Thanks for the article Jason!
Read it here...
But a quick rundown...
1. Grippen missiles are only good for vehicles, not warships.
2. Harpoon missiles are essential but many of our surface ships don't have them.
3. Airpower can be negated.
4. When fighting a peer enemy, boutique, threat of the moment (piracy and partnership missions) can't make up for a lack of real firepower.
You'll understand my points after you read the article.
Read it here...
But a quick rundown...
1. Grippen missiles are only good for vehicles, not warships.
2. Harpoon missiles are essential but many of our surface ships don't have them.
3. Airpower can be negated.
4. When fighting a peer enemy, boutique, threat of the moment (piracy and partnership missions) can't make up for a lack of real firepower.
You'll understand my points after you read the article.
These ships are being designed specifically to be destroyed and replaced. All that tech crammed into a boat that is too small to mount additional weapons systems yet larger that potential adversaries' ships that can blow the LCS out of the water from over the horizon.
ReplyDeleteIMHO, the LCS was designed for one reason and one reason only...to protect and to re-take oil platforms. Shit, the Pegasus patrol craft that were stricken over 20 years ago packed more punch (and speed) at standoff distance and they were 1/4 the size of the LCS.
America needs to get the lobbyists and the politicians out of the design room before we lose the next conventional war to the Reds in less than two weeks and have to rely on nukes.
Why in the world would you only put surface to surface missiles on a ship that have less range than a 57mm gun? Why not a set of 4 harpoons? Is the harpoon still in the US Navy inventory? Why wouldn't a Burke class destroyer have ASuW missiles? Aren't some of the VLS populated by Tomahawks?
ReplyDeleteHarpoon missiles are almost universally not equipped on US Navy surface vessels. And those few vessels that do have them don't have enough to be truly effective. AFAICT, the only USN vessels with harpoons still are the CGs. Burkes by and large don't have them nor do our frigates or LCS. This is realistically for several reasons: the harpoons we never really integrated into the designs, the vast majority of the USN arsenal of up to date viable harpoons are air launched, and the harpoon itself is horribly out of date.
DeleteRealistically the USN needs to get LRASM in production as fast as possible. It allows full integration with USN systems including carriage in the MK41 VLS canisters which will allow the vast majority of the USN to easily equip them. The only other viable modern AShM for the USN to turn to is the Naval Strike Missile/Joint Strike Missile which is a design developed and fielded by Norway. The reality is that LRASM/NSM are fairly complementary. The NSM is a 1000lb class weapon with a ~300lb warhead and ~100nm range. The LRASM is a 2000lb(2250lbs actual) class weapon with a 1000lb warhead and a range of 200+nm. NSM would work well for LCS and fighter/aircraft carry (NSM is designed to fit in the F35 internal bay and the any AShM that can do so) while LRASM would work great for the DDG and CGs within the USN arsenal and work well for external carry against larger targets.
One major advantage of USN adoption of LRASM is that it means the US Navy could easily adopt the JASSM-ER/XR upon which the LRASM is based and thereby unify weapon systems with the USAF instead of using a warmed over harpoon based design for medium range cruise missile work on USN fighters.
As far as the LCS, the main thing is the USN really needs to move to the VLS variants of the designs that support 16-32 VLS cells. And LCS with 16-32 VLS cells would transform into a pretty formidable ship being able to carry upwards of 32+ ESSM for anti-air work and between 8 and 24 LRASM or VL-ASROC (and in the future a JASSM variant with similar to the LRASM). With that complement of weapons, the LCS becomes a pretty formidable warship against just about anything else out there.
and until then...if the shit went down tomorrow the LCS are to few and far less capable offensively than a 40 year-old Perry class FFG configuration.
DeleteYou would think that they would have the medium to long range anti-ship weapon system designed prior to launching the dammed boat instead of relying on a glorified anti-aircraft caliber to fend-off closing surface threats...
skeptic, the Perrys no longer have ANY ASM or anti-sub rocket capability.
DeleteAll thy have is 1 phalanx, 1 76mm gun, and a triple tube torpedoe launcher.
Wes, the proposed Naval strike tomahawk was taken canceled as it was slower than an Harpoon and way more expensive.
DeleteDavid is right, NSTom was projecting into the 1.4+ million dollar range per copy, it was far far too expensive and really not needed esp all the extra range it carried.
DeleteContenders for future US AShM are LRASM and JSOW-ER. SLAM-ER based AShM is a pretty big long shot (and if LRASM wins the future competition SLAM-ER days are basically numbered because that would mean the navy would of adopted through the back door JASSM-ER/XR, which would finally make the Joint part of the name make sense). JSOW-ER has the issue that it is way too slow. SLAM-ER would require significant beefing up to carry a viable warhead. And only LRASM will have demonstrated VLS capability.
Paint them white and send them on a good will tour of the world.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise these ships are designed to look all Navy but are mostly expected to be targets to soak up enemy missiles and gunfire until a negotiated peace or surrender takes place.
Solomon, as for the Harpoons, the Navy will FINALLY get a VLS capable ASM in the from of the LRASM in 2015 or so.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.deagel.com/news/First-LRASM-Boosted-Test-Vehicle-Successfully-Launched-from-Mk41-Vertical-Launch-System_n000011916.aspx
it's already been shot out of a Mk. 41 canister and the guidance package is working.
However, some fool in the Navvy forgot to demand 4-8 Mk. 41 cells on each LCS class.
If you want to blame anyone for the LCS's lack of weaponry, blame the Navy for not requiring any.
I do not believe that you are gaming this correctly. A LCS should not be involved in a blow-for-blow exchange with a Chinese war ship the way this has been described. First of all they have an unmanned aerial vehicle that can be deployed to obtain situational awareness and if anything the ship's speed is used to keep itself out of the Chinese's ship's weapon range... not to close in like this.
ReplyDeleteSecond the Griffin or what ever other missile is deployed will be navalized with more powerful motors and more range but more important, the Griffin is a finned missile that when fired by the helicopter can glide and has far more range and accuracy than it is given credit here.
The larger Harpoons are radar guided and subject to defeat by passive measures such as decoys, etc. so even if launched you need several volleys to get past the passive defenses and score a hit.
Guns are last ditch defenses to be used when all else has failed and in the case of the 76MM it will probably not be used. The preferred weapon of the ship will be the helicopter and its weapons or the Griffin shot from the helicopter or the ship.
Plus the Philippines would have land based aircrafts that would be deadly against those Chinese ships... so the whole theater situation does not seem realistic.