5 Inch Deadeye/ SALGP Guided Projectile

Hood

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
6 September 2006
Messages
4,821
Reaction score
9,395
Since guided 5in shells, especially Deadeye, have come up in a couple of naval topics recently, here is a description from Jane's Weapon Systems.
Development seemed to be progressing well before it was cancelled due to budget cutbacks.

Interestingly it looks like there were plans to scale up Deadeye for 8in and 16in rounds which must have been linked to Iowa and potential Des Moines-class reactivations.
 

Attachments

  • Deadeye 5in naval shell.jpg
    Deadeye 5in naval shell.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 131
Hood said:
Since guided 5in shells, especially Deadeye, have come up in a couple of naval topics recently, here is a description from Jane's Weapon Systems.
Development seemed to be progressing well before it was cancelled due to budget cutbacks.

Interestingly it looks like there were plans to scale up Deadeye for 8in and 16in rounds which must have been linked to Iowa and potential Des Moines-class reactivations.
Click to expand...
8" was also for the Mk71 gun, that could be refitted onto any Sprucan or Tico. Or anything else with a 5" Mk42 turret spot.
 
Scott Kenny said:
8" was also for the Mk71 gun, that could be refitted onto any Sprucan or Tico. Or anything else with a 5" Mk42 turret spot.
Click to expand...
Mark 71 was pretty much dead by the time Deadeye got started. There were proposed semi-active laser homing projectiles for it, AFAIK, but as a separate programme.
 
Yellow Palace said:
Mark 71 was pretty much dead by the time Deadeye got started. There were proposed semi-active laser homing projectiles for it, AFAIK, but as a separate programme.
Click to expand...

The original 8-inch SALGP appears to have been called Paveway (from when PAVEWAY was a general term for laser guidance, not specific to the air-dropped LGB.)

The 8-inch Mk 71 did attempt a brief comeback in the 1980s, around the same time as the battleships. There's an ad from that era in the Mk 71 thread, I think.

Aside: the Mk 71 won't fit everywhere a Mk 45 will. It's deeper by about a full deck and so could not fit in the aft position on the Spruances, for example. And I think it would have displaced some forward VLS cells in the DDG-51 in a proposed retrofit there as well.
 
TomS said:
from when PAVEWAY was a general term for laser guidance, not specific to the air-dropped LGB
Click to expand...
The original PAVE WAY wasn't specifically laser guidance - the GBU-8 HOBOS was developed under PAVE WAY II, which was the electro-optical guidance part of the project, and there was a PAVE WAY III aimed at developing an infra-red guided bomb which apparently went nowhere.
 
Yellow Palace said:
The original PAVE WAY wasn't specifically laser guidance - the GBU-8 HOBOS was developed under PAVE WAY II, which was the electro-optical guidance part of the project, and there was a PAVE WAY III aimed at developing an infra-red guided bomb which apparently went nowhere.
Click to expand...
To add even more confusion Paveway II & III were later reused for later laser-guided bomb programs.
 
Paveway 1-3 were separate seeker design branches that should not be confused with design series I, II, III, and IV; all incorporating laser seekers and some using multiple seeker technologies. Paveway 2 used televsion technology 4-5 times the cost of Paveway 1, which really would have been interesting. The problem was it didn't offer enough utility of purpose, so got cancelled. Paveway 3 was more or less a dead end SARH approach that had few applications. Probably not enough call for SARH from guns that were short ranged compared to missiles.

Would be interesting to see GBU-58 technology deployed in the larger guns. Probably too little too late considering rocket technology is easier to incorporate.
 
MadRat said:
Would be interesting to see GBU-58 technology deployed in the larger guns. Probably too little too late considering rocket technology is easier to incorporate.
Click to expand...
Today, the interesting bit is the Excalibur HTK, which is "using technology from the GBU-53/B StormBreaker" in a 155mm artillery shell. If it is using the entire StormBreaker sensor set, that's MMW radar, SAL, imaging IR, GPS/Inertial, and a data link.
 
Pretty impressive for a 6" diameter. I assume the electroptical grid sensor incorporates SAL and IIR. I wonder if the datalink and MMW coop their receivers. GPS is surprisingly straightforward in hardware with much of its complexity hidden in the software.
 
MadRat said:
Pretty impressive for a 6" diameter. I assume the electroptical grid sensor incorporates SAL and IIR. I wonder if the datalink and MMW coop their receivers. GPS is surprisingly straightforward in hardware with much of its complexity hidden in the software.
Click to expand...
I mean, the core GBU-53 is right about 6" in diameter, the wing sections take it up to 6.5-7"

So the real question would be if the basic chipset was cannon rated already or if HTK was just based on the GBU-53 chipset and hardened. I'm guessing it was the latter, it'd be silly to make a bomb guidance scheme rated for anything over about 20 gees.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I mean, the core GBU-53 is right about 6" in diameter, the wing sections take it up to 6.5-7"

So the real question would be if the basic chipset was cannon rated already or if HTK was just based on the GBU-53 chipset and hardened. I'm guessing it was the latter, it'd be silly to make a bomb guidance scheme rated for anything over about 20 gees.
Click to expand...
Not unless you were planning on having the the same chip work for both Shell and Bomb.

Cause I imagine you could replace the rocket fuel for the air Launch type instead of the standard shell sustainor ones.

Cause as is this thing would be able to fit easily in a Zuni pod.
 
Firefinder said:
Not unless you were planning on having the the same chip work for both Shell and Bomb.

Cause I imagine you could replace the rocket fuel for the air Launch type instead of the standard shell sustainor ones.

Cause as is this thing would be able to fit easily in a Zuni pod.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's where I'm tripping up. I can't see spending all the $$$$$ to harden a chipset intended for bomb or rocket use up to cannon launch levels to let the exact same chips be used in either bombs or cannons, without getting the .gov to pay for it as a program of record. Unless the entire sensor set is on a single chip?

Pretty sure a Zuni pod doesn't exceed about 5 gees in launch, so you could use the bomb chips without modifications.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom