US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

S

SlothmanAllen

Junior Member
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
It has been known since the announcement of the DDG(X) project by the Pentagon that when needed, smaller Mk41 VLS cells can be swapped with larger VLS cells for hypersonic missiles. I believe the G-VLS is meant for it.

With the case settled, one of the more important questions - What would be the dimension for the G-VLS?

On the other hand, speaking of which - Recall that some months ago, according to @tphuang, lyman2003 mentioned that the Type 093B SSNs that Huludao is starting to pump out since last year have 1.2-meter diameter VLS cells that can launch larger anti-ship ballistic missiles and hypersonic missiles in the future. Perhaps the PLAN will pursue larger VLS cells similar to this for their surface combatants in the future?
Click to expand...

So I guess you could have less cells with the same number of missiles? I wonder if they will mix Mk. 41 with G-VLS or just go all in on G-VLS? Potentially one apparent drawback is that with less cells you cannot launch as many missiles simultaneously. I am not sure how much of a problem that really would be, but it seems like a potential setback.

I thought the Type 055 already had larger cells? Or is just that the Chinese implementation of VLS is more modern and thus takes a greater missile size into consideration? I am guessing the description of G-VLS indicates that it is an even larger cell (at least length wise), than those on the Type 055? Regardless, multiple navies want greater range and speed, and there is only so much you can do with a ~Mk. 41 sized VLS.

Edit: Also, do Crusiers even exist any more? These Destroyers are all like ~12,000+ tonnes! What would a true next-gen Cruiser even look like?
 
BoraTas

BoraTas

Major
Registered Member
Temstar said:
View attachment 110941
Now, if I remember correctly this was the advice Yankee/Shilao recommended to USAF. The topic was J-20 HMD and PLAAF pilots was complaining that they were too heavy and causing their neck to hurt. Yankee/Shilao was then wondering how USAF deals with this problem and says they recommend acupuncture and TCM to USAF F-35 pilots.

Seriously though would HMD weight be a problem among F-35 pilots or are USAF HMD lighter than PLAAF counterpart?

33rd fighter wing seems to indeed specialize in training F-35 pilots.
Click to expand...
If new wellness facilities had to be established in bases, it doesn't speak well for pilot long-term health or retention. People tend to not opt for jobs that are punishing on the body.
 
A

Andy1974

Senior Member
Registered Member
SlothmanAllen said:
So I guess you could have less cells with the same number of missiles? I wonder if they will mix Mk. 41 with G-VLS or just go all in on G-VLS?
Click to expand...
It sounds like they might make these large cells before having the weapons to put in them. Then packs Mk41 weapons in there until these future weapons will be developed.

What could possibly go wrong?
 
H

Heliox

Junior Member
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
If new wellness facilities had to be established in bases, it doesn't speak well for pilot long-term health or retention. People tend to not opt for jobs that are punishing on the body.
Click to expand...

Fighter pilots aren't normal people. Like SF soldiers, like elite athletes, like firefighters ...

There are certain vocations that draw people who have that "right stuff". Who relish challenge and adversity so they can appeal to their alpha psyche by dominating or overcoming in the face of that.

What that does though is it makes recruitment difficult. There's only a certain percentage of the population that has the psych makeup to fit this role. This plays to China's strength as even 0.1% of 1.4 billion is already bigger than the US military.

The retention problem for the USAF comes into play when they have to scrap the bottom of the barrel with their woke recruitment campaigns and start filling roles for alpha warriors with beta hipsters.

That's why I'm always in favour of PLA recruitment campaigns that advertise the hard slog and sacrifice of a military career. China has a numbers advantage that it should never need to appeal to tiktok social media wannabes that give up defending their nations sky because their neck's too sore to pose for that killer selfie.
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
SlothmanAllen said:
So I guess you could have less cells with the same number of missiles? I wonder if they will mix Mk. 41 with G-VLS or just go all in on G-VLS? Potentially one apparent drawback is that with less cells you cannot launch as many missiles simultaneously. I am not sure how much of a problem that really would be, but it seems like a potential setback.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I have no idea how they are going to go from 8-cell Mk 41 VLS to (supposedly) 4-cell G-VLS, while being able to quad-pack SM-missiles into every single cell of the G-VLS, with the 4-cell G-VLS using the same footprint as the 8-cell Mk 41 VLS.

That would be trying to fit twice the number of missiles than before in the exact same footprint.

