Surface Ships Need More Offensive Punch, Outlook

Firefinder

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
145
Reaction score
199
Raw numbers, I'm afraid. The current fleet is literally falling apart because they are not having the RnR and refit time they need. You'll need something along the lines of a 400+ fleet at the minimum for the commitments... but Congress isn't going to be giving the money.
Then you have the issue of MANNING all those ships

And the Navy is understrength manning wise as is.

People are just not finding reasons to basically sell their souls to the military for quarter of the price of what they can get on the outside.

Thats before you get into the series of Toxic leadership and terrible working conditions cause by Congress jerking around the Navy chain to do shit that honestly not needed in some areas. Or should be cover by other countries but seen they been covered by the US for so long... They just dont see the need to.
 

GruntFox

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
59
Reaction score
33
Raw numbers, I'm afraid. The current fleet is literally falling apart because they are not having the RnR and refit time they need. You'll need something along the lines of a 400+ fleet at the minimum for the commitments... but Congress isn't going to be giving the money.
Then you have the issue of MANNING all those ships

And the Navy is understrength manning wise as is.

People are just not finding reasons to basically sell their souls to the military for quarter of the price of what they can get on the outside.

Thats before you get into the series of Toxic leadership and terrible working conditions cause by Congress jerking around the Navy chain to do shit that honestly not needed in some areas. Or should be cover by other countries but seen they been covered by the US for so long... They just dont see the need to.
The biggest problem is that wages have been stagnant across the board for the military, and thus they have a poor retention rate... and since we're getting back to the 'good old days' of how Congress treats the military (i.e. poorly) with plenty of enabling by various groups...

... have fun keeping the world from going back to having a major world war every generation (or less) if you can't ensure that the military can actually function (and thus keep the price tag of trade at literally bargain bin/practically free prices)...

... yeah, the stuff you discover when you do research for a future-history setting. People who don't understand things think that nukes prevent war, the actual reality is less 'nukes' and more 'trade'...
 

uk 75

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
3,290
Reaction score
2,105
As the Falklands showed graphically the major naval weapon is the nuclear submarine.
China has a long way to go before it can challenge the US Navy in this respect.
China's shiny new carriers and escorts would meet a grizzly fate like the Argentine Navy in 1982. Even the Japanese submarine force on its own could do a heck of a lot of damage.
 

GruntFox

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
59
Reaction score
33
As the Falklands showed graphically the major naval weapon is the nuclear submarine.
China has a long way to go before it can challenge the US Navy in this respect.
China's shiny new carriers and escorts would meet a grizzly fate like the Argentine Navy in 1982. Even the Japanese submarine force on its own could do a heck of a lot of damage.
Actually, the technological context has been shifting. It's been known for decades that blue-green wavelength lasers have minimal power loss in the water (and recently, certain UV wavelengths), meaning that once blue-green lasers get developed (IR is the poorest laser wavelength outside of microwaves and radio waves, so development into blue-green and UV lasers are going to be a priority once we got a handle on IR lasers), it's going to be problematic for submarines to actually get a torpedo in. Add the fun prospect of having a blue-green LIDAR sensor array that can also act as an anti-torpedo system... and submarines are going to have to rely on tube-launched missiles more than torpedoes to get a hit in.

At least with a missile, you can get it to hypersonic velocities which means they're effectively immune to anything not a UV pulse laser (due to the plasma sheath's properties, it's similar to how quartz is the perfect window to IR frequencies), torpedoes not so much.
 

Josh_TN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
955
Reaction score
589
High frequency lasers are still attenuated with increasing depth, they just have mild penetration where as the IR band basically has none. They likely will find some use in shallow water, where they have been used to map sea floors and detect mines, but it seem unlikely they would be effective at depths off a continental shelf. Lasers are also unlikely to ever be effective wide area sensors; they would probably be used as secondary localization/track refinement and target characterization (at depths where they were effective).
 

GruntFox

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
59
Reaction score
33
High frequency lasers are still attenuated with increasing depth, they just have mild penetration where as the IR band basically has none. They likely will find some use in shallow water, where they have been used to map sea floors and detect mines, but it seem unlikely they would be effective at depths off a continental shelf. Lasers are also unlikely to ever be effective wide area sensors; they would probably be used as secondary localization/track refinement and target characterization (at depths where they were effective).
Here's the thing, it doesn't have to be 'to the bottom of the sea', all it needs is to give a wide area (probably less than 10 km) to make it all but impossible for a submarine to use torpedoes for they'll be detected and backtracked. You'll need dozens upon dozens of torpedoes (a similar situation with PDPLs and missiles mind you) to even hope to penetrate a halfway viable BGL anti-torpedo network, especially since computerized FCS systems are getting frighteningly potent.

