Fórum Defesa Brasil

Diupa escreveu:

O comando , ainda existe.

Navy Not Following Marines’ Lead in Developing V-22 Osprey Tanker
By: Sam LaGrone
May 4, 2015 11:57 AM • Updated: May 4, 2015 1:04 PM


Undated photo of an aerial refueling test from a Marine Corps Bell-Boeing MV-22. U.S. Marine Corps Photo

The Navy has no immediate plans to explore using its planned fleet of V-22 Ospreys carrier onboard delivery aircraft to refuel its carrier aircraft, while the Marines are actively looking to include a tanking capability in its own tilt-rotor V-22s by 2017, service officials told USNI News on Monday.

Last year, the Navy selected the Bell Boeing V-22 to be the replacement for the service’s aging fleet of Northrop Grumman C-2A Greyhoud carrier onboard delivery (COD) that’s used to bring on supplies and material from shore to an embarked aircraft carrier.

While the has Navy touted some benefits of selecting the Osprey — its easier to get supplies to a ship at long range since the V-22 can land on more ships, not just the carrier — it’s not talked about the using the Navy Osprey as a refueling platform.

“While there is always a potential to leverage other V-22 capabilities down the road, our focus remains on seamlessly transitioning the Navy variant of the V-22 into the airwing to fulfill the carrier onboard delivery mission,” Navy spokesman Lt. Rob Myers told USNI News on Monday.

For its part, the Marines are currently developing the V-22 Aerial Refueling System (VARS), which is being developed in parallel with the planned first Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter deployment in 2017, according to the Marine Corps’ 2015 aviation plan.

Similar to the Harvest HAWK roll-on weapons kit for the Marine’s Lockheed Martin KC-130J, the system will be able to roll on and off the aircraft as needed, USNI News understands.

The goal of VARS is to include an organic tanking capability to the Marine Air Combat Element (ACE) of an embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) starting with tactical fighters and then moving into other aircraft.

For the Navy, the next tanking option is less obvious.

At the moment, the service’s Boeing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets serve as the tanking platform for the carrier. The Navy has expressed concern it’s burning through its fighter flight hours faster than anticipated in part due to the tanking mission.

Up to 20 percent of Super Hornet sorties from a U.S. carrier are tanking missions and the Navy is very interested in taking the burden of the strike fighter force, USNI News understands.

How service will get there isn’t clear.

“The Navy will incorporate carrier-based organic tanking capability requirements into future aircraft studies to include the possibility of tanking capability with the recapitalization of C-2A, existing strike fighters and future manned or unmanned aircraft,” read the latest Pentagon aviation outlook report to Congress, the so-called 30-year aviation plan, released last week.

The service didn’t include an aerial refueling capability in its COD requirements, USNI News understands.
Lockheed Martin, in its bid to replace the COD C-2s proposed refurbishing old S-3 Viking anti-submarine warfare (ASW) into a COD that could refuel from the carrier but lost out to the Bell-Boeing V-22 COD.

Unmanned aircraft, could eventually take over the role, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus said last week.

The NAVAIR’s preferred set of requirements for the Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) also includes the ability for the unmanned aerial vehicle to tank other aircraft.

http://news.usni.org/2015/05/04/navy-no ... rey-tanker

Raytheon secures $559m contract to deliver SM-3 Block IB for US Navy
5 May 2015

USS Lake Erie

Raytheon has received a $559m contract from the Missile Defense Agency to deliver the US Navy's Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IB all-up rounds.

Under this not-to-exceed sole-source undefinitised contract action (UCA), Raytheon will initially supply 44 SM-3 guided missiles with the total number of missiles slated to increase to 52 on UCA definitisation.

In addition, the company will provide the work required to produce and deliver the third stage rocket motor reliability, growth, and design improvements.

Raytheon Missile Systems senior programme director Mitch Stevison said: "We've consistently demonstrated the SM-3 Block IB's quality, and now combatant commanders are focused on building up their quantities.

"This contract award reflects the confidence the Missile Defense Agency has in this missile's regional ballistic missile defence protection."

The final assembly of the SM-3 Block IB is carried out at its SM-6 and SM-3 all-up-round production facility at Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama, US.
"This contract award reflects the confidence the Missile Defense Agency has in this missile's regional ballistic missile defence protection."

