RN anti-ship missiles

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by abc123 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:I thought that the project 'Interim' goes so drastically down in numbers that can (at the same time) have Harpoons because the missile stock will only be renewed, but in a v limited way(=numbers)... the launchers are there (and are pretty much compatible?)
- could easily have misunderstood
Yes, it make's sense to just muy more modern version of Harpoons, if that's just Interim solution. Probably the cheapest and fastest option.
Maybe even buying from USN stock?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

Jensy wrote:As an aside, I haven't seen any mention of LRASM being incorporated with a box launcher for a while. Anyone know if that is still the plan now that up-arming the LCS is out of favour?
There is a version of the Mk41 that is deck mounted at around 45 degrees from the vertical, in the developmental stage. But it can still fit all the weapons systems used in the VLS as long as they are not restricted purely to vertical launch. It comes in sizes from singletons to quads. I will try to find the article on the Mk41 that mentioned it.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote: a version of the Mk41 that is deck mounted at around 45 degrees from the vertical
You could modify the Zumwalts, which have silos a plenty, right on the edges of the decks
- point them outwards, and do :) broadsides ... against enemy shipping hundreds of kilometers away
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Timmymagic »

Lord Jim wrote:
Jensy wrote:As an aside, I haven't seen any mention of LRASM being incorporated with a box launcher for a while. Anyone know if that is still the plan now that up-arming the LCS is out of favour?
There is a version of the Mk41 that is deck mounted at around 45 degrees from the vertical, in the developmental stage. But it can still fit all the weapons systems used in the VLS as long as they are not restricted purely to vertical launch. It comes in sizes from singletons to quads. I will try to find the article on the Mk41 that mentioned it.
It's the BAE Systems Adaptable Deck Launcher

https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/a ... k-launcher

It's absolutely massive...sounds like it was developed to give CVN's the ability to launch ESSM Blk.II and larger as the Mk.26 mount is not compatible with the larger missiles.


Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

It is not that massive compared to other launch systems when comparing deck space, though you would probably only get half as many missiles. But it would give you the ability to launch LRASM from the deck rather then a VLS as was the question. Of course if we had put the Mk41 on the T-31 this wouldn't be an issue. We should have gone down the PPA configuration route, but built all five as low spec but able to readily be brought up to either an intermediate or high standard if the need arose. But that ship has sailed as will the T-31 as a glorified long range Gunboat.

BlueD954
Member
Posts: 233
Joined: 02 Oct 2020, 05:11
Singapore

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by BlueD954 »

Lord Jim wrote:It is not that massive compared to other launch systems when comparing deck space, though you would probably only get half as many missiles. But it would give you the ability to launch LRASM from the deck rather then a VLS as was the question. Of course if we had put the Mk41 on the T-31 this wouldn't be an issue. We should have gone down the PPA configuration route, but built all five as low spec but able to readily be brought up to either an intermediate or high standard if the need arose. But that ship has sailed as will the T-31 as a glorified long range Gunboat.
There's the Type 32 for that. Seems the Type 321 is the cheap 'frigate' with bare minimum firepower.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Scimitar54 »

What is a Type 321 Frigate, Dusty Bin? :lol:

Simon82
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 27 May 2015, 20:35

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Simon82 »

Just thought I’d leave this article about LRASM integration on the F-35 here in case anyone’s interested:

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... n-on-f-35/

Jdam
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »

Do a particular service own the weapons or do they just go into a stockpile? If the LRASM could work on the P-8/F-35 and ships what would happen?

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by xav »

UK’s ISSGW
Asked about other ongoing international competitions in which NSM may be competing, Raytheon’s head of NSM program told Naval News that NSM is a highly capable missile that can be either ship- or vehicle-launched:

We are always evaluating the needs across the International Navies and have a competitive offering should they have a requirement. We’re closely following the UK’s ISSGW competition and have a solution that meets or exceeds their requirements and can be fielded rapidly as we did with USS Gabrielle Giffords.

For the record, the I-SSGW contract is set to be awarded sometime by this summer, following a statement by Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence made in December 2020. The Royal Navy’s surface fleet (Type 23 frigates and some of the Type 45 destroyers) currently deploys with Harpoon Block 1C procured back in the 1980s. The ageing system was set to reach its end of shelf life in 2018, but this has been pushed back to 2023.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... -platform/

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1432
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by NickC »

LRASM - The DoD 2020 DOT&E report released Jan 2021

Assessment
Based on the FY17-19 LRASM 1.0 integrated testing,
- The LRASM 1.0 QRA had limited operational realism.
- Multiple hardware and software failures occurred in the QRA program that the Navy continues to address.
- The Navy should conduct an IOT&E on LRASM 1.1, stressing the system by using the full set of expected operational conditions

Feb 2021 USN Capt. William Hargreaves, LRASM program director said it's working through a series of minor changes to correct for deficiencies identified during testing.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

http://data.parliament.uk/writteneviden ... 91829.html
I found this hiding via a link on another sight. It appears to be a joint Anglo/French Committee meeting discussing the future of FS/ASW back in 2018 with the witnesses being from the French military, DGA and industry. It is a fascinating question and answer session that clearly shows where France is coming from regarding the programme and how they see it developing in the future. It also highlight the major differences in how procurement programmes seem to be handled in both countries. A long piece but well worth a read.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The first joint inquiry of this sort that I have seen:

Defence Committee
[&]
Commission de la Défense Nationale et des Forces Armées

Oral evidence: Future Anti-ship Missile System – Joint Inquiry
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by abc123 »

Come on people, just buy damn Harpoons or NSMs, it isn't like your'e buying a death star.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

In theory the FC/ASW could be the naval equivalent of the SPEAR programme, providing various weapons to v=cover a multitude of roles. It could replace Storm Shadow, Harpoon, TLAM, and eventually the SM39 Exocet on submarines giving the RN a capability it lost when it retired the Sub-Harpoon from service. It could be integrated to the T-45 and successor, the T-26, P-8A, Typhoon, and Astute. Carriage by the F-35B would be advantageous, as well as a shore based version. But it will not be cheap though commonality of components or a modular frame work would help.

