RN anti-ship missiles

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5543
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Jake1992 wrote: 22 Jul 2022, 22:09
Dobbo wrote: 22 Jul 2022, 21:27 I think the anti ship missile is the supersonic one, the subsonic one is (apparently) a much larger land attack missile. Feels ambitious to have different ones - but what do I know!
I thought the whole idea of the project was to make one missile that could do both land attack and anti ship to give that greater flexibility ie instead of have 8 anti ship and 8 land attack you’d have 16 that can be used for either role.
SW1 wrote: 22 Jul 2022, 21:58 Subsonic missiles you can at make “stealthy”
Is stealthy going to be as greater use as we think though, from what Iv read to seems speed make a missile harder to stop than stealth. We’re taking about a sub Mach 1 missile here it doesn’t really fill me with confidence.
Simple. Supersonic needs BIG resources to fly, hugely powerful engine, nearly an order of magnitude larger drag force (which typically scales as (velocity)^2, i.e. Mach 3 missile faces 11 times ((3/0.9)-2=11.11) the drag-force of a Mach 0.9 missile, if similar sized), and hence larger amount of fuel. In other words, super-sonic missile MUST have
- much smaller warhead
- AND/OR significantly shorter range
than sub-sonic ones. Just physics. We can easily compare Concord and B747.

Example is not well known in detail, but to my understanding;
- StormShadow is 1.3t, has a 450 kg warhead, with 550 km range in lo-lo profile, a high-subsonic missile
- ASM-3A of Japan is 1t, has unknown warhead (said to be less than 150 kg), with 400 km range in hi-lo profile, Mach 3.
- BrahMos-A, 2.5t, warhead 200-300 kg, with 400 km range in hi-lo profile, Mach 3.

Very different ones.

Of course, super-sonic missile is more expensive (high-power engine and super-sonic airframe is much expensive than a TNT gun powder). Hypersonic? Will be surely hugely expensive.

Online
Jdam
Member
Posts: 918
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »

Our intern solution is going to the be the sub sonic missile we need, how is this program already getting complicated and going off course at this state. :crazy:

What we need is 1 missile that is Hypersonic and can attacked Naval/Land targets, can be vertically and air launched, go!.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5543
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Jdam wrote: 23 Jul 2022, 21:27 Our intern solution is going to the be the sub sonic missile we need, how is this program already getting complicated and going off course at this state. :crazy:
NSM is medium range (~200 km) sub-sonic agile and stealthy ASM, capable of land attack, with a warhead of 125 kg. FC/ASW sub-sonic version will be a sub-sonic agile and stealthy land-attack missile with ~1000 km range and ~400 kg warhead.

If you think NSM is "similar" to FC/ASW-subsonic, you must say "SeaVenom is the same to NSM".

I do not think so.
What we need is 1 missile that is Hypersonic and can attacked Naval/Land targets, can be vertically and air launched, go!.
When will it be ready? It will be VERY expensive, how many UK will be able to buy it? How small the warhead will be? How long the range will be? It must be Mk.41 VLS compatible. To be air-launch capable, it must be less than 1.5t in weight, typically = cannot be very large missile.

Let's take a look at SM-6 Blk-1A and 1B (a Mk41 VLS capable, hyper-sonic missile, which is adopted as a land attack missile by US army, and also considered PRIMARILY as a land/surface attack missile by US navy), it has a small warhead of 60 kg, and is $4M a pop. Note SM-6 Blk-1A is already 1.5t missile, and Blk1B will be ~2t in weight.

So, you propose to design/develop something similar in capability, something surely more expensive (because of procurement number limitation), and rely solely on this missile to hit enemy HQ, ammo-stock, fuel base, and logistic stops? As a high-speed/small-warhead missile, it will good for HQ, but for fuel base and logistic stops, larger warhead will be much better. And, of course, larger warhead, long-range cruise missile is MUCH MUCH cheaper than the hypersonic land-attack missile.

I can see the reason to have both.

On the other hand, I am not sure if UK/France shall develop both by their own.

For me, subsonic-agile-stealth-long-range FC/ASW, combined with SM-6 Blk1B, will work well. France needs Exocet replacement, which is super-sonic ASM. Good. But, as it is Exocet replacement, it cannot be too large. For example, Japanese ASM-3A is 1t, 6.5m large, Mach 3, 200-400 km range (hi-lo) ASM with ~100 kg warhead. Supersonic FC/ASW will be with a similar size/range/warhead. Good. But, may not be important for RN?

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1133
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by wargame_insomniac »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 24 Jul 2022, 04:31
Jdam wrote: 23 Jul 2022, 21:27 Our intern solution is going to the be the sub sonic missile we need, how is this program already getting complicated and going off course at this state. :crazy:
NSM is medium range (~200 km) sub-sonic agile and stealthy ASM, capable of land attack, with a warhead of 125 kg. FC/ASW sub-sonic version will be a sub-sonic agile and stealthy land-attack missile with ~1000 km range and ~400 kg warhead.

If you think NSM is "similar" to FC/ASW-subsonic, you must say "SeaVenom is the same to NSM".

I do not think so.
What we need is 1 missile that is Hypersonic and can attacked Naval/Land targets, can be vertically and air launched, go!.
When will it be ready? It will be VERY expensive, how many UK will be able to buy it? How small the warhead will be? How long the range will be? It must be Mk.41 VLS compatible. To be air-launch capable, it must be less than 1.5t in weight, typically = cannot be very large missile.

Let's take a look at SM-6 Blk-1A and 1B (a Mk41 VLS capable, hyper-sonic missile, which is adopted as a land attack missile by US army, and also considered PRIMARILY as a land/surface attack missile by US navy), it has a small warhead of 60 kg, and is $4M a pop. Note SM-6 Blk-1A is already 1.5t missile, and Blk1B will be ~2t in weight.

So, you propose to design/develop something similar in capability, something surely more expensive (because of procurement number limitation), and rely solely on this missile to hit enemy HQ, ammo-stock, fuel base, and logistic stops? As a high-speed/small-warhead missile, it will good for HQ, but for fuel base and logistic stops, larger warhead will be much better. And, of course, larger warhead, long-range cruise missile is MUCH MUCH cheaper than the hypersonic land-attack missile.

I can see the reason to have both.

On the other hand, I am not sure if UK/France shall develop both by their own.

For me, subsonic-agile-stealth-long-range FC/ASW, combined with SM-6 Blk1B, will work well. France needs Exocet replacement, which is super-sonic ASM. Good. But, as it is Exocet replacement, it cannot be too large. For example, Japanese ASM-3A is 1t, 6.5m large, Mach 3, 200-400 km range (hi-lo) ASM with ~100 kg warhead. Supersonic FC/ASW will be with a similar size/range/warhead. Good. But, may not be important for RN?
I can see the use in a couple of different Anti-Ship / Land Attack Cruise Missiles. A small number of expensive highly capable missiles for use against particularly high value target. And a larger number of cheaper less capable missiles for main volume of attacks.

We have seen in the Ukraine war that as time has gone, the Russians are having to resort to cheaper munitions including unguided bombs as they could nt afford to continue to use their much vaunted hypersonic and supersonic cruise missiles.

I believe that NSM is one of the cheaper ASM, albeit with shorter range / smaller warhead. The USN is using it on their LCS, whilst they are using the likes of Harpoon / Tomahawk / SM-6 Blk-1A on Arleigh Burkes. For RN to me it would make sense to initially use the NSM as an interim on T45 but eventually on the T31, whilst the T45/T83 and the T26 can use the FC/ASW. If both NSM / FC/ASW can use the Mk41 VLS then RN can have a mix of these two missiles on T45/T83 and the T26.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5543
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

LMM and SeaVenom. The near future RN anti-ship capability main weapons. (other than NSM if they really come)

Impressive 20 LMM on Wildcat (twitter.com/RFAArgus/status/1552909382333112321)

Image

and Sea Venoms. (twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1552924163140210689)