Add to the fact that sensor density is becoming 'yes' in battlefield conditions (to the point where we're knowing when people are going to the bathroom), things like electronic warfare (which Q-Radar is defeating the traditional methods of) and stealth (can't stealth every direction, some directions are simply going to have less stealth than others due to how stealth -as we know it- works) are going to be far less useful...

I wouldn't be surprised that SSNs will become simply not only a minimal requirement for oceanic warfare, but also simply another arrow in the quiver, so to speak.
 

uk 75

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
3,290
Reaction score
2,105
SSNs and large SSKs can also carry missiles in their tubes or added vls.
Their speed and immunity relative to surface ships remains.
I detect a continous attempt from some here to turn the posing PLAN into a serious threat.
 

Josh_TN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
955
Reaction score
589
Laser detection of torpedoes is probably far more practical than the parent sub; the torpedo will have to come close to the target and at some point run shallow enough to damage it. I still suspect a reliable hard kill defense against torpedoes will be problematic.
 

GruntFox

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
59
Reaction score
33
SSNs and large SSKs can also carry missiles in their tubes or added vls.
Their speed and immunity relative to surface ships remains.
I detect a continous attempt from some here to turn the posing PLAN into a serious threat.
However, SSKs won't have the capability to go as fast for long as SSNs, hence my comment on SSNs being the new 'minimum'. Also, I also stated that SSNs with missiles are still viable with hypersonic missiles (or at least implied as such). The PLAN isn't a serious threat... yet. China is currently in an extensive upgrade regimen right now, and that generally takes decades to complete with how green-water the PLAN was.
Laser detection of torpedoes is probably far more practical than the parent sub; the torpedo will have to come close to the target and at some point run shallow enough to damage it. I still suspect a reliable hard kill defense against torpedoes will be problematic.
With even the USN thinking of slapping a fission reactor into practically everything (the Zulmwalts being a prototype of sorts for a component of this new design philosophy that is coming out with its reworked electrical layout) that floats? I wouldn't be surprised that the anti-torpedo/submarine LIDAR and the various blue-green lasers will go further than you would believe.
 

Josh_TN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
955
Reaction score
589
The USN isn’t putting fission on any surface ship that isn’t a Ford; I’m not sure where you get that idea. They do however what a lot of growth margin in the power supply of their new ships, and a LIDAR would likely not be a big power draw. But you still need some kind of inexpensive anti torpedo weapon to complete the kill chain and it will probably have to self guide after launch, or else be some kind of barrage mortar system. I still think a *reliable* hard kill system is a ways off.
 

GruntFox

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
59
Reaction score
33
The USN isn’t putting fission on any surface ship that isn’t a Ford; I’m not sure where you get that idea. They do however what a lot of growth margin in the power supply of their new ships, and a LIDAR would likely not be a big power draw. But you still need some kind of inexpensive anti torpedo weapon to complete the kill chain and it will probably have to self guide after launch, or else be some kind of barrage mortar system. I still think a *reliable* hard kill system is a ways off.
Not when you actually get into the nitty-gritty of the future designs that aren't slap-dash. The USN has been thinking of expanding nuclear reactor deployment to cruisers and destroyers for a while now. Especially since the USN has been going all-in with railguns and lasers.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
228
Reaction score
222
The biggest problem is that wages have been stagnant across the board for the military, and thus they have a poor retention rate... and since we're getting back to the 'good old days' of how Congress treats the military (i.e. poorly) with plenty of enabling by various groups...

... have fun keeping the world from going back to having a major world war every generation (or less) if you can't ensure that the military can actually function (and thus keep the price tag of trade at literally bargain bin/practically free prices)...

