via the Grey Lynx.com
Some twenty-seven Lynx from No. 815 Squadron ‘went south’ where they operated in the ASW, ASV, VERTical-REPlenishment (VERTREP) and Special Operations insertion role. Many of the Lynx were hastily fitted with Sea Skua missiles, even though the missiles had not completed their full acceptance trials within the Fleet Air Arm (FAA). It was not only the Sea Skua’s use which was hasty, many of the HAS Mk 2s heading south with the Task Force were not uniformly equipped - not all had Sea Skua, while Electronic-Counter Measures (ECM), thermal imagers and MAD were only carried by a handful of aircraft. Many Lynx were fitted with door-mounted GPMGs for Close-Air-Support (CAS) operations and, though unofficial, the installation proved popular with crews.Impressive...and a war record I was unaware of.
One of the most celebrated actions involved two Lynx from HMS Brilliant, which attacked the Argentine submarine Santa Fe on the 25th April 1982, during Operation Corporate. One launched a Mk 46 torpedo, expecting the vessel to submerge, which it didn’t. The sub was then unable lo submerge due to the circling torpedo beneath it; the Lynx attacked with their 7.62mm machine-guns eventually putting the submarine out of action.Further action on the night of the 3rd May 1982 saw HMS Coventry’s Lynx ripple fire two Sea Skuas at the enemy patrol boat, Alferez Sorbal. Two direct hits were scored from a range of 13km. In the confusion of the attack the vessel was struck again by a further two Sea Skuas from a Lynx attached to HMS Glasgow. On May 23rd the Argentine supply ship Rio Caracana received two direct hits courtesy of a Lynx from HMS Antelope. The Sea Skua was gaining itself an impressive reputation, leaving a succession of enemy vessels burning and sinking following Lynx attacks. By the end of the Falklands Conflict Lynx HAS Mk 2s of the RN had an impressive combat record, with one example even having a lucky escape when attacked by a pair of Argentine Daggers. Three Lynx were lost when the ships Ardent, Atlantic Conveyer and Coventry were sunk. A further example lost its nose when an unexploded bomb bounced off the side of HMS Broadsword - however no Lynx were shot down or lost in flying accidents despite the atrocious weather conditions encountered in the region.
If you think about it, the one hole in US naval aviation is the lack of thought given to the armed helo in the attack mission.
Correction.
The anti-ship mission.
That's extremely unfortunate and extremely hard to understand. The S-3 once had this mission set and with its retirement I assume that its been passed to F-18's. That makes sense if you can successfully keep all ships at 150 or more miles away from your task force but that's an impossibility in any area in which we might operate in the future. The straits of Hormuz are crowded and the same can be said of shipping lanes in the Indian, Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
A properly armed MH-60 should be as successful in this role as the British Lynx's were. We have comparable weapons...the Hell Fire acting as a Sea Skua surrogate. And the Harpoon acting as an Exocet clone.
We have the capability but not the will. Time to get it done.
The Lynx/Sea Skua combo were also used to great effect against several Iraqi navy vessels in the Gulf War. A very effective combination in littoral regions against minor vessels as you said.
ReplyDeleteIIRC, MH-60S can carry Hellfire. Not sure about MH-60R.
ReplyDeletedon't make me lie. i'm not at all sure but i thought that they both were equipped to fire them.
ReplyDeleteas a side note, i hope everyone reads about the Brits disabling ships with machine gun fire alone. pretty damn impressive. its a matter of making stuff work...not necessarily having perfect gear.
ReplyDeleteA well directed burst of 50cal in the direction of a sub's rudder, diving planes or soft spots around the tower should do the trick. Wouldn't want to get too close to a ship with any kind of responsive capability!
DeleteHellfire comes sas standard fit on all MH-60Rs. The new AGM-11R will reach out and touch multiple target types at 15km.
