Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US Naval Weapon Systems

    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Jun 27, 2015 11:31 pm

    Mike E wrote:Don't worry... 

    These are baseless claims and nothing more. The Navy seems to think that just because their missile can intercept a non-maneuverable, subsonic AShM it will be able to intercept every Russian one. 

    The RAM's use a very small fragmentation warhead that would require a direct hit on the AShM to take it down...against a missile that is *faster* and also maneuvering (especially in groups), that is unlikely. 

    Besides we use so few RAM systems it barely makes a difference.


    You're saying that all US destroyers aren't equipped with Sea-Ram systems ? Are you sure ?
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2646
    Points : 2684
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  Mike E on Sun Jun 28, 2015 1:47 am

    max steel wrote:
    Mike E wrote:Don't worry... 

    These are baseless claims and nothing more. The Navy seems to think that just because their missile can intercept a non-maneuverable, subsonic AShM it will be able to intercept every Russian one. 

    The RAM's use a very small fragmentation warhead that would require a direct hit on the AShM to take it down...against a missile that is *faster* and also maneuvering (especially in groups), that is unlikely. 

    Besides we use so few RAM systems it barely makes a difference.
    You're saying that all US destroyers aren't equipped with Sea-Ram systems ? Are you sure ?
    As of right now, no active US Destroyer is equipped with RAM systems...only the Phalanx CIWS.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:12 pm

    I guess you're confusing it with  newly tested us navy RIM-116C Block 2 RAM .

    Nope i'm talking about Sea-Ram Block 0 and Block 1 .  RIM-116B Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) ( block 1 ) has Speed in excess of Mach 2.

    You said none of usa ship uses it . Well The RIM-116 is in service on several American  warships . The missile is currently active aboard Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers, Nimitz-class aircraft carriers, Wasp-class amphibious assault ships, Tarawa-class amphibious assault ships, San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ships, Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship, Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ships, and littoral combat ships (LCS) .

    RAM is better than Phalanx CIWS against anti-ship missiles .


    Last edited by max steel on Mon Jun 29, 2015 1:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21517
    Points : 22067
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:34 am

    RAM is better than Phalanx CIWS against anti-ship missiles .

    Phalanx is ineffective against low flying targets... anything below about 20m and it suffers from multipath returns via its radar and can't hit anything... subsonic or supersonic.

    there is a reason Kashtan has thermal and digital optics as well as MMW and CMW radars on the mount... each technology has strengths and weaknesses and together they are the best solution...
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Mon Jun 29, 2015 1:42 pm

    But what about RIM-116B and newly tested RIM-116C SeaRams garry ?  I know about ciws thats not an issue .
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21517
    Points : 22067
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 01, 2015 6:31 am

    Hard to say... there is a reason why after testing with MA-31s that the Americans want to test with better analogs of heavier Russian weapons.

    A 600kg missile moving at mach 2.5 or so is not the same as a Moskit 4.5 ton missile moving at a similar speed, or an Onyx 2.5 ton missile... It might be like a motor bike hitting a truck on the highway, or it might be like a fly hitting your windscreen on the highway.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Sun Jul 12, 2015 3:47 pm

    We need more info on US Sea-ram 116-B vs Russian asms . Btw do Russians use sea-rams ?



    The US Navy just tested a giant electromagnetic catapult

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21517
    Points : 22067
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:45 am

    Btw do Russians use sea-rams ?

    Why would they use inferior US missiles?

    Russian and Soviet ships have used the naval equivalent of OSA and TOR and Pantsir in the past.

    For the future they have guided 57mm cannon shells in development for dealing with incoming threats, and they also have a unified service missile called 9M100 which will use IIR guidance in a short range missile for the airforce, army and navy.
    Book.
    Book.

