RN Type-4X Poll: Land Attack Missiles

C)

D)

A)

b) Tomahawk Block IV (TacTom)

a) Naval SCALP (Navalised Storm Shadow missile)

f) Harpoon III

1. B
2. A
3. E

Hmmm… is there a subliminal message there somewhere? 😀

pretty much all of them are useful but I like NSM, Tac Tom, Scalp Naval.
another option would be the Harpoon derived SLAM-ER which could be cannister mounted like the present Harpoons.

Just tallied the results so far; it’s damn close. Three more people to vote!

BTW, PPP mate, I don’t think you voted in your post.

Very true, here’s my vote: 🙂

B. TLAM – High commonality with the RN sub launched version

A. Scalp Naval – Will only have very limited commonality with the RAF version, therefore is almost a 3rd type.

Hyper,

Yep!. With just the one proviso…..I’d have the stock model right now if I had the purse strings. FASGW is already too complicated and could’ve been as simple as a blast-fragged Brimstone as FASGW(L) for the FLynx/JSF and NSM for FASGW(H) for Merlin/JSF and, ultimately, the escort fleet.

The RN hailed the coming of TLAM as a revolution as it allowed us to act with a coercive presence quickly and easily. Imagine the effectiveness of a precision guided standoff missile that could be deployed from any platform capable of operating a Merlin. We arent going to do saturation attacks on heavy ADZ’s with one Merlin on an RFA granted. For a Sierra Leone type situation the ability to slam a pair of 250lb warheads into a ‘political headquarters’ or some such thing, off a nearby RFA, without waiting for a task group to show up could be disproportionately useful.

Easy….

Longer ranged/evolved land-attack NSM.

Think Jonsey might agree….? 😮

Just tallied the results so far; it’s damn close. Three more people to vote!

BTW, PPP mate, I don’t think you voted in your post.

For genuine land attack, there are only two choices, i.e. the Scalp Naval, and the Tomahawk. All the other missiles are basically just anti-ship missiles, with a limited land attack capability. This boils down to the fact that for genuine land attack duties, you want the ability to sit a safe distance offshore, and yet still fire a good distance inland.

Since the RN is not likely to field both Sylver and Mk41, it is likely to have to be ‘A’, i.e. Scalp Naval. I have mixed feelings about this – Tomahawk is a tried and tested missile, already in RN service (though in sub form only); Scalp Naval is a new, untried, untested missile, with a lot of unknowns, especially range! The S-N has the advantage of being a bit stealthier, which would be useful, but since we don’t yet know the true specs, it does lead to a level of concern.

So, my votes are tied to A and B; I wouldn’t vote for any of the others for a true land attack role.

As for the whole mess of which capability balance is best, it isn’t actually too complex, it is just a matter of admitting the ships simply cannot do everything. If the ship is to be an AAW vessel, then it is perfectly possible to build it with a limited ABM capability, but it is not going to have more than basic ASW capability. If it is an ASW vessel, then it could still carry a few Aster 30s for CEC, but not a full load of them, and will carry no ABM capability (unless you use them as offboard magazines for the AAW vessel). Either way, a 48-64 cell VLS is perfectly possible, but its filling will be highly mission dependent. If it has to be done, it could be:

– 32 CAAM in eight VLS cells, for self defence
– 24-32 Aster 30 for CEC capability
– 16 Scalp Naval for land attack
– 0-8 Aster 50(?) for ABM

Not directly associated with the actual land-attack role, I would, however, like to see the RN buying a common dual-role anti-ship missile, to replace the currently in service versions of Harpoon. This would ideally be capable of being used from all the various platforms that are needed/desirable:

– Sub launched: only Exocet and Harpoon seem to meet this criteria
– Ship launched: they all meet this criteria, obviously
– Helo launched: not to easy, Harpoon doesn’t currently meet this
– Air launched: again, they all meet this criteria

This missile would then be fitted to all the RN’s destroyers, frigates, submarines and helos. It would, alongside the surface ships’ naval guns, allow most ships to play at least some role in the land attack mission. It is not, however, intended to turn them into true land-attack platforms, but just boost overall capabilities. In a sense, it is just meant to be a useful extra.

1. b (fitting well to the sm-3 in a mk41)
2. c (only if used in a anti ship and land attack role; mk 4 preferred)

1:B
2: A
2: E

With my main gun choices, the meduim/short range is covered, so you need missiles that add something else, either LOTS of range, or a loitering capability.

Matt

b
c
d
😮

Lots of good discussion but a distinct absence of actually voting in some posts 😉

Re compromising the roles that were voted for, we can have another poll on that after we have several general layout options on the table and several proposed solutions. Sort of a “this isn’t going to work, what gets canned?” discussion. Let’s not pre-judge the outcome; there are actually several ships in this tonnage range which do suggest it could be done but I guess those examples (and counter-examples) will wash out then. Don’t let me detract from the good banter though 😀

Single choice, Tactom as it can fit into a Mk 41 strike length VLS, as can several other missiles, thus getting more bang from your buck.

Given deck space is going to be limited, you don’t want a pile of non-compatible missile systems each requiring its own unique launcher system.

