The U.S., NATO allies and partner nations are participating in the 50th Baltic Operations (BALTOPS 50) exercise, currently underway through June 18 in and around the Baltic Sea.

BALTOPS 2021 features air and maritime assets from 18 NATO allies and partner nations, which will participate in live training events that include air defense, anti-submarine warfare, amphibious operations, maritime interdiction, mine countermeasure operations.

Command and control of the exercise is being led from the Naval Striking and Support Forces NATO (STRIKFORNATO) headquarters in Oeiras, Portugal.  II Marine Expeditionary Brigade and Expeditionary Strike Group 2 will provide command and control of Marine forces throughout the exercise from aboard USS Mount Whitney (LCC 20), demonstrating international naval integration and power projection ashore for an amphibious demonstration in Lithuania.

“This year, we celebrate the 50^th BALTOPS, an exercise that sets the foundation of interoperability across the alliance,” said U.S. Vice Adm. Gene Black, commander, Naval Striking and Support Forces NATO and commander, U.S. 6th Fleet. “BALTOPS stands as the keystone of our exercise season, demonstrating half a century of the unwavering commitment of our partners and Allies. Lessons learned in BALTOPS enable international strike group operations, advanced missile defense capabilities and seamless surface action group missions.”

According to a statement from NATO, BALTOPS 50 consists of two at-sea training phases: the combat enhancement training (CET) and force integration training (FIT) portion and the final tactical phase of the exercise (TACEX).

“During the first six days (the CET/FIT phase), ships and aircraft will transit through the Danish Straits, focusing on maritime operations in critical chokepoints, ensuring access and freedom of navigation in the Baltic Sea. The exercise will continue to move east during its two phases, operating in accordance with international law and supported by participating allies and partners. The exercise will culminate with the TACEX phase, where the exercise paradigm will shift into a ‘free-play’ portion, and commanders are given more freedom to run their own tactical programs,” the statement said. “The TACEX phase is designed to better represent operating in real-world situations.”

This year’s exercise incorporates defensive cyber warfare tactics, techniques and procedures to help forces adapt and train to ensure an asymmetric advantage in the era of modern warfare.

BALTOPS 50 involves participation from 16 NATO countries — Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, the U.K., and the U.S. — and two partner nations, Sweden and Finland. Together, the nations are providing 40 maritime units, 60 aircraft, and 4,000 personnel to the exercise.

Addressing reporters from his headquarters in Naples, Italy, Black said BALTOPS is an exercise that spans the full range of maritime missions and sets the foundation of interoperability across the alliance. 

“BALTOPS represents half a century of unwavering commitment to maritime security by our partners and allies,” said Black. “Lessons learned during BALTOPS enable international strike group operations, advanced missile defense capabilities, seamless surface action group missions, amphibious operations, and mine warfare.”

Speaking from Portugal, Deputy Commander of Naval Striking and Support Forces NATO Rear Adm. James Morley, Royal Navy, said BALTOPS forms a key element of NATO’s exercise program and NATO’s deterrence and defense, as well as demonstrates and develops alliance capability and readiness. “It serves a number of purposes, but principally it’s an opportunity to demonstrate alliance cohesion, a chance to demonstrate and to develop and to test alliance capability, and it’s all done with an emphasis on transparency. And I might just touch on each of those points in turn.”

Morley said BALTOPS provides the opportunity for allies to operate alongside each other, “Just as they would fight together, training across the entire spectrums of naval warfare against conventional threats from aircraft, ships, and submarines, including this year against a highly capable Swedish submarine, and in mine warfare, in amphibious operations, and in maritime interdiction operations.”

BALTOPS 2021 began with a training and integration period to improve unit readiness using a pre-planned serialized program. The exercise then moves to a tactical or free-play phase. “Units won’t know what the enemy will do next and will be expected to react as they would for real to a series of multi-threat challenges,” Morley said.

This year’s exercise will also add defensive cyberwarfare tactics, techniques, and procedures into the scenario. “It’s something we contend with and do every day, but it’ll give both commanders and operators something else to contend with,” Morley said. “We’ll also be experimenting with unmanned and autonomous systems, particularly in mine warfare.”

Morley said the forces will be using a range of both conventional and autonomous systems that various nations are trialing in the exercise to give them some real-world context and to test them alongside conventional capability.

The officials emphasized transparency. “BALTOPS is a long-planned and publicly announced exercise conducted in compliance with international law, with a strong focus on real-world safety,” said Morley.

“BALTOPS is regularly scheduled and announced, and always there is a slight uptick in Russian activity as we bring forces into and operate in the Baltic,” Black said. 

The Department of Defense’s Naming Commission — technically the Commission on the Naming of Items of the Department of Defense that Commemorate the Confederate States of America or Any Person Who Served Voluntarily with the Confederate States of America — has begun its work to examine bases and ships with names tied to the Confederacy and make recommendations for renaming them.

The eight commissioners, chaired by retired Navy Adm. Michelle Howard, were sworn in on March 2 and have begun biweekly meetings. Howard told the press the commission has developed an initial charter to guide the process and is developing renaming procedures and criteria.

The Naming Commission was mandated by Congress under Section 370 of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act and charged with assigning, modifying or removing anything that commemorates the Confederate States of America or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederacy. 

The military services were already contemplating the appropriateness of the eight bases named for Confederate generals who voluntarily fought against the United States — Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Bragg, Fort Lee, Fort Rucker, Fort Benning, Fort Gordon, Fort Hood, Fort Polk and Fort Pickett. A ninth base, Fort Belvoir, was previously named Camp A. A. Humphreys after Civil War Union Army Gen. Andrew A. Humphreys. It was later named for the plantation that existed at that location, which was operated with enslaved people. The commission will investigate if the renaming of that installation was done to possibly commemorate the Confederacy. 

Howard said the commission will be visiting the bases throughout the summer and fall and meeting with local stakeholders to gain perspectives and local opinions in regards to renaming assets.

Congress required a commission be appointed, with four of the commissioners to be appointed by the secretary of defense and four by the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees.