    Posts : 696
    Points : 755
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  Book. on Thu Jul 23, 2015 5:45 am

    SM-2 missile explodes, damaging Navy destroyer
    By: David Larter, Staff writer 5:40 p.m. EDT July 22, 2015

    A missile exploded as it was being fired from the destroyer The Sullivans in a Saturday exercise, damaging the the side of the ship but not injuring any crewmembers, according to Naval Sea Systems Command.

    The Standard Missile-2, fired from the aft missile deck, caused some damage to the port side of the ship, according to a NAVSEA statement. The warhead fitted to the malfunctioning missile was not activated at the time of launch.

    "On July 18 at approximately 9 a.m. a Standard Missile-2 test missile exploded after suffering a malfunction as it was fired from the guided-missile destroyer USS The Sullivans during a planned missile exercise off the coast of Virginia," NAVSEA said. "There were no injuries and only minor damage to the port side of the ship resulting from missile debris."

    NAVSEA, which is responsible for building and maintaining ships and systems for the Navy, has launched an investigation into the incident. The misfire was first reported by USNI News, which obtained images of of the explosion.

    "An investigation into the malfunction has been ordered and is being conducted by the Navy's Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems, which is part of Naval Sea Systems Command," NAVSEA said. "It is too early to determine what, if any, effect this will have on the ship's schedule."

    NAVSEA spokesman Chris Johnson said The Sullivans crew responded, and quickly extinguished, the fire on deck.

    http://www.navytimes.com/story/breaking-news/2015/07/22/sullivans-missile-explosion-sm2--sullivans-navy-destroyer/30530395/

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Dybsqx1

    SM 2 go boom!
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2646
    Points : 2684
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  Mike E on Thu Jul 23, 2015 6:30 am

    Book. wrote:SM 2 go boom!
    lol! Superior American technology in action!
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Sat Oct 24, 2015 6:56 pm

    US Navy Orders $160Mln of Phalanx Anti-Missile Machine Guns for Ships

    Why are they even using useless Phalanx anyways ?
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Oct 24, 2015 7:37 pm

    max steel wrote:US Navy Orders $160Mln of Phalanx Anti-Missile Machine Guns for Ships

    Why are they even using useless Phalanx anyways ?

    Better something then nothing, i guess. Rolling Eyes
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Thu Oct 29, 2015 5:54 pm

    Navy Planning Torpedo Restart, Would Be Modular Design With Multiple Payloads

    The Navy hopes to restart its heavyweight torpedo program after a more than 15-year hiatus in production, but those plans could be hampered by a long-term continuing resolution.
    Director of Undersea Warfare Rear Adm. Charles Richard left no doubt about his need for the program: “I have to go get that line started,” he said last week at the annual Naval Submarine League symposium.

    Program Executive Office for Submarines Executive Director George Drakeley said at the same event that the submarine community is currently limited to the Mk 54 lightweight torpedo, the Mk 48 heavyweight torpedo and the Tomahawk missile.

    “That’s really not that great, that’s not a good state of affairs,” he said.
    “Now there’s a number of programs in the [research and development] area that I can’t discuss here, but we are looking at other weapons – but I say to the community we need to do a better job giving the warfighter more weapons here.”

    And that limited selection of weapons is aging, he said. Discussing the Mk 48 Mod 7, the newest of the torpedoes, Drakeley said, “we refurbish these, we use them a lot, we fire them for training and then bring them back and refurb and reuse, but they’re getting old. And though when you look at the picture of it it looks like it’s kind of a modular weapon, we really have only been upgrading the forward part with the sonars and the electronics. So in the torpedo restart, we are going to be making this a truly modular design that you can pull out a section and plug in different payloads or different propulsion systems or different fuel supplies, and so as you’re developing the payloads you ought to be thinking about how you integrate with the modular Mk 48 some new capabilities and the like.”

    But Richard said the ability to get that modular, plug-and-play torpedo off the ground could be hurt by the budget. The Navy is currently operating under a continuing resolution, which funds the government at last year’s levels until December. Congress appears to have reached a two-year budget deal to provide some relief from the Budget Control Act spending levels, but it is unclear if Congress will be able to pass a line-by-line spending bill by December or if the continuing resolution will be extended.

    “That’s a body blow in terms of my ability to get the resources and get them into the hands of those program managers so that we can go and make torpedoes. That’s next to impossible under a continuing resolution,” Richard said.
    “So I’ve got to start making torpedoes.”

    “And then what I have to do is I have to come up with an entirely new array of schwackage options that I can go give the fleet,” he said, echoing Drakeley’s call for additional payloads.
    “That includes both undersea, that’s with the heavyweight torpedo capabilities, as well as an expanded missile portfolio. High on my expanded portfolio list is we have to figure out how to go get back in the anti-surface ship missile business. And then behind that, large and small diameter UUVs.”

    Director of Naval Reactors Adm. Frank Caldwell said at the same event last week that the Navy is pursuing adding anti-ship missiles back to its sub fleet to bring it in line with the rest of the world’s fleets.

    “For this audience, I’ll tell you we are considering that and we are taking some some steps to delivering that kind of capability to our submarine force and I can’t really say anymore than that,” he said.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri Jan 29, 2016 4:59 pm

    The Admiral In Charge of Navy Intelligence Has Not Been Allowed to See Military Secrets For Years

    For more than two years, the Navy’s intelligence chief has been stuck with a major handicap: He’s not allowed to know any secrets.

    Vice Adm. Ted “Twig” Branch has been barred from reading, seeing or hearing classified information since November 2013, when the Navy learned from the Justice Department that his name had surfaced in a giant corruption investigation involving a foreign defense contractor and scores of Navy personnel.

    Worried that Branch was on the verge of being indicted, Navy leaders suspended his access to classified materials. They did the same to one of his deputies, Rear Adm. Bruce F. Loveless, the Navy’s director of intelligence operations.

    More than 800 days later, neither Branch nor Loveless has been charged. But neither has been cleared, either. Their access to classified information remains blocked.

    Although the Navy transferred Loveless to a slightly less sensitive post, it kept Branch in charge of its intelligence division. That has resulted in an awkward arrangement, akin to sending a warship into battle with its skipper stuck onshore.

    [Epic Navy bribery scandal shows how easy it can be to steal military secrets]

    Branch can’t meet with other senior U.S. intelligence leaders to discuss sensitive operations, or hear updates from his staff about secret missions or projects. It can be a chore just to set foot in colleagues’ offices; in keeping with regulations, they must conduct a sweep beforehand to make sure any classified documents are locked up.

    Some critics have questioned how smart it is for the Navy to retain an intelligence chief with such limitations, for so long, especially at a time when the Pentagon is confronted by crises in the Middle East, the South China Sea, the Korean Peninsula and other hotspots.

    “I have never heard of anything as asinine, bizarre or stupid in all my years,” Norman Polmar, a naval analyst and historian, said in an interview. (end of excerpt)
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri Feb 05, 2016 1:11 am

    Pentagon Budget Requests $2B for Tomahawks, $2.9B for SM-6

    The Pentagon’s budget submission will contain a request for $2 billion spread over the next five years to purchase 4,000 Tomahawk weapons while funding the development of more advanced capabilities.

    Secretary of Defense Ash Carter revealed the Tomahawk buy during a Tuesday visit to Naval Air Station, China Lake, California, while also noting that the budget will commit almost $1.5 billion to development of two other advanced weapons.

    Then on Wednesday, the Secretary announced the budget will also include $2.9 billion over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) for the SM-6 interceptor, both to purchase 650 of the weapons and to advance them to become an anti-ship missile for the first time.

    Developed by Raytheon, the Tomahawk is a mainstay for ship-based weaponry, but has been restricted to striking at fixed targets. However, company executives revealed last January that Raytheon has invested in a multi-modal seeker that would allow the missiles to hit moving targets.

    “We want to diversify the kinds of targets that they can hit, from land attack, which is probably how you first met the Tomahawk many years ago, to an anti-ship version so that we continue to diversify our suite of anti-ship missiles,” Carter said Tuesday. “Again, in the spirit of making everything we have lethal.”

    The company estimated last year that that adding a moving target capability would cost about $250,000 for each missile, which already cost $1.1 million each.

    While not explicitly mentioning the new Tomahawk sensors, Carter did note that the department is using this fiscal year 2017 budget request to ensure “we’re making investments in weapons and sensors and capabilities.”

    Carter previously revealed that the Pentagon will request $1.8 billion in 2017 to buy more than 45,000 precision-guided munitions, which are being expanded at fast rates dues to the ongoing fight against the Islamic State group, commonly known as ISIS or ISIL.

    Added to that is “about $927 million over the FYDP” for the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile, or LRASM, and another $418 million over the FYDP for the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile – Extended Range (AARGM-ER) weapon, Carter said.

    The secretary indicated that improving lethality to munitions is something of a theme for the budget, adding that the investments represent “big, big, big money for munitions, very important.”

    That theme continued with the SM-6 news, giving another Raytheon product a major boost in the budget.

    A Pentagon official told Defense News that the department has successfully modified the SM-6 to be an anti-ship missile, rather than just a ballistic missile defense weapon.

    Now you see Garry was right those aegis ashore sites in Poland and Romania with SM-3 interceptors can be replaced with SM-6 interceptors also which gained anti-ship missile capability thus it can act as a cruise missile to launch on Russian soil.



    ‎‎"This new anti-ship mode makes the SM-6 highly lethal due to its speed and agility and nearly overnight doubles the purpose of every such missile used across our fleet of Aegis destroyers," the official said. "This is an example of what the secretary sees as thinking differently and how through innovation we will continue to improve the unparalleled capabilities of the US Navy."The SM-6 provides an over-the-horizon engagement capability when launched from an Aegis warship and uses the latest in hardware and software missile technology to provide needed capabilities against evolving air threats.

    Flight test Alpha was the longest downrange, and flight test Bravo was the longest cross-range intercepts with an SM-6 to date. Along with flight tests Alpha and Bravo, flight test Delta successfully intercepted two targets with simultaneous engagements, and flight test Golf successfully intercepted a target with electronic counter-measures

    According to media reports, Carter also pledged that the budget will request funding for nine Virginia-class attack submarines and 10 Aegis destroyers over the next five years. It will also include money to purchase 10 F-35C models for the Navy and 3 F-35B models for the Marines over what had been planned. This occurs as the Air Force is looking to draw down its planned FY17 buy of the F-35A model by five planes, sources told Defense News.

    And in good news for Boeing, Carter said the budget plan also calls for 16 F/A-18 Super Hornets over the FYDP. Boeing has been desperate to keep production flowing on the Super Hornet, produced in its St. Louis facilities.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty A look at the Navy's slick new Norwegian antiship missile

    Post  max steel on Wed Apr 13, 2016 2:08 pm

    A look at the Navy's slick new Norwegian antiship missile

    As part of the Navy's push towards "distributed lethatlity," littoral combat ships will soon be equipped with the Norwegian built Naval Strike Missile (NSM), an "over-the-horizon" antiship cruise missile with a range of about 115 miles.

    The US Navy has long sought to increase the firepower of its more numerous smaller ships, and the NSM, developed by Norway's Kongsberg fits the bill.

    The missile is designed to challenge all types of enemy defenses, with a stealthy design that is hard for radars to detect and the ability to skim just feet above the ocean's surface.

    "It can determine ships in a group of ships by ship class, locating the ship which is its designated target. It will attack only that target," Gary Holst, senior director for Naval Surface Warfare at Kongsberg, told Scout Warrior.

    Not only does the NSM confuse and evade enemy defenses, it has an infrared imaging seeker to stay on target. sniper


    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Wed Apr 13, 2016 11:46 pm

    The Navy's Ship Defense Missile

    In response to a range of new threats to its ships, whether it be air- and surface-launched missiles or drone aircraft, the U.S. Navy is improving and expanding its ship-defense capabilities. In early March, a test on the USS Porter—a guided-missile destroyer stationed in Rota, Spain—paired Raytheon's new Block 2 Rolling Airframe Missile with a launch and tracking system called SeaRAM to demonstrate a new way to protect ships.

    Raytheon's Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) is a lightweight supersonic weapon designed to destroy anti-ship missiles and other airborne threats to a ship at close range, typically less than 10 miles. Much like a bullet fired from a rifled-barrel, RAM Block 2 rolls around its longitudinal axis as it flies. The missile uses the rolling motion generated by its tail fins to change direction on a dime. It's guided by a radio frequency (RF)/infrared seeker to intercept threats.

    Lasers have gotten all the hype recently thanks to their potential to create effective, cheap defensive systems for ships. But RAMs have been doing the job since the early 1990s and are currently deployed on 165 different vessels across eight different navies. They form part of a three-layered ring of close-in defense for certain U.S. Navy ships. The outer defensive ring is handled by the Sea Sparrow, a ship-defense missile with a range of approximately 27 nautical miles. Inside 10 miles, RAMs take over. The last line of defense is the venerable Phalanx 20 mm radar-guided Gatling gun (or CIWS, Close-In Weapons System), which takes on threats inside two miles.


    "As advanced targets are coming in closer and maneuvering much faster, we need the performance in the RAM Block 2 to be able to be able to engage them," says Alan Davis, Raytheon's director of short-range defense systems.

    The new RAM Block 2 has a more powerful rocket motor and improved control surfaces, which make it faster and more maneuverable than its predecessor. Davis says the added power not only makes the RAM Block 2 faster, but also allows the missile to maintain its speed during energy-sapping high-G turns needed to intercept targets. The Block 2 has two and a half times the range of the Block 1 RAM, which has a reported effective intercept range of about 5.6 miles. The latest RAM also has an improved seeker package with greater sensitivity, allowing it to detect anti-ship missiles that employ low probability-of-intercept receivers.


    The ranges of the RAM Block 2 missile and 20 mm rounds of the Phalanx Gatling gun overlap. While the Phalanx is a crucial last line of defense, the RAM Block 2/SeaRAM combo gives ships (particularly U.S. Navy destroyers which haven't previously had RAM capability) a better chance of defeating threats before they get so close that a gun becomes the only choice.

    "It gives you breathing room," says Ed Lester, SeaRAM program manager and former commander of the guided missile cruiser USS Leyte Gulf. "When you're on the bridge of a ship or in the Combat Information Center, and bad things are happening, all you want is more time. That's what the missile gives you over the gun."


    It's a RAM/CIWS combo, not a RAM/Gatling gun combo. There's no gun on the SeaRam. The old air-launched Sparrow had a 27-mile range; sea-launched range is liable to be drastically shorter.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Thu May 19, 2016 10:00 pm

    U.S. Navy tests Raytheon's SeaRAM system

    In the testing, the system took out several targets in a variety of scenarios, including one in which two supersonic missiles were inbound simultaneously, flying in complex, evasive maneuvers. The targets were intercepted with Rolling Airframe Block 2 missiles.

    "SeaRAM achieved a new level of success, intercepting targets under high-stress conditions," said Rick Nelson, vice president of Raytheon's Naval and Area Mission Defense product line. "The system demonstrated once again that it can provide the sophisticated protection warfighters need."

    The tests were conducted on the Navy's Self Defense Test Ship off the coast of Southern California.

