Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Fire Scout; and Plan B is ...


The rolling wreck of fail that is LCS and all its exquisite theory continues - as it was foretold.

We know that the ASW MOD is on Plan C (or is it D, hard to tell), and the ASUW MOD is in an existential crisis of some kind TBD.


Back in May though - at least for the Brave New World of DASH ... errr ... I mean Fire Scout, we had this from the CNO.
We also achieved the early operational deployment of the MQ-8B Fire Scout Vertical Takeoff and Landing Tactical Unmanned Air Vehicle,
... and then she was shot down.

I know - things happen in "overseas contingency operations that are not conflict but are a kinetic thingyabob" - especially to those things that can't evade hostile fire even if they can see it.

Well - amazing what can happen in six weeks.
The Pentagon's top weapons tester criticized the MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned helicopter drone as unreliable in combat situations and only good for collecting non-time-sensitive data, according to a June 24 report submitted to the congressional defense committees.
BTW - if anyone can find the testimony as a whole - please send it to me. There has to be more "there there" from the DOT&E bubbas.

Of course, we saw through the hype years ago - but we knew that eventually they couldn't hide behind the PPT forever.

More free beer for the front porch - just take it over to the far corner - the cooler between LT B and Sid looks about empty. Byron was supposed to fill it up, but he wandered off a bit ago mumbl'n about needing to take his Poofy dogs to the groomer or some such.

Hat tip IndustrySpy.

62 comments:

LT B said...

I need to do a YouTube request to have Mila Kunis join our front porch. 

Retired Now said...

Evidently our American Coast Guard is also planning on some day using these little helo's.

http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2011/07/from-the-bridge-of-the-bertholf-hawaii-patrol/

This 100 plus day Patrol off Alaska and Hawaii used manned helo's, but CG plans to add the unmanned verticle a/c in the future.

LT B said...

There are other remote helos out there.  I know I saw one and was coordinating its use, but I never compared it to the Fire Scout. 

sid said...

I sure am glad this concept has "Combat" as its middle name...

And its a Success!!!!

Declaring that the Navy “is confident that we are on a path of success” in the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus on Thursday rebuffed calls by a member of the House Armed Services Committee to review and assess the entire LCS program.

Surfcaster said...

Yes, you do.

Salty Gator said...

the senator should have followed up with a logical question:  "Mr. Secretary, what is that path?"  Mabus is an empty suit.  But at least he is not a huge disappointment.  We knew he was gonig to suck.

Salty Gator said...

that's the one that looks like the Osprey, right?

Salty Gator said...

Byron, you have fru-fru pups who get groomed constantly?  My rottie needs a bath every once in a while and a good brushing, and some nails clipped almost once a week, but that's about it!

Retired Now said...

Detailed RQ-8 ops report from an FFG here:

http://www.seapower-digital.com/seapower/spsample/#pg26


This FFG deployed with 2 of those little RQ's in the same hanger.

Navig8r said...

The DOT&E report cited is probably a Beyond LRIP Report, not testimony, and those are often classified.  I'm not a fan of FireScout, mainly because it is useless as a search sensor.  Without a surface search radar it is like searching through a soda straw.  FLIR and low light TV are not search tools.  And don't even get me started about the laser.  Since LCS doesn't have a laser guided weapon, maybe they can use it to blind the bad guys, since it is not eye-safe in buddy lase mode.

steeljawscribe said...

...and should also serve as a cautionary note to those staking out mission areas for UCAS-N while looking for savings on the manned side of the house...
w/r, SJS

Squidly said...

Oy...check out the rust on Haly's flight deck...RAST tracks look like shi'ite, and I'll bet the nonskid is coming up in chunks around the padeyes.  9 months underway in that part of the world and we never had rust visible like that.  Is this the new navy way?

LT B said...

Who was the representative that pinged on him?  I wonder if it was our FL fave.  I bet he's gotten some mail from members of the front portch. :)

AW1 Tim said...

 It's one of those unitended consequences of "optimal manning". You don't have enough people to do anything more than operate the ship. Sort of. Most of the time. Hopefully.

 This is what happens when bean counters are in charge of things. It is a direct result of MacNamara's idiocy, and of politicians using the Defemse Department as a financial scratching post whenever budget talks come up.

 It is way beyond time when the Fleet needs to step up and explain to Big Navy how things are, and that it can't operate like this anymore. The watch is signalling the iceburg up ahead, and there is still time to avoid a collision.

sid said...

Capt SJS...as you are the Navair history meister...Perhaps some review of the Firebee ops in Vietnam would be appropo?

