US Navy Standard Missile Family

[bring_it_on]

Considering the Block II is about $31 million

But a quite a bit of that would be due to its mission needs. On the other hand, utilizing the front end of the SM6 and the larger stage would most likely not result in that big of a bump in cost. The SM6 is currently under $5 Million a round. It would be quite expensive to use an EKV equipped space interceptor for anti-ship purposes but I guess you could follow a growth strategy utilizing the larger stages and re-using SM6 parts for both better terminal intercept capability and longer ranged anti shipping roles. I'd put them on land as well without the other AEGIS BMD elements and develop a more Air defense oriented sensor with a smaller footprint.

 

[marauder2048]

Reposting the Figure from the SM-3 Block IIB trade study (by A.J. Pue et al.)

 

[sferrin]

Is the rest of the trade study publicly available?

edit: http://techdigest.jhuapl.edu/TD/td3205/32_05-Pue.pdf

 

[marauder2048]

Yep. Attaching a compressed version to stay within server file size limits.

 

[jsport]

http://news.usni.org/2016/02/04/secdef-carter-confirms-navy-developing-supersonic-anti-ship-missile-for-cruisers-destroyers

 

[sferrin]

http://news.usni.org/2016/02/04/secdef-carter-confirms-navy-developing-supersonic-anti-ship-missile-for-cruisers-destroyers

See post at top of this page.

 

[TomS]

I wonder whether this anti-ship mode uses the radar seeker or just off-board targeting. If the former, weight be seeing it come full circle back to the RGM-66F Standard Active anti-ship missile tested in the 1970s. Gotta say that even a semi-ballistic anti-ship missile dropping in at Mach 3+ certainly has the potential to ruin someone's day. Sure, high-end air-defense ships have a decent shot at intercepting it, but for a lot of navies that's just an unsolvable problem.

 

[Mark S.]

Here's a link to an article describing the use of earlier standard missiles in an anti-ship role during operation Praying Mantis: http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/29/politics/uss-simpson-decommissioned-warship/

 

[sferrin]

Here's a link to an article describing the use of earlier standard missiles in an anti-ship role during operation Praying Mantis: http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/29/politics/uss-simpson-decommissioned-warship/

Here's a video showing Standards in a surface attack role (not from Praying Mantis)

One comment I recall reading about Praying Mantis was, "by the time the Harpoons got there the ships were already underwater". ;D

 

[sferrin]

 

[sferrin]

Navy Sinks Former Frigate USS Reuben James in Test of New Supersonic Anti-Surface Missile

"The former frigate USS Reuben James (FFG-57) was sunk in January during a test of the Navy’s new anti-surface warfare (ASuW) variant of the Raytheon Standard Missile 6 (SM-6), company officials told USNI News on Monday.

The adaptation of the SM-6 was fired from guided missile destroyer USS John Paul Jones (DDG-32) and hit James during the Jan. 18 test at the U.S. Pacific Missile Range Facility off the coast of Hawaii, a Raytheon spokeswoman told USNI News.

“The test was a demonstration of the U.S. Navy’s concept of ‘distributed lethality,’ employing ships in dispersed formations to increase the offensive might of the surface force and enabling future options for the joint force commander,” read a release from Raytheon."

http://news.usni.org/2016/03/07/navy-sinks-former-frigate-uss-reuben-james-in-test-of-new-supersonic-anti-surface-missile

Seems like an expensive fig leaf.

 

[seruriermarshal]

Which warhead the raytheon SM-6 used ?

 

[TomS]

Mk125 focused blast-frag, 125 kg.

 

[sferrin]

Mk125 focused blast-frag, 125 kg.

Where'd you get that? Most I've seen said 115kg. (Though I'm wondering if the "115" was a mixup from the former Mk115 warhead.)

 

[TomS]

I've seen numbers from 115 kg to 135 kg in various sources. Andreas Parsch has 135 kg for Mk 125 in LASM (which is the same basic warhead), Jane's has 115kg, and I'm sure I've seen 125 kg as well. Ultimately, it doesn't matter much -- the differences might even just be a matter of what you count. How much of the warhead safing and arming mechanism is counted as warhead, for example.

 

[sferrin]

I've seen numbers from 115 kg to 135 kg in various sources. Andreas Parsch has 135 kg for Mk 125 in LASM (which is the same basic warhead), Jane's has 115kg, and I'm sure I've seen 1256 kg as well. Ultimately, it doesn't matter much -- the differences might even just be a matter of what you count. How much of the warhead safing and arming mechanism is counted as warhead, for example.

