Underwater AIM 9-X

I am some what suprised that the USN never elected to use a variant of its ‘own little baby’ the RIM-116 ‘Rolling Airframe Missile’ (RAM)!
Its smaller and lighter!
But then again the Aim-9 Sidewinder was a US Navy missile to begin with!
I guess the RAM does not have the range of the Sidewinder!

Regards
Pioneer

I also feel that this is a technology that has huge potential and am suprised its taken this long for it to become ‘mainstream’. I remember suggesting such a system myself a few years bk and was pointed to the german effort.

As mush as i distain the hype and abusive overuse of the term ‘game changer’, i feel this is one case where it is actually merited.

A last ditch self-defense weapon is only the most basic way of using this technology, apply a little imagination and you could potentially flip ASW on its head.

Imagine if you will, an anti-aircraft mine built around one of these weapons. It can be a very small device, just a missile capsule, a small motor, simple computer and sonar and some batteries. The entire package could easily be made the size of z small torpedo or mine.

The idea would be for a sub to lay a few of these devices as you would a conventional mine, for example when just starting to being hunted by hostile ASW helos or when trying to breach the ASW screen of a hostile fleet.

The ‘mine’, when released, will travel on its own power while actively emitting low level noise consistent with an attack sub. If the enemy ASW is any good, they would pick up on this and hunt it. With the ultimate step being a dipping sonar. If u r quick, u would have already figured out that the simple sonar and computer the mine carries is to trigger the launch of the missile when a dipping sonar has gone active close enough. Bye bye helo, but the best part is that his buddy would be busy calling in all other ASW assets to hunt the attacker, thereby completely misdirecting the search effort and allowing the real sub a far better chance of slipping away or getting within range of its target.

Your regards are usless this IS a copy/build-on of Russky tech: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/shkval.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval

I cannot see any resemblance or connection between the encapsulated-weapon concept being discussed in this thread and the Russian Shkval.

This is a capability that is long, long, long overdue and I would say neglected by the U.S. Navy
It will be very interesting to see if this program can be kept on time and within budget – or even kept in want by the U.S. Navy!

I also can not work out why it is that the likes of such a weapon system would not be kept secret?
I think the US Military and US arms industry are more concerned about share prices than national security – when they promote to the world such systems or capability – which encourages other potential adversary country’s to either develop their own system or countermeasures!
Let’s see how long it takes for the PRC/PLAN (or even Russia!) to ‘acquire’ this technology – which mysteriously looks like and smells like a copy of the U.S system????

Regards
Pioneer

Your regards are usless this IS a copy/build-on of Russky tech: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/shkval.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval

Hey Sferrin

Very interesting find on the SIAM (Self-Initiated Anti-Aircraft Missile) program!
Especialy the SUBADS (Submarine Air-Defense System) side of the program

I have not heard or seen this before!!

I think it some what ironic that in the heat and tensions of the Cold War that the U.S Navy did not follow through on this needed and promising program – and yet today with the demise of the Soviet/Warsaw Pact power and numerical numbers no longer there – they now decide to develop such a system!

Thanks

Regards
Pioneer

it can be carried in an unmodified configuration and fired from a submarine’s vertical launch tube

We’ve not had to modify the AIM-9X. The capsule protects it from the environment so you can use it off-the-shelf.”

This is a capability that is long, long, long overdue and I would say neglected by the U.S. Navy
It will be very interesting to see if this program can be kept on time and within budget – or even kept in want by the U.S. Navy!

I also can not work out why it is that the likes of such a weapon system would not be kept secret?
I think the US Military and US arms industry are more concerned about share prices than national security – when they promote to the world such systems or capability – which encourages other potential adversary country’s to either develop their own system or countermeasures!
Let’s see how long it takes for the PRC/PLAN (or even Russia!) to ‘acquire’ this technology – which mysteriously looks like and smells like a copy of the U.S system????

Regards
Pioneer

Concur absolutely with Swerve. There is a world of difference between a hunter having a general location on your boat and a hard fix.

If you have a buoy dropper, like a Hoover, boxing you in and getting near the point of drawing a bead the ability to make him go away is going to be massively beneficial. Even if he has a friend in a near sector it will be a finite number of minutes before he can relocate and continue the prosecution. Those minutes are the ones that you use to clear the datum.

