This U.S. missile is about to get a ship-killing upgrade

The Washington Post ^ | February 5, 2016 | Thomas Gibbons-Neff

[sukhoi-30mki]

In an apparent move to show how serious the Pentagon is about countering conventional threats such as Russia and China, Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter announced Wednesday that the U.S. Navy would get a new ship-killing missile.

The SM-6 is a vertically launched system fired from the deck of destroyers and cruisers. The missile was designed and fielded to intercept ballistic missiles in flight while they are passing through the upper atmosphere, but now, with Carter’s announcement, the SM-6 will be upgraded to defeat enemy ships.

“It makes the SM-6 basically a twofer,” said Carter to an audience of sailors in San Diego. “[It] can shoot down airborne threats. And now you can attack and destroy a ship at long range with the very same missile.”

The SM-6 is another step forward as the Pentagon moves to configure certain weapons systems to defeat enemy ships. In February 2015, the U.S. Navy showcased a video of a U.S. destroyer firing a Tomahawk cruise missile that hit a moving barge. Tomahawks are primarily used for hitting stationary land-based targets, so if they could be widely converted and used for anti-ship use it would give U.S. ships an additional, and much needed, long range anti-ship strike capability.

[Mariner]

Ummm...the warhead is only about 20lbs.

I guess the goal would be to blow the antennae off the ship and thereby disable it.

[PIF]

Only if they can’t find some stubborn spot of paint that needs to be blasted off ...

[Little Ray]

That is an awfully expensive missile to waste on a ship.
Should be looking at purchasing the BraHmos for anti-ship work. Hypersonic sea-skimmer - just the missile mass would be lethal!

[afsnco]

Pretty much anything moving at about 2500 MPH is going to leave a mark. Modern warships are so thin skinned...

[gaijin]

[Bidimus1]

For those of use Harpoon fans, using SM against surface targets is not new. Standard ARM (AGM-78) does a nice job.
True its a small warhead but if you shread the Radar system on a surface combatant you have blinded it and it becomes pretty much a target for anything else you might want to send its way.

Local control Air / Missile defense is generally not all that good.

[nuke_road_warrior]

So we spent how many millions to adapt a pretty good anti-aircraft missile to a so-so anti-ship missile?

While I recognize that an anti-ship capability is needed for surface ships, I'm not convinced that this makes any real improvement over existing capabilities. Except in rare circumstances, surface ships are not the go-to for anti-ship action. Aircraft and submarines remain the primary defenses against hostile actions by seaborne forces. Except for amphibious operations, surface ships exist to protect the carriers form hostile aircraft and submarines.

Once again, the pentagon seems obsessed to spend money on unneeded or unwanted weapons systems that “do everything sorta” while ignoring the real threats, or the need to update our core defense systems.

[Bidimus1]

I agree that a Harpoon is a better ship killer.

The SM-6 will have a range of appx 200 nautical miles 70 miles or so more than Next Gen Harpoon

If the add on cost to the SM-6 is low enough it will give Aegis Class ships a bit more flexibility. With the smaller force we have on the water flexibility is a very good thing.

It is odd that so many people seem in love with hyper-supersonic anti ship missiles and then seem to not want to use SM as a supersonic ASM with dual role.

Both US and USSR have done this before of course Terrier,Tarter,Talos and Soviet Sunburn all had surface to surface option.

As for the warhead a unlike an aircraft there is a very good chance that the missile body will strike a surface target after or as the warhead detonates. The KE will be a nice add on.

[doorgunner69]

IIRC, didn’t several of the early anit-air ship missiles also have a anti-surface capability? You never heard about it much, like the nuke warhead option.

[tanknetter]

You pop off 5-10 of them. You do so at less than max range so their fuel gets added to the fires started by the supersonic impact and warhead.

The enemy ship loses it’s sensors and the crew comes out on deck to fight the fires. Thats when the follow-on strike with Harpoons hits.

[Bidimus1]

That is my standard tactic in Harpoon. Naval War Simulator

Load ARM’ on as many platforms early as I can.

If US Navy send first strike with HARM’s and Harpoons on aircraft IF I have enough platforms will send some armed with harpoon as well. Try best to get a time on target with Harms getting to target just before Harpoons.

Brits can do it too with Alarm / Martel and Sea Eagle (but harder due to limited air craft)

French its Martel and Exocet.

Russia its Kh-31 (which can do both jobs)

Over all the combo of a High speed ARM and a sea skimmer is a good one.

[JAKraig]

One thing most people may not realize that nearly every navy now has ship killers, some only work for a few thousand yards, some several miles and some many 10’s of miles. The only way to own the sea around you is kill threats within strike distance, 200 miles is pretty a pretty good strike distance, likely farther than even high masted radar can see. Ship board armor is mostly on the hull, the deck is not that hard and superstructure even less hardened on the top. Coming straight down at 3 times the speed of sound will do serious damage even without a warhead. I would expect something that fast to go through all the superstructure to the hull, if it hits fuel, explosives or steam it is all over.

[Bidimus1]

Yes.

RIM-8A Talos was Nuclear with a 2/5kt warhead.

Nuke standard was considered but I do not think it was ever deployed.