Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

future direction of the USN/USMC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • future direction of the USN/USMC

    https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/...GY8v1xQnTDwJQ4

    look out more of that littoral buzzword that triggers so many.

    my biggest question, what ground based AAW systems do we have for the marines to utilize?

    i know we have the shoulder fired stinger, and i think we even have a humvee with 8 stingers, but it seems like we have quite a gap from stingers to patriots for shore based AAW. is there a ground based equivalant to RAM or ESSM i am unaware of in the US arsenal?

    or would they just end up doing something sort of like what we've been doing in iraq and afghanistan and just putting phalanx/RAM mounts on semi-trailers?

    also would it be more effective for the marines to get full sized ASMs like harpoon or NSM or smaller griffon/penguin type ASMs for their new mission?
    the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

    A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
    A man dies and leaves his name,
    A teacher dies and teaches death.
    Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

  • #2
    I'll divide this into two parts. And for the record, I'm only referring to at least mostly-mobile systems that can be put ashore, rather than 'base' stuff.

    Air Warfare:

    Currently You have the 1097 Humvee mounting Stingers. Really more of an anti-helicopter, anti-drone system. Can be anti-cruise missile, but I think we're getting pretty outdated in dealing with the most modern missile threats.

    My suggestions are with one exception going to be based wholly on using the short-bed 7 ton. It's a prime mover, it's in the USMC inventory, the cab is relatively spacious for what it is, already has a turret ring for personal defense weapons, and uparmored and could be given shutters for rocket blast and hydraulic leveling feet for stabilization and recoil absorbtion. And it's got reasonable enough off road performance for what we're talking about. Plus, you can do the systems as a 'fork on, fork off' setup that would allow them to either remain mobile or be dismounted once the Marines are establishing a dug-in position on an island and put into a fixed arrangement. Note, 7 tons is the rated capacity 'off road' and it can carry up to 15 tons 'on road'.

    I'm purposely picking systems that are already in the inventory for the Navy as well, so you reduce your logistical burden AND your development costs significantly, as well as your training costs since you can send Marines to Navy schools to learn the operation of the systems and maintenance.

    The systems I would go with are the following:

    Single-Vehicle Systems:

    Phalanx CIWS. Put it on a steel base that can be mounted to the bed and moved by forklift. It's a self-contained system, and will just need power and a cooling unit that could be a pair of truck radiators and a water tank and fan. The weapon operators can be in the existing truck cab which would have control cables quickly routed into it. Field of fire would be around 300 degrees horizontally due to the cab.

    SeaRAM CIWS. This is the 11 cell version. Basically the same setup as the Phalanx. You would potentially need to make sure the truck cab has rocket exhaust resistant coverage over the rear arc. Both of these systems could be dismounted in a dug-in posture and the crew put into a dugout.

    Machbet 2.0: This is the only tracked system I'm noting. Basically a VADs, using the same gun as the phalanx. But add on a quartet of SeaRAM missiles as well. This would allow for a mobile air defense setup capable of operating with USMC mobile forces. Could most likely be made as a variant of the new amphibious vehicle that the Corps is deploying, even if the vehicle itself isn't amphibious that would be fine.

    The former two are purely off the shelf with minimal engineering work needed. The latter one is a new system, but we need one anyway, so go for it.

    Multi-Vehicle Systems:

    ESSM: I think you could do this with a minimum of 3 trucks. 1 Truck housing the radar suite, 1 Truck with the fire direction center and crew, and 1 truck mounting essentially a ground version of the Mk41 VLS. I think you could get 16 ESSM per 'missile truck'. That would give you a portable, though not truly 'mobile' air defense system that could be set up under 15 minutes, with additional ESSM trucks added to a single direction center. You might want an 'equipment Truck' as well to hold cable coils and such if you wanted to really stretch your system out over like a quarter mile or more of ground, maybe put your radar on a convenient high spot with your missiles a quarter mile away in defilade. Obviously you could dismount the system component by component over a few hours and make it a fixed system, or deploy it as a fixed system in multiple components.

