Register here

Author Topic: Several Arsenal ship concepts  (Read 55434 times)

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #30 on: September 08, 2009, 04:18:30 pm »
NDIA probably moved everything around or deleted it because it is old (~1999). Anyway will attach it here.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9693
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #31 on: September 09, 2009, 05:32:44 pm »
Lockheed Martin brochure for the Long Range Land Attack Projectile.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/mfc/Photos/MFC_LRLAP_product_card.pdf

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #32 on: September 10, 2009, 07:47:22 pm »
Here is video of how an LRAP round can effect the battlefield. If VGAS rather than AGS had gone ahead this kind of naval gunfire support (NGS) capability would be available to any hull able to carry a 64 cell Mk 41 strike length VLS.

"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9693
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #33 on: December 03, 2009, 02:41:36 pm »
I thought that this report from the Rand Corporation was interesting.
 
The Arsenal Ship Acquisition Process Experience by Robert S Leonard et al., RAND NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INST SANTA MONICA CA (Jan 1999)

Quote
The Arsenal Ship acquisition program was unique in two respects: it represented a new operational concept for Navy ships, and its management structure and process were different from traditional military ship-building programs. The Arsenal Ship program was, in effect, an experiment in both product and process. Three specific goals of the program were outlined at its inception: demonstrate the capability affordably; leverage commercial practices and technologies; and, demonstrate the reformed acquisition process. This research focuses on the program's acquisition strategy.

Handle / proxy Url:  http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA365150

Offline Matt R.

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 80
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #34 on: September 10, 2011, 12:18:06 pm »
Below is an article I just came across :
Quote
Maritech wave-piercing hull may be proposed for arsenal ship
by John Bosma
Defense Daily / April 12, 1996
 
A radical new monohull being developed under the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency MARITECH (Maritime Technology) program may be proposed for the Navy/DARPA "arsenal ship" program, according to industry officials.
 
According to a program source, a high-speed wave-piercing MARITECH monohull from an industry team of General Dynamics' Bath Iron Works Div. and Norway's Kvaerner-Masa Marine may be an entrant in the arsenal ship design competition. For MARITECH, the BIW/KMM team has studied a 43,000-ton, 800- foot wave-piercer carrying 20,000 tons of containers.
 
The wave-piercer concept originated from KMM's Finnish yards, where it has undergone extensive tank and open-water testing. The wave-piercer is a very slender hull with a knifelike bow that slices through waves rather than riding over them, as more heavily constructed bows on conventional ships are designed to do.
 
KMM calls the wave-piercer "breakthrough technology." It says wave-piercer cargo liners could run efficiently at 30-35 knots, using 120,000 shaft horsepower, in transatlantic winter seas, considered the industry's benchmark for the toughest operating conditions. Even higher speeds are possible with more horsepower.
 
By contrast, today's containerships now run 23-25 knots, with the latest containerships reaching 27 knots. Industry experts say that over 50 percent of transatlantic containership crossings run behind schedule, mostly due to weather.
 
These speed figures suggest that a wave-piercer arsenal ship would be faster than most Navy surface ships. The low crew manning that the Navy seeks for arsenal ships would mesh with the sharply reduced crews required by modern commercial vessels.
 
MARITECH is a five-year, $220 million DARPA/Department of Commerce-Maritime Administration program to improve U.S. shipbuilding processes and ship design. It comes under the Clinton administration's five-year National Shipbuilding Initiative, begun in FY 94.
 
Source
« Last Edit: January 01, 2012, 12:47:28 pm by Matt R. »

Offline Matt R.

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 80
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #35 on: September 10, 2011, 01:31:50 pm »
Some pics of Rene Loire's proposed Striker.
Opinions on the hull form (barge-like) chosen ?
 
« Last Edit: September 10, 2011, 01:34:35 pm by Matt R. »

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8038
  • The path not taken.
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #36 on: September 10, 2011, 11:47:13 pm »
Some pics of Rene Loire's proposed Striker.
Opinions on the hull form (barge-like) chosen ?