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jensy »

Supersonic and land attack missiles for the fleet, Sea Viper reference also interesting. From UKDJ:
The Royal Navy will arm surface vessels with land attack missiles.
In a speech that can be read here, First Sea Lord Admiral Tony Radakin said:

“The surface fleet will be armed with the latest weaponry and harness the latest technology including land attack and supersonic missiles for the surface fleet. Sea Viper air defence missiles will be upgraded and their stockpiles increased. And investment in Wildcat and Merlin helicopters will continue.”

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... -missiles/

P.s: debated which thread to stick this in. On balance felt this was the best fit.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Jensy wrote:Supersonic and land attack missiles for the fleet,
Very interesting.

In any defence review attention always turns to the big ticket items like ships, tanks, helicopters, troop numbers etc but something almost unreported like this could massively increase the lethality of RN in any future conflict.

If this turns out to be TLAM capable Mk41 VLS added to T45, T26 and T32 it will be a massive step up.

Even adding VLS Spear3 and NSM to all escorts in the interim would be a great outcome and a genuine increase in capability.

The further investment in Merlin and Wildcat is also to be welcomed. Adding some offensive armament to Merlin would seem like a very sensible way to proceed and help enable more effective Littoral Strike with the FCF.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Ron5 »

"supersonic" missiles seems rather a redundant thing to say. I wonder if he meant hypersonic.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Ron5 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:The further investment in Merlin and Wildcat is also to be welcomed. Adding some offensive armament to Merlin would seem like a very sensible way to proceed and help enable more effective Littoral Strike with the FCF.
Highly unlikely in my opinion, that's what Apaches are for. Much more likely would be a Wildcat datalink and a Merlin LIFEX.

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1432
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by NickC »

Jensy wrote:Supersonic and land attack missiles for the fleet, Sea Viper reference also interesting. From UKDJ:
The Royal Navy will arm surface vessels with land attack missiles.
In a speech that can be read here, First Sea Lord Admiral Tony Radakin said:

“The surface fleet will be armed with the latest weaponry and harness the latest technology including land attack and supersonic missiles for the surface fleet. Sea Viper air defence missiles will be upgraded and their stockpiles increased. And investment in Wildcat and Merlin helicopters will continue.”
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... -missiles/

P.s: debated which thread to stick this in. On balance felt this was the best fit.
Could imply that ISL thinking has changed and moving towards a supersonic Anglo/French FC/ASW from earlier suggestion that RN specifying subsonic missile with land attack capabilities and the French pushing a supersonic ASW variant with limited build compatibility, but now coalescing around a similar missile to the Indian/Russian BrahMos.

If envisaging BrahMos size supersonic range land attack missile with heavy 500kg warhead it would be too large to fit in a Mk41 VLS cell and a big ticket item, if ISL meant hypersonic (similar to a BrahMos-II) rather than supersonic missile expect costs would double?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

The aim of FC/ASW is to be able to launch it from both the Mk41 VLS and Sylver VLS. That is a fixed requirement. AS for fitting TLAM to the T-26, well we haven't got that many to start with, but we could also install the new Tomahawk long Range Anti-Ship Version that the USN has adopted.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by abc123 »

Supersonic? That's Perseus, right?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1432
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by NickC »

Lord Jim wrote:The aim of FC/ASW is to be able to launch it from both the Mk41 VLS and Sylver VLS. That is a fixed requirement. AS for fitting TLAM to the T-26, well we haven't got that many to start with, but we could also install the new Tomahawk long Range Anti-Ship Version that the USN has adopted.
My understanding the max missile weight that can be fired from a Mk41 VLS cell is in the order of ~3,000+ lbs, eg the slow ~560 mph subsonic 1980's Tomahawk with booster ~3,500 lbs, 1,000 lbs warhead and 1,000+ mile range

Benchmark, the supersonic ~Mach 2.8 BrahMos. Wikipedia info ~300 kg / 660 lbs warhead, surface launch ~ 3,000 kg / 6,600 lbs, air launched 2,500 kg 5,500 lbs. Range Surface/Sea Platform - 500 km (310 mi; 270 nmi) to be upgraded to 600 km (370 mi; 320 nmi) Air Platform - 500 km (310 mi; 270 nmi), have seen air launched range also quoted as 300 km?

Whatever the true figures for the BrahMos no FC/ASW if a supersonic land attack missile variant and if constrained to launch from a MK41 VLS cell would appear to be limited to short range and with small warhead compared to the Tomahawks capability.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/inde ... idth=550px

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Lord Jim »

And this is where all the discussions and choices are still to be made, one missile to rule them all, or multiple missiles but with many components in common, or even a modular approach.

One idea I have seen banded about and sort of related was fitting the glide package available to the air dropped Mk54 ASW Torpedo to the one installed on the ASROC-VL ASW system. This would greatly increase the range of the weapon system if it is a practical option and said modified missile would still fit in the Mk41.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Ron5 »

Lord Jim wrote:And this is where all the discussions and choices are still to be made, one missile to rule them all, or multiple missiles but with many components in common, or even a modular approach.

One idea I have seen banded about and sort of related was fitting the glide package available to the air dropped Mk54 ASW Torpedo to the one installed on the ASROC-VL ASW system. This would greatly increase the range of the weapon system if it is a practical option and said modified missile would still fit in the Mk41.
LM is supposed to have developed a winged ASROC and are just waiting for a customer.

Post Reply