... yeah, the stuff you discover when you do research for a future-history setting. People who don't understand things think that nukes prevent war, the actual reality is less 'nukes' and more 'trade'...
As one who's left the military in the last decade I can attest it isn't necessarily the pay, although if all of the other contributing factors suck, then it is the cherry on top. After a while constant deployments, overused, undermaintained equipment, lack of new hardware to replace old equipment, known persons with toxic behavior put into leadership roles for "diversity", senior leaders who get caught violating UCMJ who don't get punished, career fields with half the promotion rate of all line officers, the job was fun when you were single but sucks now that you're married and have kids, the cross career experience tour was better than your core job and flesh peddlers won't let you ever go back, the job is good or sucks based on who wins the next election, your boss sucks and hates you for keeping him out of jail b/c he's too lazy to learn the legal requirements of the position he holds, ass kissers and back stabbers get BTZ's while kick ass take care of your troops guys get in the zones, they gave you a bonus 4 years ago to stay in and now 4 years later they give you a bonus to get out, the boss sucks, so does their boss, oh BTW it's your turn to go back and spend 6 months in the sand box, is a 50% pay check really worth putting up with all this shit for another XX many years?

This isn't an all inclusive list, only things my friends or I saw, or complained about since we commissioned in the 2000-2004 time frame.

Oh, back to the pay issue, officer pay increased 19.7% from 2012 to 2021, same grade and time in grade. Since I left, my base salary in a completely different field only increased 18.3% in the same time frame, there are a ton of caveats to be had, but the pay raise piece looks to be in line with what's outside (the base salary is much bigger, but the benefits are different). In my case the operational experience tour career field was way better than my core career field, but I signed up to fly planes and kill bad guys which they wouldn't let me do that b/c I made the mistake of getting two engineering degrees, which they they didn't pay the tuition. Then when given the chance to pursue a free MBA from a top 3 ranked program they viewed my entrance to the program as a decision to not pursue a military career because it wasn't through the established PME track.

At the end of the day, was it the XX% jump in base pay, or the fact that everything that made the military attractive when you raised your hand and swore your oath, now sucks Y/YY many years into the journey. If it's the latter the former is icing on the cake, if it's the former you probably wouldn't have raised your hand in the first place.

All of this to say, once you decide that the military isn't for you, pay only determines which of your post military careers you select. In other words, if the oil job pays 50% more than the aerospace job (that pays 10-20% more than the military job) and has better benefits (the oil job, than both the military and aerospace) then choosing that option isn't being seduced so much as making a rational decision. Which doesn't even begin to introduce incentive pay, which is to say performance based bonuses, stock bonuses, etc. aren't different (they are, aerospace offered a 3% bonus, while oil offered 15%, starting, that increases by 5% every promotion, and stock, you get the idea...)
 
Last edited:

GruntFox

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
59
Reaction score
33
The biggest problem is that wages have been stagnant across the board for the military, and thus they have a poor retention rate... and since we're getting back to the 'good old days' of how Congress treats the military (i.e. poorly) with plenty of enabling by various groups...

... have fun keeping the world from going back to having a major world war every generation (or less) if you can't ensure that the military can actually function (and thus keep the price tag of trade at literally bargain bin/practically free prices)...

... yeah, the stuff you discover when you do research for a future-history setting. People who don't understand things think that nukes prevent war, the actual reality is less 'nukes' and more 'trade'...
As one who's left the military in the last decade I can attest it isn't necessarily the pay, although if all of the other contributing factors suck, then it is the cherry on top. After a while constant deployments, overused, undermaintained equipment, lack of new hardware to replace old equipment, known persons with toxic behavior put into leadership roles for "diversity", senior leaders who get caught violating UCMJ who don't get punished, career fields with half the promotion rate of all line officers, the job was fun when you were single but sucks now that you're married and have kids, the cross career experience tour was better than your core job and flesh peddlers won't let you ever go back, the job is good or sucks based on who wins the next election, your boss sucks and hates you for keeping him out of jail b/c he's too lazy to learn the legal requirements of the position he holds, ass kissers and back stabbers get BTZ's while kick ass take care of your troops guys get in the zones, they gave you a bonus 4 years ago to stay in and now 4 years later they give you a bonus to get out, the boss sucks, so does their boss, oh BTW it's your turn to go back and spend 6 months in the sand box, is a 50% pay check really worth putting up with all this shit for another XX many years?

This isn't an all inclusive list, only things my friends or I saw, or complained about since we commissioned in the 2000-2004 time frame.