Funnily enough I’d not expect this to be all that useful against pingers. Dipping choppers tend to work as a pair – either with one flushing the contact to the ‘catcher’ or as an active pair to bracket a given area. Giving the submarine two targets that would have to be simultaneously engaged, without deploying some missile director element, could be chancy.

If possessing a subSAM convinces the submarine mafia they are driving an AEGIS destroyer and try and take on whole squadrons then that is a problem. I cant see that being a real likelihood though and, if its cheap and has a low ship-impact, I would imagine that this kind of missile could be a welcome addition to a subs self-defence suite.

It’s a good recipe for survival when something starts pinging you, & you know that up there’s an aircraft which will kill you if you don’t do something. What’s the alternative? Sit there & die, secure in the knowledge that you didn’t draw in loads of ASW assets, just the one which ended your existence?

Sometimes, there’s nothing to lose.

That might be interesting in blue waters against lonely ASW planes, but in all other scenarios it will draw all kind of ASW assets to the point like flies to a pile of xxx. Not a good recipe for survival.

Yes, but if a helo dip an active sonar nearby, you’re either detected or on the verge of detected, a sidewinder mite remove the immediate torpedo threat.
On top of that, It must be a huge relief to have any kind of defense vs these would be bullies.

Bang on for both points IMMOO.

I think that the most interesting bit is the potential to change one’s opponent’s tactics.

Once MPA were working effectively it was no longer sensible to optimise submarines for surface work (travelling faster on the surface AND surfacing to attack with fish and cannons).

If the boat has the potential to lay off an attack from another position (or several other positions as long as one is clever enough not to send buoys and SAMs in a pattern which serves to bracket and tri-angulate one’s own position!) then MPA and ASW Helo tactics will have to change.

Something like the Viking would still work though. Too bad they’re scrapping them all.

I thought they were being put into storage & being offered to other countries? Last I heard, you could have them for the price of delivery, but there was a support contract tied to the deal.

I’d rather have an anti-torpedo torpedo. 😀

Meh, the current jammer/decoy combo launchers for subs aren’t that bad either. U212 is getting four launchers with five decoy and five jammer micro-torpedoes each in Batch 2, the same batch that will probably have IDAS installed from the start.

Yes, but if a helo dip an active sonar nearby, you’re either detected or on the verge of detected, a sidewinder mite remove the immediate torpedo threat.
On top of that, It must be a huge relief to have any kind of defense vs these would be bullies.

In addtion, if it were known to be widely deployed, the utility of dipping helicopters will get significantly reduced. Is anybody really going to want to send a helicopter against a SAM battery? (No trees to hide behind at sea 🙂 )

Something like the Viking would still work though. Too bad they’re scrapping them all.

You’re not terribly stealthy any more once you start shooting at aircraft …
I’d rather have an anti-torpedo torpedo. 😀

Yes, but if a helo dip an active sonar nearby, you’re either detected or on the verge of detected, a sidewinder mite remove the immediate torpedo threat.
On top of that, It must be a huge relief to have any kind of defense vs these would be bullies.

You’re not terribly stealthy any more once you start shooting at aircraft …
I’d rather have an anti-torpedo torpedo. 😀

You guys might be interested in this:

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/siam.html

So if RN follows a similar path, how ‘common‘ can CAAMM be?:D

Mayhap not new but as with US adoption of VLS on surface ships they do seem to have come late to the party but with an improved solution.

The logistics and admin advantages of having the same missile depoyed by SSN as by warplabe is potentially great. (Not to mention not having a whole new system to implement and troubleshoot).

Not really all-new. The IDAS missile seems to be mostly a shrunk Polyphem Triton, or at least derives a lot from that cancelled earlier design. The fibre-optic guidance is also transferred from Triton of course.

Not quite. Triton had significant differences from the land-based Polyphem, but was intended to have a fairly high degree of commonality with the latter missile. Today’s IDAS is in turn fairly different from Triton. One example is in wing configuration. Another is the warhead arrangement.

The Brits developed a sub launched Blowpipe SAM that was supposedly used by Israel.

The submarine type ordered by Israel was designed to be able to receive the UK weapon, but it was never fitted.

Who says that AIM-9X is being used as a surface to air missile? It could be used for any payload that can fit within the diameter of the missile body couldn’t it???

😉