We’ve discussed the combat utility of unmanned surface
suicide drones (see, “Surface Drone Swarm”). One of the conclusions was that drones are
easily spotted and defeated, assuming any degree of competence and preparedness
by the defender. Here’s some real world
data about drone detection from the recent Ukraine attack on the Russian patrol
boat.
Just prior to the attack, a Russian merchant ship, the Ella,
reported sighting four drones which, presumably, were the ones that wound up
attacking the patrol boat.
Assuming that ‘see’ means visual observation, this
demonstrates that drones are easily detected even using simple visual
means. It is unlikely that a merchant
ship would have sophisticated EO/IR sensors so ‘see’ likely means a man with
binoculars.
Similarly, ‘radar’ undoubtedly means a basic navigation
radar rather than a high powered, optimized, military grade radar.
Thus, if a simple merchant ship could spot and track drones
at 2-3 nm, a warship should be able to, at least, do that and, likely, a good
deal more. An alert defender would have
more than enough time to destroy drones given a 2-3 nm ‘head start’. Of course, this assumes that the defender has
appropriate weapons which neither the Russians nor the US Navy has to any great
extent.
This incident also suggests that the ‘swarm’ was just four
drones. Destroying four drones with
detection and engagement beginning 3+ nm out should be an easy task. The Navy needs to begin working out the tactics
and weapons required to do this. As a
reminder, we’re operating within easy reach of land off Yemen so we’d better be
prepared.
_______________________________
Significantly the crew reported that they could only see the drones when they came within 2 nautical miles (2.3 miles / 3.7 km) of the ship. Their radar could only extend the detection range to 3 nautical miles (3.5 miles / 5.5 km).[1]
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/03/vital-russian-supply-lines-in-black-sea-cut-by-ukrainian-drones/
"Stealth" drones attacking at night, or through fog, might be a bit tricky? Presumably it would be much more expensive to build a drone that submerged for the last couple of miles i.e. became effectively a torpedo.
ReplyDeleteNot that it matters given that the USN has no suitable defensive weapons. Why is that? Drone enthusiasts have been predicting nautical attack drones for years.
""Stealth" drones attacking at night, or through fog, might be a bit tricky?"
DeleteTricky for who? A small, low powered drone is much more susceptible to the degrading effects of weather than a ship with elevated, more capable sensors.
"Not that it matters given that the USN has no suitable defensive weapons."
You may not realize it but this is a microcosm of the network instead of firepower issue that I constantly harp on. All the networks and data in the universe is pointless without the firepower to take advantage of that information. Similarly, the Navy has many sensors and means of detection of drones but, as you note, lacks the appropriate firepower to destroy those drones. We've gone way too far on the fantasy network side of things and have ignored firepower (along with strategy and tactics). That needs to change.
Is the firepower need met by CIWS or other smaller guns? If so, seems pretty straight forward to bolt on 2-6 on a ship and address this. If the detection range is greater, what would the weapon be that would address that range?
Delete"Is the firepower need met by CIWS or other smaller guns? "
DeleteCIWS is perfectly capable of dealing with drones ... we think. To the best of my knowledge, the Navy has never tested it under realistic conditions. The problem with CIWS is that, on most ships, there's only one. Dealing with a swarm then becomes a problem due to dwell time and mount masking.
There are many good longer range options such as Hellfire, various rockets, SeaRAM, etc. Again, though, few or none of those are installed on most ships.
"seems pretty straight forward to bolt on 2-6 on a ship"
In concept, yes. In reality, it's a bit more complicated though doable. One has to consider utility availability, weight margins, weight distribution, radar interference, additional crew and control systems, etc.
If you believe the European Defence Review #63 May/June 2022 article " Higher definition for naval navigation radars" should have no problems tracking FAC/FIAC, including the new Next Generation Surface Search Radar (NGSSR) AN/SPS-73(V)18.
ReplyDeleteCongress has bemoaned about the slow pace of the Navy’s current NGSSR ship installation and contract funding execution and noted NGSSR has successfully achieved all phases of developmental testing and has transitioned to full rate production.
The Houthis have already been using USVs but it seems they have been detected and destroyed far away from any ships.
ReplyDelete"detected and destroyed far away from any ships."
DeleteAs 'predicted' by this post and the linked post on the subject. Contrary to popular belief, war is not a random, unpredictable event. It is perfectly predictable and operations and scenarios can be easily anticipated.
