Comments on: Lockheed Snags DARPA Anti-Ship Missile Award

By: Valcan

Valcan — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:14:07 +0000

Bomb, you need to think positive. Oh wait your not american are you. I guess you are then.
What are you german? british? french?

By: bobbymike

bobbymike — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:57:22 +0000

Want to defeat an inbound RV from a MRBM or ICBM fired at a carrier battle group? The defense is called the “free electron laser” Speed of light weaponary makes a Mach 15 RV seem like granny driving to the flower shop.

By: bobbymike

bobbymike — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:56:28 +0000

By: Earlydawn

Earlydawn — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:58:49 +0000

It’s good to see the Navy getting a suitable anti-shipping missile after all of the emphasis we’ve placed on carrier aviation to kill naval assets. I’d go cheap and simple on this one, since it probably won’t even run a full generation before railguns usurp all surface combat roles.

By: Anon

Anon — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:57:17 +0000

This missile reminds me of a Star Trek Voyager program that had the Enterprise trying to escape from an intelligent missile that, once launched, did whatever it took to get to the target.
It’s not interstellar travel in this case, but the same idea.…

By: Valcan

Valcan — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:59:18 +0000

bomb, sence we are talking ICBM it might be there worried about a chinese what have you sub popping up and launching one or more of these things at range. Or maybe a Battlecrusier like the russians have.….though the chinese one will probbly work better…though many crewmen will die from lead poisioning.

By: Valcan

Valcan — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:55:56 +0000

Finaly it HAS been needed for a while. Weve been putting way to much on the idea that our carriers would be invincible.
Hell we’ve put antisub, antiship, ground support, etc, etc, hell just about everything you could think of onto the backs of carriers. Mean while a typical navy taskforce could be defeated by a bunch of cheap a$$ chinese missile boats.
Why not shift back to
Cheap fast frigate: designed to hunt subs, and to support anti piracy missions. (Something Like the LCS but cheaper…alot cheaper.…and can be built on mass.)
Destroyer: For now the current DDG fleet is OK. But in the future something ment for anti air/missile threats like those mentioned above. Weather it relies on something like the current SM-3 or a laser system what have you.
Crusier/Heavy Crusier: Ok a Cusier platform for long range engagments between surface combatants. These ships should be large and able to carry a signifigant amount of amunition. My idea is to get with the army find out how to use something like atacms.
Heavy crusier for direct on shore fire support. Again large heavily armed and armored. 8in or 155 (id go with 8 in considering a 155 cant even break a tanks armor but whatever works.) Again heavy armor. Its the 21 century if we cant make armor for a 600 to 700 foot naval vessel thats better than 1940’s were screwed. Anyways Good closein anti missile system maybe the phalanx system(and i mean good not 2 turrets but 4 at least as well as various others)
You could maybe make use of many of the same parts for the destroyers crusiers etc to save cost.
Aircraft carriers…well save that for later. They need more defenses and such etc.
Ok thats just some of the surface fleet im tired of typing and i have things need doin.
Tips. Forget stealth. ATM it is just to costly to try to make a stealth crusier thats good for anything to much money and design constraints.
Maybe shift to trimaridian or another design. Trimaridian definatly for the frigates.
All larger ships destroyer-carrier nucleur powered. Save a crap load of money in fuel maybe rethink different reactor designes.
anyways just some thoughts.
oh yea some atacms info:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/atacms.htm

By: strider

strider — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:23:43 +0000

either way, the U.S. woefully needed a credible anti-ship capability for a long time.

By: freefallingbomb

freefallingbomb — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:30:07 +0000

I wonder: That “exotic anti-ship system in development in China” against which the L.R.A.S.M. will be employed, could that be the novel Chinese idea of fitting conventional warheads on I.C.B.M.s and then fire them against large surface ships? The text doesn’t specify it.
If so, I wonder how a L.R.A.S.M. (= clearly some sort of sea-to-sea-ammunition, not some Tomahawk-like sea-to-ground ammunition) can possibly defeat this threat (= the conventional anti-ship-I.C.B.M.), both in terms of flight range and in terms of locating that threat somewhere “at sea”…(?)