APRIL 3, 2017— Huntington Ingalls Industries (NYSE:HII) reports that the newest Virginia-class submarine, Washington (SSN 787), successfully completed its initial sea trials on Sunday. Washington was built as part of a teaming
When it came time to upgrade the autopilot system in four Victoria-Class long-range patrol submarines, Canada’s Department of National Defence (DND) assembled a consortium including three federal government departments—National Research Council of Canada (NRC), DND, and Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC)—and L-3 MAPPS of Montreal, the contractor that is supplying the control and simulation solutions for the new system. The builds of HMCS Victoria, Windsor, Chicoutimi, and Corner Brook began in the mid-1980s, so the original autopilot system has become obsolescent. The submarines are transitioning from point-to-point wiring to modern digital data bus communications.
The system includes an operator console, computers, and electronic enclosures. The computers receive data on depth, course, speed, pitch, roll, and heading from transducers, calculate, and send values to the rudder and hydroplanes’ control surfaces. When engaged, the new autopilot system will automatically adjust and compensate for any disturbance that could affect the submarine’s set course through the water, advises DND, either on the surface or when submerged. The autopilot system is independent from the ballast control system.
Built in the UK for the Royal Navy, the diesel-electric-driven submarines were bought by the Canadian government in 1998, after the Royal Navy decided to convert to an all-nuclear fleet. The first vessel slated for conversion to the new autopilot system is HMCS Windsor. She measures 70.3 meters long by 7.6 meters across the beam, and has a maximum operational depth greater than 200 meters. Displacement is 2,220 tons surfaced and 2,439 tons submerged, and maximum submerged speed is 20 knots.
David Millan, Senior Research Council Officer at the National Research Council of Canada in St. John’s, Newfoundland, has worked on the autopilot replacement project since 2012. The first order of business was to help develop the specifications for the autopilot control system. Then, on behalf of DND, he and his team evaluated three proposals for providing the simulation and control solutions. L-3 MAPPS was awarded the contract. Millan was aboard HMCS Victoria for 10 days off Halifax to collect full-scale baseline data on the existing autopilot system. When the new system is installed, the baseline data will be used to gauge its performance. Next, DRDC provided a numerical model which Millan and his team modernized, added an external interface, and used to provide an independent evaluation of L-3 MAPPS’ autopilot algorithm software. They then simulated the interaction between the numerical submarine and the numerical autopilot to commands such as “Do a turning circle”, “Hold a straight line”, and “Change depth”, and observed the movements of the simulated submarine. There were criteria for each maneuver such as accuracy in meeting the set point and course keeping. They also combined maneuvers, such as both changing depth and turning. They recommended improvements, which were quickly addressed by L-3 MAPPS. Millan notes that the new autopilot system has “a very snazzy interface” which emulates the old one, even though the technology has changed from push buttons to touch screens.
NRC’s tow tank which is 200 meters long by 12 meters wide by 7 meters deep—the largest in Canada—is used to test ships, marine components, assemblies, and software in varying current, wave, wind, and water conditions. Millan and his fabrication team spent five months building a model submarine for testing. It is 4.5 meters long by 6 meters, 1.1 meter from keel to top of sail, and weighs 670 kilograms. The model is comprised of: the nose assembly, containing the forward hydroplane system; the mid-body assembly, an aluminum pressure housing for the control and communication systems, support electronics, batteries, and sensors; the aft water-tight housing for the propulsion, rudder and aft hydroplane systems; the sail section for antennas and positioning systems; and a ballasted keel.
Dr. Jim Millan, NRC Director of Research and Development, explains that according to Froude scaling laws, the 1-to-15-scale model submarine they built measures 1/15th of the real submarine in each dimension. The model’s weight and propulsion power are 1/3375th of the actual submarine; the speed is one-quarter of the actual vessel, and events in model-scale time happen four times faster than at full scale (e.g., it can turn around in ¼ of the time). The model’s maximum submerged speed is 2.6 meters per second, and maximum power is 11 kilowatts.
In 2014, one week was spent in initial testing and commissioning, and a second week was spent conducting 14 operational tank tests in calm water, and also with seas coming from the bow and stern, with various wave heights, and with three different boat speeds. The tests included surfacing, diving, maintaining depth, and snorkel depth in various wave fields. The data from the physical model was used to improve the numerical model, which will be used in submariner training and also to generate data to assist operators.
Dr. Francois Belanger, Project Engineer for L-3 MAPPS, and DND project manager Hans Pall were involved in the model testing. The model submarine was operated wirelessly. The autopilot algorithm running on a PC on the shore controlled the hydroplanes on the model submarine. “For a PhD, Dr. Belanger is an immensely practical fellow,” observes David Millan. “He was able to change the autopilot on the fly to reflect the analysis of each run. I haven’t seen that done before: improving the algorithm while running the model.” He added that the DND project manager saw the model testing as an opportunity to advance the autopilot’s capabilities as much as possible before testing at full scale. Model testing also enabled them to acquire data on boat maneuverability and hydrodynamic characterization, information that was not transferred to DND when the submarines were acquired.
