Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System with M282 Warhead
SIDENOTE: If this works as advertised then the small boat problem is a thing of the past. One UH-1Y, a AH-1Z or an MH-60R could take out a swarm of 20 boats.
yeah this is gonna be a battlefield changer. anti-armor fires out of a system that's light weight and an attack helo can carry upwards of 40? instead of 16 kills per sortie you're getting more than twice that! this will change things. even better is the fact that light helos can carry it.
i can imagine a swarm of small boats being taken out by one helicopter.
don't get cocky treadhead....i got the brief. fighting heavy armor is like buying real estate. location, location, location.
besides an RPG penetrated an M1 and this has a bigger warhead. add to it the fact that i'll take a mobility kill on an MBT and be happy and you still have a great weapon system.
oh and did i mention that against MBT's i'll be launching in salvos???? yep. DRT. dead right there.
Now, imagine a LCS carrying several Firescouts armed with these APKWS and able to remain airborne for 6-8 hours.
Then - and if an engagement begins - the Firescouts can shuttle back to the LCS or another warship and conduct a brief "pitstop" taking on fuel and more APKWS for another extended patrol.
Finally - and taking a cue from the Libyan rebels last year, could ships have simple launchers installed with an existing designator or EO turret slaved to the launcher. Not a Phalanx or SEARAM but something even far simpler. Just a thought!
Not to get into too much detail, the RPG is a HEAT warhead, detonates outside the armor, and burns it's way in. The M282 is a blast-frag warhead with a delayed fuse. The RPG's detonation is what allows it to penetrate armor while the M282 has to rely on the structure and inertia of the rocket to get the warhead through the armor before it explodes. There is also the issue of the fact that the M114 (not a M113) had only 0.75" of aluminum armor where it got hit.
http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m114.html
That same location on the M1A2 is protected by 2"+ of RHA & composites in the skirt and RHA hull armor. While it might get noisy, an M1 would laugh at these things.
The M1's combat history is filled with its ability to shake off dozens of hits by RPGs, tank rounds, etc. That one that got through was an extreme fluke.
Still, as a target I think the M114 is probably a pretty reliable stand-in for Russian built BMP's. The BMP series is notorious for its poor protection, just youtube search for videos of the current fighting in Syria and there are dozens of videos of burned out BMP-1's and 2's that have fallen victim to rebel IED's and RPG's.
For the small boat swarm problem, isn't APKWS limitation the laser designation? The laser has to be directed on target until it strikes before you can redirect to the next target and fire. LCITS is what has me more excited since that promises optical targeting and true fire and forget.
IMHO, The LCS's current defense again SBS (Small Boat Swarm) attacks is quite pitiful. I have been proposing an upgun of the LCS using currently available systems: 1. Replace 50 cals with stabilized mk51 MAWS sporting the M230 30mm autocannon. The Mk51 can have a laser designator for the Hellfires. 2. Put two 35mm Millennium Guns next to the SeaRAM at the corners of the hanger roof (they do not penetrate the deck). 3. Replace the mk44 30mm cannons with popup armored Hellfire box launchers (4-6 cells each). Each Hellfire can also be swapped out with a 4-pod of DAGR/LOGIR rockets (for a total of 24 rockets per side of the ship). 4. Put Spike NLOS missiles in the forward mission bay that was to be the NETFIRES bay. 5. Put 4 EODAS sensors in the mast to provide 360 IIR sensor coverage around the LCS.
lets not get too carried away when it comes to the small boat threat. i mean i like the idea of helos doing most of the fighting against them but the LCS' basic weaponry will be devestating against most of these threats. its 57mm cannon still outranges rpg's and small arms that most of these boats will use and larger boats will be killed by the Griffin until a better missile can be found. and we still haven't gotten the 30mm cannons into action or deck mounted machine guns.
2.75 rockets are cool but i don't think we want to get too carried away with its basic defense at the cost of cargo space, or cost that comes with addiing all that stuff.
I was just thinking.. Instead of a 6 round Hellfire box launcher per side, replace the inner two cells with a larger cell for a 19-round 2.75 rocket pod.
Instead of: ┌┬┬┐ ├┼┼┤ └┴┴┘ Convert to: ┌┬─┬┐ ├┤O├┤ └┴─┴┘ That would give 4 Hellfires and 19 DAGR/LOGIRs per side or 34 DAGR/LOGIR per side if you swap out the Hellfires.
Their ships are designed to protect their waters where they have good intel and are not likely to encounter a SBS attack.
Our ships re designed to police someone else's waters where our intel is compromised and where we are more likely to encounter SBS attacks (in places like the gulf).
There is another 2.75 seeker head in development that is IIR instead of laser-guided called LOGIR. Think mini AIM-9X, but for ground targets. This will enable multiple, simultaneous fire against surface targets.
SOL while agrees the APKWS is apparently a very good missile, do the math about fighting swarming boats. First how many missiles fired X how many a/c shooting x flying off how many flight decks?
And that assume all of the boats are coming at a ship or task unit from one vector and that they are all identified well before engagement.
The one thing that Bob Work has right is the absolute need for good ISR. But IF there is a leaker, look out~
Spudman has the right line of thinking up-gunning though I would use different weapons and one has to watch WHERE weapons mounts can actually be installed on either LCS.
Great find Solomon... one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen!
ReplyDeleteSurprised at the size of it though. I thought the 2.75 rocket was much smaller; almost looks like a Sidewinder-type missile.
yeah this is gonna be a battlefield changer. anti-armor fires out of a system that's light weight and an attack helo can carry upwards of 40? instead of 16 kills per sortie you're getting more than twice that! this will change things. even better is the fact that light helos can carry it.
ReplyDeletei can imagine a swarm of small boats being taken out by one helicopter.
APCs and brick walls are one thing.. MBTs are a completely different beast (speaking as an M1 tanker).
ReplyDeleteThey should be putting a tube (or two) of 19 alongside the SEA-RAM on the LCS.
don't get cocky treadhead....i got the brief. fighting heavy armor is like buying real estate. location, location, location.
ReplyDeletebesides an RPG penetrated an M1 and this has a bigger warhead. add to it the fact that i'll take a mobility kill on an MBT and be happy and you still have a great weapon system.
oh and did i mention that against MBT's i'll be launching in salvos???? yep. DRT. dead right there.
Now, imagine a LCS carrying several Firescouts armed with these APKWS and able to remain airborne for 6-8 hours.
ReplyDeleteThen - and if an engagement begins - the Firescouts can shuttle back to the LCS or another warship and conduct a brief "pitstop" taking on fuel and more APKWS for another extended patrol.
Finally - and taking a cue from the Libyan rebels last year, could ships have simple launchers installed with an existing designator or EO turret slaved to the launcher. Not a Phalanx or SEARAM but something even far simpler. Just a thought!
Better tread-head than track-grease :)
ReplyDeleteNot to get into too much detail, the RPG is a HEAT warhead, detonates outside the armor, and burns it's way in. The M282 is a blast-frag warhead with a delayed fuse. The RPG's detonation is what allows it to penetrate armor while the M282 has to rely on the structure and inertia of the rocket to get the warhead through the armor before it explodes. There is also the issue of the fact that the M114 (not a M113) had only 0.75" of aluminum armor where it got hit.
http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m114.html
That same location on the M1A2 is protected by 2"+ of RHA & composites in the skirt and RHA hull armor. While it might get noisy, an M1 would laugh at these things.
The M1's combat history is filled with its ability to shake off dozens of hits by RPGs, tank rounds, etc. That one that got through was an extreme fluke.
Still, as a target I think the M114 is probably a pretty reliable stand-in for Russian built BMP's. The BMP series is notorious for its poor protection, just youtube search for videos of the current fighting in Syria and there are dozens of videos of burned out BMP-1's and 2's that have fallen victim to rebel IED's and RPG's.
Deletethe placement! whoever fired that shot must have spent sometime as an antitank assaultman cause he knew exactly where to hit that track.
Deletethat was school house perfect.
For the small boat swarm problem, isn't APKWS limitation the laser designation? The laser has to be directed on target until it strikes before you can redirect to the next target and fire. LCITS is what has me more excited since that promises optical targeting and true fire and forget.
ReplyDeletelaser designation doesn't worry me. if someone else is lasing the target then the shooter can keep moving on.
DeleteIMHO, The LCS's current defense again SBS (Small Boat Swarm) attacks is quite pitiful. I have been proposing an upgun of the LCS using currently available systems:
Delete1. Replace 50 cals with stabilized mk51 MAWS sporting the M230 30mm autocannon. The Mk51 can have a laser designator for the Hellfires.
2. Put two 35mm Millennium Guns next to the SeaRAM at the corners of the hanger roof (they do not penetrate the deck).
3. Replace the mk44 30mm cannons with popup armored Hellfire box launchers (4-6 cells each). Each Hellfire can also be swapped out with a 4-pod of DAGR/LOGIR rockets (for a total of 24 rockets per side of the ship).
4. Put Spike NLOS missiles in the forward mission bay that was to be the NETFIRES bay.
5. Put 4 EODAS sensors in the mast to provide 360 IIR sensor coverage around the LCS.
lets not get too carried away when it comes to the small boat threat. i mean i like the idea of helos doing most of the fighting against them but the LCS' basic weaponry will be devestating against most of these threats. its 57mm cannon still outranges rpg's and small arms that most of these boats will use and larger boats will be killed by the Griffin until a better missile can be found. and we still haven't gotten the 30mm cannons into action or deck mounted machine guns.
Delete2.75 rockets are cool but i don't think we want to get too carried away with its basic defense at the cost of cargo space, or cost that comes with addiing all that stuff.
I was just thinking.. Instead of a 6 round Hellfire box launcher per side, replace the inner two cells with a larger cell for a 19-round 2.75 rocket pod.
DeleteInstead of:
┌┬┬┐
├┼┼┤
└┴┴┘
Convert to:
┌┬─┬┐
├┤O├┤
└┴─┴┘
That would give 4 Hellfires and 19 DAGR/LOGIRs per side or 34 DAGR/LOGIR per side if you swap out the Hellfires.
your concept is more than doable...but i wonder.
Deletewhy haven't we seen the nordic countries do something like this? they are the littoral warfare experts afterall.
Their ships are designed to protect their waters where they have good intel and are not likely to encounter a SBS attack.
DeleteOur ships re designed to police someone else's waters where our intel is compromised and where we are more likely to encounter SBS attacks (in places like the gulf).
There is another 2.75 seeker head in development that is IIR instead of laser-guided called LOGIR. Think mini AIM-9X, but for ground targets. This will enable multiple, simultaneous fire against surface targets.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcwd/nawcwd/news/2010/2010_06_logir.htm
SOL while agrees the APKWS is apparently a very good missile, do the math about fighting swarming boats. First how many missiles fired X how many a/c shooting x flying off how many flight decks?
ReplyDeleteAnd that assume all of the boats are coming at a ship or task unit from one vector and that they are all identified well before engagement.
The one thing that Bob Work has right is the absolute need for good ISR. But IF there is a leaker, look out~
Spudman has the right line of thinking up-gunning though I would use different weapons and one has to watch WHERE weapons mounts can actually be installed on either LCS.
Here is my idea of placement and Fields of Fire for the LCS2.
ReplyDeletehttp://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/LCS/587a1df2.jpg