The next big move in naval aviation?

So, without wishing to seem off in any way, you think DEW will get a place aboard ship as CIWS/AAW but then list all the, perfectly accurate, reasons why it wont!.:diablo:

To be honest Adrian I dont see lasers or HPM’s making the leap from land-based to sea-based technology for a very long time. Stabilisation of the beam emitter is no issue, but, directed-energy and atmosphere attenuation, with the heavy saline-saturated environment you need to shoot through, dont go together.

EM railguns with extremely high projectile velocities and cyclic rates would seem to be a different story though and, with the current work on EMALS offering some potential for technology crossover, I’d imagine thats the near(ish) future for naval CIWS/SHORADS.

RE: The next big move in naval aviation?

Not going to replace the functions of the aircraft carrier but once solid state lasers and HPM weapons with sufficient impact energy properties get fielded then the carrier, with manned or unmanned aircraft, is probably out of the game.

I see the addition of high energy weapons (lasers, etc.) as a part of CIWS as something that will insure the continued life of a carrier and any ship that can produce the electrical power to defend itself with this type of weapon.
One thing that energy weapons will have to contend with is dealing with the sea environment! Fog, so common in sea operations is something that seriously degrades the performance of lasers. Pulsing lasers helps but is not a cure-all.
Each meter or so of fog or high humidity, acts like a lense on a laser beam. So one pulse will have to hit the high humidity environment, be partially defused then, the second pulse would then burn through that area until it is diffused. The third pulse will burn that area and, each pulse will burn further away from the ship. Each pulse would have to sustain the hole in the humidity while following pulses burn closer to the target. This all based upon the beam being stationary. If the beam is moving -angularly, this complicates the situation.
Back in 1986, the Soviet cruiser Kirov was scheduled to receive a laser CIWS but, the high humidity problems have not been solved, yet. AW&ST (back when it earned the name of “aviation leak”) did some nice articles on this.
This was just one of many projects that the USSR had in development that caused President Reagen to commence the Strategic Defense Initiative or “Star Wars Project.”

Adrian

Currently, I don’t see anything on the R&D horizon that could provide the weapons that would enable some other type ship to replace the function of the large deck carrier.

Easy one. DEW. Not going to replace the functions of the aircraft carrier but once solid state lasers and HPM weapons with sufficient impact energy properties get fielded then the carrier, with manned or unmanned aircraft, is probably out of the game.

What then?. Submarine and, less likely, surface ‘arsenal ships’ with densely packed RATTLRS/Fasthawk hypersonics probably!. Either that or THOR/Rods-from-God orbital bombardment!.

Widespread use of VTOL UCAV/UAVs replacing/augmenting helicopters.

The Big deck carrier will become obsolete the moment it’s primary weapon system, ie aircraft, be they manned or unmanned, becomes obsolete. The carrier is a mobile platform for the deployment of air power from the sea. The Battleship became obsolete because it’s primary weapon system, the big guns, were superceded by carrier aircraft, which could take a bomb equivalent in destructive capability and instead of ‘lobbing’ it 25 miles at the enemy, could carry and deliver it to the enemy 200+ miles from the fleet, with far greater accuracy. Until anyone can suggest a weapon system that can do anything aircraft can do today but do it several orders of magnitude better and cheaper then the carriers’ future is militarily secure. Upgrading a Battleship with a new weapon system often proved prohibitively expensive (hence the postwar BBG schemes fell by the wayside) whereas upgrading a carrier is very easy. You just put different aircraft aboard, and that applies today. Future UCAVs will not require any major modification to the existing carrier fleet (strucurally) so the key to retaining flexibility and adaptability seems to lie with not having your primary weapon system ‘bolted’ or welded to the deck!

RE: The next big move in naval aviation?

Have big carriers had their day? Is there any move coming over the horizon which spells revolution for the projection of airpower?

I don’t feel the large deck carriers have passed their prime, yet. All it will take is another ‘tin horn dictator’ to stur the world up like the invasion of Kuwait and suddenly, the appreciation of the large deck carrier will again appear. So far all the brush fire conflicts have not challenged sea power, once one does one real liability of the smaller carrier will show… the lack of ability to sustain damage and continue flight operations.

Since 1900 the world has gone around twenty years maximum without a significant conflict. Whereas human nature has not changed, I don’t see small ‘brush-fire’ type conflicts as being the normal.

Currently, I don’t see anything on the R&D horizon that could provide the weapons that would enable some other type ship to replace the function of the large deck carrier. Some UCAV’s could perform some light bombing missions but, I don’t know of anything that could replace the ordnance a dozen carrier fighters, such as the F/A-18, MiG-29K, or Rafale could deliver…. repeatedly.
Even if some other weapon system could deliver the required ordnance, taking the air superiority role is another mission that will remain for the carrier to support surface fleet forces.

The very NEXT big thing is going to be shipboard HALE/MALE UCAV’s and the sensor coverage they provide to the deployed fleet.

The ability to loft a Searchwater type array on half a dozen air-vehicles that can remain on station for 20+ hours, off small decks, is going to revolutionise expeditionary operations. Effectively they will provide any amphibious group or STOVL carrier group with the kind of situational awareness that has, previously demanded the presence of a supercarrier.

Coupled in with advanced loitering munitions and LO UCAV’s naval aviation, in effects-based terms, will be more effective and deployable than ever before.

You’re right about the $$$, but that’s still the only thing I can think of that would actually be considered revolutionary in naval aviation.

I’d think that the next big move in naval aviation would be if the USN ever decides to give the sub-launched UCAV concept a serious go.

the biggest problem there is the $$$ per bomb on target. Not cheap. That and DARPA cancelled Cormorant.

I’d think that the next big move in naval aviation would be if the USN ever decides to give the sub-launched UCAV concept a serious go.

I would say the Stealthy F-35C to be followed closely by CUAV will provide a great leap in capability vs the current generation. 😀

Have big carriers had their day? Is there any move coming over the horizon which spells revolution for the projection of airpower?

Not anytime soon. There are all kinds of speculative things you could argue but I’ll bet it’s 40-50 years before you see the carrier disappear if then.