Image
Image

sol
Member
Posts: 499
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 09:11
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by sol »

Royal Navy to buy the Naval Strike Missile

These users liked the author sol for the post (total 5):
Phil Sayersabc123dmereifieldserge750wargame_insomniac

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2899
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by abc123 »

sol wrote: 23 Nov 2022, 13:01 Royal Navy to buy the Naval Strike Missile

Thank God, it was the only logical decision. :thumbup:
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…

JohnM
Donator
Posts: 155
Joined: 15 Apr 2020, 19:39
United States of America

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by JohnM »

11 sets, as well…presumably for the 6 T45s and 5 T23s, and hopefully the latter will then migrate to the T31 as they come online… this is good, very good…
These users liked the author JohnM for the post:
abc123

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by RichardIC »

NSM initial operating capability in "a little over" 12 months.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/st ... -42395846/

UK and Norwegian authorities have today announced that they have agreed to
further strengthen existing defence ties. The Royal Navy will receive the Naval
Strike Missile (NSM), outfitted on Type 23 frigates and Type 45 destroyers, in a
collaboration with the Norwegian government.

The collaboration will result in more ships equipped with the highly
sophisticated Naval Strike Missiles which in turn will contribute in enhancing
the security in our common areas of interest. Replacing the Harpoon
surface-to-surface weapon, due to go out of service in 2023, the world-class
anti-ship missile will be ready for operations onboard the first Royal Navy
vessel in a little over 12 months.

"KONGSBERG is very pleased to welcome the Royal Navy as a member of the NSM
User Group. We proudly support the strengthening of defence ties between our
nations by integrating the NSM on the Royal Navy's vessels," says Executive Vice
President in Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace Øyvind Kolset.

KONGSBERG cannot provide any further comment on the potential size of this
contract.
These users liked the author RichardIC for the post (total 4):
donald_of_tokyodmereifieldRon5serge750

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1063
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by serge750 »

what the odds now of getting the JSM for the P8 & F35 fleets ? - external use
These users liked the author serge750 for the post (total 2):
wargame_insomniacRon5

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1133
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by wargame_insomniac »

That's great news. Long term I can see it best being used as a cheaper Anti-Ship Missile on T31 and the potential T32 class frigates, who will be more likely to be in littoral waters facing mid-tier or even low-tier opposition.

In the long term I hope the FCASW will be fiited to both the T45 / T26, as this will be more modern, more expensive missile with probably faster speed and/or better stealth + longer range + larger warhead, which will be need when facing top-tier peer enemies.

Dobbo
Member
Posts: 120
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 07:41
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Dobbo »

My expectation is that FCASW is unlikely to be fitted to T45 (I suspect it would require MK41 being fitted).

I would be surprised if it wasn’t a major part of T83 and any other vessel that has MK41 fitted - such as T31 in time - but NSM provides a likely cheaper and easier to fit alternative to what is likely to be a very expensive and very high performance weapon.

Online
Jdam
Member
Posts: 918
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »

Dobbo wrote: 26 Nov 2022, 17:51 My expectation is that FCASW is unlikely to be fitted to T45 (I suspect it would require MK41 being fitted).

I would be surprised if it wasn’t a major part of T83 and any other vessel that has MK41 fitted - such as T31 in time - but NSM provides a likely cheaper and easier to fit alternative to what is likely to be a very expensive and very high performance weapon.
Wont it need to fit on French ships? (of do they all use the A-70?)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Ron5 »

Dobbo wrote: 26 Nov 2022, 17:51 My expectation is that FCASW is unlikely to be fitted to T45 (I suspect it would require MK41 being fitted).