I know they took losses that would be considered outright appalling today.

Guest said...

I am all for Fire Scout if it means fewer pilots eating the icecream and taking up rack space.

sid said...

 9 months underway in that part of the world and we never had rust visible like that.  Is this the new navy way?

Priorities...

Some things are just more important for a Navy than taking care of its ships.

Squidly said...

Nah...we never let it get that bad on my FFG.  If we had, the XO would have had my ass and a few others.   This one looks so bad that they risk decertification.  In fact, I never saw corrosion that bad on our sister FFGs either (let alone any USN ship) back in the early 90's.  Unless manning has been further reduced on Haly, I don't buy it.  Perhaps this is a result of reducing inport watch sections.

It's a fact, padeyes rust.  But nothing that a wire brush and some primer/paint won't fix...and it can be done underway.   

Grumpy Old Ham said...

I think you might be too late, LT B. 

May I suggest Salma Hayek, instead...

Anonymous said...

Phib, you need to stop this viscious slandering about my dogs. They ain't never seen a doggy salon much less get in one. The get a bath once a week and their hair cut when it gets too long.

BTW, I heard that high dollar bird dog of yours can't swim...sorry to hear that ;)

Surfcaster said...

It will be different this time - don't worry.

LT B said...

I think I saw it was the former Marine from California.

LT B said...

That's why I said that.  I'm good w/ Salma and I KNOW the Phibster, w/ his Yen for Latinas would give her prime rocking chair real estate.

Stu said...

Don't hate us because we are beautiful. 

Anonymous said...

It looks like the stern of an old Russian trawler.  Where are the haddock, and pollock, and cod?

sid said...

I saw a little nifty trick on a gun forum...

Whenever a comment thread would turn trollish, somebody would "hayek" it.

Amazing how effective it is... 8-)

(don't expect it to work when I rant about the LCS...hayek me all you want...I can't get enough)

sid said...

I know they took losses that would be considered outright appalling today.

Also, there were times its soda straw visible view simply couldn't deliver the goods...So manned recce still had to go in to collect what was needed.

Mike M. said...

Well, if you want a search sensor, try BAMS.

sid said...

Yet another tether to the vagaries of foreign base rights...

steeljawscribe said...

...and Regulus I/II, and TDR, and (as Sal has posted elsewhere) DASH, but my favorite remais the wayward drone F6F that eluded not one but 2 F-89's near Palmdale.  Appropos the whole unmanned recce deal, another cautionary tale is that of the D-21 (which went 0-4 in operational missions despite looking bulletproof on paper - and this was well before the PPT era...)
w/r, SJS

steeljawscribe said...

Well - I remember coming back from my fair share of extended underway periods in the 80's on flightdecks slicker than goose droppings on a sheet of ice.  Non-skid is a finicky beast and demands certain temperatures to apply and cure lest it peel and flake away early in deployment.
w/r, SJS

Anonymous said...

Indeed.  And once it is on you've got to maintain it.  
Nonskid does not get applied to RAST tracks.  Those should be clean (and gray).
And no running rust from the LSO shack...cosmetic issues aside, this is a sign of other problems.

Retired Now said...

Hi Res USN Photo of ASW module:

http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/081002-N-4236E-087.jpg


Notice that the "ASW module" for LPD 17 is exactly the same as for LCS classes !!

lot's of expensive innovation in this brand new idea for an ASW "module".

Byron said...

You mean sailors actually out on the deck painting? No offense, but they need to spend more down below the waterline doing preservation than worrying about the parts that offend your sensabilities. And both the inner and outer cover plates get non-skid on the top...unless you want a deck crew to go from rough non-skid to slick painted deck in one step?

Byron said...

My dogs, though little and white, are terriers at heart if that tells you anything. They like to run like hell out in the yard, play like dervishes and sound like they are eating each other and God forgive them, they like to dig for the moles in the yard that they think are still there. They get a weekly bath and a brush and a carry on, doggie!!!

Byron said...

Oh, hell, I want Zeva David!!!!! :)

Anonymous said...

Perhaps it's changed, but the rule formerly was no nonskid on the track covers. 
Agree with the below decks thing - but you still got to maintain stuff topside. 

Combat Wombat said...

It's not because you were beautiful, but because you were smelly, noisy, and there.... O:-)

UltimaRatioRegis said...

Not a chance, you ugly old shipfitter!  It is clear that my lovely Ziva prefers Marines, thank you very much! 

Now go back to welding or whatever it is you were doing!  And leave Ziva and me alone!!!!

CDR Salamander said...

