tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post6042206437860713283..comments2024-03-28T07:56:09.239-07:00Comments on Navy Matters: Networks and Royal Navy Signal FlagsComNavOpshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comBlogger31125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-78393021060817595522021-02-25T09:48:56.829-08:002021-02-25T09:48:56.829-08:00What's better is that Collingwood, Nelson'...What's better is that Collingwood, Nelson's second in command, is reported by his Flag Captain of deriding Nelson's 'Duty' signal with the comment ''Why does he keep signalling?We know what we must do''<br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00822561994579196125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-33981047892526451322021-02-25T09:21:44.669-08:002021-02-25T09:21:44.669-08:00"let field data talk"
There is no field..."let field data talk"<br /><br />There is no field data. Neither the military nor industry would ever release any specifics about detection ranges and certainly not about stealth detection ranges.<br />ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-4471106983443357872021-02-25T07:52:56.311-08:002021-02-25T07:52:56.311-08:00Not that I am answering for ComNavOps or anything ...Not that I am answering for ComNavOps or anything but where is this field data that you mention? One that's not designed to look good? One that's faced a probable real chaos and repeated attacks of enemy EW and still works perfectly as you suggests (E2D can achieve no communications among Navy pilots)?<br /><br />You stated in the beginning that were to believe E2D manufacture specifications, your assessment would work. Unfortunately for us, it's almost a given that manufacturers data is highly unrealistic and only achieve in the most unimaginable conditions. I suspect that it's highly and extremely likely that your assessment is optimistic to the extreme. lpnam9114https://www.blogger.com/profile/11976981950593478526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-51706350991722288302021-02-24T13:47:23.654-08:002021-02-24T13:47:23.654-08:00"No long range strike with cruise missiles be..."No long range strike with cruise missiles because GPS will be disrupted"<br /><br />There are other technologies can be used to address this, for instance, back to digital maps (require long loading time before fire). Certainly, you cannot move mountains and large building away in hours.<br /><br />There are also more advanced technologies, just use relativity among key land features than entire digital map, such as major mountains. This is what China's DF-26 use. While a missile flies close to target, its guiding system check relativity among reference points and target.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-19755174021751794232021-02-24T08:07:44.659-08:002021-02-24T08:07:44.659-08:00In my idea of a proposed fleet, I incorporate a lo...In my idea of a proposed fleet, I incorporate a lot of CAPT Wayne Hughes's NNFM littoral combat fleet, and one role that I would have for them is forming an OPFOR for Fleet Problems.CDR Chiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16596017728508279652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-57491121306885347012021-02-24T08:03:25.741-08:002021-02-24T08:03:25.741-08:00253-269-863-261-471-958-220-370-4-21-19-24
England...253-269-863-261-471-958-220-370-4-21-19-24<br />England-expects-that-every-man-will-do-his-d-u-t-y. CDR Chiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16596017728508279652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-16082461502807750882021-02-24T07:56:09.836-08:002021-02-24T07:56:09.836-08:00"I don't ever remember seeing any live op..."I don't ever remember seeing any live opposition."<br /><br />All the Perrys we retired and the Ticonderogas we're going to start retiring and the Cyclones we're retiring and the LCS we're retiring would make a good start on a credible, live OPFOR.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-80490478720462777382021-02-23T19:22:33.942-08:002021-02-23T19:22:33.942-08:00And do it over and over and over.
