- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
Air defense against SSMs seems to be mentioned more at the beginning of this article though...
Defense News
Defense News
Surface Ships Need More Offensive Punch, Outlook
Change missile-fighting concepts, add lasers and railguns on ships, expert urges
Nov. 17, 2014 - 03:45AM | By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS
WASHINGTON — Commanders of Aegis-equipped cruisers and destroyers long have been confident in their ability to detect, engage and destroy incoming enemy missiles, often employing a layered strategy to hit threats at long, medium and short ranges. That’s key to one of their prime missions, protecting an aircraft carrier from enemy attack.
But there’s a catch. Under a doctrine that shoots two missiles at each incoming weapon, and with missile magazines that carry about a 100 missiles or so, the flow of defensive weapons is likely to run dry in a short time.
“A cruiser or destroyer will exhaust its missiles relatively quickly against incoming missiles — about 50 incoming missiles will use up the inventory of air-defense weapons,” said Bryan Clark, a naval analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) in Washington.
(...SNIPPED)
To counter these threats, “we need a new defensive anti-air warfare (AAW) concept,” Clark told reporters Monday in a preview of a new study in which he urges the US Navy to “reinvigorate” surface warfare.
“We need to shift to a single, dense defensive, close-in AAW layer rather than a layered approach,” he urged, suggesting an engagement range of about thirty nautical miles.
“Current air defense schemes are based on fallacies and wishful thinking,” Clark, a former top adviser to chief of naval operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, said. “Using my most expensive, biggest weapons first leaves only cheap, close-in weapons.” A shift to 30 nautical miles, he added, takes advantage of cheaper interceptors that can be carried in larger numbers, relying on the ability of the Aegis system’s fire control abilities to hit their targets.
Holding back Standard SM-2 and SM-6 weapons, he said, makes them available as offensive weapons, able to reach out and destroy enemy aircraft.
Underlying Clark’s study is an urge to increase the fleet’s lethality and think more offensively.
“The surface fleet of today really can’t do offensive sea control,” he explained. “I want to make this an executable plan as opposed to an aspirational plan. It’s very payload-focused, based on modifications rather than on a brand-new surface combatant.”
Among the moves Clark espouses are quicker development and fielding of laser weapons and electromagnetic rail guns.
“The Navy now has no plan to integrate a laser into a large surface combatant. There is discussion, but nothing definitive,” he said, noting the need for about 1500 kilowatts for power and cooling needs. But the Flight III version of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, designed with more electrical power and scheduled to begin construction in 2019, could handle an effective weapon.
(...SNIPPED)