Colonial-Marine said:
In that case I have to question the Navy's whole premise of standing off at over 200nm, obviously your worrying about anti-ship missilse if your dealing with somebody like the PRC, but I imagine most amphibious landings in the future will occur against countries that don't have tons of modern shore-based anti-ship missiles.
If the enemy doesn’t have any anti ship missiles or heavy artillery rocket systems which can equally well engage ships, odds are they also do not have the capability to defend the entire coastline in the first place. Let alone defend the coastline AND defend the air assault landing zones behind the beaches. That means the initial Marine landing is unopposed, and a V-22 can drop a M777 into the landing zone for fire support very quickly. Hugely expensive naval gun system with marginal ammunition loads need not be required. Lots of money is already being spent on systems to find the enemy, so avoiding him is possible.
The USN will eventually get some kind of guided shore bombardment weapon though. It may not be super long ranged, but right now a project I forget the name of is moving along to create a self contained screw in GPS guidance fuse. I think the program name might be 'GPS competent munition' but I'm not sure. I believe they are at the point of test firing. Its internal battery is charged and GPS grid are set by an induction device just before firing using a hand held computer. I'm sure they can bolt one into a Mk45 5in turret. That could cover 'no naval defense weak enemy' scenarios well enough.
It won’t allow super high accuracy because the fins are so small to fit within the diameter of 105-155mm shells rather then unfolding, but it can convert any existing artillery shell that accepts US fuses into a fairly accurate round. CEP of 30-50 meters or so; instead of 300-600 meters at 40km range for normal artillery. That would greatly increase the value of the existing 5in guns and ammo, without the massive cost of an entirely new weapon or entirely new ammo like ERGM. More importantly we already have lots of 5in guns. An invasion force could count on at least one or two such vessels being around. Specialist ships with specialist weapons wont be around when you need them. All the more so since the USN is going to keep shrinking in the future.
An ex-Marine I know used to argue that the Navy should just get something with plenty of armor on it, several Phalanx CIWS, loaded with MLRS type rockets and guns, then proceed to get close and shoot it out.
Sure, just let me know when you find 2 billion dollars to pay for each one of those things, and then 2 billion more to pay the life insurance benefits and long term care of its dead and wounded crew after it gets sunk by a mine. MLRS leaves duds like crazy anyway. Would you really want to come ashore on a beach or landing zone covered in tens of thousands of unexploded DPICM bomblets? The fact is the USN needs around 5-10 billion dollars more a year, every year, just to keep its strength equal to what it is now. Without that money the USN will shrink to about 200 ships. Specialist ships, for as rarely used a role as shore bombardment no less, are absurdly unaffordable.
Funny and somehow accurate description. I like it!