In his last days in office, then-Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller announced his picks, but shortly after taking office Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin III replaced Miller’s appointees with his own. In addition to Howard, Austin appointed retired Marine Corps Gen. Bob Neller, Dr. Kori Schake, director of Foreign & Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute, and retired Army Brig. Gen. Ty Seidule, emeritus professor of history, U.S. Military Academy.

Beyond the Army bases, there are Navy ships named for Confederate leaders or victories, including the oceanographic ship USNS Maury (T-AGS 66) and guided missile cruiser USS Chancellorsville (CG 62), named for the 1863 battle led by Gen. Robert E. Lee and Gen. Stonewall Jackson. Both those generals were honored by the Navy with the naming of now-decommissioned ballistic missile submarines — USS Robert E. Lee (SSBN 601) and USS Stonewall Jackson (SSBN 634).

Other Navy ships have honored Confederate officers in the past, including guided missile destroyers USS Tattnall (DDG 18), USS Semmes (DDG 18) USS Buchanan (DDG 14) and USS Waddell (DDG 24); guided missile frigate USS Richard L. Page (FFG 5); and submarine tenders USS Dixon (AS 37) and USS Hunley (AS 31).

Matthew Fontaine Maury, for which USNS Maury is named, is less known for his Confederate service than he was for his work before the Civil War as a student of the environment and its impact on navigation. He published “The Physical Geography of the Sea” in 1855; was superintendent of the United States Naval Observatory; headed the Navy’s Depot of Charts and Instruments; and wrote the Wind and Current Chart of the North Atlantic. His method and format of collecting oceanographic observations became a global standard.

According to Howard, the commission’s mandate is limited to defense assets with names tied to the Confederacy. That means that bases, ships or facilities honoring officials who owned slaves or were segregationists would not fall under the purview of the commission. USS Carl Vinson, for example, is named for a lawmaker who was a staunch support of the Navy, but also a segregationist.  USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002) is named for a former president and naval officer who initially supported segregation but later championed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In addition to bases, the legislation calls for comprehensive inventory of military assets, such as buildings, street names, parks, ships, aircraft and equipment that in some way commemorate the Confederacy. Grave markers, museums or artifacts within museums are not part of the commission’s mandate, but it may examine displays that may glorify the CSA.

The commission will brief the secretary of defense on its progress and recommendations, and is required to brief the House and Senate Armed Services Committees on its progress by Oct. 1. The commission’s final report is due Oct. 1, 2022.

U.S. Navy pilots and naval flight officers flying specialized aircraft are helping scientists collect data for airborne research.

The U.S. Naval Research Laboratory’s (NRL) Scientific Development Squadron One (VXS-1), based in Maryland at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, operates worldwide on extended detachments and annually logs more than 400 flight hours.

The squadron currently flies two NP-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft, one RC-12M King Air and one UV-18 Twin Otter, as well as numerous TigerShark unmanned aircraft that operate worldwide on extended detachments supporting numerous projects such as bathymetry, electronic countermeasures, gravity mapping and radar development research. All are uniquely configured to make the integration of systems, sensors and research projects easier.

“While airborne flight test typically refers to developmental and operational testing, a lesser-known aspect of the community includes science and technology research,” said Cmdr. Ian Lilyquist, who commands VXS-1. “We’re not graduates of the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School, but we are part of the test community doing airborne research.” 

While programs of record that are part of the acquisition process go through the developmental and operational test squadrons, VXS-1 works outside the acquisition cycle.

“Researchers come to us to refine their technologies before they get into acquisition, or to accelerate testing to mature their technology and streamline the acquisition process,” Lilyquist said. “We’re the Navy’s only airborne scientific research squadron. We work directly for NRL and the Naval Research Enterprise, using airborne platforms that provide pathways for early prototyping, experimentation and demonstrations of emerging technology so we can accelerate the Navy’s ability to get leading-edge capabilities to the fleet.”

The P-3 is a heavy-lift, four-engine, long-endurance aircraft conducive to doing projects that need to be in the air for a long time or flown overseas into an operational environment. The RC-12 and Twin Otter are smaller, twin-engine turboprops, with a lower cost to operate, and well suited for some of the smaller projects. 

“We can do projects in the ranges off of Pax River, and the warning areas offshore, as well as on detachments. The most recent example was the deployment of our Twin Otter to Homer, Alaska, where they flew missions for six weeks off the southern coast of Alaska,” said Lilyquist.

“Our unit has the same structure as an operational squadron, but the difference in VXS-1 is that we have a projects department,” said Lt. Michael Benner, an NP-3C and RC-12M pilot. “They plan the work, get the projects installed and ready to fly on our aircraft, and execute the research. It’s the entire reason for our existence.”

Benner said the squadron’s aircraft adapt to meet project requirements. “On the NP-3, we have flown sensors that require very specific pitch, roll and yaw angles to be held for extended periods. On the RC-12, we’ve flown communications components requiring exact geographical distances and strict angle of bank limitations. On the UV-18, we have flown preplanned routes to match the exact time and place of satellite overflight.”

“We use the NP-3 to conduct most of our missions,” said Lt. Cmdr. Brandon Adams. “Unlike the P-3s used for the MPA mission, the interiors of our NP-3s are pretty much empty.” That space can be filled with specialized sensors and data collection equipment to help the scientists conduct their research.

The squadron’s RC-12M is a little faster than the Twin Otter and can operate up to 27,000 feet for five hours. It’s still considered a lightweight aircraft and offers a lower cost alternative to researchers who do not require the large four-engine NP-3 for their work.

Adams said each project is unique, but they all require thorough preflight planning. Safety of flight is always of paramount concern, and before VXS-1 even operates the aircraft with the project installed it must go through a comprehensive Naval Air Systems Command review.

“Because of the uniqueness of each project, we must conduct a thorough examination of what is different about the project and if there are potential impacts to our normal operating and emergency procedures, as well as have an understanding of the desired flight profile and possible impacts. From there, an understanding of the desired flight profile can be achieved,” Adams said.

There’s a lot of crew coordination between the air crew and researchers.

“When we fly, we communicate with the scientists in the back to make sure we’re getting the right data they need,” Adams said.

Adams and Lt. Evan Pappas recently took the squadron’s UV-18 to Alaska to conduct an airborne lidar and camera survey to look at the ocean surface and immediate subsurface in a high wind environment to collect data on the water column in support of NRL’s ocean sciences division.

