MBDA Future Cruise / Anti-Ship Weapon (FC / ASW)

Yeah that would be super good but its gonna be complicated. But i think its possible to do it.
 
kqcke for you said:
Yeah that would be super good but its gonna be complicated. But i think its possible to do it.
Click to expand...

There's the example of 3M54K, with a supersonic sprint stage that launches from a subsonic carrier airframe. Definitely complex but also doable.
 
TomS said:
There's the example of 3M54K, with a supersonic sprint stage that launches from a subsonic carrier airframe. Definitely complex but also doable.
Click to expand...
Yeah but 3M54K isn't Limited to MK.41 size and doesnt have an LO requirment. Its Shows that it is possible but we want something way harder to build. Tought it could be one of the best ASHM in the world.
 
kqcke for you said:
Yeah but 3M54K isn't Limited to MK.41 size and doesnt have an LO requirment. Its Shows that it is possible but we want something way harder to build. Tought it could be one of the best ASHM in the world.
Click to expand...

It fits a 21-inch torpedo tube, though it does seem to be too long for a Mk41. If you accepted less range on the cruise segment and shaped the carrier fuselage for reduced RCS, I'll bet you could get close.
 
TomS said:
It fits a 21-inch torpedo tube, though it does seem to be too long for a Mk41. If you accepted less range on the cruise segment and shaped the carrier fuselage for reduced RCS, I'll bet you could get close.
Click to expand...
Maybe. Another question would be to make what LO. The whole Missile or only the sprint Part? If we do sea skimming they don't have that mutch of a range to see it. Hard to see and very fast could be very deadly but it probaly won't be that nice for the range
 
kqcke for you said:
Maybe. Another question would be to make what LO. The whole Missile or only the sprint Part? If we do sea skimming they don't have that mutch of a range to see it. Hard to see and very fast could be very deadly but it probaly won't be that nice for the range
Click to expand...
I think the sprint part is the nose of the missile. So do head-on LO shaping like the newest Tomahawks, and both subsonic and supersonic stretches are covered.
 
kqcke for you said:
Maybe. Another question would be to make what LO. The whole Missile or only the sprint Part? If we do sea skimming they don't have that mutch of a range to see it. Hard to see and very fast could be very deadly but it probaly won't be that nice for the range
Click to expand...

You'd really have to model it, but my gut says you make the carrier airframe LO so that it can get quite close to the target and don't bother trying to reduce the sprint stage RCS because it's going it have a screaming IR signature anyway. If you can get relatively close before you light the sprint stage, the overall engagement space is closed up dramatically.
 
Last edited:
TomS said:
You'd really have to model it, but my gut says you make the carrier airframe LO so that it can get quite close to the target and don't bother trying to reduce the sprint stage RCS because it's going it have a screaming IR signature anyway. If you can get relatively close before you light the sprint stage, the overall engagement space is closed up dramatically.
Click to expand...
True. At Mach 3, that missile is covering 1km/sec. How far is the radar horizon for something 10m off the deck? 20km? less? Your total system reaction time is now ~20sec or less, assuming that the missile is obvious enough at that range to be detected. ~1.5sec human reaction times to slap the great big red "defenses to AUTO" button, SM2(equivalent) intercepts at about 8km, 1sec "look" before next shot, RIM-116(equivalent) intercepts at about 3km, then it's down to CIWS starting firing with missile at 2km with initial impact of rounds at 1km and destruction at about 500m.
 
Scott Kenny said:
True. At Mach 3, that missile is covering 1km/sec. How far is the radar horizon for something 10m off the deck? 20km? less? Your total system reaction time is now ~20sec or less, assuming that the missile is obvious enough at that range to be detected. ~1.5sec human reaction times to slap the great big red "defenses to AUTO" button, SM2(equivalent) intercepts at about 8km, 1sec "look" before next shot, RIM-116(equivalent) intercepts at about 3km, then it's down to CIWS starting firing with missile at 2km with initial impact of rounds at 1km and destruction at about 500m.
Click to expand...

I think subsonic cruise and supersonic sprint is the worst of both worlds. You add complexity dramatically. And after you've managed to sneak really close to a target you give it all up in the final burst of speed. Given the reaction times of modern defence systems I don't think it adds anything really, apart from 100% guaranteeing that they will detect you on the run in. Perhaps it makes sense with a non-LO missile, but if you've gone to all of the trouble of making it LO you may as well use it all the way in.