    Anti-Ship:

    Multi-vehicle System:

    Naval Strike Missile: I'm thinking a 3 or 4 truck system. 1 Truck with 4 Missiles. 1-2 trucks with the radar(s). And 1 Truck housing fire control. Add Missile Trucks based upon threat potential.

    Single Vehicle System:

    I'm thinking something based on the Brimstone Sea Spear potentially? A single truck mounting 4-6 of them plus the fire control team and gear? The system is certainly designed to go onto a boat as small as a 7 ton......

    Or a single truck mounting 2 Penguins, plus an extendable IR mast. Completely emission free targeting and launching of the missile against an enemy vessel.
    Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
      I'll divide this into two parts. And for the record, I'm only referring to at least mostly-mobile systems that can be put ashore, rather than 'base' stuff.

      Air Warfare:

      Currently You have the 1097 Humvee mounting Stingers. Really more of an anti-helicopter, anti-drone system. Can be anti-cruise missile, but I think we're getting pretty outdated in dealing with the most modern missile threats.

      My suggestions are with one exception going to be based wholly on using the short-bed 7 ton. It's a prime mover, it's in the USMC inventory, the cab is relatively spacious for what it is, already has a turret ring for personal defense weapons, and uparmored and could be given shutters for rocket blast and hydraulic leveling feet for stabilization and recoil absorbtion. And it's got reasonable enough off road performance for what we're talking about. Plus, you can do the systems as a 'fork on, fork off' setup that would allow them to either remain mobile or be dismounted once the Marines are establishing a dug-in position on an island and put into a fixed arrangement. Note, 7 tons is the rated capacity 'off road' and it can carry up to 15 tons 'on road'.

      I'm purposely picking systems that are already in the inventory for the Navy as well, so you reduce your logistical burden AND your development costs significantly, as well as your training costs since you can send Marines to Navy schools to learn the operation of the systems and maintenance.

      The systems I would go with are the following:

      Single-Vehicle Systems:

      Phalanx CIWS. Put it on a steel base that can be mounted to the bed and moved by forklift. It's a self-contained system, and will just need power and a cooling unit that could be a pair of truck radiators and a water tank and fan. The weapon operators can be in the existing truck cab which would have control cables quickly routed into it. Field of fire would be around 300 degrees horizontally due to the cab.

      SeaRAM CIWS. This is the 11 cell version. Basically the same setup as the Phalanx. You would potentially need to make sure the truck cab has rocket exhaust resistant coverage over the rear arc. Both of these systems could be dismounted in a dug-in posture and the crew put into a dugout.

      Machbet 2.0: This is the only tracked system I'm noting. Basically a VADs, using the same gun as the phalanx. But add on a quartet of SeaRAM missiles as well. This would allow for a mobile air defense setup capable of operating with USMC mobile forces. Could most likely be made as a variant of the new amphibious vehicle that the Corps is deploying, even if the vehicle itself isn't amphibious that would be fine.

      The former two are purely off the shelf with minimal engineering work needed. The latter one is a new system, but we need one anyway, so go for it.

      Multi-Vehicle Systems:

      ESSM: I think you could do this with a minimum of 3 trucks. 1 Truck housing the radar suite, 1 Truck with the fire direction center and crew, and 1 truck mounting essentially a ground version of the Mk41 VLS. I think you could get 16 ESSM per 'missile truck'. That would give you a portable, though not truly 'mobile' air defense system that could be set up under 15 minutes, with additional ESSM trucks added to a single direction center. You might want an 'equipment Truck' as well to hold cable coils and such if you wanted to really stretch your system out over like a quarter mile or more of ground, maybe put your radar on a convenient high spot with your missiles a quarter mile away in defilade. Obviously you could dismount the system component by component over a few hours and make it a fixed system, or deploy it as a fixed system in multiple components.

