Revolution Underway In Naval Surface Warfare

Sferrin

Sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
3 June 2011
Messages
20,999
Reaction score
19,285
"NEWTOWN, Conn. --- Two radical weapons will revolutionize naval warfare in the second decade of the 21st century, according to Forecast International's new analysis, "The Market for Naval Surface Warfare Systems." Lasers will be tasked with anti-aircraft, anti-missile, and anti-small-craft roles, while rail guns will give surface ships an entirely new dimension of ship-killing firepower.

"Probably the only way to defend against these weapons is not to be there when they get used," said Stuart Slade, senior naval analyst at Forecast International."

. . .

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/165303/a-revolution-is-underway-in-naval-surface-warfare.html
 
covert_shores said:
food for thought.

Can you fire a laser through a periscope-like design?
Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely, already has been done on a UK test vessel for fleet defence / self defence measures against optical observations.
 
Most beam directors by definition are made up of a series of mirrors, so a periscope apparatus is suitable provided you can get the final gimbal stuff on the top installed, can somehow keep the main lens clean/dry, and can tolerate a fairly large diameter periscope shaft.

One could cheat with a beam director of large diameter riding above the wave line while the periscope shaft is smaller, but the wake from the setup will still stick out like a sore thumb, and the beam director would have a hard time being radar stealthy. As a defensive weapon against maritime patrol aircraft, maybe, but ASROC style torpedoes, or those 100 mile torpedoes people are talking about, it will provide no real shield.

But in the age of lasers, line of sight is line of death, so NLOS/standoff weapons come into the fore until laser defenses can deal with smaller target swarms.


The reverse of blue laser LIDARS finding subs from aircraft, may mean aircraft may have a laser means of attacking subs (though I guess the best target of merit is the propeller?)
 
Attacking a submerged submarine with a laser would have a lot of problems unless we're talking really really powerful lasers. But in the near-ish term ASW aircraft could use a lasers to destroy or at least impair communications masts, snorkels, radars, pretty much anything else the sub might want to stick above the surface to do its job.
 
Moose said:
Attacking a submerged submarine with a laser would have a lot of problems unless we're talking really really powerful lasers. But in the near-ish term ASW aircraft could use a lasers to destroy or at least impair communications masts, snorkels, radars, pretty much anything else the sub might want to stick above the surface to do its job.
Click to expand...

But being in an ASW helo/patrol aircraft when a periscope with a 100kw laser lights up would not be a fun experience.
 
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2015/07/20/the_us_navys_cruise_missile_nightmare__107640.html
 
covert_shores said:
food for thought.

Can you fire a laser through a periscope-like design?
Click to expand...
Yes, BUT.

You want a very large diameter final mirror to control how much heat that laser dumps inside itself. Any given mirror might be 99.9% reflective, but 1MW laser means 1kw on a small mirror.

The Boeing ABL used relatively small mirrors to bounce through the laser turret, and then expanded to a 1.5m primary targeting mirror.
 
jsport said:
https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2...=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru
Click to expand...
No, money won’t fix it, but it will go along way.
As I’ve said in another thread if we start utilizing smaller shipyards now, to build small vessels, we’ll build the skill and experience base, and can justify investing money in those other yards so they can work on larger ships in the future.

I’d start with a fleet of theoretical MKVII boats. 95-100ft long, 75tons or less.

Armament would be the same as the MKVIs, but the extra size would would be primarily for extra fuel tank size, and cargo/gear stowage. Vessels like these could do minor supply runs, PAX transfers between islands, etc in the SCS during wartime. During peacetime they can run patrols in the gulf and and around Somalia.

After a few years of building those, DoD can invest in expanding those yards, and then begin building larger more dedicated blue water vessels.

We have an untapped shipyard in WA that’s building merchants, we can use them to reinvigorate the MSC fleet, and again after a few years potentially and some more investment, and maybe throw a few LCS or Connie’s to them for repairs.
 
jsport said:
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2021/may/mk-vi-dead-long-live-mk-vii
Click to expand...
Their notional MK VII idea would be the second step in getting these other yards up to speed on warships, after my version.