But either way it won't happen....with the subsonic stealthy missile arriving by 2028 that means that its a low risk development in terms of its flight characteristics. There just isn't time for the sort of flight development that a 2 stage missile would require.
 
timmymagic said:
I think subsonic cruise and supersonic sprint is the worst of both worlds. You add complexity dramatically. And after you've managed to sneak really close to a target you give it all up in the final burst of speed. Given the reaction times of modern defence systems I don't think it adds anything really, apart from 100% guaranteeing that they will detect you on the run in. Perhaps it makes sense with a non-LO missile, but if you've gone to all of the trouble of making it LO you may as well use it all the way in.
Click to expand...
Thats the thing because LO wont Work all the way. The closer you get the weaker your LO shield is. While russian and Chinese Radar may not be so good now they will get better and Stealth only won't be the solution anymore. Then its both.
 
At close enough ranges, radars will detect stealthy targets, so it makes sense to minimise exposure time during the terminal phase when the missile will be detected anyway.

The main problem with subsonic cruise phase is the amount of time it will take for the missile to get to its target, and whether said target will still be there. I know the US put significant effort into trying to achieve accurate Over-The-Horizon targeting during the last decade of the Cold War, to be achieved entirely by passive means via White Cloud and EP-3s etc (thus ideally giving the Soviets no forewarning, in the belief that they would be keeping active emissions to a minimum, hence air-search radars off, until they detect the TASM seekers switching on).

It will be interesting to find out how that has developed in the intervening 30 years.
 
A Tentative Fleet Plan said:
At close enough ranges, radars will detect stealthy targets, so it makes sense to minimise exposure time during the terminal phase when the missile will be detected anyway.

The main problem with subsonic cruise phase is the amount of time it will take for the missile to get to its target, and whether said target will still be there. I know the US put significant effort into trying to achieve accurate Over-The-Horizon targeting during the last decade of the Cold War, to be achieved entirely by passive means via White Cloud and EP-3s etc (thus ideally giving the Soviets no forewarning, in the belief that they would be keeping active emissions to a minimum, hence air-search radars off, until they detect the TASM seekers switching on).

It will be interesting to find out how that has developed in the intervening 30 years.
Click to expand...

LRASM suggests they think they have solved this to a significant degree.
 
timmymagic said:
I think subsonic cruise and supersonic sprint is the worst of both worlds. You add complexity dramatically. And after you've managed to sneak really close to a target you give it all up in the final burst of speed. Given the reaction times of modern defence systems I don't think it adds anything really, apart from 100% guaranteeing that they will detect you on the run in. Perhaps it makes sense with a non-LO missile, but if you've gone to all of the trouble of making it LO you may as well use it all the way in.

But either way it won't happen....with the subsonic stealthy missile arriving by 2028 that means that its a low risk development in terms of its flight characteristics. There just isn't time for the sort of flight development that a 2 stage missile would require.
Click to expand...
LO doesn't make the missile invisible, it just greatly reduces the range at which the defenses can get enough of a return to get a firing solution.

If the missile is supersonic in the terminal phase, it spends minimum time inside the "already detected by the defenses" range. If you can get the detected range down to less than 10km, you just removed their SM2/ESSM equivalents from the defensive engagement entirely, because by the time the first defensive missiles arrive the incoming missile is already at the "launch commit" range for the RAM equivalent missiles! (Yes, I'm using US missiles, because the first time I did this thought experiment was with the 3M54 Klubs, attacking a US ship)
 
And If we go to russian and some chinese ships they need even more time thanks to cold Launch so its even harder for them
 
Scott Kenny said:
LO doesn't make the missile invisible, it just greatly reduces the range at which the defenses can get enough of a return to get a firing solution.

If the missile is supersonic in the terminal phase, it spends minimum time inside the "already detected by the defenses" range. If you can get the detected range down to less than 10km, you just removed their SM2/ESSM equivalents from the defensive engagement entirely, because by the time the first defensive missiles arrive the incoming missile is already at the "launch commit" range for the RAM equivalent missiles! (Yes, I'm using US missiles, because the first time I did this thought experiment was with the 3M54 Klubs, attacking a US ship)
Click to expand...

Yes, subsonic cruise and supersonic terminal is the most dangerous and difficult to stop attack method for sea skimmers. A torpedo might be worse in terms of lethal effects but would likely have less range, unless it were a proper heavyweight, which magnifies the Klub's main issue: the missiles that haul this kind of stuff are humongous.

I'm not sure an anti-ship Klub would fit in any American VLS outside of a Trident for instance since the missile is almost 10 meters long.
 
