- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,556
- Reaction score
- 7,175
Seeing Gibbon passed long ago who will write our “Decline and Fall”Even when we had six carriers deployed to Desert Storm we still had carriers in the Pacific.
Seeing Gibbon passed long ago who will write our “Decline and Fall”Even when we had six carriers deployed to Desert Storm we still had carriers in the Pacific.
Probably someone with a surname of Chin.Seeing Gibbon passed long ago who will write our “Decline and Fall”
To be almost immediately followed by someone writing the story of the decline of China with a last name Patel.Probably someone with a surname of Chin.
Navy seeks industry feedback on new maritime strike weapon for 'coalition' - Breaking Defense
The new weapon, dubbed CAMS, would be used by numerous other countries and cost $1.5 million per all-up-round.breakingdefense.com
I thought NSM was the lower-end missile?
What happened with that? Too expensive? Too hard to scale production? Too sensitive to widely export?
Things are rather chaotic in the Biden Administration and the Pentagon at the moment.
And LRASM is rather lacklusture, IMHO.
Not to mention that Tactical Tomahawk, aka Block IV, still has reliability, not to mention capability, issues. And LRASM is rather lacklusture, IMHO.
Not supersonic for one thing. Pretty much a must have for any new shipkiller missile that wants to remain viable beyond the short term (and maybe not even that much margin).
You don't gain a whole lot by making an AShM supersonic. And frankly you lose a hell of a lot of range in the process, which usually puts the launcher into the target's engagement envelope.Not supersonic for one thing. Pretty much a must have for any new shipkiller missile that wants to remain viable beyond the short term (and maybe not even that much margin).
More like an active war where weapons are being tested in realtime is messing with established practices.Things are rather chaotic in the Biden Administration and the Pentagon at the moment.
I think that's unlikely, since they even added a stealth chine to the nose of the newest Tomahawks. There's no reason to add that unless the chine reduces detection range from "crossing the radar horizon" to something notably less than that.I think it likely that LRASM is detected as soon as it crosses the radar horizon. Radar energy increases to the forth power with range. If LRASM was hard to detect at the radar horizon, it would not bother with a radar altimeter or sea skimming at all.
Yes. I'd be willing to sacrifice 1000nmi of range to have a stealthy approach for 500nmi and then supersonic sprint for the last ~30-50km.That said, if you compare YJ-18 to Tomahawk, they have similar launch weights but one has three times the range and a satellite link. There are clearly downsides to the terminal solid rocket mode; it is not the best of all worlds. TINSTAAFL
Supersonic comes with range and weight limitations. I’ll note that the PLAN does not have a fully supersonic missile either, just the YJ-18 with supersonic terminal mode. For the rest of its flight it’s a shitty tomahawk. There are large bomber sized weapons that are purely supersonic, but few with more range and none light enough for tactical aircraft. YJ-12 is ok if you want the same range at high altitude restricted to H-6 as a launch platform. There are hypersonic options too, but that limits the warload of an H-6 even more.
I think that's unlikely, since they even added a stealth chine to the nose of the newest Tomahawks. There's no reason to add that unless the chine reduces detection range from "crossing the radar horizon" to something notably less than that.
The overall LRASM shape is largely that of the TACIT BLUE/alien school bus, so it's stealthy versus a lot of angles and not just head-on. So they're hard to detect from above (so much for AEW planes or helos giving warning), and they have a much sharper nose than TACIT BLUE for even better head-on stealth.
Yes. I'd be willing to sacrifice 1000nmi of range to have a stealthy approach for 500nmi and then supersonic sprint for the last ~30-50km.
There are ship-launched versions of YJ-12 in service as well, replacing the Moskits on the Sovremennys and YJ-83s on the sole Type 051B. I expect similar work will be carried out over the next decade replacing the YJ-83s of the Type 052s, 052Bs, and 051Cs, and possibly the YJ-62s of the 052Cs.
The Chinese are pretty much treating it as a one-to-one replacement for YJ-83, if it fits aboard the Type 051B, then it will fit aboard all of the 051Cs, 052s, 052Bs and 052Cs.Fair enough, there are five specialized destroyers with oversized launch tubes. I do not expect YJ-12 to be installed anywhere else though.
The Chinese are pretty much treating it as a one-to-one replacement for YJ-83, if it fits aboard the Type 051B, then it will fit aboard all of the 051Cs, 052s, 052Bs and 052Cs.
All of the later destroyers have larger displacements than the Type 051B, if the latter can accommodate sixteen YJ-12s, then I would expect the later destroyer classes to be capable of as well.I cannot find launch weights for either missile but surely the YJ-12 is significantly heavier and produces a lot more topside weight? They have similar ranges and warhead mass, but the supersonic missile must burn more fuel.