I would be surprised if it wasn’t a major part of T83 and any other vessel that has MK41 fitted - such as T31 in time - but NSM provides a likely cheaper and easier to fit alternative to what is likely to be a very expensive and very high performance weapon.
And my expectation is that FCASW will be cancelled. Save a ton of money for both parties.
These users liked the author Ron5 for the post (total 3):
PoiuytrewqDobboabc123

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 363
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Phil Sayers »

You may be right but I think cruise missiles are exactly the kind of thing that both the UK and France will view as being strategically important to retain the ability to design and manufacture. The programme itself may be cancelled but, if so, I don't see either country giving up on domestically developing a replacement programme.
These users liked the author Phil Sayers for the post:
Dobbo

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1403
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by tomuk »

Phil Sayers wrote: 26 Nov 2022, 20:13 You may be right but I think cruise missiles are exactly the kind of thing that both the UK and France will view as being strategically important to retain the ability to design and manufacture. The programme itself may be cancelled but, if so, I don't see either country giving up on domestically developing a replacement programme.
Particularly the French as there is linkage between FCASW and their ASAMP nuclear missile.

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

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Timmymagic »

serge750 wrote: 23 Nov 2022, 19:06 what the odds now of getting the JSM for the P8 & F35 fleets ? - external use
Low for both still....

JSM is not integrated on P-8. The Australians were looking at it in 2015, but since gone very quiet. They have since ordered LRASM, which will be integrated on P-8 in 2027/28. Basically unless someone funds it its not happening...

Similar story for F-35B. JSM will be integrated to F-35A. It should then in theory be easy to integrate on F-35B as the most complex systems integration will have been completed, with carry and drop tests being required for the B variant. But thats not funded...so unless someone funds that its not happening. Can't see the UK being that interested in paying, but perhaps Japan or USMC will.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
serge750

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

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by xav »

At Paris Air Show, MBDA unveiled Orchestrike.

Basically the missiles talk to each other and make their own decisions to avoid air defense, attack targets, fly in close formation to appear as a single missile.

This technology could be applied to the future FCASW

These users liked the author xav for the post (total 6):
donald_of_tokyoRon5RichardICJohnMserge750bobp


Online
Jdam
Member
Posts: 918
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »



Good news but now we need to be getting a move onto to meet that 2028 date :think:
These users liked the author Jdam for the post:
Ron5

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

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by xav »

Italy Joins France And The UK For FC/ASW Program
Italy, France and the United Kingdom (UK) signed a letter of intent (LoI) on June 20, 2023 during the Paris Air Show. With this LoI, the French-British Future Cruise and Anti-Ship Weapon (FC/ASW) programme will be opened to the Italian partner.

FC/ASW schedule
2017: Launch of the conceptual studies
2022: Launch of the evaluation phase, which focuses on the rise in maturity of the two selected concepts (stealthy and subsonic or supersonic)
2023: Italy joins the program
2024: Launch of the program
2028: Planned in-service date for the anti-ship variant
2030: Planned in-service date for the land-attack variant

The case for Italy joining FC/ASW
Joining the FC/ASW program makes sense for Italy and should not come as a surprise: the Italian Air Force will have to replace in the future its in-service Storm Shadow land attack cruise missiles (which are currently, as for France and the UK, under a midlife upgrade programme) while the Chief of Italian Navy (Marina Militare) in 2020, Vice Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone (now Admiral and Chief of the Defense Staff since October 2021) highlighted the need for a credible deep strike capability to be provided for the future destroyer project (the over 10,000 tons class DDX) as all as for the future submarines (Type 212NFS).

Italy could bring some know-how and technology to the French and British partners: As part of the Teseo Mk2/E program, MBDA Italy is currently developing a very advanced dual-mode homing head section which will feature both a new generation coherent Radio-Frequency (RF) seeker with ECCM capability and a Electro-Optic (EO) sensor. According to Italian journalist (and Naval News regular contributor) Luca Peruzzi, the RF seeker co-developed by MBDA together with Leonardo, will feature AESA (active electronically scanned array) technology provided by the latter company. During the Seafuture 2023 conference and exhibition, MBDA and the Italian Navy gave an update on the Teseo Mk2/E programme, pointing out the RF seeker development is on schedule alongside the overall weapon system.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... w-program/
These users liked the author xav for the post (total 2):
PoiuytrewqRon5

Online
Jdam
Member
Posts: 918
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Jdam »

I need to ask what is the "2024: Launch of the program" mean Start of R&D?, start of production, start of the test program?