The old autopilot system’s use was captain-dependent, notes David Millan. The autopilot controlled the hydroplanes, but operational preferences determined whether or not the captain adjusted them manually. “Submarines around a certain speed, enter a transition zone going from maintaining depth in one mode to another mode,” explains Millan. “As you go faster, the hydroplanes move in opposite directions” (compared to moving in the same direction when moving slower), which is why the helmsman may choose to manually take control. The intelligent algorithm in the new autopilot system allows for adaptability, depending on the speed and performance of the vessel. It should be able to feel the boat and how it’s performing—to the extent that a machine can—says Millan, and change control modes as required. “It’s hard to do that with the old-fashioned hard-wired system,” he adds. “I hope it will be used in all of the cases where it’s operationally applicable. It will reduce the load on the helmsman.”
Reflecting on the importance of ensuring the numerical model is accurate, Dr. Jim Millan says, “That data potentially becomes a life and death decision-making tool. Knowing the capabilities of your submarine and being informed of its maneuverability and ability to escape or avoid harm, that’s what it’s all about. That’s what we do for the Navy. It’s safety and performance.”
Factory acceptance testing of the new autopilot equipment sets is complete. Ten days of sea trials are planned for October 2016 to complete characterization of the Windsor before the new equipment set is installed in early 2017. Sea acceptance tests are planned for spring 2017.
AUGUST 22, 2016 — Danish subsea diving contractor JD-Contractor A/S has discovered a wreck off the coast of Jutland that it believes is that of the World War I German minelaying submarine
Even before it was formally submitted as the Annual Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels for Fiscal Year 2016, a draft of the Navy’s latest shipbuilding plan was floating around Washington and being seen by defense commentators as likely to have a short shelf life. The plan holds to the Navy’s goal of reaching a 308-ship battle force over the next five years. But an ongoing Force Structure Assessment (FSA) is under way that will likely see that number raised, the U.S. Naval Institute quotes naval analyst Bryan Clark of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments as saying. Clark, a former special assistant to past Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, told USNI News that the plan is “very provisional until the Navy comes up with a new set of force structure requirements.” He added that Congress is “already weighing in with additional ships they want to build, and the new administration is going to obviously have things they want to do differently.”
The draft is an updated version of the plan submitted last year and continues to be based on the 2012 Force Structure Assessment (FSA) “to meet strategy and presence requirements and maintain a healthy industrial base.”
The problem with this is that the world has gotten a lot more dangerous since the 2012 FSA was compiled. Among other things, Vladimir Putin has invaded and annexed Crimea and subsequently pulled out various ploys from the Soviet era Cold War play book and China has been building whole new Spratley islands and sticking airstrips on them, essentially creating large (if stationary) aircraft carriers. Turn on the BBC World Service News any day and you’ll be able to add to the list.
The upshot is that the next FSA is likely to produce a need for a larger submarine fleet and more cruiser/destroyer-type vessels (CRUDES) than envisaged in the 2012 FSA.
Meantime, the draft shipbuilding plan says that since the 2012 FSA was completed there have been some minor adjustments in the Navy’s forward deployed posture, warfighting prioritization, and structure that have seen the 2012 FSA objective for 306 ships increased to 308 as a result of these changes. Here’s what they consist of: Fleet ballistic missile submarines: 12; Nuclear-powered aircraft carriers: 11; Nuclear-powered attack submarines: 48; Nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines* 0; Large, multi-mission, surface combatants: 88; Small, multi-role, surface combatants: 52; Amphibious Warfare ships: 34;Combat logistics force ships: 29; Support vessels: 34.
While all this is aimed at producing pretty much the fleet seen as needed in the 2012 FSA, it seems evident that the next FSA will actually result in a requirement for a larger battle force.
LAWMAKERS SEEK MORE SHIPS
The FY 2017 Defense Authorization Act is now churning through the Congressional hopper and legislators are intent on getting ahead of the curve.
But you don’t always get what you ask for—and when it comes to Navy shipbuilding and Congress sometimes it will be just a bit different, even when it’s more.
The House last month authorized $20.6 billion for shipbuilding, $2.3 billion above the President’s budget. As we’ll discuss later, how it wants to find the money is controversial and sets things up for resolution by a House-Senate conference and possibly even a veto.
Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Randy Forbes, (R-VA) says that between the shipbuilding account and the National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund (set up in the FY 2015 act as a holding fund dedicated to the Ohio replacement ballistic missile submarine program), that $20.6 billion is the highest level of shipbuilding funding, accounting for inflation, since President Reagan was in office.
In addition to shifting the amount requested by the President for the Ohio replacement into the NSBDF, the House measure expands the authorities in the NSBDF to include “continuous production” of Ohio class replacement submarines, allowing the Navy to procure components such as missile tubes at substantially lower cost.
Additionally, the measure:
The House measure also includes an amendment by Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-AL) that would prevent any funds from being used to “select only a single contractor for the construction of the Littoral Combat Ship or any successor frigate class ship program” until the Secretary of the Navy certifies a number of requirements to Congress—effectively delaying progress on the Navy’s down select from two LCS variants to one until the next administration takes office.
