Arsenal Ships

Solaris · May 5, 2014

JayBird said:
The ship looks like 8 month pregnant woman, but it's still beautiful in her own way.

Actually its bloated midsection makes it look more like a pregnant humpback whale than anything else. I guess even humpbacks are beautiful to their own mothers.

Jeff Head said:
This looks much more like PLAN effort at n Arsenal Ship, or a Missile Defense Ship similar to the proposed use of the San Antonio LPD hull for a BMD ship that the US is considering.

An arsenal ship wouldn't have so many sensors. Actually an arsenal ship would have almost no sensors, which is mainly the point of an arsenal ship, i.e. a cheap and massive missile carrier.

snake65 said:
That might be an attempt to show the initial 20kT ship considered. Would make sense to make an ABM defense ship on 071 hull. Definitely inspired by proposed SanAntonio conversion into ABM ship.

An ABM ship serves no real purpose for the PLAN. Who is it meant to counter? The US definitely needs one of these things, to counter the likes of Iran, North Korea and most of all China, but China's neighbors don't have any significant ballistic missile capability to speak of. Not ones that need ships to be part of the picture, anyways.

Blitzo · May 6, 2014

Re: Type 055 DDG - PLAN's Next Generation Destroyer Thread

Solaris said:
An arsenal ship wouldn't have so many sensors. Actually an arsenal ship would have almost no sensors, which is mainly the point of an arsenal ship, i.e. a cheap and massive missile carrier.

I think that may have been the case originally when the arsenal ship concept was first conceived, but more recently, there have been consideration of ABM arsenal ships, leveraging the large size of an arsenal ship to also hold a large ABM PAR.

Of course, I'm talking about the proposal for the flight ii San Antonio.

Jeff Head · May 6, 2014

Re: Type 055 DDG - PLAN's Next Generation Destroyer Thread

Solaris said:
An arsenal ship wouldn't have so many sensors. Actually an arsenal ship would have almost no sensors, which is mainly the point of an arsenal ship, i.e. a cheap and massive missile carrier.

As someone who is personally familiar with those studies, which consisted of SC-21, and then DD21, and finally the DDG-1000, which became the Zumwalt, I can say all of the following:

The main point of the arsenal ship was to have a lot of VLS cells for mainly land attack missiles, but which could also carry AAW and ASuW missiles. Up to 500 cells were considered.

They were not going to be cheap at all.

The serious contenders for the Arsenal part of the SC-21study contained full sensor capabilities (but not AEGIS) for self defense and for receiving targeting for their missiles...from AEGIS vessels, from AWACS, and from their own sensors. Some of the designs considered included refit mechant/container/cargo ships, but they were quickly rejected as it was realized that these vessels themselves would be targeted and would require to be built to Naval/Military standards, and to be able to defend themselves.

They probably would not have had main 127mm or other main guns, or torpedo tubes, and were not going to have sonar capabilities. So the electronics and sensors necessary for all of that would not have been there. But for their missiles, they would have been fully "sensored."

As it was, after the SC-21, DD21 and ultimately the DDG-1000 vessel...along with the introduction into the fleet of the four Ohio SSGN conversions...it was determined that there was no need for the arsenal ships.

The Ohios, with their 154 Tomahawk load out capabilities, and their inherent stealth, were considered close enough.

Solaris · May 6, 2014

Re: Type 055 DDG - PLAN's Next Generation Destroyer Thread

Jeff Head said:
The serious contenders for that study contained full sensor capabilities for self defense and for receiving targeting for their missiles...from AEGIS vessels, from AWACS, and from their own sensors. Some of the designs considered included refit mechant/container/cargo ships, but they were quickly rejected as such vessels themselves would be targeted and would require to be built to Naval/Military standards, and to be able to defend themselves.

They probably would not have had main 127mm or other guns, or torpedo tubes, and were not going to have sonar capabilities. So the electronics and sensors necessary for those would not have been there. But for their missiles, they would have been fully "sensored."

So it sounds like no Aegis system, no SPY-1's, no SPG-62's, no bow sonar, no TACTAS, no torps, no guns. If you need external cueing for your weapons you obviously do not have these sensors on your own. Full sensor capabilities for self defense sound to me like a horizon/surface search radar, and whatever was on the Phalanxes. This is consistent with what I see on the internet.

Fully sensored for air defense missiles like SM-2 and ESSM would have involved Aegis/SPY-1/SPG-62 for sure, but the semi-official depictions I see on the internet don't have SPY-1's. And LACM's don't need sensors, just a datalink.

So basically, this is still what I was saying it was: almost no sensors, giant floating container with lots of missiles. As far as expense, I'll bet the cost of the 500 missiles is greater than the cost of the rest of the ship.

Jeff Head · May 6, 2014

Re: Type 055 DDG - PLAN's Next Generation Destroyer Thread

Solaris said:
So it sounds like ...

Full sensor capabilities for self defense sound to me like ...

This is consistent with what I see on the internet.