Sounds like they have the same grooming habits as their owner.

Leatherneck said...

I'll send the report to an email.
tomdotcarteratosddotmil

Byron said...

Least I don't look like my dog, like certain folks wearing a cocked hat and a coating of moisture protecting slime do... :-E

Byron said...

The closest you and Ziva will get to being alone is you, the USA channel and the re-runs from seasons past  8-)

UltimaRatioRegis said...

Your point?

Anonymous said...

The surface search radar is coming.  You guys shouldn't put this in the same category as LCS mission modules.  It will have utility to other surface ships, the Navy just doesn't realize it yet. 

LT B said...

An example would be the Robert's Ridge incident as detailed in "Not a Good Day to Die."  Part of the problem is that the 8000 km screwdriver can be turned by those that think they can get the big picture through their soda straw.  In that case, the group in Saudi Arabia, I think started over running those in Afghanistan as they watched it via the straw.

Mike M. said...

To be fair, the technology in the 1960s was primitive, and the problems not well understood.  Sort of like aviation in 1914.

It's worth remembering that the JMSDF operated DASH for many years without problems.  Training counts for a lot in unmanned aviation.  These aren't toys.

Anonymous said...

If the beer is running low, you need to let Bravo Delta or me know, as we have the keys to the walk ins in the Badger Burrows I have dug under the porch. I see she remembered to plug the forklift in, after she used it last, so I will send a couple of pallets up on the West Beer Elevator to Porch Deck Level. You guys can store it yourself from there.

As long as I am loading the pallets full, do you need any chip, pretzels, et al?

Sal, the Pate and caviar walking down on level 19 West i running low, so you might want to call SYSCO. 

Anonymous said...

For 'walking". pleae read walk in

Anonymous said...

A Surface Watfare Module TBD?   We all know how well using TBDs against ships worked out last time.

Southern Air Pirate said...

Mike,

The only reason DASH worked for the JMSDF was thye were willing to put the time and money into making it work, while we were willing to put the time and money into creating the LAMPS program. We took the UH-2 and modified it into the SH-2 which did pretty well in through out the end of the cold war. However we have been screwing with drones since TDR was introduced in 1944. One would think that the tech would have caught up with the moon by now right?

Guest said...

The surface radar is coming and with it either decreased onsta times or a bigger airframe.  Which is about the same way we ended up with the SH-2.  Got to love our ability to learn from history.

Salty Gator said...

And one day, Diversity will make the navy better.  Just keep pressing the "I Believe" button and keep sending those checks!

Seriously the Navy admiralty is like Sunday Morning Televangelists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmC-cuGemoU&feature=related

sid said...

If today's DOD were to attempt a reprise, it would take 5 years of powerpoints. The selection of two retired CNOs to the board of the prime contractor. The aircraft would come in grossly overweight with a balky engine at twice the projected unit price. And only 3 would get built.

Anonymous said...

I thought that the TDR was a rather snarp looking beast.

Anonymous said...

onsta times?  are you a pilot?  maybe you need some crew rest?  these things don't care about that barrier that has plagued the surface community for decades.

CDR Salamander said...

Maintenance is still required for the UAS and associated equipment, and Sailors are still need to fly and process information. They need sleep too.

Try again guest.

Anonymous said...

OK, I will.

The physical requirements of sitting at a GCS console are so demanding that crew rest is required?  Really?  You think it should be different from other consoles?  No one is "flying" this aircraft as most here infer in the comparisons to DASH and predator/reaper.  It takes off and lands on its own.  It can fly its mission on its own.  The operator can "fly" it if he/she wants to, but that is not the norm.

The maintenance compared to a 60 will be significantly less (no hydraulics helps).  Crew rest for the maintenance crew is not an issue that will be driven by working on Fire Scout. And there are already plenty of Sailors in CIC to process information.  It's mostly surf pic info, how challenging is that?

Sal, you obviously have a "thing" for LCS and it's warranted, especially with the mission modules.  But casting this system in the same light as the mission modules is a stretch.  Should give it a fair shake.

SouthernAP said...

