Sea Air Space 2022 - Day 1: Constellation-class frigate and new naval weapon systems
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 เม.ย. 2022
- Day 1 video coverage at the Sea Air Space 2022 exposition near Washington DC. In this video we first talked to Fincantieri to get an update on the Constellation-class frigate program. We then discussed naval weapon systems with MSI Defence, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems and Kongsberg.
=====================
01:06 - Constellation-class frigate program with Fincantieri Marinette Marine
04:30 - MSI Defence Mark 38 Mod 4 30mm naval gun system
07:53 - Lockheed Martin's Expeditionary Launching System
09:21 - BAE Systems E-Launcher
09:52 - Kongsberg NSM-HL helicopter launched naval strike missile
=====================
For new videos every week, subscribe here! th-cam.com/users/NavalNews?su...
Follow us on Twitter: / navalnewscom
Follow us on LinkedIn: / navalnews
Like us on Facebook: navalnewscom
Check out our daily naval defense news coverage at: www.navalnews.com/
NAVAL NEWS is fully focused on naval topics. We cover the latest naval defense shows & events. We also report on naval technology from all over the world. Navalnews.com is updated daily with in-depth features, industry, and naval forces news round-ups, event coverage, video reports and more. Our top of the line site is responsive across all mobile and desktop devices.
Mark: we're so excited to introduce the groundbreaking cutting-edge technology in ship building
Xavier: whoew.. and what is this?
Mark: Frigate's Erection Bay
Xavier: Giggity!
USS Krieger's motto:
STOP, MY ERECTION BAY CAN ONLY GET SO ERECT.
Really excited that the Constellation-class is going to be picking up the CAPTAS Variable Depth Sonar. It's arguably been the best towed sonar on the market and has seen a great track record in service with the French, Spanish and Italian navies. Two French FREMMs won the US Navy's ASW award competition. Great decision by the Constellation program!
The Expeditionary Launch System (ELS), with a properly developed ecosystem, will enable the Navy surface fleet to deliver the kind of strike capability previously only possible for the Air Force or Carrier Battle group.
At present, if you wanted to launch large numbers of standoff weapons on a sustained basis, you would need a strategic bomber force. The Air Force can fly from one continent to another, launching 1-2 dozen JASSMs per aircraft at standoff range, and fly on without ever being seen by the enemy, before landing and reloading at a friendly air base, to repeat the process every day or two. The Navy is limited in this area. Carriers can launch dozens of planes, each with a couple of JASSMs each, assuming they have no other pressing missions. They can also fire Tomahawks, more than a 150 from an Ohio SSGN, or a couple of dozen from large surface combatants, depending on their load out. But then they have to go back to a friendly port to reload, before returning to station to repeat the feat, a process that could take weeks, again, assuming they have no more pressing missions.
But the ELS not only allows virtually any vessel access to ordinance, but it also allows a properly designed combatant vessel to rearm while underway, a capability that was designed into the existing Mk41 VLS, but never used or exercised operationally. ELS containers could be stored on mass on a Fleet Auxiliary Vessel, and off loaded to a combatant vessel's helipad via CH-53K. A combatant vessel designed around the ELS would have a large section of empty deck space amidships. The FFG-62's have an informal space currently dedicated to NSM mounts, but they could put anything there. The DDG(X) has a dedicated "Destroyer Payload Module" segment for "payload". But both seem dependent on a pier side crane to install anything. But by designing a passage either through the aft machinery stack via the helicopter bay, or along the side of the stack, one could move a container from the helipad to this amidships space. Then you would just need an overhead crane system to "play Tetris" with the containers, rotating and setting them into port, starboard, or a single centerline bank, or both. Rinse and repeat in reverse and you could return empty containers to your auxiliary vessel to be reloaded from shipboard shores of hundreds of cannisters. There will likely be a division between 20' tactical and 40' strike containers, with the former limited to ESSMs, JSMs, and ASROCs, while latter would be needed for Tomahawks, JASSMs, SM-3s, or SM-6s. And since they are containers, they can be layered.
