Naval missiles and launchers

I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
FORBIN said:
More powerful Main Surface Combattants


Allow me

I precise
Daring 48 Aster + considering 8 harpoon in fact only 4 lots from retired Broadsword Batch 3 but all 6 can receive
Iver Huitfeldt 32 SM-2 + 2 x Mk-56 and/or max 16 Harpoons but can have all i consider 24 + 8 tubes total 64

View attachment 40324
Click to expand...
Iver Huiltfeldt: 32 Mk41 VLS + 12 Mk56 VLS + (designed for) 16 Exocet = 60; as built: 32 + 12 + 8 = 52
Daring: (designed for) 64 Mk41 VLS + (designed for) 8 Harpoon = 72; as built: 48 +/- 8 = 48 to 56
Horizon: (designed for) 64 Sylver VLS + 8 Exocet = 72; as built: 48 + 8 = 56
Fridtjof Nansen: (designed for) 16 Mk41 VLS + 8 NSM = 24; as built: 8-16 + 8 = 16 to 24
De Zeven Provincien: (designed for) 48 Mk41 VLS + 8 Harpoon = 56; as built: 40 + 8 = 48
Halifax: 16 Mk48 VLS + 8 Harpoon = 24; as built 16 + 8 = 24
Kirov: 20 Granit + 96 Fort + 128 Tor = 244; I see how you got this number, but I did say I excluded SRSAMs (I also miscalculated the large missiles); OTOH Kirov seems to possibly just have too many SRSAMs to ignore, so it's hard to say overall.
 
S

schenkus

Junior Member
Registered Member
Iron Man said:
Daring: (designed for) 64 Mk41 VLS + (designed for) 8 Harpoon = 72; as built: 48 +/- 8 = 48 to 56
Click to expand...

Actually the Daring class uses Sylver A50 instead of Mk41, so they can only use Aster 30/Aster 15 (there is no quad packed ESSM equivalent and no strike missile for this launcher).
 
I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
schenkus said:
Actually the Daring class uses Sylver A50 instead of Mk41, so they can only use Aster 30/Aster 15 (there is no quad packed ESSM equivalent and no strike missile for this launcher).
Click to expand...
Yes, my error. They do use the Sylver system.
 
I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
Iron Man said:
Yes, my error. They do use the Sylver system.
Click to expand...
Actually, to be more precise, the Daring was designed for 48 Sylver + 16 Mk41 + 8 Harpoon, but the Mk41 option was never exercised and the Harpoons have only been put on a few of the ships, due of course to $$$.
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Iron Man said:
If SM-6 can also intercept a DF-21D then the ASBM's effectiveness will be significantly diminished, as many more ships will carry SM-6 than will carry SM-3, and will carry them in larger numbers as well.
Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:
I doubt there was any effectiveness of ASBM in the first place. PRC never had shown any tests of how an ASBM would acquire maintain and hit a moving target.
Click to expand...

SinoSoldier said:
A weapons system like the DF-21D, disregarding its inherent effectiveness for a moment, relies on a terminally-maneuvering RV, implying that the best chances of intercepting it would be during its midcourse stage of flight. SM-6, however, has a maximum intercept altitude of roughly 40 km, which limits the selection of potential targets (for midcourse interception) to only tactical BMs which have a comparable apogee. Granted, the SM-6 may go for a terminal intercept, but the probability of a successful shootdown takes a nosedive. The SM-3, with a max intercept altitude exceeding 200 km, would be the ideal ABM of choice against threats like the DF-21D.

Before the SM-3/6 are dispensed against a notional DF-21D, I would fully expect a potential opponent to take out key links in the "kill chain" involving the neutralization of Yaogan-series satellites, long-range URAVs, land-based OTH radars, and finally strikes on mobile DF-21D launchers should the situation permit such actions.
Click to expand...

It is difficult but

Navy, Missile Defense Agency Succeed During SM-6 Ballistic Missile Defense Test
Two missiles launched from the guided-missile destroyer USS John Paul Jones (DDG-53) bullseyed a complex medium-range ballistic missile target in a successful test off Hawaii, the Missile Defense Agency announced on Wednesday.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
FORBIN said:
They don't need all new SM-6, AGM-158C, SM-3 Block I/II fit inside
Click to expand...

Lethe said:
SM-3 is limited by the diameter of the launch tube. You don't think they would make it bigger if they could?

As above, it's not only about launching the biggest missiles, but about being able to multi-pack larger missiles too.

As has already been pointed out, USN in fact tried to go with a new, larger VLS design in the form of the Mk. 57 on Zumwalt. But that program crashed and burned and they're back to the Arleigh Burke design which has no room for such innovations.
Click to expand...

They don't need for a simple reason SM-6 have a range of minimum 240 km and same for ohers very long range, sorry but i think ur not aware for munitions spécifications, i have all in my notes with VLS

Your last point is arquable never see that, coz above i have yet mentionned in more it is a special VLS with only 4 cell's especialy build for be used by Zumwalt Class around the hull in 4 areas with interior armored for deflecting the explosion outwardly with it a Zumwalt in more very stealth is much more difficult to destroy than other ships it is certain.

A critical hit in a group VLS could cut the ship in two impossible or almost with the Zumwalt except ofc big CV/CVns the more difficult to destroy with Kirov 25000 t !

And the Burke use logicaly Mk-41.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top