Submarine-Launched Ship-To-Air Missiles

[Dilandu]

The Russian RBUs throw further, of course, but also throw a much lighter overall load. Even if their charge weight is about the same as the LWTs.

They also throw a lot more projectiles and could be reloaded much faster. Granted, they aren't very useful against modern submarines, but against torpedoes they provide much more robust defense than anti-torpedoes.

 

[NMaude]

I think the US tubes throw the torpedoes about as far as the heavyweight depth charge throwers.

The Russian RBUs throw further, of course, but also throw a much lighter overall load. Even if their charge weight is about the same as the LWTs.

It makes one wonder why in the Cold War the US didn't develop a super-VLA which used a Mk-48 ADCAP as its' payload.

 

[Grey Havoc]

It makes one wonder why in the Cold War the US didn't develop a super-VLA which used a Mk-48 ADCAP as its' payload.

I suspect that has a lot to do with the MK 41 VLS program's, ah, complicated history. Not to mention certain ill-advised reorganisations within the USN during the 1970s, e.g. NAVORD being merged with NAVSHIPS to create NAVSEA.

 

[A Tentative Fleet Plan]

I wouldn't be surprised if the combination of a Mk 48 plus a large enough rocket motor to get it out to the second or third convergence zone would be too long for the Mk 41 VLS, even if the Mk 48 can fit in terms of diameter.

 

[Dilandu]

It makes one wonder why in the Cold War the US didn't develop a super-VLA which used a Mk-48 ADCAP as its' payload.

Essentially it was the UGM-89 "Perseus"; a sub-launched rocket, carrying heavyweight torpedo. While the idea was solid, the project fell viction to Rickover's desire to get a new nuclear submarine; from the straightforward super-SUBROC, "Perseus" turned into a whole bunch of unrelated concepts, and eventually got cancelled, when Congress choose the Zumwalt's ideas over Rickover's.

 

[timmymagic]

European, Japanese, Korean, Canadian and Australian warships are 100% reliant on helicopters to engage submarines. Those lightweight torpedo launchers at the hangars are no credible anti-sub weapons. They're rather interesting for potential torpedo hard kill defence.

Kind of ignoring the European MILAS, South Korean K-ASROC and Japanese Type 07 aren't you? Both have longer range than VL-ASROC and a better payload...

 

[Scott Kenny]

It makes one wonder why in the Cold War the US didn't develop a super-VLA which used a Mk-48 ADCAP as its' payload.

Aside from UGM-89 Perseus, because a Mk48 weighs in at 3500lbs all by itself. And is 21ft long. Add probably 500lbs of parachute, and the whole package is just too big to fit into a Mk41 cell.

 

[DWG]

Kind of ignoring the European MILAS, South Korean K-ASROC and Japanese Type 07 aren't you? Both have longer range than VL-ASROC and a better payload...

Fair point, though MILAS isn't exactly widely deployed.

 

[NMaude]

Aside from UGM-89 Perseus, because a Mk48 weighs in at 3500lbs all by itself. And is 21ft long. Add probably 500lbs of parachute, and the whole package is just too big to fit into a Mk41 cell.

Such a hypothetical super-VLA would no doubt have had its own dedicated launcher just like the RGM-84 Harpoon.

 

[xena]

Fair point, though MILAS isn't exactly widely deployed.

Right, but nevertheless it was/is deployed.

 

[timmymagic]

Right, but nevertheless it was/is deployed.

Should be noted that UK MoD has an RFI that has just closed for a Mk.41 VL rocket launched system with Stingray as the 'effector'. They're looking for more range than existing systems can deliver....

 

[publiusr]

The larger aquatic drones might be the submariner’s loyal wingman, drawing ASW assets off-sides like Ozawa did Halsey.

The first drone is a sonar wild weasel—the second remains quiet and launches anti-aircraft weapons itself.

Then the boomer threads the needle between the other two drones that are intentionally noisy as hell.

Last I heard, listening-device/bugs don’t work so well in Metallica concerts.

Give every biologic a headache so they go to splashing around to get away.

A sub with a couple/three UUVs likely costs less than a carrier group.

 

[shin_getter]

Why even expose the expensive, man carrying bits to the front in any case? I can see the nukes just doing recharging duty with a fleet of UUVs. Without needing a pressure hull and propulsion being standard Li-ion derived stuff, lots of these can be not much more expensive than a standard heavy torpedo.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Why even expose the expensive, man carrying bits to the front in any case? I can see the nukes just doing recharging duty with a fleet of UUVs. Without needing a pressure hull and propulsion being standard Li-ion derived stuff, lots of these can be not much more expensive than a standard heavy torpedo.

Depends on what you want them to do.

If you just want a decoy, then something the size of a torpedo is 100% viable. Crud the US Mk70 MOSS was only 10" diameter!