“We correlated that data with information from [a] buoy station off the coast and satellites,” said Pappas. “The lidar can provide high-resolution measurements of the ocean physical properties. It allows us to measure things like oil thickness in the event of a hazardous material spill and characterize bubbly surfaces to improve our ocean modeling.”

The deployment was the result of a year and a half of planning to determine the best area to conduct the research.

Low and Slow

The UV-18 is the military designation of the DeHavilland DHC-6 Twin Otter. Because the aircraft isn’t pressurized, it’s easier to modify for experiments. The Twin Otter can fly low and slow and linger in an area at speeds around 100 knots. 

For the recent airborne lidar research, Adams and Pappas required a thorough review of the necessary precautions and limitations for conducting testing in Alaska in the winter. Requirements included obtaining required survival equipment and completing a major maintenance inspection while deployed.

“We also coordinated hangar space and preflight procedures that ensured the project’s lidar equipment maintained optimal storage temperature and was rapidly warmed for flight use, despite the below-freezing temperatures,” Adams said.

According to Adams, it’s essential for the VXS-1 pilots to clarify with the project specialist what the significance of each flight parameter holds.

“The recent airborne lidar research required us to maintain 5,300 feet and fly slow, which is ideal for the UV-18. That is what it is designed to do. Ultimately, the more we know about the desired testing parameters, the more efficiently we can complete the testing. By actively engaging with our customers and thoroughly reviewing their desired objectives, together we can develop the best plan for a successful project.”

Because the ultimate goal of NRL research is a capability that can be transitioned to the fleet, the interaction with VXS-1 research pilots and the research team in early stages of a research project is invaluable.

“This helps NRL research, prototyping and testing to remain focused on the mission as the flight clearances and logistics are already following the active-duty processes,” said Dr. Damien Josset, an NRL oceanographer.

Josset, who participated in the recent deployment to Alaska, said the support from the squadron’s research pilots allowed the researchers to collect critical ocean sciences data that can be used to improve numerical simulations and as inputs of ocean models, and better predict the ocean environment for Navy operations.

“No two projects are the same,” Pappas said. “The biggest determining factors in selecting an aircraft for our customers are typically the size of their payload and the flight envelope that they’re looking for. As long as the payload fits on board the plane and the desired flight profile matches the aircraft’s performance capability, we can meet most customers’ demands for instrument and sensor configuration. This capability is what makes our aircraft unique and differentiates them either from their fleet variants or commercial civilian variants. We could have an aircraft outfitted for a project one day, de-install the equipment and any sensors, and install an entirely new project just a few days later with a different purpose and scope.”

Pappas said it’s gratifying to help the scientists take their research ideas and turn them into executable projects that yield results.

“A lot of what we do to help develop and test does not have an immediate application to the fleet at this time, but the research opens up opportunities for the scientists, and they can apply the testing to future applications.”

A report from the National Academies of Sciences has recommended the U.S. Coast Guard “take a more strategic and accelerated approach to exploit the capabilities of existing and future unmanned systems,” and the Coast Guard agrees.

The report, “Leveraging Unmanned Systems for Coast Guard Missions,” has called on the Coast Guard to engage more with unmanned systems (UxS) and the capabilities they bring to Coast Guard missions. The report acknowledges the service is currently investigating how to use UxS for its 11 statutory mission areas and to introduce their capabilities into the fleet and force structure. 

“As other military services and other operational agencies of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) integrate UxSs into their force structures, the Coast Guard will be impelled to do the same, because it engages in joint and combined operations and missions with these partners,” the document said. “Abundant evidence in this report points to both a compelling need and burgeoning opportunities for the Coast Guard to proceed more aggressively, albeit strategically and deliberately, in leveraging UxS advancements. Indeed, the study committee concludes that to remain responsive and fully relevant to its many missions, it is imperative that the Coast Guard take a more strategic and accelerated approach to exploit the capabilities of existing and future unmanned systems.”

In fact, the report’s authors were “struck by the magnitude and breadth of opportunity that lies ahead for the Coast Guard to pursue UxSs across its multiple operational domains and missions.” However, the report said “those initiatives have been characterized by limited funding spread over many years and the absence of a formal means, or a pacing mechanism, for proactively identifying, investigating, and integrating promising systems.”

The report found that, although the Coast Guard has multiple ongoing UxS initiatives, an opportunity for improvement exists by developing a formal means for identifying, investigating, and integrating promising systems. The report recommended the creation of a high-level UxS strategy.

The service has taken that advice seriously, and responded enthusiastically by establishing an Unmanned Systems Cross Functional Working Group on Dec. 21, 2020, to create a strategic vision for leveraging UxS across Coast Guard missions.

In his 2021 State of the Coast Guard address, Commandant of the Coast Guard Adm. Karl Schultz said the key to spotlighting bad behavior is maritime domain awareness.

“Last fall, our Research and Development Center tested the ability of unmanned surface vessels to augment traditional ship and aviation capabilities for operations in the far reaches of the Pacific Ocean. We learned that the future of our unmanned systems strategy will most likely rely on more diverse systems and effective integration of machine-learning to unlock actionable data for Coast Guard operators,” he said. “These are valuable lessons as we stand up an unmanned system element within our Coast Guard Requirements Shop to consider how unmanned technology can augment our future fleet.”

The UxS Cross Functional Working Group is currently developing the Coast Guard’s strategy for UxS. By leveraging and adapting these technologies, the service envisions achieving increased efficiencies, enhanced personnel safety, and improved mission performance across Coast Guard operations.

The Coast Guard Research and Development Center and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Science and Technology, through partnerships with the Department of Defense, have been evaluating UxS technologies for several years.

“These research-focused initiatives complement the service’s requirements generation and evaluation, industry engagement, and robust acquisitions processes to ensure multi-mission operational requirements are met by the best-suited capability, including manned, unmanned, and hybrid solutions,” said a Coast Guard spokesperson. “The UxS Working Group is responsible for aligning strategic efforts ranging from the identification and evaluation of emerging technologies to their operational deployment and related doctrine.”

