Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile - NSM - Discussion

Josh_TN said:
Tomahawks are good for a thousand miles
Click to expand...

Thousand mile subsonic anti-ship weapon? I assume it would have to fly at high altitudes for most of that distance in order to obtain that sort of performance. That would have some nice survivability implications against a half competent adversary with net centric cooperative engagement capability. Also that sort of range will have a nice and long 90 minute flight time to target? I may be off by a few dozen minutes but I suppose it would eventually get there. :)
 
Last edited:
bring_it_on said:
Thousand mile subsonic anti-ship weapon? I assume it would have to fly at high altitudes for most of that distance in order to obtain that sort of performance. That would have some nice survivability implications against a half competent adversary with net centric cooperative engagement capability. Also that sort of range will have a nice and long 90 minute flight time to target? I may be off by a few dozen minutes but I suppose it would eventually get there. :)
Click to expand...
While Tomahawk Block Vs maintain the long range, the old TASM only had a ~250-300nmi range.

The problem with such a long range is targeting. Since the Block Vs have a datalink and can update their target points, it works out.
 
Scott Kenny said:
The problem with such a long range is targeting. Since the Block Vs have a datalink and can update their target points, it works out.
Click to expand...

Yes by cutting the range by 2/3 and using third party targeting you can most definitely make it work with a very slow weapon with a long time of flight. It works even better if the adversary complies and lets your ISR and other assets to continue interrupted while it waits patiently for the anti ship missile to arrive.
 
Last edited:
bring_it_on said:
Yes by cutting the range by 2/3 and using third party targeting you can most definitely make it work with a very slow weapon with a long time of flight. It works even better if the adversary complies and lets your ISR and other assets to continue interrupted while it waits patiently for the anti ship missile to arrive.
Click to expand...

There’s no reason an enemy would even know it had been fired upon from a thousand miles away. An interesting thought exercise is to draw a thousand mile range circle around the Taiwanese straight. Any tomahawk capable platform inside that circle can reach any landing beach, port, or blockade task force, and all of their missiles can be coordinated via satellite.
 
Josh_TN said:
There’s no reason an enemy would even know it had been fired upon from a thousand miles away. An interesting thought exercise is to draw a thousand mile range circle around the Taiwanese straight. Any tomahawk capable platform inside that circle can reach any landing beach, port, or blockade task force, and all of their missiles can be coordinated via satellite.
Click to expand...

Must be one heck of a job they did on the latest block TLAM when it can be launched against a Chinese warship or a port from a thousand miles and the Chinese ISR and other networked capability won't even get a whiff of it either at launch or during its one and a half or two hour flight to target.
 
bring_it_on said:
Must be one heck of a job they did on the latest block TLAM when it can be launched against a Chinese warship or a port from a thousand miles and the Chinese ISR and other networked capability won't even get a whiff of it either at launch or during its one and a half or two hour flight to target.
Click to expand...

I believe they do have a couple IR early warning satellite in GEO, so the launch event might be detected. If it is flying over open water, what specific platform do you think is going to handle the tracking? You seemed to assume a small subsonic object would be easier to track than the warship that is the target.
 
Josh_TN said:
There’s no reason an enemy would even know it had been fired upon from a thousand miles away. An interesting thought exercise is to draw a thousand mile range circle around the Taiwanese straight. Any tomahawk capable platform inside that circle can reach any landing beach, port, or blockade task force, and all of their missiles can be coordinated via satellite.
Click to expand...

Realistically though...how likely is Tomahawk likely to actually penetrate any defences? It's not very stealthy, doesn't really go ultra low and doesn't perform any complex terminal manoeuvres....
 
timmymagic said:
Realistically though...how likely is Tomahawk likely to actually penetrate any defences? It's not very stealthy, doesn't really go ultra low and doesn't perform any complex terminal manoeuvres....
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that tomahawk always had a low flying trajectory and exploited the ground effect. If nothing else I would expect the Blk V to have a radar altimeter; even MALD-N has one.

RCS of the old shape was supposed to be 0.5m2; presumably the Blk IV improved on that. It definitely is not VLO, but I think detection from the frontal arc would still be somewhat reduced in distance.

Tomahawk would likely have to be used in large numbers or with other effectors (eg MALD-N) to attack well defended task forces. But the extreme range and satellite links would allow for a lot of units to concentrate fire.
 
Josh_TN said:
If it is flying over open water, what specific platform do you think is going to handle the tracking?
Click to expand...