    SeaRAM is the development of key attributes of the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System and the Rolling Airframe Missile Guided Weapon System, replacing the 20mm Phalanx gun system with an 11-missile RAM launcher assembly. It combines RAM's superior accuracy, extended range and high maneuverability with the Phalanx Block 1B's high-resolution search-and-track sensor systems and quick-response capability against close-in and extended range threats.


    US is too confident in one system and being cheap is going to cost them later not using the Phalanx also for redundancy,back up, layered affects, as well as other reasons. CIWS can only protect for approximately 1 nautical mile (2000 yards). SeaRAM provides a close in protection at 5 - 11 NM (10,000) yards. Not as proficient as the old Sea Sparrow, with a slightly better range, but the war head is different.


    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  AlfaT8 on Thu May 19, 2016 10:22 pm

    max steel wrote:U.S. Navy tests Raytheon's SeaRAM system

    In the testing, the system took out several targets in a variety of scenarios, including one in which two supersonic missiles were inbound simultaneously, flying in complex, evasive maneuvers. The targets were intercepted with Rolling Airframe Block 2 missiles.

    "SeaRAM achieved a new level of success, intercepting targets under high-stress conditions," said Rick Nelson, vice president of Raytheon's Naval and Area Mission Defense product line. "The system demonstrated once again that it can provide the sophisticated protection warfighters need."

    The tests were conducted on the Navy's Self Defense Test Ship off the coast of Southern California.

    SeaRAM is the development of key attributes of the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System and the Rolling Airframe Missile Guided Weapon System, replacing the 20mm Phalanx gun system with an 11-missile RAM launcher assembly. It combines RAM's superior accuracy, extended range and high maneuverability with the Phalanx Block 1B's high-resolution search-and-track sensor systems and quick-response capability against close-in and extended range threats.


    US is too confident in one system and being cheap is going to cost them later not using the Phalanx also for redundancy,back up, layered affects, as well as other reasons. CIWS can only protect for approximately 1 nautical mile (2000 yards). SeaRAM provides a close in protection at 5 - 11 NM (10,000) yards. Not as proficient as the old Sea Sparrow, with a slightly better range, but the war head is different.



    When did they develop supersonic AnSh missiles??
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  Guest on Thu May 19, 2016 10:36 pm

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    max steel wrote:U.S. Navy tests Raytheon's SeaRAM system

    In the testing, the system took out several targets in a variety of scenarios, including one in which two supersonic missiles were inbound simultaneously, flying in complex, evasive maneuvers. The targets were intercepted with Rolling Airframe Block 2 missiles.

    "SeaRAM achieved a new level of success, intercepting targets under high-stress conditions," said Rick Nelson, vice president of Raytheon's Naval and Area Mission Defense product line. "The system demonstrated once again that it can provide the sophisticated protection warfighters need."

    The tests were conducted on the Navy's Self Defense Test Ship off the coast of Southern California.

    SeaRAM is the development of key attributes of the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System and the Rolling Airframe Missile Guided Weapon System, replacing the 20mm Phalanx gun system with an 11-missile RAM launcher assembly. It combines RAM's superior accuracy, extended range and high maneuverability with the Phalanx Block 1B's high-resolution search-and-track sensor systems and quick-response capability against close-in and extended range threats.


    US is too confident in one system and being cheap is going to cost them later not using the Phalanx also for redundancy,back up, layered affects, as well as other reasons. CIWS can only protect for approximately 1 nautical mile (2000 yards). SeaRAM provides a close in protection at 5 - 11 NM (10,000) yards. Not as proficient as the old Sea Sparrow, with a slightly better range, but the war head is different.



    When did they develop supersonic AnSh missiles??

    Its not anti-ship missile, at least not in its primary role, it can be used aganist surface targets but its extremly limited in that role. Its RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile Block 2, used for ships SHORAD.