While such a system may not be as dense as the Mk41s, it's fully realized ability to reload while underway is a game changer. Even a lowly Frigate, with a little over 50' of dedicated space, could house 6 40' strike containers, each containing 4-6 Tomahawk missiles, assuming just a single layer. That is more than the mighty B-52 can carry. And with the ability to reload, it can have another batch to fire the next day. Or it can house 12 20' tactical containers, again assuming a single layer. The next day. And it doesn't even have to fire anything. It can change missions on the fly.
This of course makes your auxiliary ships very important. Indeed, they will likely sit at the core of a revived Surface Action Group. Fortunately, they are large, and can house ample defensive emplacements and sensors of their own. They may even come close in prominence to the carriers in certain scenarios. But they too will have to be replenished eventually. Which is why I think they compliment, instead of replace, the carriers.
As the welding for the new frigate is now done by robot welders, it means that another job/trade has now been automated.
Works for some applications. Not so well with others. They looked at robotic welding for pressure welding of spools a few times at work and what the demonstrations proved was that it simply wasn’t practical or cost effective enough to justify the huge expense. We did inherit a robotic welding machine from a smaller company we bought out. A fair bit of time & money was spent to try and integrate it into our facility with pretty dismal results. That was around 15 years ago and there hasn’t been any interest in checking out any robots since.
To be honest, it's crazy that the Army and Navy develop their own bespoke VLS/TEL. Given the longevity of MK41 VLS it makes sense to use it everywhere you can.
The Mk.41 is a very robust design but the future of missiles seems to be heading toward enlarged and vastly more capable weapons than we currently have. This is making the Mk.41 simply too small for future weapon systems. However, I still expect it to be fully capable of hosting the next generation of anti-air missiles. ESSM is still extremely capable in this regard and being able to quad-pack them into a Mk.41 cell secures the future of the venerable system.
@@dylanwight5764 There's still room for a booster in a VLS Cell for ESSM too.
What would that give ? another 20-40 km ? How's that for increased area defense capability. Cost increase ~250k$ / shot ?
Would be a good seller to smaller navies too. They typically lack money and VLS cell depth for long engagements if they want long range air defense (only one SM/cell ).
Weight concerns.....ship VLS are *robust*.
The really crazy thing is not re-using ESSM block 2 as SAMs. Could add a booster for range.
Isn't that pretty much what AMRAAM 120-ER is@@dwwolf4636 ? compatible with NASAMS 3
Great job
A great video!
Very informative channel!
brilliant frigate
US needs more capable ship yards. At current speed, a ship lost at sea would almost be irreplaceable.
In general western nations have let ship yards go to waste as more companies build ships in cheaper countries. Almost all commercial ships are built in a Asian country. Only warships are built in western countries like USA and UK
That would be extremely difficult to do as shipyards take decades to build and maintain.
During wartime you can be 100% sure other shipyards would be brought online. No reason to have them running during peace time.
yeah, an immediate war in the Pacific will almost certainly see the US ask Japan and South Korea for help. Both nations still have massive shipbuilding capabilities.
@@Kishanth.J Fincantieri builds cruise ships in Italy, not only warships so your theory is flawed.
Mantab bro 👍
Drop the sonar down below a thermal layer? OHHH sweet. thermal layers damp sound so if those can be penetrated with this new vertical sonar, life just got a lot harder on subs.
super
That 57mm is a joke on such a ship. At least make it a OM 76mm with Vulcano rounds.
HE on 57 and 76 are only have same effects, but the 57mm has high RoF for bursts and cheaper rounds. It also will use MAD-FIRES munitions and can attack multiple targets simultaneously, making the 76mm strales DART is an old joke.
@@valiant8730 Don't forget about 57 ALAMO munition too... 👍
Probably for drones
00:55 Hey Admiral, your ribbons are falling, you fool!!!!!
..
Australia didn’t include the FFGX in its search for a new frigate in its 2018. With the Hunter class Frigates construction delayed til possibly 2024/25 when the USN will start construction of its new frigates in 2022. If Australia had waited and assessed the FFGX and had a slightly modified version with say the 57mm replaced with a five inch 62 gun.
?
57 will be equiped with Alamo or madfires bullet...cost per shot from both will be chraper but with less range, but 57 also developed extended long range round..
But the Constellations don't have torpedo tubes and no hull or bow-mounted sonar.