SlothmanAllen said:
I thought the Type 055 already had larger cells? Or is just that the Chinese implementation of VLS is more modern and thus takes a greater missile size into consideration? I am guessing the description of G-VLS indicates that it is an even larger cell (at least length wise), than those on the Type 055? Regardless, multiple navies want greater range and speed, and there is only so much you can do with a ~Mk. 41 sized VLS.
Click to expand...
All Chinese destroyers of the 052D-class and 055-class are using GJB 5860-2006 UVLS..

Meanwhile, provided that if the purported 4-cell G-VLS has similar footprint to the 8-cell Mk 41 VLS, then I believe that the G-VLS cells could be larger than the cells of the GJB 5860-2006, but perhaps not by a lot.

SlothmanAllen said:
Edit: Also, do Crusiers even exist any more? These Destroyers are all like ~12,000+ tonnes! What would a true next-gen Cruiser even look like?
Click to expand...
The Kirov-class may indeed a cruiser in the truest sense, considering its size and armament volume.

However, judging by the cruiser-like displacement of future destroyers, perhaps we won't be having any actual cruiser class going forward.

That is - Unless the PLAN intends to maintain the three-tier surface combatant classification in the future - Then we can expect direct successors to the 055.
 
Last edited:
C

CrazyHorse

Junior Member
Registered Member
Heliox said:
Fighter pilots aren't normal people. Like SF soldiers, like elite athletes, like firefighters ...

There are certain vocations that draw people who have that "right stuff". Who relish challenge and adversity so they can appeal to their alpha psyche by dominating or overcoming in the face of that.

What that does though is it makes recruitment difficult. There's only a certain percentage of the population that has the psych makeup to fit this role. This plays to China's strength as even 0.1% of 1.4 billion is already bigger than the US military.

The retention problem for the USAF comes into play when they have to scrap the bottom of the barrel with their woke recruitment campaigns and start filling roles for alpha warriors with beta hipsters.

That's why I'm always in favour of PLA recruitment campaigns that advertise the hard slog and sacrifice of a military career. China has a numbers advantage that it should never need to appeal to tiktok social media wannabes that give up defending their nations sky because their neck's too sore to pose for that killer selfie.
Click to expand...
Stop using idealistic language, this shit makes no sense.
 
M

measuredingabens

Junior Member
Registered Member
Heliox said:
Fighter pilots aren't normal people. Like SF soldiers, like elite athletes, like firefighters ...

There are certain vocations that draw people who have that "right stuff". Who relish challenge and adversity so they can appeal to their alpha psyche by dominating or overcoming in the face of that.

What that does though is it makes recruitment difficult. There's only a certain percentage of the population that has the psych makeup to fit this role. This plays to China's strength as even 0.1% of 1.4 billion is already bigger than the US military.

The retention problem for the USAF comes into play when they have to scrap the bottom of the barrel with their woke recruitment campaigns and start filling roles for alpha warriors with beta hipsters.

That's why I'm always in favour of PLA recruitment campaigns that advertise the hard slog and sacrifice of a military career. China has a numbers advantage that it should never need to appeal to tiktok social media wannabes that give up defending their nations sky because their neck's too sore to pose for that killer selfie.
Click to expand...
CrazyHorse said:
Stop using idealistic language, this shit makes no sense.
Click to expand...
In fairness, combat roles do require someone to be able to withstand fairly harsh conditions. While I wouldn't word it the way that Heliox did nor place as much emphasis on that kind of mindset, recruits should be able to tolerate a large amount of hardship because fighting is dirty and brutal. That said, I would chalk US recruitment troubles more to the fact that it wasted lives in middle eastern wars with nothing to show for it. Dying/getting maimed for a meaningless cause doesn't exactly stoke patriotic sentiment.
 
X

XavNN

Junior Member
Registered Member
[VIDEO] U.S. Navy's Strike Weapons: LRASM, HALO, Tomahawk and Harpoon missiles

Interview with Rear Admiral Steve Tedford, the U.S. Navy’s Program Executive Officer for Unmanned Aviation and Strike Weapons (PEO U&W) during the Navy League's Sea Air Space 2023 maritime exposition.

We focused on future and current strike weapons. RDML Tedford, PEO U&W, discussed the following topics:

00:40 - Introduction of PEO U&W
01:22 - LRASM Long Range Anti-Ship Missile program update
02:57 - HALO Hypersonic Air Launched Offensive Anti-Surface program
04:30 - Tomahawk cruise missile program
05:20 - Tomahawk for US allies (UK Royal Navy, Australia, Japan... and the Netherlands)
06:14 - Harpoon anti-ship missile program

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top