LCS Remote Minehunting System fails

Despite $700M and 16 years of development, the Remove Minehunting System designed for the LCS has consistently failed testing. The Office of Operational Test & Evaluation says that it appears that the system plateaued 10 years ago, and hasn't shown any increase in capability or reliability in recent years. The system can't communicate with the ship beyond line of sight, can't be reliably controlled by the ship, the towed array sonar can't reliably detect mines (you know, the whole reason this system was designed), and the system only operates 25 hours between failures, far short of the required 75 hours.

A mine-detection system the U.S. Navy invested nearly $700 million and 16 years in developing can't complete its most basic functions, according to the Pentagon's weapon-testing office.

The Remote Minehunting System, or RMS, was developed for the Navy's new littoral combat ship. But the Defense Department's Office of Operational Test & Evaluation says the drone hunting technology was unable to consistently identify and destroy underwater explosives during tests dating back to September 2014.

"The Navy has determined that the RMS' total number of failures and periodicity of failures fall short of the design requirement for the system," said Capt. Thurraya Kent, a spokeswoman for the Navy.

Frank Kendall, the Pentagon's undersecretary of defense for acquisition, has scheduled a review of the program for early 2016.

www.kbzk.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Do they have anything else in the works?

a reply to: Zaphod58

So a program that cost as much as and took much longer than the Apollo Space program is virtually worthless and developed zero results...Brilliant!

How do these companies keep getting funding?

I think I'll start a defence contracting business after all it's not like I'd have to produce results.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Not yet. There are three current systems being used by 5th Fleet in the Gulf, but they're not part of the RMS package.

originally posted by: Kukri
a reply to: Zaphod58

So a program that cost as much as and took much longer than the Apollo Space program is virtually worthless and developed zero results...Brilliant!

How do these companies keep getting funding?

I think I'll start a defence contracting business after all it's not like I'd have to produce results.

We profit from our success, but learn and progress through our failures.

I understand it's expensive, but this is how we break new ground in our technologies.

originally posted by: Kukri
a reply to: Zaphod58

So a program that cost as much as and took much longer than the Apollo Space program is virtually worthless and developed zero results...Brilliant!

How do these companies keep getting funding?

I think I'll start a defence contracting business after all it's not like I'd have to produce results.

The program did not work. To glean from that fact the program was worthless and nothing can be taken from it is a huge mistake.

If you do your job well 1000 times and then fail once should you be fired? They keep getting funding because they keep having successes.

a reply to: introvert

It would appear mine hunting/avoidance hasn't really improved much over the last 80 years or soapparently even falling behind the advances in anti-ship systems development. It could be a very lucrative field of endeavour for some brilliant young minds. Amazing how the simplest weapons can be the most effective.

a reply to: Kukri

It could be a very lucrative field of endeavour for some brilliant young minds. Amazing how the simplest weapons can be the most effective.

That is true, as well. Young minds and new ideas have also played a role in our advancement.

should of kept the dolphins going strong 700 million buys a lot of fish you would have schools of dolphins surrounding your boats by now as they are intelligent they would naturaly teach their young this is how we get the best fish

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I see your point OR but you don't keep spending money on that beater car because the headlights. wipers and the new tires are still good.

a reply to: Kukri

According to Navy reports, enough progress has been made that it has been worth keeping money going into the program. They dispute the OT&E report, and claim 200 hours MTBF rate.

Just shows that it is not any sort of priority and they cannot chance using advanced propulsion units in orb drones to do the scanning.

originally posted by: Kukri
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I see your point OR but you don't keep spending money on that beater car because the headlights. wipers and the new tires are still good.

I agree. A beater car is something old and ready to fail. This is a prototype car, the first of it's kind, with technologies never developed. If we stopped all progress when we encountered problems little if any progress would ever be made.

What we have are birthing pains, not death throes.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Kukri

According to Navy reports, enough progress has been made that it has been worth keeping money going into the program. They dispute the OT&E report, and claim 200 hours MTBF rate.

MEH!! The Navy is second only to the Air Force for throwing good money after bad. Maybe the Marines could take the program over.

No offence Zaph.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Kukri
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


What we have are birthing pains, not death throes.

16 years is one hell of a long time to suffer labor pains

a reply to: Kukri

The Marines are as bad as the Navy, since their budget is through the Navy.

I guess the problem is finding the mines. Once you know what type and where a mine is, you know the best method of disposing it. But the technology of sea mines is advancing. I'm guessing that they could go to all-plastic explosives and casings. The mines themselves could have technology that listens and identifies the types of ships according and buries itself in the seabed. That rules out metal or magnetic detection. Electromagnetic waves don't travel far through water. Maybe it would be possible to detect trace amounts of explosives, but that would be impossible during a battle.

There was a website called "Science Faction" that had an alphabetic index of all the science fiction devices. One system was called a grabbler that would bury itself in the seabed until activated when needed.

originally posted by: Kukri

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Kukri
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


What we have are birthing pains, not death throes.

16 years is one hell of a long time to suffer labor pains

Yes it is

I think it is working properly, it mines money from the military and puts it into the pockets of contractors. Now, if they would have got it right in a couple of years, they would not have made nearly as much money on it.

a reply to: stormcell

They've already got that to an extent, the US uses the CAPTOR mine.

fas.org...