Seems like it would have been (and still would be) quite cost effective.


The Ohio SSGNs are pretty much taking up this role (minus the SAMs)

Not necessarily. SSGNs are not by definition readily expendable, and they have a much smaller loadout (with less options) than an arsenal ship design would.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2011, 11:53:24 pm by Grey Havoc »
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11101
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #37 on: September 11, 2011, 07:11:28 am »
Not necessarily. SSGNs are not by definition readily expendable, and they have a much smaller loadout (with less options) than an arsenal ship design would.

You think an Arsenal Ship loaded up with more cells than an SSGN would be "readily expendable"?   Good one.  ;D
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1670
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #38 on: September 11, 2011, 08:16:26 pm »
You think an Arsenal Ship loaded up with more cells than an SSGN would be "readily expendable"?   Good one.  ;D

Way back when the Arsenal Ship was first being proposed the US Navy held an "industry day" in Washington to discuss it. They handed out 3-ring binders with info on the proposal. I got one, but I think I threw it out not long afterwards because it really wasn't all that interesting. (Typical contractor specs listing all the requirements for submitting a contract--how many copies had to be submitted, how big the paper had to be, what the due dates were. Almost nothing about the actual requirements for the weapons system. Boring boring boring. No illustrations either.)

Anyway, going to that meeting was really rather weird. There were a lot of military contractors there to find out what the Navy wanted for an Arsenal Ship. But just listening to the presentations it was clear that this project was never going to get anywhere and they were never going to build the ship. I heard people discussing it in the hallways and they were talking about how nutty it was. For one thing, it was going to require something like 90% of the cruise missiles then in the Navy's inventory. And I think there was discussion of building only two of them, one in the Atlantic and one in the Pacific.

Recently the Navy's LCS has come under criticism because there was no clearly stated need for the ships and the Navy is trying to figure out what they will actually be good at. The Arsenal Ship was a more extreme example of what's happening with LCS and proof that the Navy should never let an admiral push through a pet idea without it being rigorously reviewed first.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2011, 08:18:47 pm by blackstar »

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8038
  • The path not taken.
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #39 on: September 12, 2011, 04:45:34 am »
Not necessarily. SSGNs are not by definition readily expendable, and they have a much smaller loadout (with less options) than an arsenal ship design would.

You think an Arsenal Ship loaded up with more cells than an SSGN would be "readily expendable"?   Good one.  ;D

Yes, I do, especially with regards as to the crew. Not to mention being much cheaper than either a SSGN conversion or new build (in terms of both construction and overall operating costs).

blackstar, by any chance was the author of this one of those who took part in the industry day you were at, do you remember?

Quote
Proposed Littoral Dominant Battle Group Centered Around The Arsenal Ship
 
 
 
CCS 1997
 
 
 
Subject Area - Warfighting
 
 
 
Executive Summary
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Title: A Proposed Littoral Dominant Battle Group Centered Around The Arsenal Ship
 
 
 
Author: Lieutenant Commander John P. Looney, United States Navy
 
 
 
Thesis: For the projected $500 million investment in a demonstrator Arsenal Ship, the Navy will likely get what it is asking for, a ship designed to help the aircraft carrier battle group make the transition from a blue-water dominant team to a littoral dominant team. Just as the Navy built the aircraft carrier battle group team and doctrine to dominate the blue-water for the past 50 plus years, the Navy now needs to build the team and the doctrine that can dominate the littoral battle space of the 21st century. The Arsenal Ship concept should center around having industry build a ship that could be the centerpiece of a littoral dominant battle group.
 
 
 
Background: The United States Navy has shifted its strategic focus from the blue-water to the littorals; therefore, it would make sense for the Navy to develop doctrine and force structure to dominate the littorals. The Navy is in the process of building a revolutionary new class of warship--Arsenal Ship. The Arsenal Ship's operational concept is focused on a ship that will enhance the fire power of existing aircraft carriers, land attack capable combatants and submarines. In this period of austere funding and downsizing, the Navy must look not only to new technologies but to new organizations and doctrine to effectively and efficiently meet its mandated missions. There are two areas where shortfalls exist to building a littoral dominant team: 1) the Navy does not have a staff that is organized and trained to plan and execute littoral dominance operations; and 2) the Navy has critical shortfalls in naval surface fire support assets.
 
