Chris Rawley has an article up on ID where he talks about the Tomahawk anti-ship missile and the issues that have in the past made them difficult to use and how they're overcoming those difficulties.
He also talks about the long range of the missile.
I say that's all well and good but one problem remains. We're going to need more cells. A subsonic missile is not hard to kill. That means saturation attacks....or at the very least multiple missiles per target.
So you take your average Burke class destroyer and now you have to go to war with the thought that I need a war load that takes into account anti-air missions, anti-surface missions and land attack missions. All these missions are fighting for space in my vertical launch system.
How do you figure out your warload? Who's gonna get stiffed when it comes to needs? Is it gonna be the Marine thats looking to the Navy to use its Tomahawks to interdict the enemy's supply lines in heavily defended air space? Or is the carrier going to have to take a chance that the anti-air missiles that its depending on have been filled with anti-shipping missiles...or is it the LCS' guys that were hoping that big brother has enough missiles to tag more heavily armed ships if they popped up over the horizon?
We need more cells and this, while nice, just illustrates the problem.
*I just realized that this missile really has applications for the P-8, B-52 and even the J-8...remember every sensor must be a shooter and every shooter a sensor. The Navy is simply providing a tool to get Air Force heavies into the anti ship battle!