OMG they are still re designing the FFGX!
As I said at the time, the FFGX needs so much re design, may as well gone Type 26 like Canada and Australia.
Didn’t see too much of a re design here but ok
Or they could have gone with Navantia for a repeat of the HMAS Hobart.
Is there a benefit to referring to a ship with the tonnage of a cruiser and capabilities of at least a destroyer if not a light cruiser, as a frigate?
Selling the ship to politicians.
It has to do with how the navy classifies their ships. Destroyers and cruisers are LSC "large surface combatants" frigates, mine warfare ships and the like are SSC "small surface combatants." While a SSC like a frigates can have many of the features integrated into it that a LSC does it does not have the redundancy in systems or damage control systems that a LSC does. IE a LSC expects to get hit and to be able to keep fighting after it does. The SSC hopes it doesn't get hit and hopes it doesn't need to find out if it can keep fighting after.
"What we've been doing with dozens of welders, now we are doing with two operators and robots - it's all automatic & yadda!-yadda!" Begs always one question, though! :) How many maintenance-specialists do those "robots" and fully-automated lines require?
Less than a dozen full-time.
In our Italian ships there are no robots. 🤔 Crew and dockyard personnel have to do maintenance. Not robots.
You did not tell us the Weapon systems on Constellation class Frigate
Look at the previous videos
Interesting SAS especially building n weight of FFGX at 7000 tonnes definitely not light frigate. This week Australia announced NSM for Hobart n ANZAC warships, I wonder if RAN will equip Seahawks with NSM n if NSM can be fitted to P8A or F18F/G or Blackhawks? It will be interesting to see Australia buy USV with VLS containers.
My thoughts too. Hope the RAN does
Yes, the Oliver Hazard Perry class Frigates were only 4,200 tons.
Polands just announced its Miecznik class Frigate based on the Arrowhead 140 will be 7,000 tonnes displacement as well.
Not all VLS the same?
@@Joshua_N-A True but the Constellation class will be armed with a 32 cell MK-41 VLS. Same VLS system in the Arleigh Burke class but with reduced capacity.
Constellation-class frigate...
"Frigate"?
I'm looking at a pic of it rn and it looks more like a small destroyer(but that's just me...)
Yeah a lot of modern frigates are pretty much destroyer size, the new British ones being built are very large also.
It's mostly modern requirements dictating it, they want room for all the goodies, a good sized helicopter pad and hangar, a towed sonar, VLS units, redundantcy in the machinery spaces and an excess of power generation to make future retrofits easier, and in a lot of current designs, swappable mission modules.
Original design was that of a frigate, but what Americans wants is always bigger. They have redesigned the ship to be bigger and having more systems. Basically it's a destroyer more compact. But don't tell this around.
And, if you pay something more, we can made for you brand new battleships that Americans can call "light cruisers". 🤣🤣🤣
That is what a frigate is
Title says 2021 👍
We are hurting that bad for firepower?
"HUGE" gun!
If 25 mm isn't enough, and you're moving to 30 mm, and you already have a GAU-8 that has been successfully used as a Goalkeeper CIWS, why would you not mount those with phalanx guidance, instead of buying a new, single-barrel 30mm from somebody else?
The Bushmaster 30mm is already mounted on several USN ships.
Several reasons... Goalkeeper requires significant deck penetration, is less accurate, does not support programable air burst ammunition and you don't need 4000+ rounds a minute to defend against small boats. The 30mm Bushmasters are there to replace existing 25mm self defense guns, not point defense systems designed to shoot down incoming missiles...
The USN already has a superior system in service to shoot down missiles at close range, the RIM-116. A modernized goalkeeper system would just be throwing money at a problem that's already been "solved" by introducing something worse.
If you're looking for a gun based option that is a significant step up compared to phalanx or many other gun based CIWS that can also defend against small boats at extended ranges, there are several 35mm options with programmable ammunition on the market.
The 30 will be used to defend against swarm boat attackand low altitude uas. The 30 profide more range and have profimity fuse round..
@@steamedcream7671I agree.. 35 like oerlikon rheimetal
Fix the title ..2021 ?