I don't know. I haven't looked at this a whole lot to list out what sort of persistent and scalable ISR capability the PLAN and other services have say within 1,000 miles or so of their borders. I expect it to be multi-domain and extensive. Netted together with their version of JADC2. You have to assume your peer adversary has credible capability. Especially so against a decade old subosnic missile that isn't even VLO by say 1990's standards (JASSM) vs an advesary that is outpacing your own AESA fielding quantities on surface combatants (and soon aerial platforms in theater).
 
bring_it_on said:
I don't know. I haven't looked at this a whole lot to list out what sort of persistent and scalable ISR capability the PLAN and other services have say within 1,000 miles or so of their borders. I expect it to be multi-domain and extensive. Netted together with their version of JADC2. You have to assume your peer adversary has credible capability. Especially so against a decade old subosnic missile that isn't even VLO by say 1990's standards (JASSM) vs an advesary that is outpacing your own AESA fielding quantities on surface combatants (and soon aerial platforms in theater).
Click to expand...

I ask the question specifically because in the hypothetical situation I posted, a vast amount of area inside the range circle is open water outside the first island chain, which I think would be problematic for the PRC to monitor.
 
A bit of digging into old literature of previous blocks (not as much info for blk IV and very little for the blk V update) it appears that to achieve maximum range, a medium altitude course is used, but low altitude is used for the penetration phase and over sufficiently short enough flight times, it can be used for the entire engagement.
 
Josh_TN said:
A bit of digging into old literature of previous blocks (not as much info for blk IV and very little for the blk V update) it appears that to achieve maximum range, a medium altitude course is used, but low altitude is used for the penetration phase and over sufficiently short enough flight times, it can be used for the entire engagement.
Click to expand...

A 60, 90 or 120 minute cruise phase at mid--altitude should lend itself nicely to detection by AEW platforms and other surface combatants with AESA radars. We and allies are literally out there training for hunting subsonic cruise missiles with fighter jets and even drones and managing to even shoot those down in actual operations. I mean we're talking about doing this literally in their back yard where 90+% of their force will be available to deploy..

breakingdefense.com

Israel uses F-35I to shoot down cruise missile, a first for Joint Strike Fighter - Breaking Defense

While this is the first known use of an F-35 to take down an incoming missile, the concept, at least on paper, is not new.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
 
Last edited:
bring_it_on said:
A 60, 90 or 120 minute cruise phase at mid--altitude should lend itself nicely to detection by AEW platforms and other surface combatants with AESA radars. We and allies are literally out there training for hunting subsonic cruise missiles with fighter jets and even drones and managing to even shoot those down in actual operations. I mean we're talking about doing this literally in their back yard where 90+% of their force will be available to deploy..

breakingdefense.com

Israel uses F-35I to shoot down cruise missile, a first for Joint Strike Fighter - Breaking Defense

While this is the first known use of an F-35 to take down an incoming missile, the concept, at least on paper, is not new.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...

You think there will be AEW outside the first island chain? I think that kind of deployment is pretty problematic. In fact I think that strategic problem is exactly what the J-36 is designed to solve. Against ships, you can simply use the radar horizon.

As for allied efforts to stop cruise missiles and drones, the results in the Red Sea seem mixed. No warships have been hit, but the defense hardly seems air tight either.

ETA: I would expect US strikes to be an order of magnitude greater in volume.
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
You think there will be AEW outside the first island chain? I think that kind of deployment is pretty problematic. In fact I think that strategic problem is exactly what the J-36 is designed to solve.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It's got generator power for days, I'm assuming that it's got a big radar installed in it.

As much as "stealthy AWACS" seems to be a non-sequitur.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Agreed. It's got generator power for days, I'm assuming that it's got a big radar installed in it.

As much as "stealthy AWACS" seems to be a non-sequitur.
Click to expand...

Optionally stealthy. Transit through the first island chain to your patrol station and then light up. If something takes a shot at you, you are wearing four long range weapons and and 4-6 medium on a super cruising aircraft.
 
Josh_TN said:
Optionally stealthy. Transit through the first island chain to your patrol station and then light up. If something takes a shot at you, you are wearing four long range weapons and and 4-6 medium on a super cruising aircraft.
Click to expand...
I was wondering about LPI AEW radars. If that's reasonably possible, I mean.
 
Best use of Tomahawks would be on the invasion fleet, which is slow or stopped, lacking in point defense systems, and in predictable locations. You can even use Taiwan itself to shield the missiles as they come in just like the Argentinians did at the Falklands.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I was wondering about LPI AEW radars. If that's reasonably possible, I mean.
Click to expand...

The L stands for low, not impossible. And quite honestly it is hard to imagine modern AI cannot figure that out, especially over open water where there is a lack of background noise to compete with.
 