According to Lisa Kirkpatrick, Deputy Assistant Commandant for Capability (CG-7D, the cross-programmatic working group), under the direction of the Assistant Commandant for Capability (CG-7), is comprised of subject matter experts from across the Coast Guard including representatives from the Coast Guard Coast Guard Research, Development, Test & Evaluation and Innovation Program, the Office of Aviation Forces’ Unmanned Aircraft Systems Division, the Office of Requirements and Analysis, the Office of Shore Forces, the Office of Cybersecurity Program Management, and the Directorate for Response Policy.

“The UxS Working Group follows a proven integrated product and process development approach, and will directly inform the service’s next steps to incorporate unmanned systems to increase safety and enhance mission effectiveness across Coast Guard operations,” Haring said.

The Working Group’s accomplishments and lessons learned will inform the potential establishment of a permanent UxS office, and help apply a holistic approach towards UxS across the range of Coast Guard multi-mission operations.

The Royal Navy’s new Type 31 frigates will be an inspiration. According to First Sea Lord, Adm. Tony Radakin, who released the names of the first five ships, the frigates will be known as the Inspiration class.

“Each of the names has been chosen for evoking those values we strive for: cutting-edge technology, audacity and global operations,” Radakin said. “They represent the best of Britain’s world-class shipbuilding heritage and will fly the flag for decades to come.”

According to the Royal Navy statement, the names, which were approved by Queen Elizabeth II herself, will be HMS Active, HMS Bulldog, HMS Campbeltown, HMS Formidable and HMS Venturer.

Each of the names were inspired by noteworthy warships and submarines in Royal Navy service.

• HMS Active: Named after the Type 21 frigate HMS Active which served the Royal Navy from the late 1970s until the mid-1990s. As well as taking part in the operation to liberate the Falklands, supporting the final battles for Port Stanley, Active spent her career deployed in support of Britain’s Overseas Territories and global interests, from tackling drug traffickers to enforcing UN embargos and providing humanitarian aid in the aftermath of natural disasters.

• HMS Bulldog: Named after the destroyer which helped turn the tables in the Battle of the Atlantic thanks to the bravery of her boarding party. They searched stricken U-boat U110 in May 1941 and recovered the Germans’ “unbreakable” coding machine, Enigma, plus codebooks. It gave Britain a vital intelligence lead at a key stage in the struggle to keep its Atlantic lifelines open.

• HMS Campbeltown: Named after the wartime destroyer which led the commando raid at St. Nazaire in France. In March 1942, the ship rammed the dock gates and hidden explosives aboard blew up, wreaking havoc in the port and denying its use to major German warships for the rest of World War II. The action epitomizes the raiding ethos driving the Royal Marines’ Future Commando Force.

• HMS Formidable: Named after the WW II carrier which epitomized carrier strike operations from Norway, through the Mediterranean to the Pacific. She survived kamikaze strikes and took the war to the Japanese mainland with Lt. Cmdr. Robert Hampton Gray earning the last naval VC of the war for his daring sinking of a Japanese destroyer just six days before Tokyo surrendered.

• HMS Venturer: Named after the WW II submarine which sank German U-boat U864 northwest of Bergen, Norway, on Feb. 9, 1945, while both vessels were submerged. Venturer enjoyed a technological and intelligence advantage over her foe thanks to decoded messages indicating the enemy’s location and a superbly trained crew who located and destroyed the U-boat. It was the first time one submarine had deliberately sunk another while submerged.

The names also represent the Royal Navy’s future vision, the statement said. “HMS Active signifies the forward deployment of Royal Navy ships to protect U.K. values and interests, whilst HMS Bulldog is focused on operational advantage in the North Atlantic. HMS Campbeltown symbolizes the ‘raiding from the sea’ focus of the Royal Marines’ Future Commando Force, HMS Formidable recognizes the history of aircraft carrier strike operations and HMS Venturer promotes the navy’s technology and innovation forward-look.”

It’s a tank! It’s a boat! It’s “Tank Boat!”

The Indonesian Ministry of Defense has ordered a prototype of a new kind of maritime weapons system, the X18 “Tank Boat,” from a consortium composed of Indonesian companies and a European partner.

Patrolling and protecting the Indonesia’s maritime domain is a challenge. Indonesia is a large and populous country, but is spread out among 17,000 islands — many of them sparsely settled or uninhabited — stretching more than 3,100 miles from West Papua in the east and Aceh in the west. Many critical sea lanes pass through Indonesian waters. 

The X-18 prototype has been ordered for the Indonesian Army under what is being called the Antanesa program, but more commonly referred to as Tank Boat. The consortium that built it includes the Indonesian defense and industrial equipment manufacturer PT Pindad, PT Lundin’s North Sea Boats, PT Len Industri, and engineering and electronics firm PT Hariff, as well as the European arms manufacturer maker John Cockerill, which makes turrets for light and medium-weight armored vehicles.

The X18 Tank Boat is a catamaran design for coastal, riverine and inshore operations. Officials believe the well-armed X-18 and can meet a number of maritime patrol, search and rescue, expeditionary and special operations missions with its ability operate in shallow water and land on a beach to offload or pick up troops. Tank Boat has a range of about 600 nautical miles, which allows it to move between Indonesia’s many coastal military bases.

The design isn’t new — North Sea Boats has been working on it for 10 years. The Initial concept of Tank Boat features a 105mm gun, but the current prototype will be equipped with a remotely operated Cockerill Protected Weapon Station (CPWS) turret with a 30mm automatic cannon.

North Sea Boats has experience making composite vessels such as catamarans and landing craft, including an all-composite trimaran fast attack boat built for the Indonesian navy that was destroyed by fire in 2012 before it was commissioned. The company then embarked on construction of a second trimaran that was subsequently halted.

An APC 60 variant will carry up to 60 soldiers and will be armed with a CPWS equipped with a 25- or 30-mm. gun and an EO/IR sensor.

The X-18 is diesel powered and employs waterjets. It has a crew of crew of four or five and will embark a RHIB for boardings or SEAL insertion, and features multi-mission deck for unmanned aircraft, containerized cargo or modular weapons. Designed with a shallow draft, X-18 can operate in swamps, coastal and riverine environments as well in blue water, and can land on a beach to discharge personnel and supplies onto dry land.

The composite catamaran was launched last month at the North Sea Boats facility in Banyuwangi on the eastern tip of Java. Launched on April 28, the first X-18 will undergo builder’s trials and acceptance testing, as well as weapons firing evaluations.

Zycraft of Singapore is developing a high-speed unmanned surface vessel (HSUSV) capable of sustained speeds of 35 knots in Sea State 4 carrying a 1,100-pound payload (not including fuel).

The HSUSV has both civil and military applications, from rapid rescue, surveillance of marine accidents, or interdiction of hostile targets. The vessel can be launched from shore or a host platform at sea.

James Soon, Zycraft’s CEO and former commander of the Singaporean navy fleet, said the HSUSV has a number of commercial applications such as responding to ship collisions, hijacking, pollution incidents, air crashes at sea, and search and rescue (SAR). “The HSUSV can provide rapid surveillance in maritime incidents such as for salvage companies that need to get early surveillance and situational awareness to better determine the subsequent response.”

The HSUSV can be used as rapid rescue platform in man overboard situations or other SAR cases by carrying a life saving device or medical evacuation package. Examples of paramilitary applications include surveillance of naval groups, and possibly attack using a weapon, he said.

The vessel is remotely controlled from Zycraft’s operations center in Singapore, but could be controlled from virtually anywhere with satellite connectivity, including a host ship platform.

Sea conditions is a determining factor regarding how fast manned assets can get to the scene. “Currently available high-speed boats use planning hulls, and leap out and slam on the water and therefore cannot go really fast in high waves,” said Soon. 

When manually driven, the driver has to constantly adjust the throttles when meeting large waves. This slows the boat down. Controlling such a boat in an unmanned configuration is problematic because it’s difficult to sense and respond to the waves autonomously.

The Zycraft HSUSV is based on proven wave-piercing racing boat design with a single engine. The hullform can use a waterjet or propeller. The Zycraft HSUSV is currently planned to have a single propeller.

A very slender wave-piercing hull can avoid slamming by cutting through waves instead of travelling over them. “A wave piercing HSUSV is expected to be able to overcome bad sea conditions and reach the scene several times faster than manned assets,” he said. 

“The wave piercing concept has been used by a number of manned boats for a long time, but this is the first time it is being adapted for unmanned. With manned boats, the sudden acceleration and deceleration experienced as the boat pushes through a wave and emerges won’t be felt by an unmanned boat. That is why wave piercing manned boats are not popular,” Soon said. “Imagine being jerked around for days.”

The Zycraft HSUSV has an endurance of at least two weeks at a loitering speed of 5 knots. Soon said the HSUSV is designed to be as small as possible — 11 meters or less — to keep costs down and enable it to be carried by mothership when needed. He said it will have a single point lift for launch and recovery, and will have its own launch and recovery bay for small drones or tethered UAVs to carry cameras or other sensors.

The United States and Greece are actively discussing a potential acquisition of four Hellenic Navy Future Frigates (HF2s) from Lockheed Martin, based on the company’s for-export Multi-Mission Surface Combatant (MMSC) and Freedom-class variant of the littoral combat ship (LCS).

Saudi Arabia has ordered four MMSCs and signed a Letter of Intent for four more. The first two are under construction at Fincantieri’s Marinette Marine shipyard in Wisconsin, where the Freedom-class ships are built.

Fabrication for the first MMSC, HMS Saud, began in October 2019. Steel was cut for the second as-yet-unnamed MMSC in January of this year.

“We’ve integrated these capabilities with the Saudi MMSC, focused across those multi-mission warfare areas, and we see the Hellenic Navy asking for similar capabilities to this configuration,” said Lockheed Martin’s LCS program vice president Joe DePietro, who is also responsible for the MMSC and HF2.

According to DePietro, these differences show the tremendous flexibility of the seaframe. “We’re able to achieve that with our COMBATSS 21 combat management system, which is a derivative of our Aegis combat system, found on U.S. and international platforms, which come from the same common source library. We can quickly integrate different or new warfare capabilities from a systems perspective.”

The common combat management system and weapons, with the ability to share information between the platforms allow them to maximize capabilities in many domains.

What LCS does not have but will be common with the RSNF MMSC and HF2 is an eight-cell MK 41 vertical launch system (VLS). However, unique to the HF2 will be three additional single cell VLS tubes, giving it a total of 11 cells. Missiles like the Evolved SeaSparrow Missile or Sea Ceptor common anti-air modular missile – maritime (CAMM) can be quad-packed, giving each cell the ability to have four missiles in any one cell.

To make room for the VLS in the MMSC and HF2, the gun moves forward, which also makes the room for the additional cells.

“The beauty of single cells is that you can place them in multiple areas of the ship. Because of the flexibility of our hull form and the combat management system, we can accommodate those capabilities that our international partners want to include on their ships.”

DePietro said that Lockheed Martin invested in the capability to utilize multiple VLS cells on different platforms, especially for ships that did not have existing space for a full eight-cell system or larger configuration (some Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers have up to 32 cells forward and 64 cells aft).

The Greek ship will have some variations from the basic MMSC design, such as a larger 76mm instead of the 57mm gun. The Saudi ship will have eight canister launchers for Harpoon anti-ship missiles, where the Greek ship may carry the Naval Strike Missile (NSM).

LCS is a focused-mission ship that allocates a significant amount of its volume to the mission packages. About 40 percent of the ship is set up to receive mission packages that can be connected to the ship’s computing environment to become part of the ship’s overall system. “That gives us a lot of flexibility to also integrate a more traditional multi-mission combat system — to include anti-air, anti-submarine and self-defense capabilities,” said DePietro.

For the Freedom-class LCS ships, LCS 1 through 15 carry the MK 31 RAM launcher, while LCS 17 and following ships will have the Sea-RAM installed (all of the Independence-class LCSs already have Sea-RAM).  SeaRAM combines the radar and electrooptical system of the Phalanx CIWS Mk-15 Block 1B (CRDC) with an 11-cell RAM launcher to produce an autonomous system—one which does not need any external information to engage threats.  The 11-missile SeaRAM will equip the Royal Saudi Navy’s multi-mission surface combat (MMSC) based on the Freedom-class littoral combat ships, but the Hellenic Future Frigate will employ the 21-missile MK 31 system.

