Updating Seaslug

[Rule of cool]

FWIW I'm coming to the conclusion that if the Country had the Type 984 3D search radar it would only the replace the Types 965 and 278. The Type 992 target indication radar would still be needed, and such a County would be in the unusual position of having a 3D search radar but a 2D TI radar.

 

[alertken]

uk75 #63: Seaslug: a dead end system
The wonder is...not that Seaslug did not have post-GWS-2 enhancements and/or more hulls, but that it went to sea.
Task identified 1944, County DLG Devonshire commissioned 15/11/62. Incompetent.

RN Future Fleet brain was long devoted from 1944 to anti-kamikaze (SAM) and anti-Gnat (smart) torpedo defence. Brain, 1946-64 centred in RN Scientific Service (RNSS) and in a plethora of its shore Research Establishments.

Hood, here, has recently posted in the sense that (smart) torpedoes are THE Project Management challenge; has noted RN Bath Architects' hostility to attempts by SAMsters to meddle with their designs; and #62: 1960 thoughts on NIGS. Dilandu #14 exquisite artwork, sculpted civil engineering of Seaslug launcher (recognisable to Brunel).

RN/RAF from 1943 operated W.Electric/GE Mk.24 Mine/FIDO passive but smart torpedo, claiming some of

50xU-boats it sank/damaged. P.Hennessy',Silent Deep,Pp.305/6 traces RN Controlled torps: " horror, dismal record";​

Mk.23Grog, ITP '55, Fleet Weapon Acceptance '71: “rotten...useless”.

Project Mngt. incompetence in smart underwater and Air weapons has led to RNSS/Establishments' extinction. UK now does such work in industry - MBDA + BAES. CVF overall Integration was contracted to US Consultancy/ Venture Finance House, KBR. Q: How did the Navy of Nelson so decline?

Candidate As include low RN volume, so rationed funds, spending time as cheaper than money.
I prefer silo-mngt: no sense of "System"; zero co-ordination to match needs of platform with needs of weapon.

 

[zen]

Seaslug could have been abandoned in 1956, in favour of Green Flax a.k.a Thunderbird MkII.
In fact the magazine system could handle the change, and the main differences would obviously be the guidance radar and a revised launcher.

But Seaslug suffered from timing, technology and politics.
The key decisions for service entry had to be by January 1948 to give enough time and yet in that very year the bulk of the team resigned over the move from Wescott to Farnborough.
Magazine system choices needed to be made by February 1948 yet the basics of the missile's dimensions had not yet been fixed.
Worse was to come as basic guidance choices had not been made and a mkI was driven forward while AW were told to get on with a beam rider MkII while the RAE worked the ideal final MkIII.

Edited in addition.
Remember that service entry was supposed to be 1956 in order to be ready for the Year of Maximum Danger 1957.
Korea had thrown the whole effort put of kilter and most key decisions were 1954.
But the seperate cruiser magazine system actually was prototyped on Girdle Ness along with the original tripple launcher.
....of which the twin is essentially a cheap cut down version of this.

 

[SeaslugMk2]

Girdleness had a triple launcher because the Project 502 team's analysis showed that a three round salvo would be required to meet the 85% hit probability required by the specification. In practice the Mk1 missile achieved a 75% hit rate for a single missile; therefore a twin launcher would suffice.

Incidentally, I have done a fair bit of analysis of the Seaslug Mk2 firing reports I have had access to and there is (oddly) no correlation between target range or speed and success rate, but a very definite one between target altitude and success.

SRJ.

 

[Dilandu]

Incidentally, I have done a fair bit of analysis of the Seaslug Mk2 firing reports I have had access to and there is (oddly) no correlation between target range or speed and success rate, but a very definite one between target altitude and success.

Hm. The higher target, the better sucsess rate? Maybe linked with the beam reflection from surface?

 

[starviking]

uk75 #63: Seaslug: a dead end system
The wonder is...not that Seaslug did not have post-GWS-2 enhancements and/or more hulls, but that it went to sea.
Task identified 1944, County DLG Devonshire commissioned 15/11/62. Incompetent.

IIRC, the missile team tasked with developing what became Seaslug had an enforced post-war move from London far into the countryside. This resulted in a lot of the team resigning, and so the whole group had to be reformed - from people who didn’t mind bracing countryside air.

 

[SeaslugMk2]

Hm. The higher target, the better sucsess rate? Maybe linked with the beam reflection from surface?

The issue of surface reflection was dealt with by deflecting the gathering beam upwards for low altitude targets. The problem was that to engage targets below half a degree elevation required a terminal dive (CASWTD -pronounced ‘custard’).
Targets above 1000ft -65% SSKP.
Below 1000ft -25%.

SRJ.