They could also escort the new low profile supply USVs that are being looked at. If they get damaged by PLAN USVs or small patrol craft/maritime militia, once safe the USVs can be offloaded onto the decks of their escorts and the mission continues on with minimal losses to supplies.
 
wouldnt there need to be more deck space on the MkVII and a crane?
 
jsport said:
wouldnt there need to be more deck space on the MkVII and a crane?
Click to expand...
I don’t know why you think there wouldn’t be enough deck space, and by crane I assume you mean boat davit, and not a long necked bird. In either case both are unnecessary.
 
Just for reference if we added 15ft in length to bring the boat length to 100ft and added 4.5 ft in beam to bring it up to 25ft wide, that would provide 375 sq ft of extra deck space compared to a mk vi. That is roughly the size of a single car garage.
Widening it to 25ft would also allow for a second rhib to be stowed on the boat ramp along side.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Yes, BUT.

You want a very large diameter final mirror to control how much heat that laser dumps inside itself. Any given mirror might be 99.9% reflective, but 1MW laser means 1kw on a small mirror.

The Boeing ABL used relatively small mirrors to bounce through the laser turret, and then expanded to a 1.5m primary targeting mirror.
Click to expand...
The alternative would be a Free-Electron Laser, which doesn't require mirrors, though that tech is still in its infancy.
 
GruntFox said:
The alternative would be a Free-Electron Laser, which doesn't require mirrors, though that tech is still in its infancy.
Click to expand...
It's my understanding that the beam pointer part of the FEL (analogous to gun barrel/turret) still uses mirrors, but yes a FEL needs fewer mirrors.
 
Scott Kenny said:
It's my understanding that the beam pointer part of the FEL (analogous to gun barrel/turret) still uses mirrors, but yes a FEL needs fewer mirrors.
Click to expand...
That, and you can use more wavelengths or even develop what GURPS calls a 'Rainbow Laser', which is basically a tunable laser system from anywhere from IR to UV and everything in between.
 
Scott Kenny said:
It's my understanding that the beam pointer part of the FEL (analogous to gun barrel/turret) still uses mirrors, but yes a FEL needs fewer mirrors.
Click to expand...
FEL laser would still require mirrors; the difference is in the method of beam generation (FEL laser used electron accelerator to creae an electron beam, which is then bounced throughthe system of magnetic fields - the "wiggler" device - to emit electrons energy into photons).
 
Dilandu said:
FEL laser would still require mirrors; the difference is in the method of beam generation (FEL laser used electron accelerator to creae an electron beam, which is then bounced throughthe system of magnetic fields - the "wiggler" device - to emit electrons energy into photons).
Click to expand...
The great thing about FELs is that you can make wavelengths that are impossible otherwise. For example, you can make an Xaser (X-Ray Laser) with an FEL, meaning that the plasma created when a high-powered laser hits an object is basically a window, thus maximizing effectiveness. You can do this with UV-C (aka UV Vac) wavelength lasers, too, but if you want to have lasers in space, Xasers are the way to go (UV has a defraction rate measured in megameters (1,000km or 1,000,000m), X-rays have a defraction rate measured in light seconds (~299.8Mm)).
 
GruntFox said:
The great thing about FELs is that you can make wavelengths that are impossible otherwise. For example, you can make an Xaser (X-Ray Laser) with an FEL, meaning that the plasma created when a high-powered laser hits an object is basically a window, thus maximizing effectiveness. You can do this with UV-C (aka UV Vac) wavelength lasers, too, but if you want to have lasers in space, Xasers are the way to go (UV has a defraction rate measured in megameters (1,000km or 1,000,000m), X-rays have a defraction rate measured in light seconds (~299.8Mm)).
Click to expand...
Sure, with a sufficiently large/powerful accelerator. And you need to get really exotic in your mirror materials.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Sure, with a sufficiently large/powerful accelerator. And you need to get really exotic in your mirror materials.
Click to expand...
Well, given that Battletech has started to have elements become real, I wouldn't be surprised if we discover how Battletech miniaturized the required accelerator, since we discovered what amounts to EndoSteel back in 2016.
 
GruntFox said:
Well, given that Battletech has started to have elements become real, I wouldn't be surprised if we discover how Battletech miniaturized the required accelerator, since we discovered what amounts to EndoSteel back in 2016.
Click to expand...
Crud, we use the right mirrors for UV-C or EUV making microchips. And of course there's xray machines.

But it's expensive and heavy.

I honestly think that anything in wet-navy use will end up either green or IR. Most likely IR.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom