- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Just a discussion piece to see if the ASROC would be worth returning to RCN service now that we are looking at 15 new ships to replace the Iroquois and Halifax classes? Thoughts?
ASROC viability
- Thread starter Ex-Dragoon
- Start date
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 3,893
- Points
- 1,010
Some years ago, I had a beer with two chief weapons tech (or whatever they call them now) mourning the passing of the Limbo mortar. They had two reason to mourn it: (1) It was a dumb weapon: you set depth, pointed and shot - could not be decoyed away, could not get its software or sonar confused - it went where told and blew up. (2) Even though the current ASW tactics calls for kill at a distance by helicopter, usually in the first CZ but with luck in the second CZ, some of those crafty submariners always manage to slip through and end up in your direct path zone so you need something to hurl at them other than the galley's potato peelings.
The logic of the second one still stands today: No matter how much we'd like to kill subs at a distance, there will be leakers that catch you with your pants (I mean helo) down and you need something to lob at them. ASROC would be my choice.
However, the real issue with the new combatants getting ASROC is what launcher will we get? My personal choice would be Strike Length Mk 41 or even Mk 57 VLS. This way you can buy and store whatever "bullet" you want and change the load as required by the mission: you could get VL ASROC, ESSM, VL SeaSparrow, SM II or III, even the ballistic version, Tomahawk land attack missile, and even the VL Harpoon if the American ever complete its development.
Problem is with ITAR in the way, many governments - including the powers that be in Ottawa - tend to look to European suppliers instead of the US - and that means the SYLVER/PAAMS launch system. That would unfortunately limit us to the ASTER AAW missiles family.
Anyway: I am way in favour of bringing back the ASROC.
P.S.: If we acquired some VL ASROC's right now, they could be loaded as required on the IROs because they can be fired from the Short Mk 41 VLS.
The logic of the second one still stands today: No matter how much we'd like to kill subs at a distance, there will be leakers that catch you with your pants (I mean helo) down and you need something to lob at them. ASROC would be my choice.
However, the real issue with the new combatants getting ASROC is what launcher will we get? My personal choice would be Strike Length Mk 41 or even Mk 57 VLS. This way you can buy and store whatever "bullet" you want and change the load as required by the mission: you could get VL ASROC, ESSM, VL SeaSparrow, SM II or III, even the ballistic version, Tomahawk land attack missile, and even the VL Harpoon if the American ever complete its development.
Problem is with ITAR in the way, many governments - including the powers that be in Ottawa - tend to look to European suppliers instead of the US - and that means the SYLVER/PAAMS launch system. That would unfortunately limit us to the ASTER AAW missiles family.
Anyway: I am way in favour of bringing back the ASROC.
P.S.: If we acquired some VL ASROC's right now, they could be loaded as required on the IROs because they can be fired from the Short Mk 41 VLS.
A
aesop081
Guest
Oldgateboatdriver said:
I'm guessing that it had been quite a while since those 2 Chiefs had chased a modern sub.......if ever.
drunknsubmrnr
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
ASROC was and is useful as a quick-reaction weapon. I'm not so sure it would likely kill a boat, but it would likely screw up ana ttack and force the boat to cut it's wires etc.
Our current weapon loadout is very expensive and incompatible with PAAMS. I don't think there's any real desire to pay to switch over to European weapon systems, although it's quite possible to switch over to European radar and command systems and retain American weapons and launchers.
Our current weapon loadout is very expensive and incompatible with PAAMS. I don't think there's any real desire to pay to switch over to European weapon systems, although it's quite possible to switch over to European radar and command systems and retain American weapons and launchers.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 3,893
- Points
- 1,010
CDN Aviator said:
Please, I am not quoting those chiefs verbatim. I am paraphrasing so I can make the point in a public forum, relying on concepts that have been used in public so general public may get an understanding. Obviously I don't intend to go into specific or detailed discussions of ASW tactics.
As for modern boats: What do you consider modern? I would have thought that Los Angeles class, British T Boats, type 209/212 and our own O boats would qualify as modern.
A
aesop081
Guest
Oldgateboatdriver said:
...and neither should I. As for modern, probably best if i discuss that at another place, another time.
- Reaction score
- 15,989
- Points
- 1,160
Would a modern hedgehog work?
- Reaction score
- 214
- Points
- 880
ASROCs? The Rocket Mk46's that used to launch out of those ugly matchboxes? Come on guys, this isn't the 80's - we all know ASW is dead!! :facepalm:
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Silly me I forgot China and North Korea got rid of their submarine forces.
Pusser
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 37
- Points
- 530
Just throwing this out there:
I've always been led to believe that we put ASROC on the IREs because we couldn't afford to convert them to carry helicopters (as we had the St Laurents). In other words we installed ASROC as a cost-saving measure, not because it was a better system (than a helicopter). Now that all our ships can carry helicopters, is ASROC really necessary?
As for a different rocket/torpedo system, that wouldn't make much sense in that we still use the Mk46 torpedo (which is what ASROC used) and that is and will be a viable weapon for some time to come.
I've always been led to believe that we put ASROC on the IREs because we couldn't afford to convert them to carry helicopters (as we had the St Laurents). In other words we installed ASROC as a cost-saving measure, not because it was a better system (than a helicopter). Now that all our ships can carry helicopters, is ASROC really necessary?
As for a different rocket/torpedo system, that wouldn't make much sense in that we still use the Mk46 torpedo (which is what ASROC used) and that is and will be a viable weapon for some time to come.
