DARPA's Defiant uncrewed vessel gets Caterpillar engine. Will begin sea trials soon.
The 210-metric ton MUSV-class ship is expected to be the first of its kind with maximum performance, reliability, and maintenance efficiency while still carrying significant payload at tactically useful ranges. The Navy plans to use it as a missile-laden drone boat. DARPA plans to deploy and maintain very large fleets of unmanned surface vessels that can serve as partners, across the globe, for the larger crewed combatants of the US Navy.
engine
https://navalnews.com/event-news/sea-air-space-2024/2024/04/caterpillar-collaborates-with-serco-to-power-nomars-usv
serco product page (bit old)
https://archive.is/N4VHA
[twzr warning] more context on NOMARS and the current choice of armament for this vessel
https://archive.is/bLpTb
I wonder what they'll use as the eyes and ears of this thing. It will have to know what it's launching against after all, unless the plan is to datalink into the missiles post launch. That would still require manned vessels be close to the enemy though, so I suspect there'll be a sensor platform variant
We have several soundbites and glittering generalities but nothing concrete that I know of. Some thinking from pre-ukraine sea war will likely be discarded.
This article has a couple hints. "Perception systems," daisy-chaining of vessels, and some other things.
https://www.afcea.org/signal-media/darpa-lays-course-unmanned-maritime-future
>It will have to know what it's launching against after all
I don't think it does.
It can just receive some orders and a data packet from a satellite link, upload the data packet to the missile, then fire that missile.
The question isn't the how you moron there are two options and I outlined them, uploading while onboard using the boat's datalink and uploading to the missile directly post-launch, it's about where you're gonna get the data to upload into the missile.
That's what I'm referring to by "manned systems". I doubt it because it still means you're endangering your big expensive systems with lots of trained personnel onboard. This would do best paired with a USV sensor platform.
That's a battle management system, you still need the sensors actually feed it data
>you still need the sensors actually feed it data
And those are literally on every surface ship, fixed wing asset, sats, or scattered on the ground. That is the purpose of the system: bring all the various sensors into one common program that can then be used by just about everything.
Yes, but if you need targeting data from a manned ship then this doesn't exactly remove the risk from the manned ship. I find it unlikely that you can get real-time targeting data from a satellite at the exact right time and place to launch your weapons and any aerial drone is going to have a far harder time getting close enough for its sensors to provide targeting data. You don't need sub-shiplength levels of accuracy since you've got onboard terminal guidance, sure, but you still need to sling the missiles in the general vicinity of a moving and potentially maneuvering target, so you need a real-time track. I'm asking what the plan is to attain that track and if it minimizes the risk to valuable personnel and larger manned platforms you utter buffoon. I know what a BMS is you moron.
It could be an F-35 or an AWACS, it doesn't NEED to be a destroyer or similar sized target.
AWACS likely can't provide that targeting data with sufficient precision (remember, deviations in angle at a long range are magnified) and the F-35 one once again runs into the issue of bringing a very expensive system with a very expensive to train specialist into harms way, especially when they're going to be emitting, defeating the point of stealth.
>inb4 LPI radar
is not foolproof, there is this handy dandy book on the subject too https://www.amazon.com/Detecting-Classifying-Probability-Intercept-Sensing/dp/1596932341
A low(er) cost USV that can get closer to the enemy with a small physical footprint, making it hard to actually hit on the open sea, would be a much more effective platform, and I'm wondering if that's a thing they're also working on, similar to Anduril's (previously Blue Forces) Fury, which is an unmanned aerial sensor platform.
You have not spoonfed me jack shit, I am perfectly aware of what a BMS is, and I am aware of IBCS. None of your posts are about the original question, which is regarding whether or not there was a sensor platform being developed to pair with this thing so your USV can engage targets while your expensive platforms sit far away acting as C&C platforms, which has been the general direction the US has been moving towards, most notably with the F-35. If you have nothing to add to the conversation frick off.