      Anti-Ship:

      Multi-vehicle System:

      Naval Strike Missile: I'm thinking a 3 or 4 truck system. 1 Truck with 4 Missiles. 1-2 trucks with the radar(s). And 1 Truck housing fire control. Add Missile Trucks based upon threat potential.

      Single Vehicle System:

      I'm thinking something based on the Brimstone Sea Spear potentially? A single truck mounting 4-6 of them plus the fire control team and gear? The system is certainly designed to go onto a boat as small as a 7 ton......

      Or a single truck mounting 2 Penguins, plus an extendable IR mast. Completely emission free targeting and launching of the missile against an enemy vessel.
      one thing to keep in mind, that the full sized ASMs would be able to get targeting data from AWACs and even possibly ships, so a separate radar truck, or radar on the missile truck may not be necessary...might make the missiles less useful in a situation where the navy has been more or less defeated and pushed out of data link range, but it is one option for reducing amount of material on each system or that needs to go ashore.

      i definitely think we made a mistake not investing a bit more in medium range SAMs for our ground forces.

      i wonder if a humvee, stryker or MRAP could mount 2-4 ESSMs, or maybe just put box launcher turret on the flatbed you were mentioning earlier.
      the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

      A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
      A man dies and leaves his name,
      A teacher dies and teaches death.
      Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

      Comment


      • #4
        Very true. I'd probably want to keep at least one 'radar truck' on the ground so that you're not wholly reliant on targeting data from elsewhere. But say you landed an NSM system....with a radar truck, FC truck, and 6 missile trucks. That's roughly 2 LCACs. Now you have 24 missiles on tap, enough that your little spot of paradise just became an unsinkable frigate with distributed lethality to the Task Force Commander.
        Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
          Very true. I'd probably want to keep at least one 'radar truck' on the ground so that you're not wholly reliant on targeting data from elsewhere. But say you landed an NSM system....with a radar truck, FC truck, and 6 missile trucks. That's roughly 2 LCACs. Now you have 24 missiles on tap, enough that your little spot of paradise just became an unsinkable frigate with distributed lethality to the Task Force Commander.
          yep, i agree all around it would be better, but i was also thinking that keep the AA self sufficient radars because if the enemy ships do get too close you can fire the missile and it should be able to locate target after firing. within something like 50 miles (i can't for life of me recall the actual source for this so maybe i'm mistaken), but by the time you do something similar with a SAM its already too late.
          the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

          A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
          A man dies and leaves his name,
          A teacher dies and teaches death.
          Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

          Comment


          • #6
            Well, that's why I figured that tossing the actual Phalanx and SeaRAM CIWS systems onto truck beds would be the most effective way to do that job. Proven systems, self contained, and fast acting.

            The ESSM system would be a bit more 'difficult' to put into practice, but would also have the most positive effect. So it's a catch either way there.
            Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
              Well, that's why I figured that tossing the actual Phalanx and SeaRAM CIWS systems onto truck beds would be the most effective way to do that job. Proven systems, self contained, and fast acting.

              The ESSM system would be a bit more 'difficult' to put into practice, but would also have the most positive effect. So it's a catch either way there.
              ya, CIWS is just too close defeat a complicated attack. works great for RPGs and mortars, but missiles moving and a 800mph at minimum is a different story.
              the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

              A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
              A man dies and leaves his name,
              A teacher dies and teaches death.
              Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by General_Jacke View Post

                ya, CIWS is just too close defeat a complicated attack. works great for RPGs and mortars, but missiles moving and a 800mph at minimum is a different story.
                Depending on the actual combat situation, you could deploy 2-3 SeaRAM and 1 Phalanx, or reverse it if the circumstances are giving you inclination that you'll need the other system more.
                Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                Comment


                • #9
                  Searams and Phalanxes? Will we have enough time between engagements to swap them out?

                  Pruitt
                  Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                  Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                  by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Pruitt View Post
                    Searams and Phalanxes? Will we have enough time between engagements to swap them out?