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 800px-RIM-116_Rolling_Airframe_Missile_Launcher_3
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  AlfaT8 on Thu May 19, 2016 10:58 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    max steel wrote:U.S. Navy tests Raytheon's SeaRAM system

    In the testing, the system took out several targets in a variety of scenarios, including one in which two supersonic missiles were inbound simultaneously, flying in complex, evasive maneuvers. The targets were intercepted with Rolling Airframe Block 2 missiles.

    "SeaRAM achieved a new level of success, intercepting targets under high-stress conditions," said Rick Nelson, vice president of Raytheon's Naval and Area Mission Defense product line. "The system demonstrated once again that it can provide the sophisticated protection warfighters need."

    The tests were conducted on the Navy's Self Defense Test Ship off the coast of Southern California.

    SeaRAM is the development of key attributes of the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System and the Rolling Airframe Missile Guided Weapon System, replacing the 20mm Phalanx gun system with an 11-missile RAM launcher assembly. It combines RAM's superior accuracy, extended range and high maneuverability with the Phalanx Block 1B's high-resolution search-and-track sensor systems and quick-response capability against close-in and extended range threats.


    US is too confident in one system and being cheap is going to cost them later not using the Phalanx also for redundancy,back up, layered affects, as well as other reasons. CIWS can only protect for approximately 1 nautical mile (2000 yards). SeaRAM provides a close in protection at 5 - 11 NM (10,000) yards. Not as proficient as the old Sea Sparrow, with a slightly better range, but the war head is different.



    When did they develop supersonic AnSh missiles??

    Its not anti-ship missile, at least not in its primary role, it can be used aganist surface targets but its extremly limited in that role. Its RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile Block 2, used for ships SHORAD.

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 800px-RIM-116_Rolling_Airframe_Missile_Launcher_3

    No, what i meant was the "two supersonic missiles" that it shot down.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  max steel on Fri May 20, 2016 12:30 am

    HAAWC enables the P-8 to track and kill enemy submarines from high altitudes

    The HAAWC, which stands for High Altitude Anti-Submarine Warfare Weapon Capability, is an add-on kit for the Navy’s Mark 54 lightweight torpedo that gives the weapon the ability to glide through the air high above the clouds. Boeing is aiming to have the technology on the Navy’s submarine-hunting P-8 in 2017.

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Attachment


    US ASW Skil : http://www.russiadefence.net/t4301p100-india-and-russia-joint-military-projects-news#134896
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  Guest on Fri May 20, 2016 2:08 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    max steel wrote:U.S. Navy tests Raytheon's SeaRAM system

    In the testing, the system took out several targets in a variety of scenarios, including one in which two supersonic missiles were inbound simultaneously, flying in complex, evasive maneuvers. The targets were intercepted with Rolling Airframe Block 2 missiles.

    "SeaRAM achieved a new level of success, intercepting targets under high-stress conditions," said Rick Nelson, vice president of Raytheon's Naval and Area Mission Defense product line. "The system demonstrated once again that it can provide the sophisticated protection warfighters need."

    The tests were conducted on the Navy's Self Defense Test Ship off the coast of Southern California.

    SeaRAM is the development of key attributes of the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System and the Rolling Airframe Missile Guided Weapon System, replacing the 20mm Phalanx gun system with an 11-missile RAM launcher assembly. It combines RAM's superior accuracy, extended range and high maneuverability with the Phalanx Block 1B's high-resolution search-and-track sensor systems and quick-response capability against close-in and extended range threats.


    US is too confident in one system and being cheap is going to cost them later not using the Phalanx also for redundancy,back up, layered affects, as well as other reasons. CIWS can only protect for approximately 1 nautical mile (2000 yards). SeaRAM provides a close in protection at 5 - 11 NM (10,000) yards. Not as proficient as the old Sea Sparrow, with a slightly better range, but the war head is different.



    When did they develop supersonic AnSh missiles??

    Its not anti-ship missile, at least not in its primary role, it can be used aganist surface targets but its extremly limited in that role. Its RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile Block 2, used for ships SHORAD.