Haha, jet lag... thanks for the heads up
I can't fathom why the US Navy decided not to invest in developing a ship launched LRASM missile? There's all this talk about the NSM being a 5th gen ASM missile (whatever that means), about the Zircon and its Mach 10 1000 km range (although since the Feb 24th we should take anything that Russia says not with a grain but with a spade of salt). Then there are the ASBM like the Chinese DF-21 and DF-26. And we have this awesome new asm missile with groundbraking targeting capabilities, massive range and a huge warhead and the Navy doesn't wanna have this capability beside the under wing pylons of Super Hornets and B-1s. What gives?
Kindna under fire power to defense fron swarm asymetrical attack.
Bring back the battleships
#US #AirForce #Military #Veteran , #Eisenhower #Reagan #Republican and 2024 #President #BradHartliep is the ONLY Candidate for President in 2024 who will increase America's #DefenseBudget and provide the #Manufacturing jobs needed to increase the #USNavy's Force to 400 #Combat ships ..
They should named ship after Constellation with Stargazer (like how first space shuttle renamed after Enterprise)
As real life Constellation class USS Stargazer to be counterpart of fictional Constellation class USS Stargazer
30mm? Better use that 57mm.
They should up the vls to 64 on the frigate
Why hasn't it got a bulbous bow?🤔
Hmm
@@OliverMoore1973 that i’m wondering the same?
@@AugmentedGravity I thought with that "Hmm" you were wondering about my intelligence... as if all ships have been built without them since I disappeared under a rock and only just recently emerged...
Would love the ship... if they replaced that puny 57mm.
57mm is a monster of AAW, high RoF
@@valiant8730 then it should be a secondary gun. But nobody believes in two turrets anymore.
@@memonk11 ideally the navy wouldn’t get the ship so close to the enemy that they need multiple cannons
@@Ry_TSG A few years ago they they were going on about “swarm attacks”. I guess that’s passé now.
@@memonk11 That's literally what the 57mm is good at defending against. With "low cost" guided rounds the mount can engage and destroy many small fast boats. What I'd really like to see the ship get is a couple of the 30mm mkIV remote guns shown in this video. I'd imagine they will eventually make their way to the class once the DDGs and other ships get them though.
The bow doesn't look .....conventional. Don't all such ships have a bulbous bow? .....with sonar dome? What's going on with this ship's bow?
If you removed the bulwark around the bow the ship looks quite pretty. I suppose that is supposed to be stealthy or something.
nice for Ukraine
57mm main gun on a FFG, what a f’in joke !
greece order 7 mh-60 romeo
Iron dome 😆
God bless and help the USA; help her bounce back; pay back her debts and lead her back to Christ amen
China be like: Take notes Take notes Take notes!!
I knew the U.S. would under arm the new class....ust like always. The Austrailian new frigate has a 5" gun as well as the CIWS weapons you can use to shred a small boat swarm. The 6 lb shell of a 57mm gun is worthless against anything but small boats. AT LEAST PLEASE go with the RF 3" !!!!
I wish someone would make a new lighrweight RF 7" gun....THAT'S RIGHT...SEVEN INCH GUN, for these large almost 600' "destroyers" all NATO ships could use. Why be stuck w/3-5-6-8-inch guns like WW2? A 7" could use extended range shells that still had a usefull detonation charge on arrival, and because being a bit bigger than the 6" Zumwalt shells....would not be st TWIDDLY to make. A standard HC shell would weigh like 250 lbs. and range 20 miles inland. Don't tell me that would not be useful!!
Hope the project does not catch a bad case of mission-creep
Is that when they have to keep adding more stuff because warfare moves too fast?
@@DirectorBird precisely, when the mission and roles change and so the design ends up so far away from its original goal
@@DirectorBird Yes, luckily frigates are designed to be quite general purpose and capable from the start so the Constellation class shouldn't be that much at risk from it (fingers crossed), but the Littoral Combat Ship had its share of mission creep, trying to increase the capability and shove it into roles the original concept wasn't intended for, both upped the cost of them, and put more strain on the small crew putting an underequipped ship into more demanding roles.