Guest,

What is the MTBF for some of the components in the Firescout?
What are the high failure parts in the and have they been identified?
Who will the spares train go through?
Will the L-class ship AIMD or CVN AIMD have the personnel capable of preforming the intermediate level maintenance on the components or will they be immediately BCM-7'd because all the components are beyond the maintenance capabilities of both the squadron and I-level techs?
What is the servicing time? What about the daily requirements? Who is supposed to preform the Daily inspection on it and how? What about a turn around inspection? What about the Phase A/B/C/D inspection? What are the man hours dedicated to a Phase inspection per aviation rating?
How many days in between for a fresh water rinse?
Can you preform a wash job on the FireScout with AeroClean cleaning compound due to low potable water? Or will the ship have to stock some other cleaning compound? Has that compound been cleared by both NavAirSysCom, Naval Safety Center, NavSysCom, and all the others involved with the HazMat programs in the Navy? Is it safe to use on the ship?
How many days for a corrosion inspection on the airframe?
What is the high time requirements for the engine?
What are some of the high time components and at what levels?
What are the maintenance requirements for the ground control station?
What will be required for the Seven Day inspection on the GCS?
Who is authorized to preform what level of maintenance on the GCS?

I could go on, those are questions that I haven't seen successfully answered the last time I was at Tailhook nor at a couple of other UAV/Drone meetings with in the NavAir community. All I keep getting are "Great Question, glad you asked that question, see the answer is <mumbling>, Yes you in the back have a question?"</mumbling>

Anonymous said...

SouthernAP,
All very good, basic questions for any aircraft that would be expected to safely and effectively operate aboard ship.  Are you asking me to assume that because you don't know the answers that no answers exist?  Personally, Tailhook would be the last place I would seek information on an unmanned anything...  Seriously though, I would expect that contacting RDML Shannon's folks at PEO (U&W) would be a start or possibly our HSL brothers down in Mayport who are living this dream, and working pretty hard to make this program successful.  Could also try the OPNAV N2/N6 FS action officer.

SouthernAP said...

<span>Guest,  
 
I am just a lowly maintainer and I do know that right now none of those questions have answers or the answers are very broad brush strokes with the idea that technology will provide the answer. However, at the round table at Tailhook and the last NavAir forum on UAV's into the fleet that I went to with Captain "Roy" Rodgers running, I asked some of those questions in a round about way. The answer I got from that forum was, there were no answers. The reason I ask those questions is because as I maintainer, I have been in plenty of squadrons even with 4 jets and seen ourselves worked into 20 hour days per shift all to maintain or prep for a war optempo. In a couple of those situtations it was by the grace of god alone, IMHO, that we didn't have a class A mishap. However, that is the requirements in a couple of our communities, due to the high request/low density of the platforms we were flying the heck out of ourselves and bending backwards to maintain the aircraft in a flyable status. Note I said "flyable" there were a few aircraft we had due to the nature of Naval Supply Corps being what it is now under the Naval Aviation Enterprise program, that some of our parts weren't onboard a carrier and still sitting in the FISC in Norfolk. So that meant an aircraft was PMCS or Partial Mission Capable due to Supply. It only made it harder when we had a couple of other aircraft break for other things. Then it became musical parts to make a good jet for the mission requirements. It doubly sucked moving heavy arse electronics across the Landing Area of a carrier in between recovery all in an attempt to build a good on on the fly. That stuff happens even with the new shiny birds. I also know on one of my deployments the bubbas from the HSL in our CrusDesRon brought a bird over to have a Mobile NavAirDep team that was already working on a HS H-60 do a repair job on a Bravo. This Bravo ended up getting crunched during a move and in the process the HSL guys were working harder and longer to maintain their already tiny det on just one aircraft.  
 
Sleep and crew rest is important even amongst the maintainers because bad boogie happens to aircraft out to sea. Accidents out to sea on a flight deck take out more people and cause more damage then most folks realize. So if your running your maintainers into the dirt to maintain two or three finky drones on a small boat, with a typical HSL sized det it might not work out in the cost savings that everyone thinks it will.</span>

SouthernAP said...

I also know that our rotorhead brethern down in both Mayport and to an extent up in Pax River are working hard on making the FireScout program work right. Yet, I also know via family folks that were in the HS community way back in the early 60's that worked hard in trying to make the DASH program successful as well. When that didn't become a go getter, they had a backup plan of the LAMPS program. Right now it appears that in the UAV arena it is FireScout for the VTOL thing, X-45 for UCAV, and BAMS for MPA.

However, just like when we tried to introduce Aviation in the Navy over a hundred years ago, there were paths we went down (such as the flying deck cruiser or the scouting Zepplien carrier) that just didn't work right. We also had folks like Moffett (the first BuAir) who tempered some of the more vocal supporters with short term plans and goals, all of which was to take a slightly conservative approach to both advancing technology and to preserve precious budget dollars. We should be taking the same approach as Moffett did, basically telling a few folks that if they can't make it work by the end of a 5yr budget/procurement cycle then the program is cut, period end of sentance.