This video is 58 min long.Robert A. Lynch was the engineering director for the Navy's Tomahawk cruise missile program from 1972 to 1979. This is a recording of a talk he gave at the San Diego Air and Space Museum in the Spring of 2012.
From the archives of the San Diego Air and Space Museum http://www.sandiegoairandspace.org Please do not use for commercial purposes without permission.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoU_CmZt2Yo
But that leaves one variant unaccounted for? Does anyone know what its designation is?
Scrapping these older missiles if they aren't being remanufactured is wasteful and missing an opportunity as they could be converted into expendable missile-targets.Surely, a lot of the old block I and block IIs were simply not even remanufactured but were scrapped entirely. But i don't know how many.
Nuclear models may be scrapped. They required a very significant internal reconstruction to serve as conventional weapons: nuclear warhead was much more compact than conventional one, so fuel tanks took much more space in BGM-109A. Also, nuclear models did not have terminal navigation system. Essentially, only their engines (probably; the engines on old BGM-109A and later models are different) and parts of the hull could be re-used, and it may be considered more practical to just dismantle all 109A for spare parts.And does the above all mean that as many as 2000 older tomahawks were simply scrapped?
That was wasteful, after their W-80 warheads were removed they should've been converted into target drones.Nuclear models may be scrapped.
Supposed to be anyway. With regards as to the anti-ship variant, it was planned from the outset with both nuclear and conventional options if I am not mistaken, but the former option was initially blocked by the ongoing trainwreck that was the Carter Administration, for much the same irrational reasons that the deployment of the TLAM-Ns was delayed. I think nuclear armed anti-ship Tomahawks began to be really available around the late 1982 timeframe.I'm not sure how easy is to swap the forward sections. Are they easy to detach?
Er, do they really existed? The BGM-109B wasnt exactly the ideal nuclear-delivery platform. It have no midcourse correction and no friend-or-foe identification system. It just flew to pre-set distance, switched on the seeker and start search pattern for any target. Launching such weapon with nuclear warhead - knowing that it could home on wrong ship - is... not safe.think nuclear armed anti-ship Tomahawks began to be really available around the late 1981/early 1982 timeframe
There was never a nuclear Tomahawk Anti-Ship Missile fielded.With regards as to the anti-ship variant, it was planned from the outset with both nuclear and conventional options if I am not mistaken, but the former option was initially blocked by the ongoing trainwreck that was the Carter Administration, for much the same irrational reasons that the deployment of the TLAM-Ns was delayed. I think nuclear armed anti-ship Tomahawks began to be really available around the late 1982 timeframe.
By all accounts, the TLAM-N and nuclear capable anti-ship versions actually proved relatively easy to convert to the pre-TT conventional version. The member of the Tomahawk family that turned out to be the least compatible with the rest proved to be the Block IV/Tactical Tomahawk. To the point that attempts during the late 2000s and 2010s to convert older missiles into Tactical Tomahawks were pretty much abject failures. It just wasn't worth it to literally downgrade older more capable missiles into Block IVs. I believe at one stage they were even running a variation of the old 'ID plate' scam to try and disguise the fact that they were producing brand new missiles rather than conversions.
I imagine it allows the missile to pull positive G to enter the terminal maneuver which steepens the dive and accelerates it towards its target.
That last painting implies a 4-round or 6-round container-launcher added to the forecastle of a Tico. Is that just purely notional work by the artist or something actually considered.
(A month or so ago I had a chat with a guy on another forum whether two ABLs would fit on a Kidd like the Spurance refit layout, but we agreed it looked like the ABL wouldn't fit and allow proper clearance with the Mk 26 launcher.)
It could indeed be that smaller non-armoured launcher, and agreed, something looks off with that painting the way its depicted.That last painting implies a 4-round or 6-round container-launcher added to the forecastle of a Tico. Is that just purely notional work by the artist or something actually considered.
(A month or so ago I had a chat with a guy on another forum whether two ABLs would fit on a Kidd like the Spurance refit layout, but we agreed it looked like the ABL wouldn't fit and allow proper clearance with the Mk 26 launcher.)
Before ABL, there was a proposed non-armored launcher that looked like an upscaled Mk 141 for Harpoon (also seen in the Long Beach painting). I suspect that was what the artist was sketching on Tico. It would be a bit narrower than the ABL, since it would lack the armored sides and elevating hardware, so maybe? What's really odd is that it looks like it might be drawn as partially recessed into the deck between the Mk26 launcher and the Mk 45 gun. I'm pretty sure that would not have worked.
Look like its recess into the hull.It could indeed be that smaller non-armoured launcher, and agreed, something looks off with that painting the way its depicted.That last painting implies a 4-round or 6-round container-launcher added to the forecastle of a Tico. Is that just purely notional work by the artist or something actually considered.
(A month or so ago I had a chat with a guy on another forum whether two ABLs would fit on a Kidd like the Spurance refit layout, but we agreed it looked like the ABL wouldn't fit and allow proper clearance with the Mk 26 launcher.)
Before ABL, there was a proposed non-armored launcher that looked like an upscaled Mk 141 for Harpoon (also seen in the Long Beach painting). I suspect that was what the artist was sketching on Tico. It would be a bit narrower than the ABL, since it would lack the armored sides and elevating hardware, so maybe? What's really odd is that it looks like it might be drawn as partially recessed into the deck between the Mk26 launcher and the Mk 45 gun. I'm pretty sure that would not have worked.