US Navy ships and weapon systems

AirCargo wrote:

max steel wrote:LRASM can be countered . Rest we're yet to see tomahawk back in service . Why are they testing it again ? Is it a modified Tomahawk like extended range etc ?

Max if you read it you will know, 1000 miles (1600 km)  

So the US is going against the IRBM treaty since when? Funny you guys complained about the R-500.

If they are breaking IRBM treaty then Russia should break INF by testing required equipments .

The cat & mouse game has been going for too long to even be relevant.

As long as it is ship based and not land based then it does not break the INF treaty...

If it did the Russian versions of Club and Kalibr would easily break it... the mach 3 anti ship version of Club for domestic use is supposed to have a range of 1,500km and of course Kalibr has a range of 2,500km in its land attack version...

Garry do you think US will bring tomahawk ashm back from retirement ? They just tested a 1600 km Tomahawk Ashm from their Naval Platforms . How much range is allowed for naval version ashms accorrding to treaty ?


and What do you think how russian present BOTH NAVAL AND LAND BASED ashms will fair against SEA RAM , SEA SPARROW & ESSM ?

GarryB wrote:As long as it is ship based and not land based then it does not break the INF treaty...

If it did the Russian versions of Club and Kalibr would easily break it... the mach 3 anti ship version of Club for domestic use is supposed to have a range of 1,500km and of course Kalibr has a range of 2,500km in its land attack version...

The problem that the Phase 4 has been a thorn in the relationship of both nuclear powers for a while. Testing the Phase 4 needs prior work done ashore. Artjomh provided enough food for thought at MP.net relevant thread.

Raytheon Ramps Up Production of Anti-Ballistic Missiles for US Navy




US defense contractor Raytheon said that advanced surface-to-air Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) has moved into full-rate production to provide the US Navy with more of the anti-ballistic missiles and anti-aircraft weapons.


WASHINGTON (Sputnik) – The advanced surface-to-air Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) has moved into full-rate production to provide the US Navy with more of the anti-ballistic missiles and anti-aircraft weapons, US defense contractor Raytheon said in a statement on Wednesday.
"Full-rate production allows us to significantly ramp up production and deliver to the US Navy the quantities it needs to further increase operational effectiveness," Standard Missile-6 senior program director Mike Campisi said in the statement.

The SM-6 is a supersonic surface-to-air missile deployed on cruisers and destroyers that defends against manned aircraft and drones, as well as land attacks and anti-ship cruise missiles. The SM-6 will also be used by the US Navy as part of the US anti-ballistic missile defense system, according to Raytheon.

Raytheon, one of the largest US defense contractors, has delivered more than 180 SM-6 to the US Navy to date.





http://sputniknews.com/us/20150506/1021789174.html#ixzz3afrq6Bbv



Can SM-6 neutralize China's anti-aircraft Dong Feng BM ?

Pentagon Launches Submarine-Tracking Unmanned 'Ghost Ships' This Fall


Too much money to spend on perhaps . The Pentagon has moved one step closer toward its goal of creating an unmanned, autonomous patrol ship. Set to drift in the high seas, the robotic Sea Hunter will silently follow potentially hostile submarines.

DARPA recently finished a six-week series of tests off the coast of Mississippi which proved a critical aspect of the boat was successful: it didn’t sink. To test the radar and navigation software, engineers sent the ACTUV through a maritime obstacle course which included rocks, shoals, and even other vessels which intentionally behaved unpredictably.

The ACTUV passed with flying colors, all while sticking to the maritime laws outlined in the Convention on the international regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. Already, DARPA at least has proof-of-concept, that an autonomous can navigate an ocean shared with more traditionally piloted craft.

The next step will be testing the ACTUV’s tracking capabilities. Further down the line, engineers will have to put the vessel through scenarios which involve "enemy ships" attempting to block its navigational systems.

And if all goes according to plan, ACTUVs would prove to be a cost-effective way to monitor ultra-quiet submarines deployed by Russia, China, and Iran.


http://sputniknews.com/us/20150403/1020448688.html

Old News

US Navy Tests Missile Interceptors in Pacific: Defense Contractor


Two US missile interceptors were tested against cruise missile targets during the US Navy's Combat Ship Qualification Trials in the Pacific, interceptor designer Raytheon Company announced on Friday.

Two US missile interceptors were tested against cruise missile targets during the US Navy's Combat Ship Qualification Trials in the Pacific, interceptor designer Raytheon Company announced on Friday.

"Advanced warning and cueing from another sensor or ship allows the US Navy to take full advantage of SM-6's over-the-horizon capability. The warfighter does not have to wait until the threat is knocking at the door to take it out," Standard Missile-6 senior program director Mike Campisi said in a written statement.

Targets are destroyed sooner and one ship can defend a larger area, Campisi said.

During the test, the first interceptor took out a short-range supersonic rocket while the other halted smaller low-altitude, medium range target drone. Interceptors were fired by Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Chancellorsville.

Raytheon called the missile tests a success.

SM-6 provides protection against fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles and cruise missiles. According to Raytheon, the interceptors are equipped with their own individualized radar system aimed to detect the movement of its target.

Raytheon has delivered more than 130 Standard Missile-6 interceptors to the US Navy.

The interceptors final assembly takes place at Redstone Arsenal Army post in Huntsville, Alabama.

US Aegis Ships Could Pose Threat to Russia


Russian Embassy to Washington Counselor Alexander Trofimov says that US Navy Aegis ships based in Europe could secretly carry cruise missiles threatening Russia. US Navy Aegis ships based in Europe could secretly carry cruise missiles threatening Russia, Russian Embassy to Washington Counselor Alexander Trofimov told a Congressional roundtable discussion on missile defense in Europe in the US Congress.


"Aegis can fire [anti-ballistic missile] interceptors and attack [cruise] missiles like the Tomahawk," Trofimov said on Wednesday.


Trofimov explained the defensive interceptors and offensive Tomahawk cruise missiles would be vertically deployed on the ships, making it difficult for air or space reconnaissance to identify them.
On May 1, 2015, the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Porter joined two other destroyers, USS Donald Cook and USS Ross, at the Naval Station Rota in Spain as part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) to ballistic missile defense (BMD).

A fourth Arleigh Burke-class warship, the USS Carney, will join them later in 2015.


All four ships have had their Aegis combat systems upgraded to handle BMD threats.
Trofimov said the deployment was continuing without any US-Russian dialogue to address Moscow's concerns that it was threatening the power balance in Europe.

http://sputniknews.com/military/20150521/1022394345.html

Garry do you think US will bring tomahawk ashm back from retirement ? They just tested a 1600 km Tomahawk Ashm from their Naval Platforms . How much range is allowed for naval version ashms accorrding to treaty ?

Naval systems were not included in the INF treaty.

And think of this step by the US just as a reaction to the Russian Navy introducing their UKSK launcher which allows their navy for the first time to carry enormous numbers of land attack cruise missiles and potent supersonic anti ship missiles and anti submarine weapons...

and What do you think how russian present BOTH NAVAL AND LAND BASED ashms will fair against SEA RAM , SEA SPARROW & ESSM ?

On paper those systems are very potent and should stop every threat directed at US ships.

On paper the Sea Dart and Sea Wolf were also very potent and should have stopped the Exocet missile dead in its tracks during the Falklands War too... and for various reasons they didn't.

Attack is easier that defence.

Think of a tall skyscraper with thousands of windows and doors... in terms of security you have to allow certain people access to certain places, but you also have to keep everyone else out...

A tricky job at the best of times... if the enemy masses up enough intruders at once your defences... no matter how formidable on paper can and will be overwhelmed...

No different for sea or land targets.

The main difference is that most large ships are high concentrations of missile and gun defence with radar and optronic sensors as well as soft kill and decoy systems as well.

Trofimov said the deployment was continuing without any US-Russian dialogue to address Moscow's concerns that it was threatening the power balance in Europe.

Of course when Russia starts fielding equivalent vessels with S-500 and hypersonic anti ship missiles (Zircon) and of course any future land attack missiles... perhaps upgraded to Kh-101/102 level range of 5,000km range and there will of course need to be serous talks...

Major Contracts Awarded For New US Carrier

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2015/06/05/newport-news-shipbuilding-kennedy-gerald-ford-cvn79-cvn80-cvn78-contracts-naval-sea-systems-command-navsea-thomas-moore-aircraft-carrier-/28570915/

AirCargo wrote:Major Contracts Awarded For New US Carrier

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2015/06/05/newport-news-shipbuilding-kennedy-gerald-ford-cvn79-cvn80-cvn78-contracts-naval-sea-systems-command-navsea-thomas-moore-aircraft-carrier-/28570915/

Great we just signed a contract to spend more $$$$ on something we don't need....

US Navy’s LRASM completes store separation testing

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsus-navys-lrasm-completes-store-separation-testing-4594391

1)Can US ships EW system and Nulka decoys or of various hardkill systems  damage russian ashm moskit , yakhont , klub  missile guidance ?



2)We've seen in anti-ship missile defense(ASMD) trials that ESSM RIM-116 , ASTER were succesful in destroying incoming supersonic ashm's . So how exactly russian supersonic ashm will go past american anti-ship defenses ? DuTCH HAD GOALKEEPER in 90's o intercept supersonic ashm .