The inter-bell...And do it over and over and over. <br /><br />The inter-bellum Fleet Problems were a good model, as I think you have suggested, ComNavOps. Figure out a war plan for China (and Russia) and then practice it, practice it, practice it. And do so against some realistic opposition forces. I don't know exactly how many exercises I did on active duty, but I don't ever remember seeing any live opposition.CDR Chiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16596017728508279652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-82157375066174328902021-02-23T12:11:09.104-08:002021-02-23T12:11:09.104-08:00Currently in service stealthy fighter jets - F-22,...Currently in service stealthy fighter jets - F-22, F-35, J-20, SU-57.<br /><br />If E-2D does work as manufacturer says, see through 300 miles and direct every F-35C (or F/A-18) do whatever, basically, they turn every navy fighter jet to a "manned" drone. E-2D gives all commands and none of any navy pilot allows to say anything in mission. Pilots only do whatever, E-2D tells them.<br /><br />Yes, you question E-2D's true ability but let field data talk. Nevertheless, E-2D can achieve no communications among navy pilots.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-23979792447982142232021-02-23T09:08:16.531-08:002021-02-23T09:08:16.531-08:00"Sorry rambled on a bit, feel free to delete ..."Sorry rambled on a bit, feel free to delete if I’ve gone to far off topic."<br /><br />Quite the contrary. You're spot on!ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-20397846101015767042021-02-23T06:59:52.403-08:002021-02-23T06:59:52.403-08:00Above just emphasizes the need to undertake as man...Above just emphasizes the need to undertake as many varied exercises as possible in as many conditions as possible.<br />Eg. An enemy sub has just sunk one of your ships (could be part of a convoy or a carrier group or DDG flotilla, doesn’t really matter).<br />Nearby destroyers (because for this scenario DDG’s are the only anti sub vessels the navy currently has, but that is a different discussion) have to search and destroy it. <br />First time round you have all the toys, Sonar, P8 help, helicopter, flat sea etc. (perfect conditions)<br />Then do it at night<br />Then do it without a P8 and /or helicopters. <br />Then you try with sonar issues<br />Then you do it with No coms, Disrupted coms, No radar/emissions<br />Then you do it with a damaged carrier, do you chase the sub (or subs), if how much of the carrier group do you leave with the carrier/s.<br />Practice, practice, practice.<br />Going silent should be just as familiar to all the crew’s as working with all the gizmo’s working (and any option in between).<br />In football (sorry Soccer to you lads, not Rugby with padding, sorry again couldn’t resist, no offence meant, lol), the team practices different scenarios , eg how to take a corner or free kick or a penalty, but also how to change tactics if one player is sent off/ injured. All the players don’t run round with ear pieces getting instructions from the manager; they know what to do because they have practiced it.<br />After this we assess and develop a plan. We may find we need more signal lamp practice, or new 21st century laser signal lamps that and send/read in milliseconds or even some ASW frigates/Corvettes. Nobody really knows until you try out the current system of work / plans.<br />Sorry rambled on a bit, feel free to delete if I’ve gone to far off topic.<br />Mr Shedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12736787154023573364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-61881331279457913262021-02-23T05:13:59.091-08:002021-02-23T05:13:59.091-08:00"I just wanted to know if the implications I ..."I just wanted to know if the implications I mentionned were right."<br /><br />Yes, they're right! This is telling us that our precision guided, micro-managed way of warfare, developed over the last two decades of fighting technologically deficient terrorists, is wrong for the peer war battlefield. Instead of precision and micro-managing we need to place more emphasis on unguided, area munitions that can't be jammed or decoyed (a naval or artillery shell is going to land where you aimed it and is invulnerable to jamming or decoys). When precision fails, we need massive amounts of unguided firepower to fall back on and we don't have that, currently. When our local commanders are cut off from communication with higher command, they need to be able to function on their own. And so on.<br /><br />In short, we need to develop a new way (largely an old way, actually!) of fighting. We're currently locked into the "preparing to fight the last war" mentality and we need to break out of that thought prison.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-66406272008589511432021-02-23T05:10:15.203-08:002021-02-23T05:10:15.203-08:00Alternatives to GPS