ReplyDeleteHello Solomon,
ReplyDeletethat article left out one small detail,a Westland Wasp* helicopter hit the fin/sail/conning tower (as you prefer) of the submarine with an anti-tank missile while she was on the surface.
I have a vague recollection of reading that a member of the Wasp's crew was an old friend of a member of the submarine's crews.
But that could just as well be me getting confused.
GrandLogistics.
*The Wasp was the British equivalent to the unmanned American Drone Anti Submarine Helicopter (D.A.S.H.).
I thought the USN had Penguin for its SeaHawks which was purchased after GW1 because of USN/RN joint missions against Iraqi PB in the upper Gulf.
ReplyDeleteThe odd thing is we haven't acquired a missile for Merlin even though our Italian friends have.
The MH-60R can carry 8 Hellfire's, an M240 or 50cal on the right side pintle, etc. I believe the Penguin is being phased out. While it's useful for the Seahawk's to do anti surface work the primary mission is still asw and the USN has a lot of assets for anti surface.
ReplyDeleteIt's a $70 million dollar asset. The MH-60S is about 1/3rd the price and personally I'd rather see these do anti surface, the MQ-8B, or another aircraft like the AH-6.
The reason the RN used helicopters for anti surface at South Georgia is because there weren't any carriers in range. Great job but for anti surface you're first choice is fixed wing air and SSN's.
If the USN needed to do something similar they certainly can but considering the last time we had to deal with surface targets, Operation Praying Mantis,it's not a major requirement. That said the only system LCS has that can deal with surface threats outside threat range to the ship is the MH-60R/S and MQ-8B. It's worth pointing out since LCS is supposed to do anti surface and currently the proposed missile has a range of 3.5 miles which together with the 57mm is a ridiculously set of short ranged systems. The original NLOS had a range of 25 miles and that itself was too short.
What about JSM or JSOW-ER with a booster? That should give it plenty of 100+nm punch (moving, stationary, or armored targets).
ReplyDeleteI just checked and the GP warhead on the ZUNI is 50 lbs. That is 2.5 times the explosive power of the Hellfire at a fraction of the cost.
DeleteThat should rip into all but the largest surface craft the LCS could reasonable expect to encounter. With a hard-to-detect FireScout guiding it in, you could easily aim for sensitive areas like the bridge, engine room, armory, etc.
Spud it's not clear if you are advocating LCS firing rockets? It's a bad idea. If the ship is going to engage surface targets you ideally want to engage from outside the threat range of the target or at least not be well within threat range.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore you don't want to only rely on laser guided weapons at sea given smoke, fog, etc. The 2.75 inch rocket is already laser guided and is longer ranged than the 5 inch and weighs less 1/5th. Better to just fire them from the MQ-8B or other aircraft.
In any case we have a wide range of systems for aircraft to use against surface targets. It's often forgotten that our Standard anti air missile is dual purpose and can also be used against ships so our surface combatants have various systems as well (Harpoon, Standard, 5 inch gun, helo's, etc).
The problem with LCS is it's only long range system are it's helicopters. The proposed missile system has a range of 3.5 miles which is actually less than the range of the 57mm gun. Many people were complaining the original 25 mile NLOS was too short ranged.
The LCS surface warfare module is in fact a total joke that meshes perfectly with the asw module which at this point does not add any capability and that's according to the last USN report. The ship has extremely limited anti air systems. There are also problems with the mine warfare module leaving aside the notion that a $500+ million mine hunter is beyond ridiculous. LCS is a ridiculous platform whose only virtue is carrying around two helicopters at 40+ knots. It's not remotely worth the added cost nor the loss in capability across the spectrum.
For the same price as 1 LCS (including the extra cost for the module) the USN could have bought an actual general purpose frigate, a new patrol boat to replace the Cyclone's which aren't going to be replaced, and a new mine hunter.
It's also worth noting that the original plan to swap out modules regularly is out and far less modules are to be built so in essence most LCS will be single purpose. The entire program is a total joke.
When I spoke of the LCS using Zunis, I was talking about launching them from a Firescout, not from the ship itself.
ReplyDeleteFor ship-based long-range punch, I would go with JSM or JSOW-ER.
JSOW-ER can be ship launched? how? JSM is air launched too....
ReplyDeleteSure it would be wonderful to mount a 1,000lb anti surface missile on LCS. The problem is that the USN saw LCS as having to deal with small boats not enemy ships so the space reserved is quite small. The module space actually takes either the missiles or the 30mm MK46. It's about the same size as the turret on the EFV.
ReplyDeleteMoreover, the space is over the hanger so it's not going to be expanded downward and while in theory it could be increased in height it probably would both badly effect the ships signature and be subject to corrosion from the exhaust stack which it sits directly behind.
Note the Navy's second choice of missile has a range of 3.5 miles. It's so far beyond ridiculous it's just stunning. It's also laser guided meaning it can be defeated by advanced countermeasures such as smoke. Smoke being a possible weapon of man for over a million years.
There's no provision for fitting anything like Harpoon much less any MK41 cells. How they didn't imagine that they might want to reserve space for at least 8 cells really defies belief.
Right now there is no effective missile I'm aware of that can fit in that little space except maybe the Spike NLOS which has a range of 16 miles and weighs about 150lbs. Whether the USN looked at it and whether it could fit I've no idea.
There is almost no naval patrol or missile boat over 300 tons that doesn't have LCS seriously out ranged. Hell a small boat with an AT-14 or similar ATGW has a range advantage. The helicopters can't always fly and when they can't or are deployed on the wrong threat axis the only thing LCS will be good at is running away.
Consider a ship 1/3rd the size of LCS, Saar V, manages to carry a helicopter, two sonars, harpoon, torpedoes, a 76mm gun, and 64 SAM's.
Nations around the world build 3,000 to 4,000 ton frigates that manage to do asw, anti surface, escort, surface bombardment, and either point or limited area anti air on the same hull for less cost than LCS and offering far more capability other than the high speed enjoyed by LCS.
The entire notion of designing a frigate whose primary purpose is offensive operations against small boats is irrational. Either use a general purpose ship like a frigate, aircraft, or a 500 or so ton patrol/missile boat.
The irony of course is that LCS was derived from the USN Streetfighter program which was a 500 ton fast missile boat. The USN in it's infinite wisdom and desire to have a proper ship for ticket punching simply increased the size by a factor of six.
LCS: It can't escort itself very well, much less another ship, from either aircraft or submarines and can sink small boats as long as they get within 3.5 miles or the helicopter(s) is available.
They can call it LCS all day but it's still a very fast extremely weakly armed and equipped frigate. Moreover, it's range is fairly short at it's economical cruising speed of 18 knots. While it's supposed to have an endurance of 21 days exactly how many hours can it operate at 45 knots? What percentage of the time will the crew actually get to train at high speed?
The JSM/NSM can also be configured for ship launching (see pic).
ReplyDeletehttp://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/ORD_NSM_Kongsberg_Test_Launch_Coastal_lg.jpg
Also notice that what is required is quite small and could be stored on a motorized cart that can be brought up to the flight deck as needed.
Yes, the meager missile range on the LCS is pathetic. They should have accelerated the JAGM development so they could at least hit targets over the horizon.
On the ship-launched JSOW, I saw an adapter last year that was a rocket booster that wrapped around a standard bomb and attached using the standard lugs (as opposed to a rear mounted rocket booster). Sorry, I was letting my inner armchair-general leak out. IMHO, The NSM is the best long range option with JAGM filling in the medium range stuff.
the JSM is quite different from the NSM.
ReplyDeleteyou're playing games with nomenclature.
JSM is just a tweaked NSM for the JSF in USAF, USMC, USN, and NAAF service ;)
ReplyDelete