Well nothing you can't solve with trait offs. Smaller range and warhead can help to reduce the size. Just like better technology with smaller Electronics or lower fuel consumption with the engine for subsonic flight.
 
Kat Tsun said:
torpedo might be worse in terms of lethal effects
Click to expand...
Lightweight, so the 324-400mm torps, are pretty terrible at damaging anything more than an OPV I suppose. AFAIK they use shaped charge since even a tiny one can pop open a sub's shell and kill pretty much anything inside. The "keel-blowing" heavy torps and Quickstrike bombs are pure HE, but their warhead are also over twice as heavy.
How about a missile that dive into the shallow zone and cruise, supercavitating-style, and detonate just below the ship? Or something that skims around half a meter AGL. So it would be pushing Mach 1 with a scramjet. What is the minimal engagement altitude for ESSM again?
 
asVAL said:
Lightweight, so the 324-400mm torps, are pretty terrible at damaging anything more than an OPV I suppose. AFAIK they use shaped charge since even a tiny one can pop open a sub's shell and kill pretty much anything inside. The "keel-blowing" heavy torps and Quickstrike bombs are pure HE, but their warhead are also over twice as heavy.
How about a missile that dive into the shallow zone and cruise, supercavitating-style, and detonate just below the ship?
Click to expand...

That could work, but it would require extensive development time. It would also be more elegant, perhaps.

A heavyweight torpedo by contrast would just require a bigger missile. This is probably easier/faster to do.

I guess if you really needed the first one to fit in an existing system, you could sling some sort of water impact, delayed fuse SDB though.
 
Kat Tsun said:
Yes, subsonic cruise and supersonic terminal is the most dangerous and difficult to stop attack method for sea skimmers. A torpedo might be worse in terms of lethal effects but would likely have less range, unless it were a proper heavyweight, which magnifies the Klub's main issue: the missiles that haul this kind of stuff are humongous.

I'm not sure an anti-ship Klub would fit in any American VLS outside of a Trident for instance since the missile is almost 10 meters long.
Click to expand...
So sacrifice some range, what antiship missile needs a 1500km range?

Plus, my current mental model for a US missile would be whatever turbofan engine, with an afterburner and convergent-divergent nozzle added. Since the higher the bypass ratio, the greater the thrust increase possible from afterburner.
 
Personally I've hypothesised a two stage system, seeking up to the Horizon and Sprint across the gap.

Frankly the Sprint phase has to be explosive in acceleration to stand a chance. So likely high energetic rocket and as fast as possible.
 
See page 26, "Threat-D" feasibility study using Tomahawk + Hawk or Tomahawk + SM .......

www.slideserve.com

PPT - Aerial Target Systems Update PowerPoint Presentation, free download - ID:3297415

Aerial Target Systems Update. CAPT Rick Smith Program Manager, PMA-208 Email: SmithRW4@navair.navy.mil (301) 757-6129. NDIA Aerial Targets Conference 19 November 2003. Outline. Program Mission Supersonic Targets Subsonic Targets Future Development Target Control Systems
www.slideserve.com www.slideserve.com

Page 15-16

 
Last edited:
zen said:
Personally I've hypothesised a two stage system, seeking up to the Horizon and Sprint across the gap.

Frankly the Sprint phase has to be explosive in acceleration to stand a chance. So likely high energetic rocket and as fast as possible.
Click to expand...
Going from some 600lbs thrust to 2400lbs thrust in afterburner should do it.
 
Assume 20nm Horizon limit.

At 600kts or nmph this equates to 2 minutes to close the distance
At 1,200kts or roughly mach 1.8 that reduces to 1 minute
At 2,400kts or mach 3.6 that's 30 seconds
At 4,800kts or mach 7.2 that's 15 seconds
At 9,600 or mach 14.4 that's 7.5 seconds.
 
zen said:
Assume 20nm Horizon limit.

At 600kts or nmph this equates to 2 minutes to close the distance
At 1,200kts or roughly mach 1.8 that reduces to 1 minute
At 2,400kts or mach 3.6 that's 30 seconds
At 4,800kts or mach 7.2 that's 15 seconds
At 9,600 or mach 14.4 that's 7.5 seconds.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

For most missiles, seems the practical speed limit at low altitude is about 1800knots, Mach 2.7 ish. 45 seconds from detection to impact.

Under shoot-look-shoot systems, that gives the defenses one ESSM-equivalent shot, one RAM-equivalent shot, and CIWS.

