Surface Ships Need More Offensive Punch, Outlook

NilsD

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Maybe its time to develop a better arm launcher that can be reloaded at sea like in the old days. Or design a VLS that can be reloaded at sea. It seems odd that you can strikedown missiles through a small hatch like in the case of Mk-26 but not a VLS cell that looks about equal size.
 

MihoshiK

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 9, 2007
Messages
245
Reaction score
199
Maybe its time to develop a better arm launcher that can be reloaded at sea like in the old days. Or design a VLS that can be reloaded at sea. It seems odd that you can strikedown missiles through a small hatch like in the case of Mk-26 but not a VLS cell that looks about equal size.
That's because in the old launchers (which were both maintenance and space-intensive), the missile was the round, and the launcher was the storage, whereas in a VLS system, the canister is the round AND the storage.

In the old launchers the provisions for guiding a round on a certain path were all build-in: The missile was allways moved under positive control.
In a VLS system, there's no systems for moving a round around at all. Which is why you need external equipment to reload VLS cells. If you give VLS cells the equipment for positive movement control over the rounds (the cells), you give up on two of the major advantages of a VLS system: Reduced maintenance, and reduced space, because you're adding stuff back in which was taken out when transferring to VLS.
 

Josh_TN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,201
Reaction score
802
How are VLS cells loaded in port? Is it a simple crane? I assume the problem is one of stability and seastate? I would have thought any seastate that allowed for UNREP should allow for some a transfer of maanutions by crane, but it would probably require a very large crane to be stable enough and possible some kind of guide/alignment mechanism on the target to eliminate sway. The USN does employ a half dozen heavy lift crane ships; it should be possible to use them in this role with a little modification I would think.



Of course the question I would have is whether the USN has enough missile inventory such that reloading is even a serious concern to begin with. Anecdotally I've heard that a lot of ships go out half empty; I don't know for a fact that it is true and if it is, this many simply be to reduce wear and tear deployment time on the ordnance rather than a dearth of ammunition, but its a question worth asking.
 

Firefinder

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
218
Reaction score
332
How are VLS cells loaded in port? Is it a simple crane? I assume the problem is one of stability and seastate? I would have thought any seastate that allowed for UNREP should allow for some a transfer of maanutions by crane, but it would probably require a very large crane to be stable enough and possible some kind of guide/alignment mechanism on the target to eliminate sway. The USN does employ a half dozen heavy lift crane ships; it should be possible to use them in this role with a little modification I would think.



Of course the question I would have is whether the USN has enough missile inventory such that reloading is even a serious concern to begin with. Anecdotally I've heard that a lot of ships go out half empty; I don't know for a fact that it is true and if it is, this many simply be to reduce wear and tear deployment time on the ordnance rather than a dearth of ammunition, but its a question worth asking.
It how you have to load up the VLS is the problem.

Most of the new missiles are 20 foot long, with the Hypersconics lookign at being 30 foot long.


Which means you need to have a crane able to go up about... Call it 50 foot tall.

Since you need to load the missile vertical, in any seastate that is not lable as glass, at little movement on the ship will get the missile swinging back and forth dangerously even with tie downs on the bottom.

Then you run into the issue of what to do with the missile casing that holds the missile to launch. With the old arm launchers it was easy enough to collapse them down by hand and send the them back on the other crane since the missile came in 10 foot sections. The Missile and the booster if needed. With vls you have these 20 foot long tubs. Which you have to remove before loading in the missile.

The Image beloe shows how the Navy tried to unrep VLS, you can see how in a slighter heavier seastate that be dangerous. And You can unrep in far worse. The navy has tryed to use a robot arm deal that grabs the missile case for positive control but it had a habit of damaging the thing by mistake in new and unique ways. And the Brits did have a set up that apperantly worked well up to Sea State 4 ircc, but they still ran into issue of waht do you do with the empty casings. They are to big to move by hand while being needed to make the system work.

So in the ended the navy decide to just give up on it in the mid-90s. Its why the Burke has 90 missile cells and not 96 like her newer sisters. The navy stopped giving out the crane module which was to be use to unrep it which took up 3 missile spots per VLS farm, instead taking it back to have 6 extra missiles.

They do have an idea to do it in coves and shelter waters seeming to how you used to Coal a ship at the turn of the last century which they might be testing.
 

Attachments

  • 14.jpg
    14.jpg
    65.5 KB · Views: 8
  • mk-41-vls-pc008-053.jpg
    mk-41-vls-pc008-053.jpg
    92.3 KB · Views: 8
  • Mk-41-VLS-035.jpg
    Mk-41-VLS-035.jpg
    253.3 KB · Views: 8

uk 75

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
3,823
Reaction score
2,868
We have no experience of combat between modern surface ships of any size.
The damage done to ships in the Falklands and in incident involving damage to individual US ships suggests that their life in combat would be short.
For ecample a Tico class cruiser providing air defence for a task group was likely to be destroyed by Soviet missiles or torpedos before it had expended its VLS tubes.
A clash with the PLAN is likely to be similarly bloody.
 

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
677
Reaction score
1,383
The Navy issued the first contracts to companies that will compete for about $8 billion worth of military construction projects at shipyards in Hawaii and Washington state.

They are slated to be completed by November 2029.
 

Similar threads

Top