33 years, at the end of its lifespan, not worth keeping it in service.USN Decommissions Cowpens in Continuing End of Ticonderoga Class
USS Cowpens, which was instrumental in the fight against terrorism following the 9/11 attacks and the war in Iraq as well as being credited with the...maritime-executive.com
On the other hand retiring her and the rest of the Ticos without a proper replacement is not a good idea.
The LRASM has pretty much the same shape as the TACIT BLUE, which was intended to operate inside the A2AD zone of the soviet era SAM systems to provide radar/GMTI data. And be undetectable while doing so.Sure there is: airborne radar. Delaying detection always has value. I just do not think anything is going to delay detection at 20 nm/ 35 km.
Fast yes, but detectable from space. Let alone the radar horizon to a target at 100kft. Which despite the speed of the incoming, means a long time to respond to the incoming. "This missile closes the range at 3km per second!" "That's great, because it gets detected at over 1000km, 5 minutes before it hits!"IMO the best solution will eventually be scramjet all the way to the target. That is fast and fuel efficient.
The LRASM has pretty much the same shape as the TACIT BLUE, which was intended to operate inside the A2AD zone of the soviet era SAM systems to provide radar/GMTI data. And be undetectable while doing so.
Therefore I doubt that any airborne radar will track an LRASM unless it's very close to the plane.
Fast yes, but detectable from space. Let alone the radar horizon to a target at 100kft. Which despite the speed of the incoming, means a long time to respond to the incoming. "This missile closes the range at 3km per second!" "That's great, because it gets detected at over 1000km, 5 minutes before it hits!"
I suspect that data would be classified pretty heavily.I would not think anything is invisible to a CB modern ship board AESA radar to the horizon, but I do not have the data.
I'm assuming that the strategic DSP etc satellites can see a ~5000lb solid rocket light off. And once up to speed, the friction heat alone would be enough to be detectable from ludicrous distances. Probably even from 36,000km up, though IIRC the strategic monitoring satellites aren't anywhere near that high.I do not see why missiles like HACM would need to have a large RCS. Using X-51 as a model, it seems like the chine and tiny control surfaces would make for a very small reflection. The air intake is very prominent, but presumably a weapon would do something to alter the shape or materials to attenuate the reflection. This doesn’t need to be truly stealthy; just delay detection until maybe 100 mi / 150 km. At that point, there’s probably only a single engagement cycle possible by long range high altitude SAM.
The issue with orbital observation of scramjets is noted, though currently no one is known to have such a capability. The U.S. is orbiting its first increment of tracking satellites in the next year.
I suspect that data would be classified pretty heavily.
But I'd certainly make it my goal for a stealthy cruise missile to be undetectable at the radar horizon and ideally something less than 30 seconds from impact, ~10km.
I'm assuming that the strategic DSP etc satellites can see a ~5000lb solid rocket light off. And once up to speed, the friction heat alone would be enough to be detectable from ludicrous distances. Probably even from 36,000km up, though IIRC the strategic monitoring satellites aren't anywhere near that high.
September 4, 2024
The U.S. Department of Defense will launch military repair hubs in the Indo-Pacific countries of Japan, South Korea, Australia, Singapore and the Philippines, sources told Nikkei Asia, as it envisions a global network of repair hubs for key warfighting platforms.
The Pentagon's new Regional Sustainment Framework (RSF) envisions utilizing existing industrial capabilities of its allies and partners so that it can conduct maintenance, repairs and overhauls of its ships, planes and vehicles closer to their area of operation instead of bringing them back to the continental U.S.
The plan is to launch pilot programs in five Indo-Pacific countries this year, then expand it to NATO partners in the European Command's area in 2025 and to Latin American partners under the Southern Command in 2026.
It's about how much time the other guy has to react. If you're twice as fast but can be seen from four times the distance the defender will have twice the time to react.Not supersonic for one thing. Pretty much a must have for any new shipkiller missile that wants to remain viable beyond the short term (and maybe not even that much margin).
There is nothing left to protect with tariffs as far as Canadian shipbuilding. The Canadian merchant marine has been fairly well recapitalized in recent years with foreign built ships - Canada thankfully doesn’t suffer from the stupidity of the America’s disastrous Jones Act. As far as productivity, just look at the costs and glacial pace of the two German designed replenishment ships being built in Canada. Canada would be better off concentrating on natural resources than attempting to protect an atrophied, irrelevant and incompetent industrial sector.Canadian Shipbuilders Calls for 100 Percent Tariff on Chinese-Built Ships
The Canadian Marine Industries and Shipbuilding Association (CMISA) this week issued a call for the Canadian government to impose a 100 percent tarif...maritime-executive.com
It's about how much time the other guy has to react. If you're twice as fast but can be seen from four times the distance the defender will have twice the time to react.