Desertfox said:
Best use of Tomahawks would be on the invasion fleet, which is slow or stopped, lacking in point defense systems, and in predictable locations. You can even use Taiwan itself to shield the missiles as they come in just like the Argentinians did at the Falklands.
Click to expand...

I can think of better uses, but certainly ships loading or unloading are far easier targets.
 
Josh_TN said:
The L stands for low, not impossible. And quite honestly it is hard to imagine modern AI cannot figure that out, especially over open water where there is a lack of background noise to compete with.
Click to expand...
Had not considered that point. LPI is probably trivial over a battlefield on land with dozens of radars and all the radio traffic. It's likely a lot less trivial without all that noise.
 

German F-35s Will Be Armed With Stealthy Joint Strike Missiles​

www.twz.com

German F-35s Will Be Armed With Stealthy Joint Strike Missiles

The cruise missiles will give German F-35As a potent land-attack and anti-ship capability that doesn’t sacrifice the jet’s stealth advantage. The cruise missiles will give German F-35As a potent land-attack and anti-ship capability that doesn’t sacrifice the jet’s stealth advantage.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 
Forest Green said:

German F-35s Will Be Armed With Stealthy Joint Strike Missiles​

www.twz.com

German F-35s Will Be Armed With Stealthy Joint Strike Missiles

The cruise missiles will give German F-35As a potent land-attack and anti-ship capability that doesn’t sacrifice the jet’s stealth advantage. The cruise missiles will give German F-35As a potent land-attack and anti-ship capability that doesn’t sacrifice the jet’s stealth advantage.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
Given the rate i could find die the last US Sale and assuming a similiar package we are talking about ~230 missiles or probaly atleast 200. Quite a good number given that there aren't a lot of F-35's and P-8 integration hasn't happend yet
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1938129884087250975
View: https://x.com/hartpunkt/status/1938129884087250975


The German Navy intends to equip its submarines with a "maritime strike" capability. According to information provided to hartpunkt by well-informed sources, arming the submarines with a variant of the Joint Strike Missile is being considered.

Website in German .....
www.hartpunkt.de

Maritime Strike: Weiterentwickelte Joint Strike Missile als Bewaffnung für U-Boote der 212CD-Klasse?

Im Zuge der jüngst veröffentlichten strategischen Ausrichtung mit dem Namen „Kurs Marine“ plant die Deutsche Marine unter anderem die Fähigkeiten zum „Maritime Strike“, einem von Seeplattformen ausgeführten Schlag in das Landesinnere, auszubauen
www.hartpunkt.de www.hartpunkt.de


Entwicklungslinie-NSM-und-JSM-Missile-Familie_Bild-Kongsberg-1068x767.jpg.webp
 
zjz said:
www.navalnews.com

U.S. Marine Corps Abandons Tomahawk Missiles, Doubles Down on Extended Range NMESIS in FY2026 Budget - Naval News

The U.S. Marine Corps' Long Range Fires launcher, built around a single-cell Mark 41 VLS cell for Tomahawk missiles has been cancelled
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com

Did I read correctly? A longer range NSM with "energy denser" fuel?
Click to expand...
Maybe some heavily optemised JP-10? I mean there a lot of possible options for increased range like reducing size of specific components to increase others or achieving a large drag reduction but it would be really interresting how mutch they get as NSM Block 1A already go ~250km
 
zjz said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1938162746559750156
View: https://x.com/FRHoffmann1/status/1938162746559750156
Click to expand...
I disagree with him as given the trajectory its mutch more possible. While probaly Not the +555km something among the line of 300-400km with a "high-high-low" flight path should be achievable.

Edit: I do believe this is probaly a political move to finance the development of JSM SL as a small offset to better the chances for some other programm. That said it would be the only option in europe with MdCN
 
Last edited:
kqcke for you said:
I disagree with him as given the trajectory its mutch more possible. While probaly Not the +555km something among the line of 300-400km with a "high-high-low" flight path should be achievable.

Edit: I do believe this is probaly a political move to finance the development of JSM SL as a small offset to better the chances for some other programm. That said it would be the only option in europe with MdCN
Click to expand...
NSM is developped for sub lauch ?
 
BonPlan2 said:
NSM is developped for sub lauch ?
Click to expand...

It's called NSM-SL as a concept, and has been loitering around for an age, apparently Norway and Germany will/might fund as a weapon to arm 212CD subs.

But....its not actually NSM.....NSM doesn't fit into a 21 inch torpedo tube, it is in fact a derivative of the JSM. The alterations to JSM to make it fit into an F-35 bay also made it capable of fitting in a 21 inch TT.

Any 'NSM-VL' that was eventually developed to fire from Mk.41 VLS would also be a JSM variant....due to size.

NSM-HL, for launch from helicopters, is actually NSM though...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom