Sea Slug with tandem booster

[zen]

It's in the title.
What happens if the Admiralty decides in favour of tandem booster?
At the time, the answer is that tandem favours assembly of the missile from storage.

But how does this effect outcome of Cruiser and Destroyer design studies?

Design of launcher as well. Would we see a twin arm launcher?

Does it effect outcome of system design, perhaps a common design of system for both Cruisers and Destroyers?

Does this effect of development of mkII and possible MkIII?
Do we see Blue Slug result?

Does this make elements of NIGS more possible?

 

[uk 75]

I read somewhere that the wrap around boosters actually took up less space and had the advantage of better accuracy and accelerations. Problems with Mk2 have not been really clarified.
US gave up on Standard ER for most ships in favour of MR just as we did with Seadart. But Standard evolved. Hard to see even a different config Seaslug evolving into a UK Standard MR, Seadart or an eqivalent should have been ready in 1968 not 1974

 

[zen]

No I'll continue on this thanks.

Assuming a tandem design chosen and a fairly reasonable shift to a twin arm launcher, the system would be comparable with Terrier.
Albeit the Sea Slug would still be of slightly larger diameter at 14" or more. (I have different figures for some reason) Presumably with a larger diameter of booster.

This sort of Terrier style magazine system suggests it would be easier to add in a swappable conventional or nuclear warhead.

We can see the shift to polyrod as quite plausible for SARH guidance and with this the phasing out of the beam riders along with the large and expensive Type 901 Target Tracking and Missile Guidance Radar at a later date.
SARH would expand the potential range, and improvements in rocket fuel would further result in improvements.

The late 60's could thus see the shrinking electronics permit Command Guidance as well.

However had this decision been taken the alternative of navalising Green Flax a.k.a Thunderbird MkII is much stronger.

 

[pathology_doc]

The question is of whether the UK can afford a ship large enough to take the system you propose, including the research and development costs AND TIME to put the new arrangement into service (and the same goes for navalising Thunderbird).

Standard MR grew out of Tartar because of that missile's requirement for zero-assembly loading direct from magazine to rail, and the remarkable improvements in performance it demonstrated, quickly outstripping the first-generation Terrier. The current single-stage (+/- VLS booster) Standard is Tartar-D's offspring, not Terrier's.

Sea Slug never had a single-stage equivalent to act as a basis for the development of a Tartar/Standard MR-type weapon. All that was new work, which became Sea Dart.

Terrier very quickly went from a winged, Sparrow-like missile to the Standard MR-like profile it finished with as Standard ER; it was a tail-control missile even in the pure beam-riding era. Sea Slug's aerodynamics remained first-generation throughout its service life. It always looked like an overgrown, sharp-nosed Red Top.