Plus TacTom is in service with at least three navies that I am aware of, so it has a larger customer base and hence a larger industrial base.

Unicorn

I’m going to say, whichever one is most easily able to be fitted into a Sylver A70 VLS. With Sylver A70 you still have the option of firing Aster missiles. With Mk.41, the only RN deployed munition you can fire would be the Tactical Tomahawk. None of the new Generation RN warships will have the Illuminators to fire the SM family or ESSM, the main other missiles that Mk.41 can fire.

Edit:
1. A
2. C
3. D

Single choice, Tactom as it can fit into a Mk 41 strike length VLS, as can several other missiles, thus getting more bang from your buck.

Given deck space is going to be limited, you don’t want a pile of non-compatible missile systems each requiring its own unique launcher system.

Plus TacTom is in service with at least three navies that I am aware of, so it has a larger customer base and hence a larger industrial base.

Unicorn

Having the high end air defence capabilities is a bit overkill, especially if its role is mainly land attack and ASW. There would be more benefit in using the money for more VLS cells.

#1 — “A”
#2 — “F”, VL-GMLRS
No #3.

But you’re not going to place all that truck on a single hull, don’t you? I thought more of a common baseline hull with variable aft superstructure (that’s why a 1.5-ender design).
The land-attack part has no business on an escort, it’s as a support asset for the amphib forced entry, and for simply shooting up stuff inland.

In the case of the hanger, is there anywhere else on the ship where the boats can be stored? moving those would give enough room for your two merlins.

Not as simple as just finding room in the hangar though Steve. Ships are designed with the fuel, spares, air weapons and, most importanly, embarked personnel for the ships flight determined as necessary for the vessel.

For T45 thats probably a signle Lynx HMA8 for x no. of sorties. Its obvious to state that the stores suitable for that ships flight will be woefully inadequate to keeping up sorties for 2 Merlin.

Planeman

“Knock off them negative waves, Moriarty”!!!.

LOL!. No offense taken in the slightest. Spend a while fixing ships and twitchy guided weapons systems and that is what happens unfortunately. Struggling to try and make poorly designed bits of kit work when two minutes thought at the design stage wouldve made for efficient and simple operation gives you a hell of a perspective on getting things right from the kickoff.

Now there is a typical British solution at work!.

Design Authority: “The specs say full AAW capability”
Naval Architect: “Wont fit in the hull with all the other kit”
Design Authority: “What will fit that looks close enough?”

😀

What your talking about is essentially dropping the Area AAW and ABM requirement in favour of a more modest, but quite adequate, self-defence fit. Which is every bit the right choice in the situation otherwise you cross over with the T45s and waste hull volume you need assigned to things that T45 cant do!. Namely – Carry LACM and as many choppers/UAV’s as possible.

Fully loaded T45 is close enough to 8000ton as makes academic difference. She could not do full Area AAW, carry significant numbers of LACMs and do ASW ops with multiple choppers. You would probably need a 12k ton trimaran for all that and it would be absolutely deadly – to the RN budget!. :diablo:

Nope if we’re stuck with trying to get all the missions specified on a T45-sized hull the only sensible way to do it is to start with a T45 hull, complete with PAAMS, ship a few angled box launchers for NSM somewhere and do the best job possible of expanding the hangar for a couple of Merlins.

In the case of the hanger, is there anywhere else on the ship where the boats can be stored? moving those would give enough room for your two merlins.

Planeman

You always see the problems rather than the opportunities, at least that’s how you come across (no offense at all)

“Knock off them negative waves, Moriarty”!!!.

LOL!. No offense taken in the slightest. Spend a while fixing ships and twitchy guided weapons systems and that is what happens unfortunately. Struggling to try and make poorly designed bits of kit work when two minutes thought at the design stage wouldve made for efficient and simple operation gives you a hell of a perspective on getting things right from the kickoff.

One solution might be (and this is subject to another vote elsewhere I guess) a mix of about 32 smaller AD missiles (ESSM or Mica VL sized) with say 8 ABMs. When you look at how many ESSMs can be carried in such a small space, it is quite appealing and they still qualify as “area – air defence”, at least as long as you also have the Type-45s in the team.

Now there is a typical British solution at work!.

Design Authority: “The specs say full AAW capability”
Naval Architect: “Wont fit in the hull with all the other kit”
Design Authority: “What will fit that looks close enough?”

😀

What your talking about is essentially dropping the Area AAW and ABM requirement in favour of a more modest, but quite adequate, self-defence fit. Which is every bit the right choice in the situation otherwise you cross over with the T45s and waste hull volume you need assigned to things that T45 cant do!. Namely – Carry LACM and as many choppers/UAV’s as possible.

8000t ships can still be quite large obviously.

Fully loaded T45 is close enough to 8000ton as makes academic difference. She could not do full Area AAW, carry significant numbers of LACMs and do ASW ops with multiple choppers. You would probably need a 12k ton trimaran for all that and it would be absolutely deadly – to the RN budget!. :diablo:

Nope if we’re stuck with trying to get all the missions specified on a T45-sized hull the only sensible way to do it is to start with a T45 hull, complete with PAAMS, ship a few angled box launchers for NSM somewhere and do the best job possible of expanding the hangar for a couple of Merlins.