Which one
IS THEIR ANY POSIBLE LIVING IN AUSTRALIA TO JOIN AND HAVING A BIT SHARE AND ASKING MORE IMFORMATION AND I GUEST COULD ASK TRU
SORRY IT WAS BEEN DISCONNECTED MY M3SSAGE I MEAN CAN MCPON 13 CAN GIVE ME SOME IMFORMATION AND HOPING HE WILL . HE KNOW MY EMAIL MCPON TALK TO ME REGARDING THIS PROJECT OF NAVY LEAGUE
LCSに比べると無難なデザインだ。
I am glad they didn't try to make the constellation class a stealth ship in a similar vein to the type 55 cruiser it might have been a half decent ship then. It looks like it has a clothesline perched on the top of the main superstructure.
And a 5 inch main gun would be more suitable than the 57mm for this ship. The enemy will see this ship coming from half the planet away with this design. Semi stealth is the future with a ship design half way between the Zumwalt and the Arleigh Burke being preferred.
In other words very similar to the way the Chinese have gone with the type 55 and very similar to the latest Japanese naval ships.
The Americans do stealth aircraft well but semi stealth ships seem beyond them.
This ship fails to impress in so many ways.
😎👎
Why don't you like a fully stealthy ships like the hms type 45
Ugly ship with the exposed metal tube mast 😮
Toys to killing people..
They should have bought the global combat ship, type 26.
That trash can? They better stick with the fremm.
Yeah give the project to BAE and gone dead later
The FFG-X contract was specifically for a ship based on existing hulls and very limited new technology insertion. There are no Type-26 hulls in active service so the design did not qualify. The FREMM based Constellation fulfills everything the USN wanted in terms of range, payload, crew compliment/comfort and most likely cost however only time will tell on that last point.
As much as I like the Type 26's potential, and maybe some bias as a Brit, the FREMM design is a fine choice.
Is this a larger boondoggle Uber Tax payer barge?? The LCS is a complete failure yet the US Congress wants to keep it afloat and funded. Why should this new Class be any different?
….
Finally a real warship. The REMFs that came up with the LCS piece of crap should have been horse whipped IMHO.
…
Constellation-class frigate is under-armed and does not carry enough helicopters.
The class will likely carry more than 90 missiles and is capable of housing 2x sh-60 helicopters while also having a powerful modern AESA primary radar and plenty of electronic warfare and soft kill defense systems. The ship probably needs a couple 30mm bushmasters, but the 57mm mk110 is a highly flexible and capable medium caliber rapid firing gun.
Seems reasonably well armed to me.
Your comment is wrong and therefore invalid.
@@steamedcream7671 need helios laser and 30mm or 35 oerlikon.
I also wander whether they gone put 360 'irst system or not
@@jonathan6009 I highly doubt a 35mm gun system will make its way to the class as the USN does not have them in inventory. If the final design revision includes the 4 MW generators and the proposed 10% growth margin rather than 5%, there should be more than enough power, space and displacement for lasers and other upgrades even if they are not included on the initial builds to keep cost down. Steel is cheap as the saying goes, so making them very slightly larger just to be safe seems like a good idea.
@@steamedcream7671 Yes agree, US do not have 35 mm in their inventory, therefore kindna imposible to see oerlikon installed in us system. What do you think about 30mm chain gun? Is it enough to for inner layer defense?
I feel like they do not put enough weapon in the design for inner layer defense 0-5 km that are economiczlly and effective to rapidly combat assymetric attack.
yeah vls can fire long range cruise missiles. which is why russia dont like to have once marine based vls in poland close to Moskau.
just imagine such a system in cuba. ohh already happend. thanks russia for your patients.
making civilian looking ships a warship is a warcrime.
th-cam.com/video/Ch2Rqte6XOs/w-d-xo.html
Oh really ?
Also VLS near Russia doesnt matter, both Russia and US has ballistic missile submarine with hundreds of warheads each within striking distance of each other mainland
This aint 1962
Russia introduced that concept of cargo containers that are on cargo ships equipped with cruise missiles.
At this point who cares. I just want to be a stock holder. The masses are zombies and will agree with the waste of money being poured into these pigs.
Che schifezza,mezza italiana.
So basically a dozen or so human welders are unemployed and replaced by automatic welding. That sucks