 
 
Recommendations: The United States Navy should build a littoral dominant battle group centered around the Arsenal Ship: a typical aircraft carrier battle group with an Arsenal Ship in the place of the aircraft carrier, and an Amphibious Group (PHIBGRU) commander leading it instead of a Carrier Group (CARGRU) or Cruiser Destroyer Group (CRUDESGRU) commander. An Arsenal Ship Battle Group, led by an experienced littoral warfare expert, would be a viable forward presence and power projection entity; furthermore, it would be an effective building block for follow-on forces if a large-scale crisis were to develop.

« Last Edit: September 12, 2011, 05:19:15 am by Grey Havoc »
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8038
  • The path not taken.
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #40 on: September 12, 2011, 05:07:08 am »
An old, but still interesting article by Norman Friedman (from December 2001), which mentions the Arsenal ship, and the Striker concept in particular: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3031/is_6_25/ai_n28887307/?tag=mantle_skin;content

And here's an older report on a (apparently short-lived) plan for using the DDG-51 hull as a basis for the Arsenal ship: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6712/is_n15_v198/ai_n28664605/?tag=content;col1
« Last Edit: September 12, 2011, 05:51:28 am by Grey Havoc »
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8038
  • The path not taken.
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #41 on: September 12, 2011, 05:43:37 am »
I thought that this report from the Rand Corporation was interesting.
 
The Arsenal Ship Acquisition Process Experience by Robert S Leonard et al., RAND NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INST SANTA MONICA CA (Jan 1999)

Quote
The Arsenal Ship acquisition program was unique in two respects: it represented a new operational concept for Navy ships, and its management structure and process were different from traditional military ship-building programs. The Arsenal Ship program was, in effect, an experiment in both product and process. Three specific goals of the program were outlined at its inception: demonstrate the capability affordably; leverage commercial practices and technologies; and, demonstrate the reformed acquisition process. This research focuses on the program's acquisition strategy.

Handle / proxy Url:  http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA365150

Here's the updated link: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a365150.pdf
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11101
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #42 on: September 12, 2011, 06:05:15 am »
Not necessarily. SSGNs are not by definition readily expendable, and they have a much smaller loadout (with less options) than an arsenal ship design would.

You think an Arsenal Ship loaded up with more cells than an SSGN would be "readily expendable"?   Good one.  ;D

Yes, I do, especially with regards as to the crew.

You seem to be forgetting the cost of the munitions.  You might want to do that math before declaring them "readily expendable".  BTW I'm sure the crew would appreciate your thinking them "readily expendable" as well. 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8038
  • The path not taken.
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #43 on: September 12, 2011, 07:01:53 am »
BTW I'm sure the crew would appreciate your thinking them "readily expendable" as well.

Not only was there a small crew, the idea was that they would be evacuated from the ship in high threat areas or when the ship was about to enter combat, leaving it under a combination of local computer and remote control. The basic concept behind the arsenal ship was that it would be a large, remote controlled floating mobile magazine with a wide range of weaponry, that would receive targeting information and the like from offboard sources, and which could be expended without a second thought.

The fact that it wouldn't require all the expensive equipment, such as a full radar suite, that a real warship would need, not to mention that there would be no need to build the hull to full naval standards, would have saved quite a lot of money.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2011, 07:04:44 am by Grey Havoc »
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2868
Re: Several Arsenal ship concepts
« Reply #44 on: September 12, 2011, 07:18:05 am »
The problem with regarding an ArShip as expendable is that each one would be carrying a significant portion of all the expendable land-attack weapons in the USN inventory (they'd have pretty much had to strip the surface fleet of cruise missiles to load them).  Kill one and you kill maybe a third of the USN's land-attack missile potential in any given theater.  If built, they would have been extremely high-value units.