“As with the Freedom class LCS, we’ve moved from the TRS 3D to TRS 4D AN/SPS-80 solid state radar with longer detection ranges and accuracy. That, along with the AN/SLQ-32C (V)6 electronic warfare system, gives greater capabilities with regards to the employment of the RAM missile,” said DePietro.

The HF2 will have a robust ASW capability. “We’ve looked at hull-mounted sonars for the MMSC for different customers,” DePietro said. “We believe a variable-depth sonar (VDS) paired with the MH-60R helicopter, which the Hellenic Navy has already bought, will give them a significant capability. We’re also looking at how we can maximize the capabilities of their upgraded MEKO-frigates and HF2s working together. We think the VDS will give them much needed sonar coverage of the areas where they expect to operate. We’re looking at the Thales CAPTAS 2 right now.”

The HF2 is designed to embark and operate multiple UAVs — depending on size — along with a minimum of one MH-60R, although the ship can carry two. The ship’s datalink will allow communication between the ship, the helicopter and whatever UAVs they choose, at the same time.

Like the parent LCS design, the MMSC and HF2 have Rolls-Royce MT30 gas turbines and Fairbanks Morse diesels for propulsion. DePietro said the new ships will benefit from all of the modifications, upgrades and improvements in survivability, as well as the substantial testing and validation from the LCS program since the beginning.

The export variants will have the same steel hull and aluminum superstructure. But, he said, Lockheed Martin also offers flexibility. “We can tailor the ship and the systems to meet the requirements of our customers.”

The four Saudi ships will be built at Marinette, and Lockheed is currently reviewing options to build a number of the HF2 hulls in Greece, providing an opportunity to revitalize the Greek shipbuilding industry’s capability and capacity, and to advance Greek industries.

DePietro sees more export opportunities. “We’re seeing interest from navies, particularly for ships with this Hellenic Navy configuration,” DePietro said. “There are a number of navies who would like to build them locally, in their shipyards. So, we have to go and assess the capability, and understand how that would work from a construction and contracts perspective.”

“We’re looking at the international arrangements with Fincantieri as our partner. Lockheed Martin partners around the globe for design and integration of ship platforms. Together you get a team that knows how to do this.”

Fleet modernization

New ships are needed to modernize the Hellenic navy. The HN currently operates four Hydra-class MEKO 200 frigates, built between 1992 and 1998, and nine Elli-class frigates, formerly Dutch Navy Kortenaer-class frigates, commissioned in the Royal Netherlands Navy between 1978 and 1983, and transferred to Greece between 1993 and 2002. (A total of 10 Kortenaers were acquired, but one has been decommissioned and is currently used for parts.)

While some news reports claim that Greece has made its decision on the Lockheed Martin solution for their new combatant, the actual process is complicated and not yet final.

There are other proposals being offered for consideration. British shipbuilder Babcock, partnered with Thales UK, is proposing its Arrowhead 140 design, based on the future Royal Navy Type 31 frigate (which is itself based on the based on the Danish Navy’s Iver Huitfeldt frigates. Dutch Shipbuilder Damen is reportedly offering its SIGMA 11515 frigate. A French group with Naval Group, Thales and MBDA, is proposing the Frégate de défense et d’intervention (FDI). A German team led by TKMS is proposing its MEKO A200NG or A3000 frigate. Spain’s Navantia is offering its F-110 and Fincantieri is proposing the FREMM, although they are also partnered with Lockheed Martin on the MMSC variant of LCS.

Greece wants more than ships. It wants a partnership that also includes modernization of its shipbuilding capability, upgrading of its four MEKO frigates and other considerations. The MEKO frigate upgrades offer an opportunity for the Hellenic Navy to drive commonality between MEKO frigates and HF2. Under consideration is the use of the AEGIS based COMBATSS-21 combat management system that streamline training pipelines and leveraged existing integrated systems on both ships such as the MH-60R.

“We are very committed to our Navy-to-Navy partnership with Greece,” said U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey R. Pyatt, speaking to reporters in Athens March 4. 

Pyatt noted key programs where the U.S. is supporting Greece. “We want to see the Hellenic Navy be as capable as possible because that makes NATO stronger. The MH-60 Romeos are part of that. The P-3 upgrades are part of that. The Mark-5s for the Special Forces are part of that. So, we are already demonstrating our commitment to enhancing Greece’s naval capabilities. The next big step is going to be the frigates. This is a big decision for the Greek state. It’s a sovereign decision that Greece is going to make.”

U.S. and allied navies took part in the  multi-national exercise Jeanne D’Arc (ARC) 21 in and around Japan, exercises that began May 11 and wrapped up May 16.

The Sasebo, Japan-based USS New Orleans (LPD 18) joined with the Royal Australian Navy, French armed forces, Japan self-defense forces and other U.S. forces for ARC 21.

“This exercise brings together service members from each nation’s military in a combined effort to enhance interoperability in pursuit of common regional security goals,” said Navy spokesperson Lt. Cmdr. Sherrie Flippin. “Service members from participating units planned, coordinated and conducted operations over land and at sea.”

The 684-foot New Orleans, a San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock assigned to Amphibious Squadron 11, along with elements of the Okinawa-based III Marine Expeditionary Force and the 3rd Marine Logistics Group, have been engaged in amphibious landings and air assaults while also conducting formation maneuvers, air defense exercises and communication drills with the other units in the exercise. MV-22 Osprey tilt rotor aircraft and P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft also took part.

“On the New Orleans we are prepared to flex our amphibious skills with each of the teams here and strengthen our joint operational capabilities,” Capt. Brian Schrum, New Orleans’ commanding officer, said in the release. “Each event affords us the opportunity to collaborate across staffs developing deeper personal bonds, fostering trust between all our nations and in turn growing as a cohesive naval and Marine force.”

ARC 21 also included the 387-foot Anzac-class frigate HMAS Parramatta (FFH 154) from the Royal Australian Navy, as well as the French navy’s 653-foot Mistral-class LHD FS Tonnerre (L9014) and 410-foor La Fayette-class Frigate FS Surcouf (F 711). 