Oh, back to the pay issue, officer pay increased 19.7% from 2012 to 2021, same grade and time in grade. Since I left, my base salary in a completely different field only increased 18.3% in the same time frame, there are a ton of caveats to be had, but the pay raise piece looks to be in line with what's outside (the base salary is much bigger, but the benefits are different). In my case the operational experience tour career field was way better than my core career field, but I signed up to fly planes and kill bad guys which they wouldn't let me do that b/c I made the mistake of getting two engineering degrees, which they they didn't pay the tuition. Then when given the chance to pursue a free MBA from a top 3 ranked program they viewed my entrance to the program as a decision to not pursue a military career because it wasn't through the established PME track.

At the end of the day, was it the XX% jump in base pay, or the fact that everything that made the military attractive when you raised your hand and swore your oath, now sucks Y/YY many years into the journey. If it's the latter the former is icing on the cake, if it's the former you probably wouldn't have raised your hand in the first place.

All of this to say, once you decide that the military isn't for you, pay only determines which of your post military careers you select. In other words, if the oil job pays 50% more than the aerospace job (that pays 10-20% more than the military job) and has better benefits (the oil job, than both the military and aerospace) then choosing that option isn't being seduced so much as making a rational decision. Which doesn't even begin to introduce incentive pay, which is to say performance based bonuses, stock bonuses, etc. aren't different (they are, aerospace offered a 3% bonus, while oil offered a 15%, starting, bonus that increases by 5% every promotion, and stock, you get the idea...)
Wow, this has a lot of pro-Trump/Far Right bylines inside in addition to actual good reasons.
 

shin_getter

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 1, 2019
Messages
395
Reaction score
383
In the world of reusable orbital rockets, the battle is between large ships and landbase anywhere on the planet.

Nevermind defense against hundreds of tons worth of hypersonics per salvo, Magazine depth of a fleet versus a land base? LOL.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
228
Reaction score
222
Wow, this has a lot of pro-Trump/Far Right bylines inside in addition to actual good reasons.
Please learn to differentiate between my experience (para 3) and the compilation of other CGO's of the similar time frame (para 1), I didn't vote for the orange idiot and resent the comparison. It is however sad commentary that the things taught in service academies and ROTC 1996-2004 and PME 2000-2012 about good officership/leadership is now viewed/imputed by some as far right Trumpism. Most of the frustrations expressed in para 1 by my piers was around the disconnect between what they were taught and failure to live up to that they observed/experienced. Nearly everyone of them served real combat mostly in Iraq, many as infantry officers. Don't smear them.
 

Firefinder

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
145
Reaction score
199
Oh, back to the pay issue, officer pay increased 19.7% from 2012 to 2021, same grade and time in grade. Since I left, my base salary in a completely different field only increased 18.3% in the same time frame, there are a ton of caveats to be had, but the pay raise piece looks to be in line with what's outside (the base salary is much bigger, but the benefits are different). In my case the operational experience tour career field was way better than my core career field, but I signed up to fly planes and kill bad guys which they wouldn't let me do that b/c I made the mistake of getting two engineering degrees, which they they didn't pay the tuition. Then when given the chance to pursue a free MBA from a top 3 ranked program they viewed my entrance to the program as a decision to not pursue a military career because it wasn't through the established PME track.
Meanwhile with the enlisted people who make up a solid 85 percent of the Navy, and 90 of the Army, and as such does that amount of work...

Pay increased about....

10% maybe? Only getting pay 150 bucks more now then when I made Specialist in 2013 with most of that being time in grade IRCC... Making rank is another issue, want college courses and perferable an Associates to make E6. Meanwhile you out in the field every month or somewhere else with no recieption to do them. Then even when you are back at the barracks by the time you get off work 13 hours after PT you are too tired to do college. Then you have to go the schools to make rank, which is fair, but getting into the schools are far too reliant on you unit not lossing you packet or MISSION FIRST bollocks not happening. By the time manage to do it I was too broke to do the PT test, ace the course work, but you cant be a GoOd NcO if you cant do PT. I have had more bad NCOs who got 300s then goods ones.

Throw in that they seem to be trying to make a useless gulf between officers and enlisted so communication is at a all time low with all the fun that causes. When I came in it wasn't uncommon to see the colonel making the rounds making sure everything going well, now I never see the rank. I remember my first colonel and sergeant Major i had ten years ago, I dont know the two I have now.

If what I hear from my friends in the Air Force and the Navy the issues can be summed up as the same.

Eyeah the military needs to do some soul searching if they want to actually get people back in.
 