3) Any idea on it : GQM-163 SSST: A Tricky Coyote to Match Wits With Defenses

The rocket-boosted, ramjet-powered GQM-163A was developed to simulate supersonic cruise missiles like the SS-N-22 external link Sunburn, Kh-31 external link (aka. AS-17 Krypton, which may have an anti-air AWACS-killer version external link), the Indo-Russian PJ-10 external link Brahmos, etc., which are proliferating throughout the world. Their speed and evasive maneuvers compress the amount of time a defense system has to deal with them to under a minute. A training target that can simulate their performance is critical to both proper preparedness and pursuant performance.

Despite this growing need, the Supersonic Sea Skimming Target (SSST) program moved very slowly in the 1990s, with false starts that included a Boeing-Strela Kh-31 Krypton variant before the decision was made to develop a new SSST. Orbital Sciences won the contract in June 2000, but the BQM-163 suffered a number of program delays before its final developmental test flight eventually took place in in April 2005. The program is now moving forward, slowly, and picking up international customers .


The Coyote target missile design integrates a 4-inlet, solid-fuel ducted-rocket ramjet propulsion system into a compact missile airframe 18 feet long and 14 inches in diameter. Rail-launched from Navy test and training ranges, the highly maneuverable Coyote achieves cruise speeds of over Mach 2.5, with a range of approximately 60 nautical miles at altitudes of less than 20 feet above the sea surface



http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/gqm163-ssst-a-tricky-coyote-to-match-wits-with-defenses-03155/

2)We've seen in anti-ship missile defense(ASMD) trials that ESSM RIM-116 , ASTER were succesful in destroying incoming supersonic ashm's . So how exactly russian supersonic ashm will go past american anti-ship defenses ? DuTCH HAD GOALKEEPER in 90's o intercept supersonic ashm .

Hahaha... yeah, and in the early 1980s the British fleet sailed to the south atlantic safe and secure in the knowledge that the Seawolf missile could shoot down any threat to British shipping including 114mm artillery shells.

Didn't really work that way though in practise....

The Coyote target missile design integrates a 4-inlet, solid-fuel ducted-rocket ramjet propulsion system into a compact missile airframe 18 feet long and 14 inches in diameter. Rail-launched from Navy test and training ranges, the highly maneuverable Coyote achieves cruise speeds of over Mach 2.5, with a range of approximately 60 nautical miles at altitudes of less than 20 feet above the sea surface

So what they are saying is that after almost 20 years of development they have a missile that almost exactly replicates an early Kh-31 and perhaps with a bit more work they might get it to achieve the performance of the later Kh-31s in terms of range... how freakin amazing... they should pat themselves on the back... in 40 or 50 years they might be able to replicate the SS-N-22 which entered service in about 1984...  SS-N-22 is a 4 ton mach 2.5 anti ship missile with a range of about 120km, and packing one hell of a punch.

In a few years the Zircon will enter service flying at mach 7-8...

note that the picture shown is of a Kh-31 with a huge solid rocket booster behind it.... I would suggest they don't show off too much regarding this breakthrough.

GarryB wrote:

2)We've seen in anti-ship missile defense(ASMD) trials that ESSM RIM-116 , ASTER were succesful in destroying incoming supersonic ashm's . So how exactly russian supersonic ashm will go past american anti-ship defenses ? DuTCH HAD GOALKEEPER in 90's o intercept supersonic ashm .

Hahaha... yeah, and in the early 1980s the British fleet sailed to the south atlantic safe and secure in the knowledge that the Seawolf missile could shoot down any threat to British shipping including 114mm artillery shells.

Didn't really work that way though in practise....

The Coyote target missile design integrates a 4-inlet, solid-fuel ducted-rocket ramjet propulsion system into a compact missile airframe 18 feet long and 14 inches in diameter. Rail-launched from Navy test and training ranges, the highly maneuverable Coyote achieves cruise speeds of over Mach 2.5, with a range of approximately 60 nautical miles at altitudes of less than 20 feet above the sea surface

So what they are saying is that after almost 20 years of development they have a missile that almost exactly replicates an early Kh-31 and perhaps with a bit more work they might get it to achieve the performance of the later Kh-31s in terms of range... how freakin amazing... they should pat themselves on the back... in 40 or 50 years they might be able to replicate the SS-N-22 which entered service in about 1984...  SS-N-22 is a 4 ton mach 2.5 anti ship missile with a range of about 120km, and packing one hell of a punch.

In a few years the Zircon will enter service flying at mach 7-8...

note that the picture shown is of a Kh-31 with a huge solid rocket booster behind it.... I would suggest they don't show off too much regarding this breakthrough.

Thanks Garry . but you haven't answered  my first question ?

Can US ships EW system and Nulka decoys or of various hardkill systems  damage russian ashm moskit , yakhont , klub  missile guidance ?

Thanks Garry . but you haven't answered my first question ?

Can US ships EW system and Nulka decoys or of various hardkill systems  damage russian ashm moskit , yakhont , klub  missile guidance ?

