Here's a very dirty and rough sketch of what you'd be looking for for an unmanned warship:
![[ img ]](http://i560.photobucket.com/albums/ss47/klagldsf/unmannedship.png)
Note that it must be able to embark a crew at least temporarily in order to let them fix things or as emergency basing if necessary.
| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3393 |
Page 4 of 4 |
| Author: | TimothyC [ August 16th, 2012, 5:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
There were three concepts that came out of the TSSE program for littoral combat, and I think that two of them are being conflated here (just to get it out of the way, the one that isn't is the SEA FORCE concept, that is functionally LCS as programed today). The first was the idea of the mothership, based (in the first, 1994 itteration) on the LSD-41/49 hull. It would carry a number of small (100 ton) unmanned or low-manned high speed craft that would preform the combat mission while the mothership would opperate aircraft and would provide air cover for the smaller boats/ships. The concept came back in 2005 with UUVs as "SEA TENTACLE." These motherships, while they would have used automation, would have still had manning levels not that far from active USN and USNS ships of the time. The second was the small, streatfighter sized craft at around 400 tons and very small manning levels (12 crew on the SEA LANCE design that dates from 2000). Damage control on this design was generally not even considered, and the ship was equiped with what would function as an escape capsule. From what I remember, the SEA LANCE report did make mention of the fact that these ships would need to have support tenders forward deployed with them around the world, but I don't think those costs were included in the estimations. As for mothership combat capabilities, I'd like to remind people that the LPD-17 design originally had 16 Mk 41 VLS cells for ESSM, and they are all being commissioned with a sensor suite and command architecture that is very similar to the NTU program, and as such, if they had the VLS, they would be potent warships in their own right. |
|
| Author: | klagldsf [ August 16th, 2012, 5:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
I should at least sketch out what I would think is the minimum requirement for a large unmanned vessel. It wouldn't be a complete drawing but it would at least have the systems. And yeah, what Tim says. Keep in mind that a 100 ton combat boat (manned or unmanned) is limited in what it can do. Though I like the escape capsule concept. |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ August 16th, 2012, 5:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
for an (partially) unmanned warship, maybe you should also look at the troika drone minesweeper system. |
|
| Author: | klagldsf [ August 16th, 2012, 7:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
Here's a very dirty and rough sketch of what you'd be looking for for an unmanned warship: Note that it must be able to embark a crew at least temporarily in order to let them fix things or as emergency basing if necessary. |
|
| Author: | heuhen [ August 16th, 2012, 7:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
note the SPY-1 you have there can't stay so close together. If you see on the Norwegian frigate, everything inside the radar mast of doom are the only equipment for the Spy-1, and there are almost no space to move around in there, and then I mean almost no room to move! it is possible if you somehow manage to replace all the wiring. |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ August 16th, 2012, 8:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
also, I must note that the setup you made klag is almost impossible. the center of bouyancy is about underneath the RAM, while right now your center of gravity will be underneath the mast. to fix this, you should keep tons of ballast in the stern, which is never an good thing. |
|
| Author: | klagldsf [ August 16th, 2012, 9:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
It was meant to be representational, akin to an electrical diagram sketch, just showing what systems you need as a bare minimum. Otherwise I would've just made a full drawing. The Independence is meant to emphasize scale. The reason why the SPY-1D looks like it's just floating on a mast is because I just copy-pasted it on an Atago mast. So yeah, don't actually try to make a drawing out of it. It's just a guide, a representation. |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ August 16th, 2012, 9:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
no I mean the trimaran shape  . the trimaran hull build like that has those problems, LCS-2 itself has too.
|
|
| Author: | klagldsf [ August 16th, 2012, 9:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fleshing out an Unmanned Warship concept |
Well that was just meant to be representational too since LCS-2 has a nice wide helicopter deck (lots of UAVs, in other words) and IIRC at least something of a well deck. But yeah, a trimaran isn't strictly necessary. |
|
| Page 4 of 4 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|