GruntFox

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
59
Reaction score
33
In the world of reusable orbital rockets, the battle is between large ships and landbase anywhere on the planet.

Nevermind defense against hundreds of tons worth of hypersonics per salvo, Magazine depth of a fleet versus a land base? LOL.
Counter-argument: point defense lasers (especially UV pulse lasers) connected to a powerful gas turbine engine (which the Zulmwalts are basically prototyping) and deep fuel reserves or fission reactor. That and the distance problem (i.e. the faster a vessel is, the more distance it can cover and thus the harder it is to hit).
Oh, back to the pay issue, officer pay increased 19.7% from 2012 to 2021, same grade and time in grade. Since I left, my base salary in a completely different field only increased 18.3% in the same time frame, there are a ton of caveats to be had, but the pay raise piece looks to be in line with what's outside (the base salary is much bigger, but the benefits are different). In my case the operational experience tour career field was way better than my core career field, but I signed up to fly planes and kill bad guys which they wouldn't let me do that b/c I made the mistake of getting two engineering degrees, which they they didn't pay the tuition. Then when given the chance to pursue a free MBA from a top 3 ranked program they viewed my entrance to the program as a decision to not pursue a military career because it wasn't through the established PME track.
Meanwhile with the enlisted people who make up a solid 85 percent of the Navy, and 90 of the Army, and as such does that amount of work...

Pay increased about....

10% maybe? Only getting pay 150 bucks more now then when I made Specialist in 2013 with most of that being time in grade IRCC... Making rank is another issue, want college courses and perferable an Associates to make E6. Meanwhile you out in the field every month or somewhere else with no recieption to do them. Then even when you are back at the barracks by the time you get off work 13 hours after PT you are too tired to do college. Then you have to go the schools to make rank, which is fair, but getting into the schools are far too reliant on you unit not lossing you packet or MISSION FIRST bollocks not happening. By the time manage to do it I was too broke to do the PT test, ace the course work, but you cant be a GoOd NcO if you cant do PT. I have had more bad NCOs who got 300s then goods ones.

Throw in that they seem to be trying to make a useless gulf between officers and enlisted so communication is at a all time low with all the fun that causes. When I came in it wasn't uncommon to see the colonel making the rounds making sure everything going well, now I never see the rank. I remember my first colonel and sergeant Major i had ten years ago, I dont know the two I have now.

If what I hear from my friends in the Air Force and the Navy the issues can be summed up as the same.

Eyeah the military needs to do some soul searching if they want to actually get people back in.
The biggest problem has always been that the pay and benefits simply suck compared to private alternatives, thus people would treat the military as a job of last resort... which is pretty bad for everything.
 

mkellytx

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
228
Reaction score
222
Meanwhile with the enlisted people who make up a solid 85 percent of the Navy, and 90 of the Army, and as such does that amount of work...

Pay increased about....

10% maybe? <snip>

@Firefinder ran the numbers for the enlisted charts from 2012 and 2021, it's the same 19.7% base pay raise, now that doesn't cover allowances, COLA's and such, not to mention where you choose to keep your permanent residence, all of those can greatly vary the end paycheck.

Throw in that they seem to be trying to make a useless gulf between officers and enlisted so communication is at a all time low with all the fun that causes. When I came in it wasn't uncommon to see the colonel making the rounds making sure everything going well, now I never see the rank. I remember my first colonel and sergeant Major i had ten years ago, I dont know the two I have now.

If what I hear from my friends in the Air Force and the Navy the issues can be summed up as the same.

Eyeah the military needs to do some soul searching if they want to actually get people back in.
Interesting that you also key in on the behaviors of FGO's and SNCO's/E9's, granted my last "real" interaction with enlisted was 2009 when I went from aircrew to program office, but most of my fellow former CGO's keyed in on that as well for a reason why they left. Back in the day when I was a 2nd Lt. AF maintenance flight commander, my chief used to jokingly tell our flight they couldn't get married without his permission, they respected him so much that the airmen actually did ask the chief, the 2 seniors, and the Lt. if they were OK to get hitched. When I was a 2nd Lt., all of my leadership wing commander to my squadron commander/MOO where on the flight line every day to see the daily sortie generation. After that two years of paper pushing were enough to convince me to leave for greener pastures when I had the chance, based on your Army/Marine view, glad I made that choice...
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,061
Reaction score
2,411
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,061
Reaction score
2,411

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,937
Reaction score
5,502
I think they are in for something of a rude awaking there, especially with regards as to the new DDG(X).
 