So basically, this is still what I was saying it was: almost no sensors, giant floating container with lots of missiles. As far as expense, I'll bet the cost of the 500 missiles is greater than the cost of the rest of the ship.

Sounds like does not mean...is.

And the internet alone is not the best source to make a final judgment on.

Your original statement was that, " Actually an arsenal ship would have almost no sensors..i.e. a cheap and massive missile carrier."

My point was simple, although not the same sensors as an AEGIS cruiser, the arsenal ships, had they been built, would have had modern surface and air radars capable of allowing them to target their missiles in either AAW or ASuW mode when necessary, for things that were in their range. They would have had modern data link and all of the electronics and equipment necessary for cooperative engagement as well.

That's not "almost no sensors." That's also not "cheap." These vessels would have been able to engage on their own if they had to, as well as being able to rely on AEGIS and AWACS....and IMHO, that is not at all what you were implying with the first statement.

For really long range land or surface engagement, they, like any other vessels, would have been dependent on sources (outside of GPS or INS) other than the ship, for the missile to get close enough to find and discriminate the target itself...as you stated.

Solaris · May 6, 2014

Re: Type 055 DDG - PLAN's Next Generation Destroyer Thread

Jeff Head said:
Sounds like does not mean...is.

And the internet alone is not the best source to make a final judgment on.

Your original statement was that, " Actually an arsenal ship would have almost no sensors..i.e. a cheap and massive missile carrier."

My point was simple, although not the same sensors as an AEGIS cruiser, the arsenal ships, had they been built, would have had modern surface and air radars capable of allowing them to target their missiles in either AAW or ASuW mode when necessary, for things that were in their range. They would have had modern data link and all of the electronics and equipment necessary for cooperative engagement as well.

That's not "almost no sensors." That's also not "cheap." These vessels would have been able to engage on their own if they had to, as well as being able to rely on AEGIS and AWACS....and IMHO, that is not at all what you were implying with the first statement.

For really long range land or surface engagement, they, like any other vessels, would have been dependent on sources (outside of GPS or INS) other than the ship, for the missile to get close enough to find and discriminate the target itself...as you stated.

I doubt very much these ships would have been given the ability to target their missiles in "AAW or ASuW" mode. The point of an arsenal ship would be completely missed by putting advanced sensors on such a ship. And there is no such thing as an 'ASuW radar' unless you are talking about the OTH Mineral ME-type surface radars which the USN didn't have and doesn't use now. For AAW you would have to install nothing other than the SPY-1 and the Aegis combat data system to handle the volume of missiles this thing could shoot, not to mention 5, 6, or even 10 or more SPG-62 directors to provide fire control for the SAM's during the end game. This would not be any kind of arsenal ship. It would be a giant cruiser. This conception of the arsenal ship is totally belied by the fact that the USN initially had plans to convert cargo ships into this role, which speaks to their idea for the purpose of an arsenal ship. As for cheap FAS.org quotes a sailaway price of $450 million, or basically one quarter the price of a Burke. And like I said, less than the price of the 500 Tomahawks and Standards it would be carrying.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Here is a juicy little quote:

The ships would be theater assets that will operate under the authority of the joint Commanders-In-Chief (CINCs) and receive their targeting along with command and decision information from other assets. This ship will rely on other military assets, including surface combatants, to provide the targeting information and connectivity necessary to launch its weapons. The Arsenal Ship would server as the magazine for a distributed sensor network. A unique aspect to the Arsenal Ship is that all the command and decision functions would be made off board.

Thus, the Arsenal Ship will not be fitted with long range surveillance or fire control sensors, but will be remotely controlled via robust data links. The data links will be secure, redundant and anti-jam in order to provide high reliability in the connectivity of the Arsenal Ships in high jamming operational scenarios. The overall program is an attempt to leverage the significant joint investment in Link 16 and CEC. Early in arsenal ship's life this control will be exercised through an Aegis platform. As the theater connectivity matures, the Arsenal Ship would accommodate a more robust set of controls from a wide variety of sources that would include JSTARS aircraft, AWACS or an E-2 with Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) and, a soldier or a Marine on the ground or a command post ashore. This concept allows for remote missile selection, on-board missile initialization and remote launch orders, and provides remote "missile away" messages to the control platform.

The ship would have the equivalent ordnance about 500 vertically launched weapons from a wide variety of the military's inventory of about four or five Aegis cruisers and destroyers. Employing the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) remote magazine launch concept, the arsenal ship would provide additional magazine capacity for Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (TBMD) and Air Supremacy missiles.

The Navy envisioned the ship to have a small crew (possibly less than 50 members) and be highly survivable. Associated with minimizing ship costs and manning is the planned reliance on passive survivability, so that it would be very difficult for the Arsenal Ship to be hit by modern weapons. This may be achieved by a combination of reducing the signatures of the ship and the tactical use of countermeasures. If the ship is hit by a missile or a torpedo, the design would insure that the magazines are not violated. Finally, the hull would be sized and designed such that, even if the ship encounters a large torpedo or mine, the ship won't sink.