Army opened research lab to de...Alternatives to GPS<br />Army opened research lab to develop open systems architecture with PNT, Positioning, Navigation and Timing System, several technologies as alternatives to GPS. This years Army exercise with Project Convergence 21 they will test how its new technologies function without GPS.<br /><br />One option under research, "Quantum" navigation, accelerometers used in INS have existed for a long time, however they cannot maintain their accuracy over time without an external reference so researching quantum accelerometers which can reduce navigation drift from approx 1 km a day to 1 m, but quantum accelerometer can’t distinguish between tiny gravitational effects, a mountain, and accelerations caused by a vehicle's movement, will require detailed gravitation maps.<br /><br />AMRAAM<br />Would note USAF/USN/Lockheed in full development of the long range AIM-260, same size as AIM-120 so presuming using advanced propellants motors, gels?, would allow throttling or even stopping and restarting motors as required.Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12567148391327455726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-70562339204447676962021-02-23T04:08:56.648-08:002021-02-23T04:08:56.648-08:00I grapsed the concept, I just wanted to know if th...I grapsed the concept, I just wanted to know if the implications I mentionned were right. It seems that they were. So yes you answered.<br /><br />D614-D623Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-8590830791272732122021-02-23T04:02:08.756-08:002021-02-23T04:02:08.756-08:00"I would like to know how far you believe tha..."I would like to know how far you believe that this line of thinking should be pushed."<br /><br />I'm not sure exactly what you're asking or what you mean by 'pushed'?<br /><br />You've obviously grasped the basic concept that all signals will be disrupted on a peer combat scenario so you've kind of answered your own question, I suspect. Any form of communication will be degraded, disrupted, and interrupted to varying degrees. Thus, networks, data sharing, Link X, C2, etc. will all be affected and only sporadically (and unreliably) available.<br /><br />The only assured forms of signals will be organic, meaning those that originate from the sending platform (the seeker head on a missile, for example, or the radar on a ship) and even then the returns from those signals will be subject to jamming, scatter, decoy, etc.<br /><br />None of this is just theory. We've already seen that UAVs are subject to signal disruption, loss, or hijacking. We've seen the history of electronic warfare disrupting guided missiles. The Russians have amply demonstrated communications and GPS disruption. And so on.<br /><br />So, yes, passive signals are the only solidly reliable signals and even they are susceptible to decoys, obscurants, weather, etc.<br /><br />Now, all of this is not to say that no signal will ever be successfully transmitted and received on the battlefield. That kind of total disruption by the enemy is not possible. What this is telling us is that the reverse - total success - which the US military seems to be assuming as their birthright, is equally wrong and we need to be preparing for it. We need to learn to function with no comms, few comms, less guidance, disruption, and confusion. We need to train to that level of signal disruption and become comfortable with it. We need to reverse the trend of micro-managing and go back to local command using doctrine and commander's intent.<br /><br />I don't know if that answered your question or not?<br />ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-90812514636025181302021-02-23T03:58:17.024-08:002021-02-23T03:58:17.024-08:00You have correctly identified three troubling issu...You have correctly identified three troubling issues, yes.Lonfonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-49976411247130786012021-02-23T03:00:07.283-08:002021-02-23T03:00:07.283-08:00I would like to know how far you believe that this...I would like to know how far you believe that this line of thinking should be pushed. If you go to extremes you end up with :<br /><br />- No long range strike with cruise missiles because GPS will be disrupted (astro-inertial is not working yet below clouds as far as I know).<br />- No AMRAAM or equivalent radar guided stuff.<br />- LGBs working only in good weather.<br /><br />Basically you are left with IR and EO guidance and good old guns, rockets and dumb bombs. True or not ?<br /><br />D614-D623Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-46040198732208631752021-02-22T22:17:49.991-08:002021-02-22T22:17:49.991-08:00And for discussion, while signals in the current d...And for discussion, while signals in the current day have a much greater limit than back in 1804, they must still have a limit. Their capacity and human frailty in their interpretation is finite, just as they were finite in 1805. This rather successful Commander understood that there was a limit, wherever it might be, and took prudent steps to mitigate it's effect.Brendanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06585193147968790217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-61171074292745929522021-02-22T22:12:32.278-08:002021-02-22T22:12:32.278-08:00"No captain can do wrong"