True. Re the Mk125 in LASM I'd read it was a "modified Mk125". What that means is anybody's guess.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Seems like an expensive fig leaf.

There are a lot of those around lately...

 

[Hobbes]

Seems like an expensive fig leaf.

So the USN now has a Mach 3.5 ASM in addition to its subsonic Harpoon, and it gets called a fig leaf? There's just no pleasing some people.

 

[sferrin]

Seems like an expensive fig leaf.

So the USN now has a Mach 3.5 ASM in addition to its subsonic Harpoon, and it gets called a fig leaf? There's just no pleasing some people.

If the USN had a Mach 3.5 ASM you'd be correct. It does not. It has a SAM they shot at a boat. Apples and oranges. It'd be like the USAF saying they had a new AAM because they shot down a helicopter with a laser guided bomb.

 

[Useful Dave]

Seems like an expensive fig leaf.

So the USN now has a Mach 3.5 ASM in addition to its subsonic Harpoon, and it gets called a fig leaf? There's just no pleasing some people.

I believe the issue is that, if it is utilised in a similar way to the earlier SM2ERs in the anti-surface role, the weapon is a purely surface-horizon ranged weapon due to needing to have the target illuminated by the ship, rather than over the horizon fired and self-guiding like Harpoon.

 

[TomS]

It is clearly not being used in the same way. For starters, SM-6 has an active radar seeker. It sounds like it will relying mainly on offboard targeting data in antiship mode, but the seeker might come into play for the end game. SM-6's seeker can track subsonic low altitude air targets in clutter; being able to track surface targets over water isn't a huge stretch from there.

 

[sferrin]

Seems like an expensive fig leaf.

So the USN now has a Mach 3.5 ASM in addition to its subsonic Harpoon, and it gets called a fig leaf? There's just no pleasing some people.

I believe the issue is that, if it is utilised in a similar way to the earlier SM2ERs in the anti-surface role, the weapon is a purely surface-horizon ranged weapon due to needing to have the target illuminated by the ship, rather than over the horizon fired and self-guiding like Harpoon.

SM-6 doesn't require that but it's still a poor substitute.

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20160318-mk41.html

Reopening Mk-41 production facility

 

[sferrin]

http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20160318-mk41.html

Reopening Mk-41 production facility

It's a bit disturbing that they closed it. Aegis ships are still being built.

 

[Moose]

http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20160318-mk41.html

Reopening Mk-41 production facility

It's a bit disturbing that they closed it. Aegis ships are still being built.

That's why it's re-opening. But a few years ago when Burke production was supposed to sunset LM closed the line.

 

[sferrin]

http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20160318-mk41.html

Reopening Mk-41 production facility

It's a bit disturbing that they closed it. Aegis ships are still being built.

That's why it's re-opening. But a few years ago when Burke production was supposed to sunset LM closed the line.

But there are still Aegis ships coming off the lines in other countries, and they've known the Zumwalt class was getting chopped for years. Maybe they built all they needed for future foreign applications? (Having experienced the inefficiency of starting, stopping, and restarting production first hand it is maddening. And then people wonder why things cost so much.)

 

[Mark S.]

Important systems like the MK-41 VLS are built and warehoused. You would need to match up production numbers of the VLS to ships that use them to find how many were built for future use. My take is that the number in storage fell (spares) to a level where they felt they needed to restart production.

 

[Moose]

http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20160318-mk41.html

Reopening Mk-41 production facility

It's a bit disturbing that they closed it. Aegis ships are still being built.

That's why it's re-opening. But a few years ago when Burke production was supposed to sunset LM closed the line.

But there are still Aegis ships coming off the lines in other countries, and they've known the Zumwalt class was getting chopped for years. Maybe they built all they needed for future foreign applications? (Having experienced the inefficiency of starting, stopping, and restarting production first hand it is maddening. And then people wonder why things cost so much.)

You should see the rest of the Burke supply chain. Re-start costs have been nasty across the board, the actually amazed it hasn't gotten more press. But LCS has tended to eclipse all other surface combatant coverage until recently.

 

[marauder2048]

Looks like the new SM-2 Block III varient with TVC will be called the "SM-2 Block IIIC" according to this weeks AvWeek.