Jeff Head · May 6, 2014

Re: Type 055 DDG - PLAN's Next Generation Destroyer Thread

Solaris said:
I doubt very much these ships would have been given the ability to target their missiles in "AAW or ASuW" mode.

You may doubt it all you want...does not change a thing.

Solaris said:
The point of an arsenal ship would be completely missed by putting advanced sensors on such a ship.

The point of an arsenal ship was to provide a LOT of VLS cells for use against enemy targets. Such vessels would be very valuable and become targets themselves and would need to defend themselves against enemy attempts to interdict them. Both anti-air and anti-surface attempts.

Solaris said:
And there is no such thing as an 'ASuW radar' unless you are talking about the OTH Mineral ME-type surface radars which the USN didn't have and doesn't use now.

Any search and targeting radar that allows you to identify and target a surface contact is indeed a surface radar that can be used against surface contacts (which is what ASuW means). IMHO, you are drifting into an argument over semantics.

Solaris said:
For AAW you would have to install nothing other than the SPY-1 and the Aegis combat data system...

No, you would not "have" to do any such thing. Having these vessels capable of defending themselves was viewed as critical. 1st, if left without it, even relatively light attacks could be mounted against them almost anywhere requiring that a DDG be with them at all times, even out of the the heavy threat environments.

2nd, any and all efforts they can add to their own defense is helpful...and the cooperative engagement capabilities become very critical even when they are escorted by the larger vessels.

All of these scenarios were carefully thought about in the studies and allowed for.

As it was...they were never built in any case, so it is all moot.

Now, as it is, the entire discussion of arsenal ships and how they defend themselves is completely off-topic in the Type 055 thread.

It has been over discussed here already and beat to death at this point. If you want to continue to discuss it, create a separate thread about arsenal ships in the World Military Forum and continue it there. But on this thread...

Get back on topic.

Solaris · May 6, 2014

Jeff Head said:
The point of an arsenal ship was to provide a LOT of VLS cells for use against enemy targets.

The point of an arsenal ships was no such thing. The actual point of an arsenal ship was to provide a LOT of VLS cells for use against enemy targets without having to pay for all the expensive sensors required to detect and guide them to their targets. This is absolutely clear from the text I linked for you.

Jeff Head said:
Such vessels would be very valuable and become targets themselves and would need to defend themselves against enemy attempts to interdict them. Both anti-air and anti-surface attempts.

No to anti-surface targets. As for anti-air, Phalanxes. Done.

Jeff Head said:
Any search and targeting radar that allows you to identify and target a surface contact is indeed a surface radar that can be used against surface contacts (which is what ASuW means). IMHO, you are drifting into an argument over semantics.

Indeed, this would be one of the few radars that the arsenal ship would have, but it would not be used for ASuW but rather for cueing the Phalanxes.

Jeff Head said:
No, you would not "have" to do any such thing. Having these vessels capable of defending themselves was viewed as critical. 1st, if left without it, even relatively light attacks could be mounted against them almost anywhere requiring that a DDG be with them at all times, even out of the the heavy threat environments.

2nd, any and all efforts they can add to their own defense is helpful...and the cooperative engagement capabilities become very critical even when they are escorted by the larger vessels.

These ships were never meant to defend themselves against heavy attack and would always have been assigned to CVBG's or SAG's where they would be protected as an HVU just like a carrier.

You are trying to create some kind of battlecruiser on steroids out of a concept that was never intended to ever even approach this ability.

Blitzo · May 6, 2014

I think at a point in the past, an arsenal ship was briefly considered to only be a cheap big ship stripped of sensors with only VLS.

But I think the term has evolved from there to also encompass any ship large enough to carry a large number of VLSs, regardless of whether it has extensive organic sensors or not. The flight ii San Antonio proposal, is just such an evolution, and like it as not, the idea of such a ship fits best in the arsenal ship terminology despite its model being seen with a whopping big ABM PAR.

Jeff Head · May 6, 2014

Solaris said:
The point of an arsenal ships was no such thing. The actual point of an arsenal ship was to provide a LOT of VLS cells for use against enemy targets without having to pay for all the expensive sensors required to detect and guide them to their targets. This is absolutely clear from the text I linked for you.

These ships were never meant to defend themselves against heavy attack and would always have been assigned to CVBG's or SAG's where they would be protected as an HVU just like a carrier.

You are trying to create some kind of battlecruiser on steroids out of a concept that was never intended to ever even approach this ability.

As I said, you can say and think what you will.

It was not to be a battle cruiser. It was not to have the strongest defenses capable. It was simply recognized that it need to defend itself and was going to be equipped to do so.

In the end, it was never built.

I have simply shared with you what I could. You are free to think of it whatever you will.

But what I have related is true.

Arsenal Ships

Solaris

Banned Idiot

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

Jeff Head

General

Solaris

Banned Idiot

Jeff Head

General

Solaris

Banned Idiot

Jeff Head

General

Solaris

Banned Idiot

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

Jeff Head

General