Participating ships from the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force included the 646-foot Hyūga-class helicopter destroyer JS Ise (DDH-182); 528-foot Kongō-class guided missile destroyer JS Kongō (DDG-173); 541-foot Atago-class guided missile destroyer JS Ashigara (DDG-178); 495-foot Asahi-class ASW destroyer JS Asahi (DD-119); 584-foot Ōsumi-class landing ship tank JS Ōsumi (LST 4001); and a pair of 164-foot Hayabusa-class patrol boats, JS Ōtaka (PG-826) and JS Shirataka (PG-829); along with other host nation air and ground forces.

The field training portion of the exercise began at the JSDF Kirishima maneuver area with a combat engineer subject matter expertise exchange, casualty evacuation and combat service support training, and simulated fire support coordination training between Japan Air Self Defense Forces and U.S. military personnel.

“This exercise, by bringing together our air, land, and maritime forces to increase our ability to jointly respond to crises across the range of military operations, is yet another demonstration of our rapidly growing constellation of partners, all united by the common goal of a free and open Indo-Pacific,” said Lt. Col. Jeremy Nelson, commander of the 3rd Landing Support Battalion. “It is commonly said that we train alongside our partners and allies in peace to be ready to fight alongside them in war, and exercises like ARC-21 are the best example of this.”

Forward deployed to Okinawa, Japan, the 3rd Marine Logistics Group provides responsive combat logistics support to III Marine Expeditionary Force and other Marine units within the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations through expeditionary means, forward basing and global sourcing during exercises and contingency operations.

Nelson, who was also the commander of the Marine Forces in the exercise, said the U.S. Marines were represented by an Air Naval Gunfire Liaison Company, an Explosive Ordnance Disposal unit and a reconnaissance team detachment.

The culminating events included surveillance and insertion of forces via JSDF CH-47 Chinook helicopters from Tonnerre, followed by a helicopter-borne assault via U.S. Marine Corps MV-22 Ospreys from USS New Orleans, Flippin said.

Flippin said the exercise was conducted in adherence to strict COVID mitigation measures to protect participating forces as well as local communities.

Capabilities and Limitations

Speaking to reporters, Schrum and Nelson commented on the amount of effort involved in the staff planning process for exercises like ARC 21.

Nelson said the staff planning process is a way to understand the capabilities and limitations of the participating units, and how each of the forces conducts their planning — including who they bring to the table, and why. 

“We were able to familiarize ourselves with tactics, techniques and procedures — how they conduct themselves on patrolling and in urban combat, how they use their own gear, equipment and  communications and how they use their weapon systems,” Nelson said. 

Schrum said communications is a key attribute to “achieving interoperability with partners and allies, and understanding their capabilities and what they can bring to the fight, and how we can all work together to achieve a common goal.”

Schrum noted one of the more interesting events in the exercise involved the approaches and dockings by Japanese LCACs (landing craft air cushion) in the well deck of the New Orleans.

“To see another county’s ship-to-shore connector come into our well deck and land was an amazing thing for our crew in the well deck, as well as our junior officers and watchstanders. They got a chance to see what it’s like to work with partners and allies here in this region.”

Nelson said there was a lot more commonality than differences among the different units. “They had very good gear and they take care of it,” he said. “They’re very disciplined, perform to standard and are eager to train. We worked through bad weather; the common understood COVID mitigation measures; and the language barrier, and were still able — through deliberate planning — execute a safe exercise that everyone mutually benefited from.

“Sharing experiences, tactics and best practices makes us all better. Anytime you train together, you’re better together,” Nelson said.

ARC21 is the first large-scale joint exercise involving the U.S. and France on Japanese soil, and is taking place at a time of growing Chinese assertiveness in the region.

Japanese Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi said the exercise is a way to deepen defense cooperation with the U.S. and “like-minded countries” that shares Japan’s vision of “a free and open Indo-Pacific.”

Special aviation squadrons conduct developmental and operational testing, as well as scientific research. These squadrons have specialized aircraft along with test pilots, naval flight officers (NFOs), test engineers and other specialists. Qualified test pilots, aircrews and engineers make up a very small percentage of naval aviation, but what they do has a huge impact on the Navy and Marine Corps of today and for many years to come.

The developmental testing squadrons report to the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) and Weapons Division (NAWCWD) — the two warfare centers that support the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR)— and evaluate NAVAIR’s aircraft and weapon systems to make sure they do what they’re designed to do.

The operational testing squadrons — VX-9 at China Lake, California, for tactical strike aircraft (F/A-18s, EA-18Gs and F-35s) and VX-1 at Patuxent River, Maryland, for rotary and fixed-wing antisubmarine warfare and other maritime aircraft and weapons — report to commander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force, and evaluate the aircraft and systems and their ability to conduct the mission.

Further tactical experimentation and validation is done at the schools, such as the Navy Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program at the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center at Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada.

“The three organizations have a critical role in coming together to communicate to the program sponsoring the capability and helping them make the right decisions,”said U.S. Marine Corps Col. Richard Marigliano at NAWCAD’s Naval Test Wing Atlantic.

Marigliano is responsible for four aircraft squadrons and the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School (USNTPS), which includes the full spectrum of aviation assets from large four-engine jets to tactical fighters to helicopters, tiltrotors and unmanned aircraft.

“We have about 3,800 people within Test Wing Atlantic, including government and contractor civilians, as well as officer and enlisted military personnel,” he said.

The West Coast wing, Naval Test Wing Pacific, conducts weapons flight testing for NAWCWD, but the squadrons in both wings work together. “It’s not fair to say we just do airplanes and they just do weapons, because aircraft today are a very complex systems-of-systems,” Marigliano said.

“We team an experienced civilian project engineer with a pilot or NFO with recent flying experience and who has completed Naval Test Pilot School,” said Marigliano. “We look at complex systems and see how well they are integrated and networked, with all the interfaces and inter- dependencies. The test pilots and engineers conduct the planning, execution and reporting of the tests to answer the question: ‘Did the Navy buy what it’s supposed to buy, and did it get value?’”

In addition to the test aircraft, simulators and shore-based test beds are also used.

“Some things have to be done in flight, and the tests are conducted on ranges tailored for the type of flying that we do,” Marigliano said. “Sometimes we take advantage of fleet exercise opportunities to conduct testing in more realistic environment.”