SENATE VERSION STILL IN WORKS
Right now, the Senate Armed Services Committee’s version of the Act was coming up for consideration by the full Senate. As drafted, it contains a number of similarities to the House version, with one major difference being the future of the LCS.
Among other items on the committee’s list:
In provisions relating to the Ford-class Aircraft Carrier, the Senate Arms Service Committee version directs a review of the ships’ Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) program and meantime prohibits future AAG procurement funding, saying, the acquisition “unit cost of this troubled program has breached critical cost growth thresholds, warranting a reassessment of the program and a consideration of alternatives.”
It limits funds until the Navy establishes lower end cost targets of $11 billion and $12 billion for the USS John F. Kennedy
(CVN-79) and USS Enterprise (CVN-80), respectively.
There’s no good news for LCS fans in the Senate. Its bill prohibits revisions to or deviations from the current LCS acquisition strategy, which includes procurement of both LCS designs in 2017, a down-select to a single variant no later than 2019, and a reduction in the inventory objective to 40 ships.
It also reduces authorization for the LCS by $28 million “due to unjustified unit cost growth” and cuts $59 million for LCS mission packages.
What’s more, it prohibits the use of funds to enter into or prepare to enter into a sole-source contract for a Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) or Expeditionary Fast Transport (EPF).
“In the last two years, funds were appropriated for two of these ships that Navy did not request and were not authorized by the NDAA,” says the committee. “This provision is a necessary safeguard to prevent wasteful earmarks.”
The Senate measure directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to Congress on how the Navy will transition the Ohio-class replacement submarine program from cost-plus to fixed-price contracts as soon as possible.
Picking up on a March 2016 GAO report that said the Navy should reconsider its approach to warranties for correcting construction defects, the Senate Armed Services Committee draft “directs the Secretary of the Navy to structure contract terms such that shipbuilders do not earn profit for correcting construction deficiencies following delivery that are determined to be their responsibility.”
The Senate version authorizes an extension to a Jones Act waiver pertaining to the procurement of dry docks, which would be necessary to build Navy ships.
The Senate Armed Services Committee measure also would slow the Navy’s efforts to take existing ships out of service. The measure would: 1. Prohibit funds from being used to inactivate guided missile cruisers or dock landing ships or place ships in these classes into an extended modernization period, unless prescribed criteria are met; and 2. Prohibit funds from being used to inactivate existing mine countermeasures systems until equivalent or better capabilities are fielded.
PAYING FOR IT ALL
While the levels of both House and Senate Armed Services Committees’ total defense budget proposals are line with the Administration’s total, the House version only does so with a bit of smoke and mirrors: it funds the Pentagon’s Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) only until April 20, saying “The Chairman’s expectation is that a new President will assess the national security landscape and submit a supplemental budget request—as is traditional in the first year of a new administration.”
Calling that move “budget gimmickry,” Secretary of Defense Ash Carter said, in a speech delivered May 17, that “it raids war funds in a time of war, when we have men and women deployed in operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. It also threatens the budget stability that undergirds all of the reforms, investments and initiatives that the Pentagon has been working on. And it threatens the readiness of the force—an actual contrast to the narrative its proponents propound.”
Secretary Carter noted that the passage of last fall’s Bipartisan Budget Act “gave us some much needed stability to plan and build for the future, after years of gridlock and turbulence.”
“That budget deal set the size of our budget,” he continued, “and with this degree of certainty, we focused on its shape and building the FY 2017 budget we’ve submitted and I’ve described—changing that shape in fundamental but carefully considered ways to adjust to a new strategic year end to seize opportunities for the future.
“But the budget stability that was supposed to last for two years is already under threat after only six months with a proposal to underfund DOD’s overseas warfighting accounts by $18 billion and spend that money on programmatic items we didn’t request. This approach is deeply troubling.
“If a final version of the NDAA reaches the President this year and includes a raid on war funding that risks stability and gambles with war funding, jeopardizes readiness and rejects key judgments in the department,” said Secretary Carter, “ I’ll be compelled to recommend that he veto the bill. I’m hopeful, however, that we can work with Congress to achieve a better solution. Our warfighters deserve nothing less because our mission is a deadly serious one.”
MAY 6, 2016 — Britain’s Natural Environmental Research Council is to use the name Boaty McBoatface, but not, as suggested by an online poll, for its new research vessel. The $307 million
APRIL 25, 2016 — Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has announced that France’s DCNS Group has been awarded a A$50 billion ($39 billion) contract to construct 12 submarines, beating bids from Germany’s
APRIL 7, 2016 — DARPA’s sub-hunting super drone vessel was officially named Sea Hunter today in a ceremony in Portland, OR. Developed by the DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Project Agency) Anti-Submarine Warfare
MARCH 28, 2016 — General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp., Groton, CT, has been awarded three Navy contracts worth a total $38,235,934. Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair, Groton, Connecticut, is the contracting
MARCH 9, 2016 — Norway is looking to replace its Ula-class submarines which will reach the ends of their expected lives in the 2020s. The six Ula-class submarines were built at the
FEBRUARY 17, 2016—Electric Boat Corp., Groton, CT, was recently awarded modifications to two Navy contracts. In both cases the work will be performed in Groton and Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair,