Posted on 01/20/2015 12:22:10 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Up gunning should always be an option. Look at how 20mm and 40mm AA guns multiplied on existing ships during WWII. Frankly, I think a suitable application of existing anti-tank missiles and quad-mount .50s would end the small boat threat. And we need a replacement for the Harpoon.
Finally, we should consider using armor again (real armor) for small combatants.
Because it isn't WWI anymore. Offensive weapon lethality has overtaken the ability of defensive measures to cope.
It’s about bloody time! Warships should look like warships and bristle with weapons. When you get into a fight at sea, you can’t have enough guns or missile to throw at the bad guys.
Because WW2 showed now matter how armored the ship, planes will sink it eventually. By the end of the war radio guided bombs were blasting the crud out of things. Even Kamikaze showed the potential of guided missiles. Basically they realized you CAN’T put enough armor on. If you can’t shoot it down before it hits, you are screwed. So defense is offense now. Again.
Several smaller carriers about the size of Marine assault ship. Obviously less capable, but an enemy would have to hit a lot more of them to reduce capacity.
Not true if a single .50 cal round in the right place can detonate all of your missiles.
Also, navalized Apache helos should be on coastal combatants, instead of SH-60s.
I’d go much smaller, fast CVAs carrying a mix of jets and attack helos. Keep the strike carriers, but they are overkill for most areas of the world.
Not exactly. The armored decks of British carriers stopped kamakazis. They got rid of armor because heavy guns went away. But stopping 20mm rounds, RPGs, and having an armored belt would negate the small craft threat. Excocet and Harpoon type ASCMs couldn’t penitrate 6” armor. The heavy Mach 2+ ASCMs are a different story, but they aren’t the coastal threat that is out there in most of the world.
Thanks - I have been emersed in war history and haven’t made it past WWI yet.
I have seen many vessels with combat damage and a .50 caliber hit on a missile would not cause a detonation because most ammunition of this caliber does not have an explosive filler. Also, the missile's Safe and Arming Fuze would prevent this kind of detonation.
However, take a direct hit from an anti-ship cruise missile and all bets are off. Several hundred pounds of high explosive WILL ruin your day. Sometimes you can take several hits and survive because your luck hasn't run out.
On 17 May 1987, USS STARK (FFG-31) was hit by two AM39 Exocet missiles fired by an Iraqi F-1EQ “Mirage” fighter. Both missiles impacted at or just above the waterline, portside, below the bridge. Fortunately for STARK, neither missile resulted in a high order detonation of the 364 pound warheads. Major damage and fires were mostly from the mass of the missile airframe and burning rocket motor propellant. One of the missile warheads was found mostly intact 20 feet away from the forward Standard SM-1 missile magazine of 40 missiles. There were 37 crew killed and 21 wounded in the attack.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.