C
Mine Warfare and Mine Countermeasures-Current Status
As stated in the main text of this report, current MCM forces are designed primarily for a Cold War scenario. Specifically, the MCM force was designed to enable port breakout, to counter relatively deep ASW mines, and to counter mines in straits, choke points, and the outer continental shelf that might be used to impede the flow of logistics to Europe or, to a lesser extent, the western Pacific. Defense planners left to allies the task of clearing mines in the shallow-water approaches to their ports and their near-shore transit routes. It should also be recalled that the current U.S. capability was designed during that period when "we never have to engage in another opposed amphibious assault" was the conventional wisdom. Now the United States is faced with a situation in which breakout from its own ports has, for the time being at least, lost importance and the threat of deep-water mining has diminished. Breakout from advanced points for prepositioning ships, however, is important. Moreover, conducting an opposed amphibious assault is once again a very real possibility, and regional allies may not be available to clear shallow-water approaches to logistical support offloading sites and landing areas. The United States cannot be sure that it will have the MCM assistance of coalition forces as it did during the Persian Gulf War.
The Navy's current MCM capability includes the following major systems:
At present, no other country can match the MCM capability resident in these six systems. Although countries such as Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, and Belgium have a respectable MCM capability, none have airborne MCM, nor do they have mammal systems with their unique mine hunting and mine neutralization capabilities. This is not to say, however, that the U.S. Navy's existing systems represent a balanced, trouble-free capability. The Italian nonmagnetic Isotta-Fraschini diesel engines, which are the main power systems aboard the MCM-1 and MHC-51, have experienced the "teething" problems expected of any new design. Limited to speeds of 13.5 and 15 knots, respectively, these ships cannot deploy with the battle group and must be forward deployed or transported to a crisis site by heavy-lift ship as was done in the Persian Gulf War.
The AN/SLQ-48 mine neutralization vehicle used by both the MCM-1 and the MHC-51 is not well suited to the neutralization of shallow-water mines. The vehicle tends to be underpowered and may leave on the bottom a mine that looks like a mine to any subsequent sonar search and an explosive charge subject to later detonation under proper impact conditions. Although the MH-53E MCM helicopter has mine hunting capability, it does not yet include a neutralization component and the helicopters are not equipped with GPS receivers. Further, MH53Es are not equipped with artificial horizon and night vision equipment and are thus incapable of night operations.
SYSTEMS UNDER DEVELOPMENT
The primary MCM systems currently being developed are included within the scope of the Joint Countermine Advanced Concepts Technology Demonstration Phases I and II. Although additional concepts currently are being considered for Phase III ACTD, this phase has not yet been authorized. Joint Countermine ACTD
Over the years the problem with advancing the capability of U.S. MCM forces has not been the lack of good ideas or the lack of a technically skilled research team. During the Cold War years, many excellent and needed technical advancements entered the research and development program, but few emerged. In many of these cases the project was canceled not because the concept was found to fall short of expectations but because funding support was diverted to other weapons or countermeasures projects that were considered more important. Additionally, there has been too little attention to viewing MCM forces as a total system in which operational requirements needed for a balanced capability are recognized, technical solutions (frequently already in the R&D program) are identified, and program components are protected until they reach service use. The recently introduced ACTD program offers a solution to both of these problems.
The ACTD is a joint effort in which each service with a stake in a given warfare area, or component of an area, submits for competition those of its concepts already elevated to the status of advanced technology demonstration (ATD). The ATDs chosen for an ACTD are those that can be brought to the prototype stage for performance demonstration, or adequately modeled for such, in the near term-usually two to five years. The performance of the concept is evaluated in an exercise, and the results are used to reach a decision on acceptance or rejection. At a minimum, the fleet is left with a useful prototype from among the accepted concepts.
The Joint Countermine ACTD now in effect consists of concepts submitted by the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps and covers sea mines, very shallow water mines and obstacles in the surf zone and the craft landing zone, and inland land mines. The officially accepted Joint Countermine ACTD consists of 12 MCM concepts broken down into two phases for demonstration before the end of this decade. It should be pointed out that due, in part, to the limitation on the number of concepts accepted for a given phase, the ACTD does not represent, in full, those concepts required to produce a balanced MCM capability up to the craft landing zone for the Navy-Marine Corps team. The MCM concepts accepted into Phases I and II of the Joint Countermine ACTD are identified and described briefly below.Joint Countermine ACTD Phase I
The following naval systems will be included in Phase II:
|
||
|
|
|