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,937
Reaction score
5,502
Via the CDR Salamander blog:
 

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
414
Reaction score
823
Hanwha-Defense-details-KVLS-II-system-at-MADEX-2021.jpeg
An upgraded variant of the KVLS, the KVLS-II is being developed by Hanwha Defense itself. The KVLS-II keeps the original VLS and hot launch configuration, as well as hazard monitoring and damage control system.

A complete system will comprise a maximum of six modules of four missiles, for a 8×8 configuration for the KVLS. While less wide and large that the first version, the KVLS-II is more than 2 meters higher. The KVLS-II launcher empty weight was not disclosed.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,180
Reaction score
2,712
View attachment 658730
An upgraded variant of the KVLS, the KVLS-II is being developed by Hanwha Defense itself. The KVLS-II keeps the original VLS and hot launch configuration, as well as hazard monitoring and damage control system.

A complete system will comprise a maximum of six modules of four missiles, for a 8×8 configuration for the KVLS. While less wide and large that the first version, the KVLS-II is more than 2 meters higher. The KVLS-II launcher empty weight was not disclosed.
Thought the cells on this were much larger than the KVLS? :confused:
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,797
Reaction score
2,180
View attachment 658730
An upgraded variant of the KVLS, the KVLS-II is being developed by Hanwha Defense itself. The KVLS-II keeps the original VLS and hot launch configuration, as well as hazard monitoring and damage control system.

A complete system will comprise a maximum of six modules of four missiles, for a 8×8 configuration for the KVLS. While less wide and large that the first version, the KVLS-II is more than 2 meters higher. The KVLS-II launcher empty weight was not disclosed.
Thought the cells on this were much larger than the KVLS? :confused:

They are. The press release is really confusing but I think it's saying that the 4-cell KVLS-II has a smaller deck area than the 8-cell KVLS but is significantly deeper. That seems about right; KVLS-II cells were supposed to be about 1.8 times the cross sectional area of KVLS, so a block of 4 new big cells should be a bit smaller than 8 of the older ones.
 

Bhurki

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
241
Reaction score
224
View attachment 658730
An upgraded variant of the KVLS, the KVLS-II is being developed by Hanwha Defense itself. The KVLS-II keeps the original VLS and hot launch configuration, as well as hazard monitoring and damage control system.

A complete system will comprise a maximum of six modules of four missiles, for a 8×8 configuration for the KVLS. While less wide and large that the first version, the KVLS-II is more than 2 meters higher. The KVLS-II launcher empty weight was not disclosed.
Thought the cells on this were much larger than the KVLS? :confused:

They are. The press release is really confusing but I think it's saying that the 4-cell KVLS-II has a smaller deck area than the 8-cell KVLS but is significantly deeper. That seems about right; KVLS-II cells were supposed to be about 1.8 times the cross sectional area of KVLS, so a block of 4 new big cells should be a bit smaller than 8 of the older ones.
Specifications of the orginial KVLS cell? Max cell weight, dimensions etc.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,180
Reaction score
2,712
View attachment 658730
An upgraded variant of the KVLS, the KVLS-II is being developed by Hanwha Defense itself. The KVLS-II keeps the original VLS and hot launch configuration, as well as hazard monitoring and damage control system.

A complete system will comprise a maximum of six modules of four missiles, for a 8×8 configuration for the KVLS. While less wide and large that the first version, the KVLS-II is more than 2 meters higher. The KVLS-II launcher empty weight was not disclosed.
Thought the cells on this were much larger than the KVLS? :confused:

They are. The press release is really confusing but I think it's saying that the 4-cell KVLS-II has a smaller deck area than the 8-cell KVLS but is significantly deeper. That seems about right; KVLS-II cells were supposed to be about 1.8 times the cross sectional area of KVLS, so a block of 4 new big cells should be a bit smaller than 8 of the older ones.

Based on info I've come across over the years. The KVLS-II is from a poster named "Albatross" on MPNET back in the day. He seemed very knowledgeable of SK systems.


VLS Cell size.jpg
 

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,937
Reaction score
5,502

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,180
Reaction score
2,712

The cult of Transformation has still not been vanquished I see.
I've come to the conclusion the word, "transformation" has become a fig-leaf.
 

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
414
Reaction score
823

Similar threads

Top