BAe Stealth UXV UCAV Carrier concept

[zebedee]

Stealth UAV carrier on Flights site...

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/09/18/216843/bae-systems-stealth-ship-concept-to-operate-unmanned-systems.html

Zeb

 

[PMN1]

We have had a discussion on it here

http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/4072/t/BAE-Systems-unveils-new-Mothership-warship-design.html

and some are starting to suspect BAE are watching the board for ideas.....

 

[GTX]

Some photos of BAE's model of the proposed UXV (not UXB as was stated in the Flight International Article) at the recent DSEi exhibition (sorry about the poor quality, the photos were taken with my phone):

Regards,

Greg

 

[Kim Margosein]

The phone-quality photos produce an interesting effect. They look rather like CAD designs.

Kim M

 

[Sferrin]

CHA-CHING!!

 

[gery]

An interesting letter....how does it stuff work...

 

[Triton]

MOTHERSHIP FOR UNMANNED VEHICLES LOOKS TO THE FUTURE

10 Sep 2007 | Ref. 286/2007

BAE Systems has developed a new concept warship, the UXV Combatant, designed to operate in a future battle space dominated by land, sea and air unmanned vehicles.

Using a proven naval hull form to launch, operate and recover large numbers of small unmanned vehicles for extended periods, the UXV plays the role of mother ship - a permanent base and control centre for the futuristic unmanned land, sea and air vehicles before, during and on completion of their missions. The 8000-tonne vessel, an evolution of the multi-role warship, is not expected to enter service until post 2020.

The design provides a cost-effective solution to the evolving challenges facing the modern navy. Features will include:

* Flexible and efficient twin flight decks
* Variable ski jump
* Rotary aviation facilities
* Below-deck hangar
* Smart munitions

The weapons are a future development of the Type 45 combat suite. With the UXV support capability, performing multiple roles combined with an easily adaptable design, which moves the concept of stealth to the next level.

Propulsion options include full integrated electrical propulsion with twin propeller shafts/motors supplied by gas turbine and diesel alternators. Alternatively, cruising power can be supplied by two shafts/motors and diesel alternators with boost power from one gas turbine driving two water jets.

The concept brings together naval technologies developed through collaboration with partners such as Rolls Royce and across BAE Systems business units, as part of a programme of continuous improvement.

http://www.baesystems.com/Newsroom/Newsreleases/autoGen_107810163127.html

 

[Triton]

From Popular Science magazine February 15, 2008:

"The UXV Combatant Up Close"
Kris Holland

NEW-ERA CANNONS
Next-generation cannons could fire bursts of 20 rounds in succession—and have the munitions all arrive on target at the same instant.

SMART WEAPONS
The foredeck could house superlight vertical-launch missiles, ultra-precise Phalanx missiles (which can shoot down incoming rockets traveling as fast as Mach 3) and cruise missiles.

MOON POOL
From a hidden pool in the ships interior, unmanned subs could deploy and return to the craft safely and invisibly.

HIGH-TECH DECKS
On deck, electromagnetic catapults could launch unmanned aircraft from adjustable ramps. Radar, sensors and RFID chips could be used to organize the drones.

http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-space/article/2008-02/warships-tomorrow

 

[vajt]

Got to hand it to BAE, interesting concept. Almost like a future version of an LCS mixed with the Absalon and expanded flight deck.

-----JT-----

 

[JohnR]

Any idea about dimensions?

 

[Triton]

Any idea about dimensions?

Norman Polmar writes on Military.com that the UxV combatant’s hull and combat systems will be a development of the Type 45 destroyer aka Daring Class and be an enlarged design.
http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,150165,00.html

The V-shaped flight deck is 164 feet long.
http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-space/article/2008-02/warships-tomorrow?page=2

Type 45/Daring Class

Length: 152.4 m (500 ft)
Beam: 21.2 m (69.5 ft)
Draught: 7.4 m (16.4 ft)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer

I presume the UxV combatant's hull has similar dimensions since it is derived from the Type 45.

 

[Triton]

Artist's impression of BAE Systems UXV by Kollected Pty. Ltd.

Source:
http://www.kollected.com/437946/UXV

 

[Grey Havoc]

IMHO, if ever this design manages to make it off the design board and into the shipyard, it will probably be as a nuclear powered design.

 

[Grey Havoc]

IMHO, if ever this design manages to make it off the design board and into the shipyard, it will probably be as a nuclear powered design.

Despite the fact that it is a conventionally powered design derived from the conventionally powered Type 45 and designed in the UK which has never built a nuclear powered ship?

Yes. Despite that little problem. ;D

 

[Triton]

Despite the fact that it is a conventionally powered design derived from the conventionally powered Type 45 and designed in the UK which has never built a nuclear powered ship?

The United Kingdom has never built a nuclear-powered surface ship.

 

[Grey Havoc]

A little thought exercise here. If they did go the nuclear route, would I be amiss in thinking that they would use two of RR's PWR2 Core H type reactors (at a glance they would seem to have the necessary growth margin) for the design, or would they use something a little more exotic?

 

[Grey Havoc]

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-new...-u-s-navy-to-build-the-drone-carrier-warship/
Mentions both the UXV as well as Naval Group's Ocean Avenger concept that was revealed last year.

 

[Grey Havoc]

A bit of surprisingly recent history, showing how quickly things have changed. One article isn't worth a new thread, so here's as good a place as any. In the author's opinion, the reason why the UXV never went past a model was that it was a 'bespoke' drone carrier - neither a destroyer nor a carrier, or both - when instead, drones were added to the capacity of existing and planned platforms. For example, 'Project Ark Royal', which includes retrofitting the QE class carriers for additional drones.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-uxv-combatant-the-drone-carrier-that-came-too-soon/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/project-ark-royal-plans-for-angled-decks-and-drones/

 

[Foo Fighter]

So the Cat's are back in town? I wonder how much they will cost to be retrofitted now.

 

[Grey Havoc]

So the Cat's are back in town? I wonder how much they will cost to be retrofitted now.

Due to certain past shenanigans, it may be near impossible to refit them so.

 

[TylrrTylrr]

Due to certain past shenanigans, it may be near impossible to refit them so.

Weren't the carriers built with the ability to retrofit them?

 

[Grey Havoc]

Weren't the carriers built with the ability to retrofit them?

It was deleted, supposedly as a cost cutting measure, reportedly thanks to certain civil servants.

 

[TylrrTylrr]

It was deleted, supposedly as a cost cutting measure, reportedly thanks to certain civil servants.

i pray not, Id like to see Ark Royal come to fruition at some point. Have you got a source?

 

[Grey Havoc]

Here's a quick one:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...-flagship-aircraft-carrier-turned-into-farce/(Registration or subscription may be required)

EDIT: Sorry, wrong link, I'll have to go to find the actual one.

 

[red admiral]

It was deleted, supposedly as a cost cutting measure, reportedly thanks to certain civil servants.

I think it's the opposite, where TCA took the extra money for an "adaptable" carrier design as contracted and then didn't make it adaptable

 

[Martes]

I presume the UxV combatant's hull has similar dimensions since it is derived from the Type 45.

Back in the day, I drafted a through-deck variant for the UXV based on Type 45 profile and dimensions:

​

 

[timmymagic]

It was deleted, supposedly as a cost cutting measure, reportedly thanks to certain civil servants.

Wasn't deleted. All that happened was the detailed design work for the cats never went ahead as the RN decided on STOVL. The voids and spaces necessary were built into the design still. Just left empty.

 

[Springtime]

Worth mentioning that it's available in the Hypothetical US navy units with all USN type systems in Command Modern Operations UXV UCAV carrier more of a pich for a US Navy contract and if not how would it have been better than using a LHA or similar for the job though it be a interesting "war time" design something to replace lost or in refit/repair LHA or VTOL carriers

 

[Foo Fighter]

Is the maglev cat a worthy addition, technically not being steam dependeant is a plus.

 

[red admiral]

The voids and spaces necessary were built into the design still. Just left empty.

My understanding is that they weren't left empty. Hence the massive cost increase once it was realised this had been done and so a much more major reshuffling was required.

 

[timmymagic]

My understanding is that they weren't left empty. Hence the massive cost increase once it was realised this had been done and so a much more major reshuffling was required.

I had it direct from one of the BMT design team. The costs to convert PoW in build were to do with reversing work that had already been undertaken, actually designing the installations, purchasing EMALS and AAG....and the inevitable slowdown/shutdown/reprofiling of other work whilst this was undertaken over a period of 2 years.

 

[timmymagic]

Is the maglev cat a worthy addition, technically not being steam dependeant is a plus.

Yes, something like EMKIT will actually launch most fixed wing prop based UCAV with ease.

 

[Yellow Palace]

I had it direct from one of the BMT design team. The costs to convert PoW in build were to do with reversing work that had already been undertaken, actually designing the installations, purchasing EMALS and AAG....and the inevitable slowdown/shutdown/reprofiling of other work whilst this was undertaken over a period of 2 years.

No names, no pack drill - but I've stood in some of the relevant compartments with the platform chief naval architect (now retired). There's 'empty' and there's 'empty' on a ship. Sailors abhor a void. What was there could be removed if required, mostly just through mandraulics - and there were vast yawning chasms of space allocated for stuff relating to catapults and arresting gear.

FWIW, part of the difficulty with the 2010 proposal was that the ship design had assumed steam catapults, but by then EMALS was being proposed. The two systems impose very different requirements for space, weight and power.