Sea Power: Delving deeper into Sea 1180 | ADM April 2012

Tom Muir | Canberra

Since this concept first came to light in the 2009 Defence White Paper, the Sea 1180 Offshore Combatant Vessel (OCV) project has been aired quite extensively in the media – a high point being Gregor Ferguson’s excellent overview of the subject in ADM’s April 2011 issue – and through official briefings for industry, as well as the release of an ITR which elicited 62 responses. And there have been some developments since.

ADM understands that the RPDE’s quicklook analysis of industry’s ability to deliver and support the OCV concept reached seven conclusions including that Australian industry has the skills, infrastructure, resources and capacity to build the OCVs in the given time period, and that the mine countermeasure role performed, within a multirole OCV modular functionality concept, was dependent on unmanned systems, which were either to be developed or are not currently in service with the RAN.

As a result of the recommendations from these studies, a further RPDE quick look was initiated in August 2011 to assess how modular mission systems can provide a multi-role capability as proposed for the OCV.

There have been – and presumably still are – other studies including those from DSTO investigating deployable mission systems and initial platform systems, the Directorate of Navy platform systems, and a design study aimed at developing a practical OCV concept solution that achieves reduced ownership costs through commonality of systems equipment and training.

In September last year, Defence released an Initial Capability Description (ICD) for the OCV as a basis for further industry solicitation, feasibility studies and the development of initial capability options to support First Pass for Sea 1180. The ICD sets down the current force, which comprises 26 vessels of four classes including 14 Armidale class patrol boats (PB), two Leeuwin class survey ships (AGS), four Paluma class coastal survey vessels and six Huon class coastal minehunters (MHC).

It also points out the limitations of the different classes that while designed to maximise their respective capabilities of law enforcement, hydrographic survey, port and channel route survey and mine clearance, each has limited ability to adapt to changed circumstances since their acquisition.

An example is that the speed and endurance of the minehunters preclude them from providing deployed mine countermeasures support to a maritime task group faced by potentially mined waters unless the MHC are deployed well before and ahead of the task group. The patrol boats are also designed to modified commercial standards explicitly for low threat policing operations where platform survivability options are modest.

The OCV will also be required to potentially undertake additional roles to that of the current force including littoral warfare, counter-terrorism/piracy, special forces support and possible involvement in regional security operations. The extent to which these roles can be undertaken will impact on the eventual OCV capability solution.

Following are among the ICD’s assumptions that the OCV:

• will be a single modular multirole class of around 20 vessels;
• will have a maximum displacement of up to 2,000 tonnes;
• will rely on modular unmanned underwater systems for both mine countermeasures and hydrographic tasks, containerised and portable, and capable of being used in any port or loaded onto any of the OCV or other suitable vessels;
• may embark helicopter/UAV to allow a surge in surveillance and response capabilities.

OCV principal tasks

 The OCV’s primary task is deterring and defeating attacks on Australia, the definition of which is highlighted in the 2009 Defence White Paper. This means that the MCM systems will need to be deployed to ensure that select fleet bases, vital ports, forward operating bases and sea lanes of communication (SLOC) are not denied by sea mines, and that deployed maritime elements are not denied littoral access for maneuver or force projection. Complementary military geospatial information systems will need to be similarly deployed. MCM route surveys, hydrographic surveys and oceanographic data collection are also necessary ongoing activities

Other tasks include contributing to stability in the South Pacific and East Timor; contributing to military contingencies in the Asia-Pacific region (where SLOC security is important to this country’s national interests); and contributing to military contingencies in support of global security. In regard to the last this is possible but it is unlikely for the OCV to deploy to far beyond the Australian principal operational environment.

Broad OCV concept

The ICD says that central to the capability provided by the OCV will be the ability to readily adapt and enhance baseline seaframes with modular ‘capability brick’ combinations of systems, both material and support, with appropriately trained personnel embarked to undertake one or more primary roles during periods of operational availability.

This role adaptability might allow greater flexibility for scheduling and tasking by minimising the need for immediate role reconfiguration, a potentially complex operation involving coordination of logistics, training, transport and materiel support depending on the nature of the operation.

In broad terms the ICD sees the total mission requirements, both permanent and modular elements, will likely dictate sea frame requirements so as not to limit the functionality of the OCV. Notwithstanding specific mission system requirements, other capability and operational aspects such as speed, endurance, range, sensor and communications fits, and integrated platform survivability characteristics, will be significant drivers of the eventual seaframe solution. To reduce overall support costs such as for training and maintenance, equipment commonality will be a key development and acquisition consideration.