"The centerpiece of the yet-to-be-funded SM-2 Block IIIC is a steering control upgrade—derived from the SM-6—the addition of jet-tab thrust vector control, improved guidance system and different autopilot. The thrust vector control is primarily aimed at enhancing short-range performance.

As a second step, the Navy and Raytheon are considering a dual-pulse rocket motor enhancement and introduction of more advanced guidance software, says Ron Shields, the company’s program manager. Shields says the upgrade program has already attracted international interest­—the SM-2 has a broad customer base, and many countries operating Block IIIAs would like to modernize them."

Hope it does get funded seeing how the -IIIB has been around for quite a while now.

According to fbo.gov, looks like integral TVC is coming to SM-2 and SM-6 in the form of a movable nozzle (a supersonic split line nozzle for SM-6). Earlier RFI with more details and imagery is attached.

 

[sferrin]

"supersonic split line nozzle"? ???

 

[Orionblamblam]

"supersonic split line nozzle"? ???

Like so:

 

[sferrin]

"supersonic split line nozzle"? ???

Like so:

Yeah, I saw the picture in the doc but was like, "okay, and?" Your explanation on your blog helped the light bulb go on.

 

[marauder2048]

"supersonic split line nozzle"? ???

Like so:

Yeah, I saw the picture in the doc but was like, "okay, and?" Your explanation on your blog helped the light bulb go on.

Care to post a link to the explanation? My understanding is that the supersonic split line nozzle achieves thrust deflection angles greater than nozzle deflection angles by exploiting supersonic shockwave propagation.

 

[sferrin]

http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=32201

 

[marauder2048]

http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=32201

It's a fine explanation. I would only add some motivation. Specifically, because thrust deflection angles are greater than nozzle deflection angles, the supersonic split line nozzle is well suited
for volume constrained installations that prevent large nozzle deflections.

 

[sferrin]

http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=32201

It's a fine explanation. I would only add some motivation. Specifically, because thrust deflection angles are greater than nozzle deflection angles, the supersonic split line nozzle is well suited
for volume constrained installations that prevent large nozzle deflections.

This oughta do it:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/865977.pdf


They actually made it into a book. Yours for the low low price of $129.70.

http://www.amazon.com/Test-Firing-Supersonic-Split-Line-Nozzle/dp/B00ARRLDJS

 

[bring_it_on]

USN plans active seeker refit for SM-2 missile



The US Navy (USN) plans to introduce an active radar seeker into the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) family as part of upgrade and obsolescence mitigation programme intended to maintain the effectiveness of SM-2 into the 2030s.

This move comes alongside activity to re-start SM-2 all-up-round (AUR) production in fiscal year (FY) 2017 to meet international customer demand through Foreign Military Sales (FMS).

Although the USN ceased procurement of new SM-2 missiles after its FY 2011 buy, the service expects to maintain the weapon in inventory for at least another 20 years. Under the FY 2017 budget plan, initial funding has been earmarked for SM-2 improvement requirements definition and risk reduction work.

 

[sferrin]

USN plans active seeker refit for SM-2 missile



The US Navy (USN) plans to introduce an active radar seeker into the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) family as part of upgrade and obsolescence mitigation programme intended to maintain the effectiveness of SM-2 into the 2030s.

This move comes alongside activity to re-start SM-2 all-up-round (AUR) production in fiscal year (FY) 2017 to meet international customer demand through Foreign Military Sales (FMS).

Although the USN ceased procurement of new SM-2 missiles after its FY 2011 buy, the service expects to maintain the weapon in inventory for at least another 20 years. Under the FY 2017 budget plan, initial funding has been earmarked for SM-2 improvement requirements definition and risk reduction work.

Did they ever implement the maneuverability upgrade? (TVC.)

 

[Moose]

Not for SM-2, Block IIIc was never funded. Unfortunately, hard budgetary choices got made. I wonder how they're approaching this upgrade from a programmatic point of view.

 

[marauder2048]

Not for SM-2, Block IIIc was never funded. Unfortunately, hard budgetary choices got made. I wonder how they're approaching this upgrade from a programmatic point of view.

There was a software based maneuverability upgrade for SM-2 Block IIIB, which IIRC, was mostly about 3D trajectory shaping to put the IIR seeker at the best aspect angle e.g. non head-on.

From NSWC Technical Digest 1994.