                    Pruitt
                    you mean reloading? it really depends, i know phalanx takes a long time to reload, but i'd assume it would at least 30 minutes between engagements once an engagement is over.
                    it just depends on how long an engagement is
                    the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

                    A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
                    A man dies and leaves his name,
                    A teacher dies and teaches death.
                    Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post

                      Depending on the actual combat situation, you could deploy 2-3 SeaRAM and 1 Phalanx, or reverse it if the circumstances are giving you inclination that you'll need the other system more.
                      RAM has decent range so i'd prefer it over phalanx, but still think they should have something with a slightly longer range.

                      the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

                      A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
                      A man dies and leaves his name,
                      A teacher dies and teaches death.
                      Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by General_Jacke View Post
                        https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/...GY8v1xQnTDwJQ4

                        look out more of that littoral buzzword that triggers so many.

                        my biggest question, what ground based AAW systems do we have for the marines to utilize?

                        i know we have the shoulder fired stinger, and i think we even have a humvee with 8 stingers, but it seems like we have quite a gap from stingers to patriots for shore based AAW. is there a ground based equivalant to RAM or ESSM i am unaware of in the US arsenal?

                        or would they just end up doing something sort of like what we've been doing in iraq and afghanistan and just putting phalanx/RAM mounts on semi-trailers?

                        also would it be more effective for the marines to get full sized ASMs like harpoon or NSM or smaller griffon/penguin type ASMs for their new mission?
                        You guys would be better off just buying more NASAMS, you use them already on a very limited scale.
                        Several NASAMS were used to guard air space over Washington, D.C. during the 2005 United States presidential inauguration, and are used to protect air space around the White House.
                        Australia has also been deficient in SAM defence for the army, so we are buying NASAMS and bolting a launcher on the back of the Hawkei, as well as a fixed launcher.

                        D2fYn1JW0AAtzvN.jpg
                        "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                        Ernest Hemingway.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by General_Jacke View Post

                          RAM has decent range so i'd prefer it over phalanx, but still think they should have something with a slightly longer range.
                          That's where the ESSM would come in.

                          Problem is that something like RAM is the biggest you can fit on a single wheeled vehicle. At least and have one that's not ungodly expensive and special.

                          I mean, on the bigger scale, you could deploy a full SPY and SM6 BMD system ashore. But I think ESSM is a more reasonable sized missile for general anti air and anti missile purposes.
                          Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post

                            That's where the ESSM would come in.

                            Problem is that something like RAM is the biggest you can fit on a single wheeled vehicle. At least and have one that's not ungodly expensive and special.

                            I mean, on the bigger scale, you could deploy a full SPY and SM6 BMD system ashore. But I think ESSM is a more reasonable sized missile for general anti air and anti missile purposes.
                            for defending the specific island i agree, but based on the article it sounds like they want each island they take to provide a pretty decent sized area of AA, so they probably are looking at a mobile SPY array and SM VLS set up, which is where things get a bit wonky, in my head at least.
                            the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

                            A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
                            A man dies and leaves his name,
                            A teacher dies and teaches death.
                            Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by General_Jacke View Post

                              for defending the specific island i agree, but based on the article it sounds like they want each island they take to provide a pretty decent sized area of AA, so they probably are looking at a mobile SPY array and SM VLS set up, which is where things get a bit wonky, in my head at least.
                              I mean, we have existing logistics vehicles that could handle moving something that size. Even over unpaved but not necessarily rugged terrain.

                              But we are talking a lot of vehicles and expense. We're thinking more along the lines of a company level operation to make that happen. With the trucks, forklifts, radars, missiles, command post, and generators.

                              And then you're going to deploy a platoon of infantry just to protect the site. And a platoon of lighter systems like the truck based RAM I mentioned.

                              I think for the same effort you could deploy 2 phalanx, 4 RAM, 1 ESSM, and 1 NSM system. To me, anything like a full AEGIS ashore is going to be a 2nd or even 3rd wave fortification upgrade.
                              Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X