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 800px-RIM-116_Rolling_Airframe_Missile_Launcher_3

    No, what i meant was the "two supersonic missiles" that it shot down.

    Ah, my bad then, well i anyways have answer for you.

    GQM-163 Coyote is training platform for US Navy.

    https://www.orbitalatk.com/flight-systems/missile-defense-systems/ascm-targets/docs/BR06007_3862%20Coyote_R3.pdf
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri May 20, 2016 8:23 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:
    max steel wrote:U.S. Navy tests Raytheon's SeaRAM system

    In the testing, the system took out several targets in a variety of scenarios, including one in which two supersonic missiles were inbound simultaneously, flying in complex, evasive maneuvers. The targets were intercepted with Rolling Airframe Block 2 missiles.

    "SeaRAM achieved a new level of success, intercepting targets under high-stress conditions," said Rick Nelson, vice president of Raytheon's Naval and Area Mission Defense product line. "The system demonstrated once again that it can provide the sophisticated protection warfighters need."

    The tests were conducted on the Navy's Self Defense Test Ship off the coast of Southern California.

    SeaRAM is the development of key attributes of the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System and the Rolling Airframe Missile Guided Weapon System, replacing the 20mm Phalanx gun system with an 11-missile RAM launcher assembly. It combines RAM's superior accuracy, extended range and high maneuverability with the Phalanx Block 1B's high-resolution search-and-track sensor systems and quick-response capability against close-in and extended range threats.


    US is too confident in one system and being cheap is going to cost them later not using the Phalanx also for redundancy,back up, layered affects, as well as other reasons. CIWS can only protect for approximately 1 nautical mile (2000 yards). SeaRAM provides a close in protection at 5 - 11 NM (10,000) yards. Not as proficient as the old Sea Sparrow, with a slightly better range, but the war head is different.



    When did they develop supersonic AnSh missiles??

    Its not anti-ship missile, at least not in its primary role, it can be used aganist surface targets but its extremly limited in that role. Its RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile Block 2, used for ships SHORAD.

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 800px-RIM-116_Rolling_Airframe_Missile_Launcher_3

    No, what i meant was the "two supersonic missiles" that it shot down.

    Ah, my bad then, well i anyways have answer for you.

    GQM-163 Coyote is training platform for US Navy.

    https://www.orbitalatk.com/flight-systems/missile-defense-systems/ascm-targets/docs/BR06007_3862%20Coyote_R3.pdf

    thanks man. thumbsup
    JohninMK
    JohninMK

    Posts : 6564
    Points : 6631
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  JohninMK on Wed May 25, 2016 7:12 pm

    Lockheed Martin claims that its guidance and control systems will greatly improve the MK 48 torpedoes' effectiveness and provide the weapon with advanced counter-measure capabilities.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The US Navy is expected to order up to 250 of the heaviest, self-guided torpedoes in the next five years, which will be steered toward enemy targets by an advanced sonar system, defense contractor Lockheed Martin announced in a press release on Monday.

    Lockheed noted it will provide the sonar-based guidance systems for the torpedoes under a $475 million contract with the Navy.

    "The Lockheed Martin guidance and control systems will equip the heavyweight torpedoes with increased bandwidth and streamlined targeting and tracking capabilities," the release explained. "These systems will increase the MK 48's effectiveness and provide advanced counter-measure capabilities."

    The MK 48 is described as a heavyweight torpedo that can be launched from virtually all military submarines. It has the ability to track and destroy surface ships, and other submarines in shallow water and at depths of more than 1,000 feet.

    The Navy could potentially order up to 250 MK 48s in the next five years for anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare, the release noted.


    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20160525/1040245347/navy-torpedo-guidance-systems-purchase.html#ixzz49gl1bdVB

    Sponsored content

    US Naval Weapon Systems - Page 2 Empty Re: US Naval Weapon Systems

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:17 am