The SM-3 is capable of destroying incoming ballistic missile threats in space, with an impact equivalent to a 10t truck travelling at 600mph.

The Block IB includes an enhanced two-colour infrared seeker and the Throttleable Divert and Attitude Control System, which is a mechanism that propels the missile toward incoming targets.

Currently, the SM-3 Block IB is scheduled for land-based deployment in Romania this year.

This development is part of the second phase of the Phased Adaptive Approach, which is the US missile defence plan in Europe.

In March, Raytheon began updating its SM-3 Block IBs with new threat upgrade software, in a bid to enhance its lethal capability against advanced threats.

Image: A RIM-161 Standard Missile (SM-3) is launched from the Aegis cruiser, USS Lake Erie. Photo: courtesy of Lt. Chris Bishop Deputy Director, US Navy photo (RELEASED).

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... us-4569200

Custa a mesma coisa que um míssil balístico?

USS Samuel B. Roberts decommissioned at Mayport

News Staff, First Coast News 11:19 a.m. EDT May 22, 2015



JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — The USS Samuel B. Roberts, after nearly 30 years of service, was decommissioned Friday morning at Mayport in Jacksonville.

The Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate was named for Navy Coxswain Samuel B. Roberts Jr. Back in September 1942, Roberts volunteered for a rescue mission to save Marines that had been surrounded by a superior Japanese force, according to a press release.

The rescue group reportedly came under heavy fire and was almost destroyed. Roberts volunteered, selflessly, to distract the Japanese troops by drawing their fire away from the rescue group.

His plan worked - and all the Marines were able to be evacuated. Tragically, as he was making his escape, Roberts' boat was hit and he was mortally wounded. Roberts was posthumously awarded the Navy Cross.

The USS Samuel B. Roberts had a crew of 17 officers, 198 enlisted men, and could support a SH-60 helicopter or an MQ-8 UAV Fire Scout detachment.



http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/new ... /27775493/






.

.

.


.

aproveitem, sei que é o sonho molhado de alguns

Eu passo...

NettoBR escreveu:Eu passo...

Repensa, pois daqui uns quatro anos termos duas Niterói, a Barroso e os Amazonas e olhe lá....

Grande abraço

Ham hã

Pega as OHP que puder, retifica os motores, coloca lançador de ESSM e Harpoon e teremos navios por uns bons anos.

Abraços

juarez castro escreveu:

NettoBR escreveu:Eu passo...

Repensa, pois daqui uns quatro anos termos duas Niterói, a Barroso e os Amazonas e olhe lá....

Esqueceu do grande São Paulo?
E aliás, usando ele como exemplo, nós aprendemos que substituir navios velhos por outros caindo aos pedaços não compensa muito.

saullo escreveu:Pega as OHP que puder, retifica os motores, coloca lançador de ESSM e Harpoon e teremos navios por uns bons anos.

Se fosse só retificar os motores estaria ótimo...

http://www.defesaaereanaval.com.br/mant ... ada-facil/

Mas do jeito que vai ficaremos sem nada...
Está complicado, mas nada que não fosse previsto.

Abraços

Esses OHP foram usados até o osso, acho que não compensa o esforço de reformá-los...

Mas olhe pelo lado positivo da coisa, se não sobrarem mais navios de superfície na Marinha pelo menos vamos ter uma frota de 1 Subnuc e vários irmãozinhos diesel-elétricos novinhos em folha daqui uns 10 anos ou mais. Quem tem isso aqui na AS? Ninguém!!!

Todos os vizinhos vão morrer de inveja...

É por isso que houve um volte de face e o governo Português preferiu adqurir as M Holandesas, do que as OHP que até já estavam reservadas para nós. Essas fragatas foram usadas até à última!

Successful live fire test of the LCS surface-to-surface Missile Module (SSMM). This will be a 24 pack module using the modified Hellfire missile for Naval Surface strike use of the LCS, specifically against swarming speed boats. Quite an impressive video showing three missiles striking three targets.

This is not the new, long range ASuW missile, which will be the upgrade for the new Fast Frigate and LCS upgrades.