Imagine what happens if you can do that Mach 2.7ish sprint but your radar detection range is down to 10nmi due to head-on LO shaping (and ONLY head-on, for cost). 23 seconds from detection to impact. That takes the ESSM-equivalents out of the defensive engagement entirely, as they'd hit at about 5nmi and leave the RAM-equivalents to hit at 2nmi (and CIWS needs to start the engagement at 2nmi with a supersonic missile).
 
However a Mach 7 missile might only need to break apart into multiple shrapnel and the impact is likely to pepper a ship with many holes. Increasing the likely destructive and disabling of it.
15 seconds.

Get it to 10nm and we're talking 7 seconds.
 
kqcke for you said:
Sea skimming with mach 7? Why don't we just do sea swimming at that Point ?
Click to expand...

Indeed. Plus, im sure how fast you could accelerate to that kind of speed. I'd be perfectly happy at 2.5M with some maneuvering ability.
 
breakingdefense.com

47 Seconds From Hell: A Challenge To Navy Doctrine - Breaking Defense

WASHINGTON: Someone shoots a cruise missile at you. How far away would you like to stop it: over 200 miles out or less than 35? If you answered “over 200,” congratulations, you’re thinking like the US Navy, which has spent billions of dollars over decades to develop ever more sophisticated...
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

The USN expects about M3.5 or so at 30 nautical miles, which matches Brahmos and other high supersonic missiles. M7 is more in line with Zircon, but it flies at SR-71 altitudes instead of sea level, though this still presents a difficult air defense problem of course.

In combination, they are probably unstoppable without taking ship casualties, given something like Aegis. PAAMS may fare better.
 
zen said:
However a Mach 7 missile might only need to break apart into multiple shrapnel and the impact is likely to pepper a ship with many holes. Increasing the likely destructive and disabling of it.
Click to expand...
Crud, a Mach 2.7 missile can do that just fine if destroyed at 500m from the target!

Good luck doing Mach 7 close to the water, however. Even if you can deal with the thermal issues and drag resulting from going that fast in the thick atmosphere, there's no space/time to react to big waves, so you're going to have to average up higher, probably 5-10m above the tops of the waves, probably 10-15m above the average sea level. And that punches your "crossing the horizon" distance back up.
 
Have they ever tried a system like SDIs Homing Overlay Experiment type vehicle for the anti-anti-ship missile mission or are blast fragmentation warheads easier and more effective.
 
However it doesn't take a genuis to see that if we can sneak up to just 10nm.close, and assuming 14 seconds is too short for anything but a single RAM shot at best, then Mach 3.5 is good enough......and fast enough to not need much explosive warhead.
 
bobbymike said:
Have they ever tried a system like SDIs Homing Overlay Experiment type vehicle for the anti-anti-ship missile mission or are blast fragmentation warheads easier and more effective.
Click to expand...
For things in the air, damaging their wings, tail, or control surfaces is enough to make them crash at long range.

It's the terminal defense, when the missile can stay on a ballistic path and still hit the ship, that you basically need to detonate whatever warhead at 500-1000m. And that can take a direct hit from something big, or a literal buzzsaw of rounds.


zen said:
However it doesn't take a genuis to see that if we can sneak up to just 10nm.close, and assuming 14 seconds is too short for anything but a single RAM shot at best, then Mach 3.5 is good enough......and fast enough to not need much explosive warhead.
Click to expand...
Remember that there's also usually a Phalanx CIWS gun in there, too, so it's one RAM shot and then CIWS for a few seconds.

But you still need a couple hundred kg or more of HE, ships are big targets. A tank is basically one compartment on a ship, so an attack that will total a tank may not damage more than one compartment on a ship.

Overall, though? That's the horror of the SS-N-27. No time for all your defenses to work.
 
Scott Kenny said:
But you still need a couple hundred kg or more of HE, ships are big targets. A tank is basically one compartment on a ship, so an attack that will total a tank may not damage more than one compartment on a ship.
Click to expand...
Yes and No.
Ships are not tanks and noware near that level of armouring in this age, or fact the density of systems.
So it's more a need to distribute the effect of the weapon to hit as many vital elements as possible.

Trying to hit it with big AP dart is likely to just pass through the ship, leaving only a small hole.

The big explosive warhead is to distribute effect and shock load the structure and systems.
 
Last edited:
Was there ever a successful combat engagement recorded by the Klub-S in any conflict? I am interested in a real life engagement that shows its effectiveness .....
 
zjz said:
Was there ever a successful combat engagement recorded by the Klub-S in any conflict? I am interested in a real life engagement that shows its effectiveness .....
Click to expand...
Well Not against ships to my knowledge but only against Land Targets with the Land Attack Version
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom