Category Archives: Vessels of Opportunity

When is a Flight Deck Not a Flight Deck?

Posted on by
9

Containerized minelaying system on a River Batch 2 Offshore Patrol Vessel

It has been said that aircraft carriers are the ultimate modular warships because their primary weapons (aircraft) are interchangeable.

A flight deck on an Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) certainly offers a degree of aviation options. General purpose, cargo, ASW, and ASuW helicopters and a range of Unmanned Air Systems, but it appears our allies, the UK and particularly Australia may be looking at other ways to use this large open space.

Royal Navy:

Navy Lookout had a post that talked about restoring a naval mining capability in the Royal Navy. There was no specific reference to using flight decks or to Offshore Patrol Vessels.

The RN does not need dedicated minelaying vessels. The SSNs have a theoretical minelaying capability but XLUUVs are a much lower risk and stealthier solution for covert and sensitive missions. Where stealth is less important, containerised minelaying solutions are being developed that can be secured to the deck and dispense mines over the stern. (emphasis applied–Chuck)

But the photo, above, definitely got my attention. There we see an SH Defence “CUBE” containerized mine laying system developed by RWM Italia S.p,A. (Rheinmetall). on the flight deck of a River Batch 2 Offshore Patrol Vessel (HMS TAMAR).

Australian Navy:

Australia is planning to produce up to 14 flight deck equipped Arafura class OPVs including two intended specifically for Mine Counter Measures (MCM). These ships were always intended to accept containerized mission loads. It appears they are now planning what these ships will do in wartime.

Missile Launcher:

We already saw “Australia Considering Modular C-Dome For Arafura OPVs” –Naval News

Australia Considering Modular C-Dome For Arafura OPVs
Illustration of Arafura-class OPV fitted with C-DOME

Mine Layer:

As noted in the Navy Lookout, Australia is planning to buy and produce large numbers of mines. Naval News reports,

“Australia is set to accelerate the procurement of sea mines as part of Project SEA 2000…The decision to rapidly procure the capability, reportedly from a European supplier, will deliver a ‘significant’ deterrent effect according to Defence…it’s understood that the government has budgeted approximately $500 million to 1 billion Australian dollars for the acquisition…the weapons being brought are smart mines, able to disseminate between civilian vessels and a variety of military targets, allowing a strategic anchorage to be denied to hostile forces, all the while preserving access for aligned vessels. (emphasis applied–Chuck)

This all points to large numbers of mines being used in defensive fields. Such minefields will almost certainly be laid by surface vessels. Australia does have some civilian crewed support ships that might be used for mine laying, but as the Arafura class comes online, they will be the most likely surface minelayers.

SURTASS-E:

SURTASS-E. (U.S Department of Defense)

Then there is these reports from Naval News and The Drive that Australia is getting SURTASS-E systems.

SURTASS-E is expected to provide long range detection and cuing for tactical weapons, against both diesel- and nuclear-powered submarines. Again, the Arafura class seems a likely host, because the system is intended for military crew manning and, unlike the civilian manned National Support Squadron ships, these ships are armed and have communication systems that include tactical data link.

Now About the Coast Guard:

Using a flight deck for non-aviation purposes is not a foreign idea to the Coast Guard. They do it all the time to provide a holding area for migrants. 

USCGC Mohawk’s (WMEC 913) crew patrols the South Florida Straits during Operation Vigilant Sentry, Jan. 5, 2023. Mohawk’s crew patrolled the Florida Straits and Caribbean Sea in support of Homeland Security Task Force—Southeast and Operation Vigilant Sentry in the Coast Guard Seventh District’s area of operations for a 46-day patrol. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by USCGC Legare (WMEC 912)

“Navy: Mine Countermeasures Mission Packages to Be Available for Vessels of Opportunity” –SeaPower/Coast Guard Connection?

Posted on by
2

USNS Hershel “Woody” Williams launches a Knightfish unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) while at anchor in the Chesapeake Bay, Sept. 14, 2019. Photo: US Navy

The Navy League’s on line magazine, Seapower, reports,

“Capt. Mike Egan, branch head for mine warfare in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, speaking May 24 in Monterey, California, at the 2022 International Mine Warfare Technology Symposium of the Mine Warfare Association, said the MCM mission package is on track to achieve initial operational capability in the fall of 2022 and the Navy plans to procure a total of 24 packages.

“The Navy plans to equip 15 Independence-class littoral combat ships with the MCM mission package, which will leave an additional nine mission packages for use elsewhere.”

USN mine countermeasures ships are being decommissioned. Soon these mission packages will be the only US naval mine clearance assets. If a US port is mined, how will the mines be cleared?

Currently all Independence class LCS are based in San Diego. With the decision to shed all but six of the Freedom class LCS, none of which will be MCM capable, it is likely at least some Independence class will be based on the East Coast, presumably at Jacksonville. Aside from these 15 LCS mounted systems, it also appears the Navy will mount one on each of the five Lewis-B. Puller-class “Expeditionary Sea Bases” (ESB). That still leaves four MCM mission packages unclaimed.

LCSs based in San Diego and Jacksonville are still a long way from many US ports. In addition to transit time, the LCSs may be deployed or may not be available on short notice. The ESBs are all expected to be forward deployed, with one probably being assigned to each Geographic Combatant Commanders with the exception of Northern Command, e.g. Africa Command, Central Command, European Command, Indo-Pacific Command, and Southern Command, so they are unlikely to be available.

These four packages could provide mine clearance for US ports. One East Coast (perhaps Norfolk area), one West Coast (Seattle?), one Hawaii (Pearl?), and one in Alaska (Anchorage?) might be a logical distribution.

We know the disasterous effect of even short term port closures. Time is critical. The mission packages should be able to be deployed by air to the port(s) of interest. Some elements of the packages could certainly operate from shore. In many cases Coast Guard bases and air stations would be logical locations for temporary relocation of Navy assets. It is not unlikely Coast Guard fixed wing aircraft might be tasked with providing the air lift.

Some elements of the mission package, like the Unmanned Underwater Vehicles are still likely to require operation from floating units. Buoy Tenders would likely be able to fill this role. It might be worthwhile exercising this option, perhaps at RIMPAC.