A Nelson quot..."No captain can do wrong"<br /><br />A Nelson quote very appropriate for the discussion at hand. Part of Nelson's ability and success was recognising the need to not overburden his subordinates. Other quotes:<br /><br />"I shall never distract the attention of my fleet on the day of action by a superabundance of signals" (Naval Chronicle, Volume 14, p411)<br /><br />"You will see by this loose letter than it is almost impossible at this distance to give precise orders for such various Services but I rely on your abilities and Zeal to do what is right."<br />(Nelson the New Letters, p367)<br /><br />And the fuller quote, which is also pertinent:<br />"But, in case Signals can neither be seen or perfectly understood, no Captain can do very wrong if he places his Ship alongside that of an Enemy."<br />(Nelson's Trafalgar Memorandum)Brendanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06585193147968790217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-34675521685083356482021-02-22T19:26:25.145-08:002021-02-22T19:26:25.145-08:00"I documented it in a post but I don't re..."I documented it in a post but I don't remember which one off the top of my head."<br /><br />I know, and I believe you were/are correct. At very best we are introducing something else into the electromagnetic spectrum that potentially could be identified and tracked. Or worse, used by large anti-ship missiles (and I wonder who has those) to home in on our carriers.CDR Chiphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16596017728508279652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-23265090231557485372021-02-22T14:04:14.416-08:002021-02-22T14:04:14.416-08:00" F-35C can then rely on information from E-2..." F-35C can then rely on information from E-2D"<br /><br />Not in any peer threat combat scenario. Every modern fighter aircraft is semi- to fully stealthy. The E-2 radar is not going to see semi- to full stealth aircraft at 300 miles. Depending on the degree of stealth, detection ranges would be on the order of 20-50 miles.<br /><br />"none of them can attack E-2D which are so far away from them."<br /><br />In a previous post, we covered the Chinese Very Long Range Air to Air Missile (VLRAAM) and the impact it would have on E-2 operations. It is reported to have a range of 300 miles and speed of Mach 6. See, <b><a href="https://navy-matters.blogspot.com/2018/09/goodbye-poseidon-and-hawkeye.html" rel="nofollow">Goodbye Hawkeye</a></b><br /><br />You need to come up to speed on the archives! ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-48440982447592153862021-02-22T13:11:13.987-08:002021-02-22T13:11:13.987-08:00E-2, especially latest E-2D is able to let F-35C t...E-2, especially latest E-2D is able to let F-35C turn off their radar. They become missile launcher. E-2D provides 300 miles search range (at least as manufacturer boast). F-35C can then rely on information from E-2D without sending any signal out. Even though enemies know there are E-2D behind F-35C but except one, none of them can attack E-2D which are so far away from them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-4549826936398980392021-02-22T11:07:26.766-08:002021-02-22T11:07:26.766-08:00Relearning to fight under EMCON is a good starting...Relearning to fight under EMCON is a good starting point but probably not enough. In the Battle of Heligoland the Germans used destroyers as bait. The same concept of bait can use radio traffic. If you hear increased traffic at a location, it will peak your curiosity. These type of head games can help keep an enemy confused. And if they chose to ignore the extra traffic it can be used to allow you to communicate more freely. The combination of minimal controlled traffic and deception should be even more effective than just EMCON.<br /><br />Of course if you can't reliably fight under EMCON, all this isn't possible.Trondude 5952https://www.blogger.com/profile/09625187976091596494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-35700342107002993292021-02-22T10:09:13.757-08:002021-02-22T10:09:13.757-08:00I assume it's still an EMCON failure, otherwis...I assume it's still an EMCON failure, otherwise the Navy would be trumpeting the result everywhere.Lonfonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-21852845969727094492021-02-22T09:58:24.215-08:002021-02-22T09:58:24.215-08:00"As far as EMALS, I keep hearing conflicting ..."As far as EMALS, I keep hearing conflicting reports."<br /><br />Well, CNO Greenert stated that EMALS was not EMCON capable during a discussion of emissions control. That would seem believable.<br /><br />I documented it in a post but I don't remember which one off the top of my head.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.com