!

They must have enough SM-2s between them to rip a hole in time!

and that is roughly three times as big as any other fleet in the world ...................

tied up for Christmas

No wonder the politicians scent cuts

It seems to me that if the Navy lacks the skill sets to utilize the new carrier operationally, we may as well save the country a fortune and cancel it now.

maybe the Yanks will sell/rent/lease us one of theirs when they go over the fiscal cliff in january?

The picture of those US warships made me smile as we have a number of very large Naval Dockyards that always look relatively unoccupied. That certainly is not the case with that image.

I guess we could pretend that quality beats quantity :O:rolleyes::rolleyes:

ORAC, please re-size your boats piccy to within PPRuNe limits.

Thanks.