I am trying to ease my concerns about this "2028: Planned in-service date for the anti-ship variant" as it seems ambitious for a new modern weapon system.

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 363
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by Phil Sayers »

While I was aware of a debate about whether to go high supersonic / hypersonic or subsonic and stealthy, I was not aware that there would be two separate variants for land attack and anti-shipping. Possibly something of a retrograde step given that these days most equivalent missiles can accomplish both roles?

new guy
Senior Member
Posts: 1173
Joined: 18 Apr 2023, 01:53
United Kingdom

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by new guy »

maybe a mistake has occurred? Pretty sure FC/ASW was meant to be 1 multi-role variant for both roles. Only talk ever about 2 variants was 1 fast and 1 stealth. Also 2028 date is old IOC date and 2030 is the most recently updated one.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5543
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: RN anti-ship missiles

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

xav wrote: 26 Jun 2023, 09:50 Italy Joins France And The UK For FC/ASW Program
Italy, France and the United Kingdom (UK) signed a letter of intent (LoI) on June 20, 2023 during the Paris Air Show. With this LoI, the French-British Future Cruise and Anti-Ship Weapon (FC/ASW) programme will be opened to the Italian partner.

FC/ASW schedule
2017: Launch of the conceptual studies
2022: Launch of the evaluation phase, which focuses on the rise in maturity of the two selected concepts (stealthy and subsonic or supersonic)
2023: Italy joins the program
2024: Launch of the program
2028: Planned in-service date for the anti-ship variant
2030: Planned in-service date for the land-attack variant

The case for Italy joining FC/ASW
Joining the FC/ASW program makes sense for Italy and should not come as a surprise: the Italian Air Force will have to replace in the future its in-service Storm Shadow land attack cruise missiles (which are currently, as for France and the UK, under a midlife upgrade programme) while the Chief of Italian Navy (Marina Militare) in 2020, Vice Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone (now Admiral and Chief of the Defense Staff since October 2021) highlighted the need for a credible deep strike capability to be provided for the future destroyer project (the over 10,000 tons class DDX) as all as for the future submarines (Type 212NFS).

Italy could bring some know-how and technology to the French and British partners: As part of the Teseo Mk2/E program, MBDA Italy is currently developing a very advanced dual-mode homing head section which will feature both a new generation coherent Radio-Frequency (RF) seeker with ECCM capability and a Electro-Optic (EO) sensor. According to Italian journalist (and Naval News regular contributor) Luca Peruzzi, the RF seeker co-developed by MBDA together with Leonardo, will feature AESA (active electronically scanned array) technology provided by the latter company. During the Seafuture 2023 conference and exhibition, MBDA and the Italian Navy gave an update on the Teseo Mk2/E programme, pointing out the RF seeker development is on schedule alongside the overall weapon system.
Thanks a lot, Xavier-san.

Looks like there is clear need to order TLAM BlkV now?

Even if everything goes well, the first land-attack variant will be there on 2030. As the "production" takes time, surely this means it will be 2033 before all the T26's (and possibly T31's) Mk.41 VLS will be filled with FC/ASW. 2033 is well after T26 in service date. In short, it virtually CANNOT MEET the required in-service date. (just meeting the requirement "on paper").

Plus-1. There is 100% probability we see delays of 2-5 years of these dates. 100% a dare say.

Plus-2. UK must pay for "Mk.41 integration/certification" effort, which may take 2 years or so. Can you believe it will be "at the same time" as for Sylver 70 VLS? I do not think so.

Order 500 TLAM blkV (with its dedicated interface electronics and software) NOW. They will be delivered around 2025-2028, and all the T26's (and possibly T31's) Mk.41 VLS can be filled with TLAM. Even after FC/ASW in service, TLAM will be useful as a cheaper-but-long-range land attack capability. Tthere is zero chance FC/ASW being cheaper than TLAM.
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 4):
Poiuytrewqwargame_insomniacbobpTempest414

Post Reply