It is a fight between measure and countermeasure... both sides have an idea of what the other has and how it works and based on that can work out what might stop it from working properly. Of course the other side might anticipate some counter measures and implement some counter counter measures of their own....

For instance it is know that some high speed Russian missiles have angled titanium plates in their nose to deflect cannon shells and protect the warhead from HE rounds that are intended to set off the warhead. Jammers are effective against active radar guided weapons, but passive homing or missiles using IR guidance are immune to radar jammers... the missiles might even have a home on jam capability... especially those fitted with nuclear warheads that just need to get in the vicinity of the target to be effective.

US Navy Engineer Guilty of Attempting to Pass Carrier Schematics to Egypt

http://sputniknews.com/us/20150616/1023406497.html#ixzz3dGFiUIhk

US Navy Acquires Advanced Radar for Surveillance Aircraft



http://sputniknews.com/military/20150619/1023607842.html

HII hands over 12th Virginia submarine to US Navy

Huntington Ingalls Industries' (HII's) Newport News Shipbuilding division has handed over the US Navy's (USN's) 12th Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN), officials announced on 25 June.

John Warner (SSN 785) - named after the US senator and former secretary of the navy - was delivered at HII's Newport News, Virginia shipyard. It is the sixth Virginia SSN to be completed by Newport News, which is building the boats in partnership with General Dynamics Electric Boat, under a teaming agreement.

The USN is acquiring a 30-boat class of Virginia SSNs. Eleven boats are in commission.

John Warner is the second of eight Block III Virginias that feature a redesigned bow (with a new Large Aperture Bow array) and two 87-inch Virginia payload tubes that each launch six Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles.

http://www.janes.com/article/52592/hii-hands-over-12th-virginia-submarine-to-us-navy

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________


NAVSEA seeks a more robust towed array for US Navy

◙NAVSEA has issued an RfP for a new thin line towed array to replace the legacy TB-29A that equips the navy's attack submarines and SURTASS surface ships

◙The TB-29X towed array project includes options for up to 67 production assemblies over four years
The US Navy's (USN's) submarine community has set out plans to acquire an improved thin line towed array (TLTA) as its primary long-range passive acoustic sensor system.

Introduction of the new TB-29X array is required "to enable the fleet to complete missions without interruptions due to array failures", according to Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA).

http://www.janes.com/article/52575/navsea-seeks-a-more-robust-towed-array-for-us-navy

what does it mean can anyone explain

________________________________________________________________________________________________________


USN trawls industry for future frigate's long-range missile

The US Navy (USN) is canvassing industry for technology options to fulfil a requirement to equip its future frigates with an over-the-horizon weapon system to defend the ships against military surface craft and vessels.

As part of a Request for Information (RfI) released by the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) in mid-June, the US government is seeking information "for design, development, test and evaluation, and manufacture of an over-the-horizon missile system capability to defeat surface threats".

The system would be fitted on board new frigates to be based upon a modified version of the USN's Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). Current shipbuilding plans indicate that the navy intends to acquire 20 frigates beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2019.

http://www.janes.com/article/52542/usn-trawls-industry-for-future-frigate-s-long-range-missile

Beneath the skin: US Navy DDG 51 Flight III guided missile destroyer

The US Navy's DDG 51 Flight III guided missile destroyer has now entered the detailed design stage. Richard Scott examines how this new variant, designed to take the new AN/SPY-6(V) Air and Missile Defense Radar to sea, will differ from the current Flight IIA design Beginning procurement in fiscal year (FY) 2016, the US Navy's (USN's) next-generation DDG 51 Flight III guided missile destroyer will, from the outside, resemble its antecedent. Under the skin, however, there will be some significant changes in order that the hull, mechanical and electrical (HM&E) systems, and the
Aegis combat system, can support a new Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) intended to confer the Flight III ships with an unmatched integrated air and missile defence (IAMD) capability.

http://www.janes360.com/images/assets/731/51731/US_Navy_DDG_51_Flight_III_guided_missile_destroyer.pdf

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________


New RAM Block 2 achieves initial operational capability

RAM Block 2 was subject to DT/OT at the Pacific Missile Range between May 2013 and March 2015 .The RIM-116C Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Block 2 ship self-defence missile has achieved initial operational capability (IOC) on board the LPD 17 San Antonio-class assault ship USS Arlington (LPD 24), the US Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) has confirmed.

An evolutionary development of the RIM-116B RAM Block 1 missile, the new RIM-116C embodies kinematic and sensor upgrades to expand the missile's engagement envelope so as to defeat more manoeuvrable and higher speed anti-ship cruise missiles. RAM Block 2 is a far more advanced system, boasting three times the manoeuvrability of the original Rolling Airframe Missile .


Be scared russian ashms and ascms , New SEA-RAM RIM-116C is here .


http://www.janes.com/article/51938/new-ram-achieves-ioc

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.

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 ?

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.