Focus on the Mission and Aircraft

Capt. Elizabeth Somerville is a naval flight officer and chief test pilot for VX-23, based at Patuxent River. She will assume command of the squadron in July.

“We conduct testing for tactical aircraft, including the F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, T-45 trainer and the F-35, and we will be receiving the MQ-25 Stingray unmanned aerial refueling aircraft when it’s ready,” she said. “We have a tremendous team at my squadron and at the wing here on the East Coast and the West Coast, involving thousands of dedicated professionals. There is a lot of personal investment in develop- mental flight test.”

Somerville said developmental flight testing differs from operational flight testing.

“We come into the acquisition of an aircraft, weapon or software first, as early on in the life cycle of that product as possible. There has already been a lot of work on that product to get it to this point, and we then take it through its developments and ensure it works and does the job it was designed to do. Our squadron is filled with USNTPS graduates. After developmental test, usually a system will undergo operational test where a squadron will make sure the product meets the mission needs of the fleet.”

The departments in her squadron are focused either on the mission or the aircraft, she said.

“We get projects to test aircraft, systems and software, and they can cross multiple departments. We conduct a lot of ‘carrier suitability testing.’ Not only do aircraft have to be able to land safely on the carrier, but so do all of the systems and components. Everything on that aircraft — each black box, weapon and every little bit of software — has to function in that harsh carrier environment.”

VX-23 has a team of engineers who are specialists in a wide variety of disciplines who work with the US-NTPS-trained pilots and NFOs to develop the detailed test plan, which then goes through a review process. “We have experienced test flight engineers and test conductors who monitor the whole series of events in real time to make sure everything is behaving as expected, we’re getting the data we need, and we’re conducting the testing effectively, efficiently and safely,” Somerville said.

According to Somerville, things don’t always behave as expected. The systems are so complex and have to be integrated and interoperable. “You can’t expect everything to go perfectly the first time,” said Somerville. “We’re constantly learning and discovering things, and it’s important to find things early enough so they can be fixed. We don’t want to pass on a capability to the fleet that doesn’t do its job. We’re here to deliver the warfighter the capability that he or she needs.”

Somerville said her team is always looking for opportunities to take systems in mission-relevant environments, such as fleet exercises, to test under realistic conditions and validate the systems. “We leverage ways to test systems without taking an airplane up. We do extensive lab testing and modeling and simulation when we can, which is safer and more cost effective. It costs a lot less to run a simulator for an hour than an aircraft. But sometimes, there’s no substitute for getting that system and that aircraft airborne into its relevant environment and ensuring that it works.”

VX-31, based at NAS China Lake, also does F/A-18 and EA-18G flight testing. “We work with them extensively,” Somerville said.

Lt. Anup Engineer, an E-2D Hawkeye NFO, is a test pilot with VX-20, also based at Pax River. He served with VAW-113 and made three deployments aboard the USS George Washington and USS Ronald Reagan. He was selected for Naval Test Pilot School, and upon graduation joined VX-20 as a project officer. VX-20 is the primary E-2 test squadron, with multiple variants equipped for different testing.

“At USNTPS we learn about organization, math, quantification of data and writing. We learn how to develop a methodological plan to get the test points completed with a minimum amount of resources,” he said. “There is a meticulous test planning process. We need to tell the people who will be flying our flights exactly what data we need them to collect, and we learn to document everything that we observe as pilots or NFOs, all so we can accurately evaluate the system against the requirement, and what the fleet needs.”

The project teams include civilian engineers and technical staff and industry representatives with a wealth of knowledge and experience. But, Engineer said, he’s often one of the few active-duty military people on a

project. “We bring recent fleet experience. We have a set of knowledge that is unique, because we’ve deployed the plane operationally.”

“When you’re in the fleet, you notice things that could be improved upon to make the airplane better. As a development test pilot, I now have a chance to effect new technologies early on, before they’re too mature to be changed,” Engineer said. “I’m working on the latest generation of software that will make a number of improvements to the weapon system, including the radar, communications and data links. My job is about making good systems work even better.”

MIT of Flight Test

“We train aviators and aviation professionals to manage critically important aircraft programs for all of U.S. military services, the Department of Defense and 17 partner nations,” said U.S. Naval Test Pilot School Commanding Officer Lt. Col. Rory “Pikey” Feely, U.S. Marine Corps.

USNTPS has a very involved training curriculum. “We train over 70 students a year. End-to-end, the school has a 55-week cycle time at a minimum, with 47 weeks here in the building. The typical student is already a very accomplished aviator with one to two successful tours in the fleet and usually an engineering, mathematics or physics degree.”

According to Feely, an advanced diploma in flight test from USNTPS requires 530-plus hours in academics, 100 sorties and about 120 flight hours in applied academics in the aircraft and preparation of more than two dozen technical reports. “By the time they leave here they will have flown anywhere from 10 to 15 different aircraft, from helicopters to tail-draggers to jets to gliders.”

Graduates usually report to one of the NAWCAD or NAWCWD squadrons at Pax River or China Lake, which is why they were selected for USNTPS.

USNTPS has international students and instructors from about 17 or 18 partner nations and provides test pilot training for Army and Air Force rotary wing and tilt rotor pilots. Command of the USNTPS rotates between the Navy, Marine Corps and Army.

“We train a lot of non-pilot engineers,” Feely said. “Our airborne and unmanned students mainly focus on combat systems, and everyone receives some level of unmanned systems training.”

Feely said people think USNTPS has a bunch of really cool aircraft, and it does, “but they are more airborne classrooms and laboratories rather than aircraft. … While some of the USNTPS aircraft are old, it’s not a museum. We don’t do boring. We are doing applied science. We are the MIT of flight test.

“For the capstone project, we tell the students, ‘Here’s your aircraft. Here are the books. Presume you’re the first person to evaluate the aircraft. Write the test plan. Fly the aircraft. Write the report,’” Feely said.

“At the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School, we deal with a lot of high achievers,” said Feely. “Everyone here at the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School, the students and the instructors, have been competitively selected. Not every student who comes here is the next Chuck Yeager, but 90 of our US-NTPS graduates have become astronauts.”