This should also allow the doom-sayers to relax and sleep at night knowing that a few drone boats do not spell the end of the Navy and are not ushering in a completely new era of warfare. In the same vein, the Navy should be questioning their blind embrace of drones.
Technical question. When is a drone not a drone, especially if it is a "suicide drone". Isn't a missile or torpedo a drone but more expensive?
ReplyDeleteJust a thought:
If you send 100 "cheap drones" towards a ship in a swarm some may get thro'. Doesn't matter it not, ideally the ship uses it's defense missiles up and/or CIWS amo (wont take long with 3 "guns"). The follow up clever/fast/expensive missiles (what you may call fast drones) sink the ship. Assuming it hasn't run away to reload. Or may be send them so they all arrive at the same time?
I assume someone cleverer than me has thought of this scenario.
"I assume someone cleverer than me has thought of this scenario."
DeleteWell, someone has definitely thought through the utter impracticalities of that scenario which makes it nearly impossible. You might give some thought to where/how these hundred drones would get to the operational area in the middle of the Pacific Ocean without being detected and destroyed.
While concern over these drone boats is minimal in WestPac scenarios, with our continued involvement in the Red Sea/Persian Gulf, are we looking at the Hellfires as an addition to ships besides LCS? Is it even possible? Does SeaRam have potential as surface-to-surface, or are we generally reliant on CIWS and Bushmasters for the small boat issue??
ReplyDeleteAll of those are potentially effective against drones. To the best of my knowledge, none are being installed on any ships that don't normally have them. Again, to the best of my knowledge, the Navy has never tested a realistic swarm scenario to develop tactics and identify suitable weapons and weapon fits.
DeleteI guess we'll do like the Navy always does: Wait until a ship gets hit/sunk and then issue a report and then not bother making any changes.
@Jj. The problem with HELLFIRE is apart from a few experiments, HELLFIRE is really more of an air to ground missile. USN has bought over the years some HELLFIREs and there's 2 version that are ship safe to use but it's not been really installed on a ship to ship platform use, except a LCS trial and Israel patrol ships....
DeleteI think at this point, you are probably better off with something more like TOW or the older DRAGON, maybe even the LAW could work?, which can be fired from a ground to ground position. This assumes that SOMEONE inside DoD or USN gets a system on a ship and conducts some trials to see where to be stationed, training, backblast area, reload, more training!,etc etc...it sounds easy, just put a TOW system on board BUT it does require a lot more than that. I like the idea!
"something more like TOW or the older DRAGON, maybe even the LAW"
DeleteI'm not all that familiar with Army systems but LAW is unguided and would have no chance of scoring a hit when launched from a pitching, rolling platform at a pitching, rolling, high speed, small target. TOW and DRAGON are wire guided via optical sight and require maintaining manual optical tracking until impact. Again, this seems unlikely from a pitching, rolling, maneuvering, wave/spray drenched, launch platform against a pitching, rolling, small, high speed target.
This is why a Hellfire-type missile is a good choice. It is self-guided (fire and forget) and is pretty much impervious to the launch platform's movements. It also provides catastrophic evidence of a kill which eliminates the dwell time concern.
"I think at this point, you are probably better off with something more like TOW or the older DRAGON"
DeleteThe dragon was so bad at hitting moving targets Marines only used them on bunkers. The TOW A model's wires would be shorted out by the water. The TOW B uses a laser to keep it on track but is going to perform any better than a RAM from CIWS.
Well, let me give it another try.
DeleteI was assuming this would be a quick requirement fix and simply, you can't fire a HELLFIRE from a different platform other than a helicopter. It would have to be a crash program to get a Hillfire to launch from a ship. Now, you could operate a helicopter from the ship but that probably doesn't work for 24-7 without bringing out a lot more resources to the fight so that's why I brought TOW or older systems like Dragon or even the old EU systems like HOT or MILAN. They are independent systems that don't require a helicopter or to be integrated into the combat system of the ship. Now, will they work? Maybe, maybe not but I was assuming we would need to rush into service SOMETHING to fight off a swarm of sea drones and apart from PHALANX or 57mm or just machine guns brought on board, there's not much else right now...next step if needed, is some kind of ARMY or USMC independent ground system like TOW or similar.
All your good counter points, actually kind of make my point that it isn't that easy to find the right solution and especially, will this stuff work?? Has anyone fired a ground attack missile from a MOVING SHIP onto a small moving target??? At night???
I wouldn't compare a highly-qualified WSO in an APACHE or COBRA to some sailor that got a few hours of training and now is doing it for real in combat, stressed out, at night.....
