Departure and Landing Technologies of Shipborne Antisubmarine Helicopter Based on the U.S. Army Amphibious Assault Ship

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2023.0812

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the technological development trend of the stowage and release process of U.S. amphibious assault shipborne anti-submarine helicopter, its related programs and processes are analyzed, centering on the stowage and release process technology of U.S. amphibious assault ship. A number of programs for the shipborne helicopters of LHA and LHD ships, to depart from the ship for takeoff, embarkation and land on board, as well as the emergency land on board are studied. The mining of autonomous applicability technology is aimed at refining the off-ship takeoff, land on board, and emergency land on board methods and routes. The research results show that the accident rate of off-ship takeoffs can be controlled at less than 10‱ and the average accident rate is 5‱ under the visual flight weather condition or instrument flight weather condition in 100000 sorties off-ship simulations according to U.S. shipborne helicopter off-ship takeoff programs Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ, In 100000 sorties off-ship simulation according to U.S. naval helicopter land on board program Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, the accident rate of land on board process can be controlled below 25‱; the accident rate of land on board process of the land on board program Ⅰ can be controlled to 5‱ or less; the accident rate of land on board process of the land on board program Ⅱ can be controlled to 15‱ or less; the accident rate of land on board process of the land on board program Ⅲ can be controlled to 20‱ or less; and the accident rate of land on board process of emergency land on board program can be controlled to 25‱ or less.

Key words: U.S. Army amphibious assault ship, anti-submarine helicopter, off-ship takeoff, land on board, emergency land on board

CLC Number:

E917

WANG Guan, WEI Ning, GUO Yu. Departure and Landing Technologies of Shipborne Antisubmarine Helicopter Based on the U.S. Army Amphibious Assault Ship[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2023, 44(S2): 199-208.

Figures/Tables 16

Table 1 List of active amphibious ships of the United States Navy

级别/分类	现役数量	舰艇称	排水量/t
美国级两栖攻击舰^[9]	2	美国号(LHA-6)	45693
美国级两栖攻击舰^[9]	2	的黎波里号(LHA-7)	45693
黄蜂级两栖攻击舰^[10]	7	黄蜂号(LHD-1)	41150^[19]
		埃塞克斯号(LHD-2)
		基萨奇山号(LHD-3)
		拳师号(LHD-4)
		巴丹号(LHD-5)
		硫磺岛号(LHD-7)
		马金岛号(LHD-8)
圣安东尼奥级船坞登陆舰^[11]	12	圣安东尼奥号(LPD-17)	25300
		新奥尔良号(LPD-18)
		梅萨维德号(LPD-19)
		绿湾号(LPD-20)
		纽约号(LPD-21)
		圣地亚哥号(LPD-22)
		安克雷奇号(LPD-23)
		阿灵顿号(LPD-24)
		萨默塞特号(LPD-25)
		约翰·P·穆尔沙号(LPD-26)
		波特兰号(LPD-27)
		劳德代尔堡号(LPD-28)
哈伯斯费里级船坞登陆舰^[12]	4	哈伯斯费里号(LSD-49)	16740
		卡特霍尔号(LSD-50)
		奥克希尔号(LSD-51)
		珍珠港号(LSD-52)
惠德贝岛级船坞登陆舰^[13]	6	日耳曼城(LSD-42)	16195
		冈斯顿厅(LSD-44)
		康斯托克(LSD-45)
		托尔图加(LSD-46)
		拉什莫尔(LSD-47)
		阿希兰(LSD-48)
蓝岭级两栖指挥舰^[14]	2	蓝岭号	19176
蓝岭级两栖指挥舰^[14]	2	惠特尼山号	19176
蒙特福特角级机动登陆平台舰^[15]	2	蒙特福特角(T-ESD-1)	83000
蒙特福特角级机动登陆平台舰^[15]	2	约翰·格伦(T-ESD-2)	83000
刘易斯·B·普勒级远征移动基地舰^[16]	3	刘易斯·B·普勒(ESB-3)	79251
		赫谢尔·伍迪·威廉姆斯(ESB-4)
		米格尔·基思(ESB-5)
LCAC 气垫船^[17]	74^[18]	—	185

Fig.1 Simulation experiment results of U.S. shipboard helicopter off-ship takeoff program Ⅰ

Fig.2 Simulation experiment results of U.S. shipboard helicopter off-ship takeoff programⅡ

Fig.3 Takeoff roadmap of shipborne helicopter takeoff plan Ⅲ

Fig.4 Simulation experiment results of U.S. shipboard helicopter off-ship takeoff program Ⅲ

Fig.5 Waiting and boarding land on board mode routes of shipborne helicopter

Fig.6 Night boarding land on board mode route

Fig.7 Simulation experiment results of U.S. shipboard helicopter boarding and land on board programⅠ

Fig.8 Simulation experiment results of U.S. shipboard helicopter boarding and land on board programⅡ

