Quote:
Originally Posted by rickusn
Galrahn can you post the text of:
"U.S. Warships To Get Missile Defense Upgrades"
I cant access it.
Thanks Rick.
|
np. The article covered the upgrade to version 3.6, making it so AEGIS BMD can work at the same time as normal AEGIS defense. No reboot.
Quote:
U.S. Warships To Get Missile Defense Upgrades
The latest U.S. Navy Aegis ships fitted for the ballistic missile defense (BMD) program can now handle anti-air warfare roles as well, according to Navy and industry sources.
More Arleigh Burke-class destroyers may get the ballistic-missile modification, as well.
Ships used in early BMD tests have been unable to handle air-defense roles due to processing limitations on older military computers and the nature of the test program. But the latest Aegis BMD ship, the cruiser Shiloh, is fitted with Aegis BMD version 3.6, restoring the multimission capabilities of the Aegis system.
“We spiraled for the research and track mission and for search, track and engagement,” Jimmy Carter, Lockheed Martin’s director of sea-based missile defense systems, said Sept. 26. “Those were not certified loads, they were only for emergency capability. You’d have to reboot the system under anti-air warfare [AAW] or reboot under BMD.”That’s no longer the case for the latest BMD upgrades.
“Everything before in engagement capability was done in special configuration for emergency activation,” Rear Adm. Brad Hicks, Aegis program director for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), told Defense News in late August. “This is our first capability that is a full-up, tactical capability that’s a normal fleet-issue software for the Aegis ships that ... returns the ship’s multimission capability. So when they load the Aegis BMD 3.6, they not only have a BMD capability — a tracking and engagement capability — they also get back their anti-air warfare capability. And will be able to conduct self-defense.”
The new system was tested June 22 near Hawaii when the Shiloh combined its 3.6 Aegis system with the new Standard SM-3 Block IA missile to intercept a separating target warhead in its terminal phase.
Three Aegis destroyers also took part in the June test. One ship, fitted with the 3.0 upgrade, linked with a land-based radar to evaluate the Shiloh’s ability to track the incoming warhead. Two other destroyers, including the Japanese Aegis destroyer Kirishima, performed long-range surveillance and tracking.
After returning to Japan, the Kirishima is the first Japanese Aegis ship to be upgraded with Aegis BMD software.
Eighteen U.S. Navy Aegis ships — three cruisers and 15 destroyers — are being modified for the BMD mission. Two ships already are fitted with Aegis 3.6, the Shiloh and destroyer Stethem, according to Lockheed Martin. The other two cruisers, Lake Erie and Port Royal, will have it by the end of the year, along with the destroyers Curtis Wilbur and Decatur. All the ships will be capable of launching the SM-3 missile, which designed to intercept a ballistic missile or warhead.
Ships already fitted with Aegis 3.0 include the destroyers John S. McCain, Fitzgerald, Russell, Milius, Paul Hamilton, John Paul Jones, Benfold, Hopper, O’Kane and Higgins. Those ships will be upgraded to the full 3.6 version by 2009, according to the Navy.
Some critics of the Navy BMD program have feared the ships would not be available for normal missions, such as escorting an aircraft carrier. But that won’t be the case, Hicks said.
“When those 18 ships are there, we’ll have to work out with the operational and combatant commanders … how we will deploy those ships as part of their normal battlegroup operations,” he said.
That’s a key element in allocating so many ships to the BMD role, one analyst said.
“It seems to me the Navy was reluctant to fully embrace the BMD missions for fear that more of the fleet would be dedicated to national missile defense,” said Bob Work, a naval analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington. “This provides a much more flexible missile defense force.”
More BMD Ships?
The Navy also is considering adding the BMD upgrades to the DDG destroyer modernization program scheduled to begin in 2010, shortly before the last new DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer is completed. That program currently is limited to hull, mechanical and electrical system improvements and some minor combat system upgrades.
But open architecture efforts and inclusion of more commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) elements into the Aegis system could make it easier and more affordable to add BMD functions to all the ships, the sources said, and the upgrades also could be applied to Aegis systems on non-U.S. ships.
Japan, Spain and Norway currently field the Aegis on naval vessels, and Australia and South Korea are building new Aegis destroyers. Saudi Arabia also has expressed serious interest in acquiring an Aegis version of the U.S. Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship.
“That’s the beauty of having allies that have Aegis,” said a Pentagon source. “They can use it for this purpose.”
|
Every one of the DDGs listed is also every one of the Flight I and Flight II DDGs in the Pacific Fleet. 16 total so far, with 2 more expected. I have no idea what the other two ships will be, and don't believe the Navy has named them yet.
I think it is interesting to compare the Atlantic Fleet and Pacific Fleet, because in many ways they really are different, both in the way they deploy and in their focus.
The Pacific Fleet is about projecting firepower, either in deployments or in forward bases. Whether it is the submarines in Hawaii or Guam, the Destroyers in Hawaii or Japan, or the Kitty Hawk/Essex forward deployments, the Pacific Fleet puts a lot of firepower deep into the Pacific, even when training. Exercises are typically enormous, usually with no fewer than 40 ships with some exercising numbering well over 100, and the inclusion of Australia, Canada (when they can), and Japan in every exercise possible is noteworthy. The Gotland adds additional training in ASW for every CSG working up on the West coast, there is a focus on humanitarian deployments focused around medical supplies and infrastructure construction in the Pacific, whether it is the hospital ship or L-class ships. Deployments of ESGs are always to the 5th Fleet AOR, while CSGs have traditionally focused on the 7th Fleet AOR. SSGs don't exist per se, instead Flight IIAs are deployed in independently while lower Flights are deployed for AEGIS BMD exercises, tests, and deployments to the Sea of Japan AOR. FFGs have traditionally been deployed in ESGs or deployed for narcotics operations to South America. The USS Rentz appears a first exception for a FFG to the Gulf outside a CSG.
The Atlantic Fleet on the other hand is quite different. CSG and ESG deployments are exclusively to the 5th Fleet AOR. SSGs are common, and almost always include a L-class ship that is testing one or several types of unmanned systems. It is not uncommon for CGs to deploy with SSGs in the Atlantic Fleet, something that never happens in the Pacific. Training almost always involves a NATO nation, including integration with French, Dutch, Canadian, Italian, Spanish, or British ships in Atlantic exercises, or or deploying ships from the East coast to Europe for exercises like Neptune Warrior, which included 1 CG, 2 DDGs, and 3 FFGs form the US in October 06. Deployments encourage partnership with other nations with integration of other nation warships into Strike Groups, whether Argentina, Spain, Britain, or French. Humanitarian missions are centered around the Horn of Africa, but also recently near Nigeria. It also appears there is an increase in attention in South America, which was highlighted with the deployment of the USS George Washington to the region last summer.
Compare the next two CSGs from either coast as a perfect example. That Nimitz CSG you listed earlier, with 4 DDGs, one of which has 4 UUVs for MIW, and 2 with AEGIS BMD, puts the Nimitz CSG in a class of its own in able to deal with wartime scenarios organically.
The Truman CSG on the other hand, the next Atlantic carrier out, will have the HMS Manchester in the CSG, and there is talk of a French submarine as well. Another example is the USS Barry expected to be integrated into the HMS Illustrious Strike Group later this year.
The Pacific Fleet is about projecting firepower, while the Atlantic Fleet is about projecting partnership.