Roles and mission elements

To simplify the development of more detailed operational concepts, capability requirements and functional performance specifications, the current and future roles have been aggregated to:

• Constabulary (Role A) – law enforcement, counter terrorism/piracy and regional security operations;
• Littoral warfare (Role B) – some surface warfare functions (surveillance and interdiction) as an extension of Role A, amphibious warfare (advance force/combat team mobility) and potentially undersea warfare (eg barrier surveillance);
• Mine countermeasures (Role C) – route survey and mine neutralisation in ports, channels, harbour approaches and traffic routes, and direct support to Task Group littoral access and manoeuvre; and
• Maritime geospatial (Role D) – deliberate coastal and inshore hydrographic survey and rapid environmental assessment (REA), with the latter complementary to Role C.

Permanent mission elements: the ICD suggests that given the probable high operational demand for Role A configured OCVs it may be more efficient and cost effective if necessary mission system elements related to this role are permanently fitted as the baseline capability in all seaframes. This might include a C4I and EW suite with appropriate capacity and interfaces enabling expanded ‘plug-in’ capability needed for Roles B, C and D, sensors for navigation and local area surveillance, basic armament and multi-purpose boats.

Modular mission elements: enhancement from Role A to Role B may require additional joint C4ISR, watercraft, point defence system and torpedo countermeasures. The last can be managed as part of broader fleet requirements with the seaframe fitted ‘for but not with’. The Phalanx CIWS and the AN/SLQ 25C NIXIE towed torpedo decoy are seen as potential examples and may be applicable for Role C also.

The Role C and D variants will utilise off-board systems and the transportability of Role C and D modular systems would provide for greater flexibility and compensation for the reduced number of seaframes (ie around 20) to sustain current operations in Role A and B configurations.

While modular systems could be containersed for storage and movement they do not need to be embarked as such on OCV seaframes. Prototyping and trials have already demonstrated that embarking mission subsystems such as boats and unmanned underwater vehicles as discrete elements is more economical for space and ease of movement within a mission bay.

Concepts of employment

For Role A little change is envisaged from current policing roles with an OCV tasked to patrol a local area to intercept vessels of interest and respond to unauthorised activity. High speed interception, covert surveillance and low speed loitering for prolonged periods may be required as well as boarding apprehended vessels and transporting their personnel to detention or otherwise.

Role B will have some common employment functions with Role A where these involve responses to threats during combat, rather than constabulary tasks with offensive operations potentially against comparable sized and lightly armed vessels such as mine-layers, small to medium sized amphibious vessels and patrol craft. The ability to embark a helicopter or UAV would enhance the OCV’s capability for this role. Other missions could include deployment of remote u/w sensors and the short term covert insertion sustaining and extraction of soldiers at remote locations.

For Role C (MCM operations) the OCV will rely on robotic technologies and the use of autonomous systems to work in a stand-off mode rather than within a dangerous, potentially mined area. Traditional MCM vessels, using hull mounted and towed sensors can operate in close proximity to mine threats due to their low electro-magnetic and acoustic signatures and high resilience to shock.

However this concept of a general purpose seaframe standing off at safe distance to deploy MCM systems into the minefield has potential limitations, including its inability to undertake mechanical minesweeping or to aid ships damaged by mines. The highest risk in standoff operation is the location and extent of the mine threat area, the mitigation of which may require helicopter or UAV deployment of airborne MCM sensors.

Where supporting a Task Group the OCV would self deploy or detach from the group and operate ahead to undertake its MCM activities. A necessary element of each MCM/REA mission system would be a command support system for planning and post mission analysis.

For Role D (Maritime Geospatial) the OCV may need to deploy with a Task Group, or ahead of it, to provide offshore and inshore surveys and the collection of oceanographic and seabed data for storage or initial onboard. The deployment of UUV, boats and possibly UAV for data collection will enable the OCV to stand-off from poorly chartered and constrained inshore waters.

In conclusion the paper says that the diversity of roles, attributes and required capability effects will be key drivers of the OCV system solution. But because this diversity may present risk and challenges for the affordability and cost effectiveness of a single ship class solution, options of mixed classes of OCV variants, with mixed levels of capability, cannot be completely discounted at this early stage of the development, if the overall intent to ‘realise potential operational efficiencies and reduced cost of ownership’ can still be achieved.

Acknowledgement:
This article has drawn heavily on the OCV Initial Capability Description (Sea 1180) released by Defence’s Capability Development Group.