Not sure why its so hard to bring Hellfire aboard and put to use??? While it might not have been fully integrated, the groundwork was already done on LCS. And CNOs point that the other systems have to be manually guided makes them a poor choice at best. Being self guided means they just need to be launched in the right direction. If they arent easilly VLS compatible, fine, stuff em into boxes and bolt em down somwhere. This is somthing that could start being installed on ships by late summer if a little effort was put into it...
DeleteAs footnotes, 1) Israel is already.operating a dozen patrol boats utilizing Hellfires and
Delete2) putting 9 of them in a simple deck mounted box made of 1 inch steel would weigh between 4k and 5k lbs, so it shouldnt be to hard to make them work almost anywhere it would fit...
A couple first year engineering students and a few workers could build and install this in no time...
The french navy has started a crash program to equip all it's frigates and destroyes with additional EO/IR fire control systems and to give the ships a 360 degree coverage against emerging threats.
ReplyDeleteLike every warship in existence should have as a matter of course. Can you imagine a WWII ship being designed with blind spots in the field of fire or lacking suitable weapons? Our designs have gotten lazy and stupid as we pursued business case designs instead of combat designs.
DeleteThink this, you can hit a truck with many rounds from an M16 but unable to stop it.
ReplyDeleteRussia may need to get this Chinese system - a group of unmanned surface drones AI controlled autonomous defense system. These mini destroyers have AESA radar, 8 VLS, 2 torpedoes, 2 rocket pod, a 30mm gun, .... with a maximum speed of 42knots. China has officially listed them for sale in 2021, 2022 Zhuhai Air Show,
https://www.defense-aerospace.com/china-begins-sea-trials-of-new-killer-robot-ship/
https://www.militarydrones.org.cn/jari-usv-p00717p1.html
https://en.topwar.ru/151264-avtonomnye-morskie-sistemy-na-strazhe-interesov-kitaja.html
A network of these mini destroyers have enough fire power to destroyer other ships, submarines, helicopters and some aircrafts. Their AESA radar and sonar can find targets. AI control system can automatically steer enough mini destroyers to attack positions.
Although officially Chinese position is not to sell weapons to either side, giving their good relations, Russia should ask for a technological transfer.
That's hilarious! That mini-boat has mini-sensors and unspecified mini-weapons. As best I can tell, it's purpose is to generate foreign sales to countries that have to defend a harbor and can't afford a navy.
DeleteThis should really cause the Navy to rethink not integrating the new Constellation's Mk110 fire control system with its radar. That 57mm gun could be an effective and inexpensive weapon against drones. But the accuracy with the EO system is poor even when the target isn't obscured by weather or smoke.
ReplyDeletehttps://navy-matters.blogspot.com/2021/09/constellation-mk-110-57-mm-gun.html?m=0
Mk 110 57mm gun
DeleteThink it should have dedicated radar as the Phalanx with its integrated search and tracking radars.
Approx five years ago the Navy awarded a contract to L3 for their ALaMO, Advanced Low-cost Munitions Ordnance, MK 332 Mod 0 High-Explosive, 4-Bolt Guided (HE-4G) smart projectile (won out against the BAE (Bofors) ORKA, Ordnance for Rapid Kill of Attack Craft, 57mm smart round). The round was envisaged for use against a swarm of 30 FAC/FIAC and ISD of 2020 for both the LCS classes. ALaMO has zero AA capability.
Oct. 2023. Navy awarded Northrop Grumman a development contract for the company’s newly designed 57mm guided high explosive ammunition for use with the Mk110 gun, presuming for its AA capability to replace the BAE(Bofors) 3P Pre-fragmented, Programmable, Proximity- fused) projectiles (the Raytheon Mad-Fires AA round , Multi-Azimuth Defense Fast Intercept Round , DARPA funded program appears to have sunk without trace).
Would note the 57mm Mk110 gun has only two instantaneously ready use 20 round magazines which can be loaded with separate types of ammunition e.g. surface and AA and expect fire only 10 rounds before having to cease fire to allow barrel to cool down as barrel is not water cooled (the original design did have a water cooled barrel) and think dispersion will limit its effective range to approx. 8 to 10 km / 4.3 to 5.4 nm.
Now we get to see if the Chinese think they are easy to detect and neutralize. Read the Article on USNI on the $1B Replicator DIU effort for swarming lethal surface drones.
ReplyDelete