Fig.9 The ship command board land on board diagram

Fig.10 Simulation experiment results of U.S. shipboard helicopter boarding and land on board program Ⅲ

Fig.11 Top view of emergency land on board of shipborne helicopter

Fig.9 Side view of emergency land on board of shipborne helicopter

Fig.13 Results of simulation experiments on emergency land on board programs for U.S. Navy shipboard helicopters

Fig.14 Fitting analysis of simulated results of U.S. shipboard helicopter off-ship takeoff programsⅠ, Ⅱ, and Ⅲ

Fig.15 Fit analysis of simulation results of U.S. shipboard helicopter off-ship land on board programsⅠ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ and emergency land on board program (Ⅳ)

References 20

[1]	陶俊权, 韩维, 苏析超, 等. 两栖攻击舰舰载直升机作战与保障能力评估[J]. 兵器装备工程学报, 2022, 43(3):176-182.
	TAO J Q, HAN W, SU X C, et al. Operations and support capability evaluation of ship-based helicopter for amphibious assault ship[J]. Journal of Ordnance Equipment Engineering, 2022, 43(3):176-182. (in Chinese)
[2]	尹成义. 两栖攻击舰编队编成模式与决策优化模型研究[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2022, 47(7):62-66.
	YIN C Y. Research on forming mode and optimization model of decision-making of amphibious assault ship formation[J]. Fire Control and Command Control, 2022, 47(7):62-66. (in Chinese)
[3]	翟永翠, 胡志强. 基于CAS理论的两栖编队作战体系能力涌现模型[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2021, 46(9):133-142.
	ZHAI Y C, HU Z Q. Research on emergence model of amphibious formation combat system capability bnased on CAS theory[J]. Fire Control and Command Control, 2021, 46(9):133-142. (in Chinese)
[4]	YEADO S. The problems facing United States Marine Corps amphibious assaults[J/OL]. Journal of Advanced Military Studies, 2020, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.21140/mcuj.20201102008.
[5]	童亮, 甘旭升, 张宏宏, 等. 考虑多因素影响的无人机碰撞风险评估[J]. 兵器装备工程学报, 2023, 44(4):282-289.
	TONG L, GAN X S, ZHANG H H, et al. Risk assessment of UAV collision considering multiple factors[J]. Journal of Ordnance Equipment Engineering, 2023, 44(4):282-289. (in Chinese)
[6]	BEBERMEVER R, GALANIS K, PRICE S. LHA(R): amphibious assault ships for the 21st century[R/OL]. (2002-05-30). https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/1772.
[7]	KATZ J. New LHA, LHD overhaul model may see funding in FY-23 for ‘beta test’[J]. Inside the Navy, 2019, 32(2):1,4
[8]	HERSEY L. Senate committee wants 24 amphibious ships ‘ready at any time’[EB/OL].(2023-06-23). https://insidedefense.com/daily-news/senate-committee-wants-24-amphibious-ships-ready-any-time#:-:text=Sen.%20Tim%20Kaine%20%28D-VA%29%2C%20who%20chairs%20the%20Senate,be%20available%20for%20deployment%20at%20any%20given%20time.
[9]	QUIGLEY A. Navy’s shipbuilding plan calls for fewer amphibious ships than USMC seeks[J]. Inside the Navy, 2021(25):34.
[10]	SCOTT R. USN declares IOC for JPALS[J]. Jane’s Navy International, 2021(5):126.
[11]	JOPPEN L. Warren controls offers 1852N seawater deballasting valve[J]. Valve World, 2022(3):27.
[12]	WASSERBLY D. US Navy believes it can field 38 amphibious ships[J]. Jane’s Defence Weekly, 2018, 55(3):11-11.
[13]	FONG C H. From Sea to Shore[J]. Asian Defence Journal, 2021(Apr.).
[14]	CAVAS C P. In transition: US Navy moves ahead with amphibious transformation[J]. Jane’s Navy International, 2019(1):124.
[15]	SCOTT R. US Navy awards contracts for new amphibious and replenishment ships[J]. Jane’s Defence Weekly, 2016, 53(27):10-10.
[16]	DECKER A. Stefany: Gap in LHA production poses cost increase and industrial base impact[J]. Inside the Navy, 2022(20):35.
[17]	THOMAS R. Lightining strikes in the Pacific[J]. Combat Aircraft Monthly, 2022(6):23.
[18]	ABOTT R. SASC defense bill extends amphib block buy, seeks upgrade report[EB/OL]. (2021-09-28). https://www.defensedaily.com/sasc-defense-bill-extends-amphib-block-buy-seeks-upgrade-report/navy-usmc/.
[19]	KATZ J. Navy, Congress mull incremental funding authority for LHA-9, LPD-31[J]. Inside the Navy, 2019(13):32.
[20]	SCOTT R. Survival skills: Advances in European rotary-wing self-protection[J]. Journal of Electromagnetic Dominance, 2023.