>is not foolproof, there is this handy dandy book on the subject too https://www.amazon.com/Detecting-Classifying-Probability-Intercept-Sensing/dp/1596932341
Prove you have this book.
If you have a copy I can provide quotes from specific pages to prove I own it. Don't have a physical copy because they b***h and moan whenever I try to get the company to buy me a copy unless it's literally not available in a (cheaper) digital format.
11.1.3
Modern Network-Centric Concepts Arriving
Neat. You can israelitegle.
I mean I can provide more complete quotes, you can tell me "Page 537, 7th word to the end of the caption" or something, and I'd tell you it's FMWC.
Black person, the PDF is readily available on israelitegle. That means frick all.
OK, you were the one asking for proofs. Anyways IDK where you got it from but if it was libgen I'd be careful about trusting them what with recent tensions
Holy shit, you are moronic. I'm not wasting any more time spoon-feeding you.
Burkes, Constellations, etc.
This:
https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/land/integrated-battle-command-system-ibcs
Will be interesting to see how the space force side of JADC2 will integrate with whatever the naval variant of this BMS will be called.
I'm also very curious about naval elaborations on northrop's recent success in scaling link16 down for tactical tablets in a meshnet without a central server. Now that we have that and SDA's confirmation that they fixed the teething issues with link16 to/from space, things can get real stupid and fun.
>Armada of tiny USVs (the size of saildrones, say), equipped with the usual satcom but also low-ish power devices that allow the whole gang to maintain comms via WAN
> In February 2024 the Air Force's Brig. Gen. Luke Cropsey warned that phase two of Combined JADC2, which was supposed to go forward in 2024 is not starting because Continuing Resolutions (CRs) do not fund new program spending —full Congressional budget approval for FY2024 is required for Combined JADC2 to go forward in 2024.
really starting to hate republicans for this shit, just because you don't get your way doesn't mean you should grind the military budget to a standstill for half a decade or more. This shit WILL have long term consequences.
Pretty sure that got passed
It did, but still likely not in time to do phase 2 in 2024, it'll probably slip a year.
Tons of other programs that eventually got their FY24 funding had to delay shit ~5+ months which is going to have long term impacts, especially when this money was supposed to go towards long-lead production items which will just snowball delays later on.
They broke so much shit. Extra costs to space projects in particular will be obscene.
>really starting to hate republicans for this shit, just because you don't get your way doesn't mean you should grind the military budget to a standstill
The current GOP is at the mercy of a radical minority that are arguably RINOs taking advantage of the chaos and ambiguity caused by the inflamed populism in the voter base to advance their personal agendas at any cost. The old guard is all about defense spending, but the GOP doesn't have institutional control over its members the way the DNC does.
Humming birds drones sats radar ufr
It’s darpa
so these are naval equivalent of fighters/wingmen?
yes, but unmanned
Imagine taking a Mk 41 VLS cell, putting it on an overgrown speedboat, and then datalinking it to a Burke. Distributed lethality and all that.
this implies that it would need a central "carrier" mothership or in this specific case a tender for replenishment for fuel, maybe ammo, and perhaps light repairs.
>this implies that it would need a central "carrier" mothership
yep yepo. and a chinese/iranian anti-drone satellite to hack all the shit..
>very large fleets of unmanned surface vessels that can serve as partners
well. here go all US bridges..
wat
>Caterpillar engine
My experience with their post-2005-ish truck based offerings has led me to believe this is not a great idea.
I know nothing about their naval business. Definitely interested if anyone has experience with them.
Same. I suppose it's also important to note that there might not be any emissions nonsense on the military versions, they might eliminate it under national security auth.
That fricker in the bottom left though? The C7.1?
Presumably that's the "next gen" version of the C7, which is based on the 3126.
I would rather get pegged than own anything with a C7 in it ever again. They've got so many fricking stupid problems.
I remember one issue involving the air compressor where if it failed it would simply crack the whole god damned block or something.
for a moment i thought it was going to have a caterpillar silent drive like Tom Clancy's Red October