In the future, the Tomahawk cruise missile could be modified to hit a warship from 1,000 miles away. raytheon
Posted on 07/12/2009 7:32:55 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Tomahawk may get ship-killer role
By Enric Volante
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
A U.S. Navy missile that cruises hundreds of miles over land to blow up buildings is being redesigned in Tucson to chase down moving targets.
Raytheon Missile Systems wants to turn its land-attack Tomahawk missile into a ship killer that can do something never done before: Hit a cruising warship from a thousand miles away.
On Friday, the Defense Department announced a $12.8 million contract for Raytheon to engineer and test a new warhead system for the Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile. Ninety percent of the work would be done at Raytheon's Tucson plant.
The new warhead is one stop on a technology road map Raytheon has developed to upgrade the missile.
A financial analyst said this illustrates a strength of the city's biggest employer — the ability to upgrade combat-proven missiles with new technology to meet the military's future needs.
"It's a common process for Raytheon with its missiles," said analyst Paul Nesbit. "They've been making improvements to many others."
The company has also had its problems. In May, the head of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency complained of cost overruns and delays he blamed on poor management at Raytheon and other defense contractors. Raytheon officials say they have corrected the problems.
The Block IV is the latest generation of Tomahawk missiles. The Navy fired hundreds of them in the first Persian Gulf War and in the Iraq war. In May, the Navy awarded Raytheon a $207 million contract to build 207 more.
Although some components are built at Raytheon Co. plants in other states, nearly all of the 250 jobs tied to Tomahawks are in Tucson. They are among about 11,000 full-time-equivalent jobs here at Raytheon Missile Systems, Southern Arizona's largest employer.
Tomahawks shipped from Tucson end up on U.S. Navy destroyers, cruisers and four classes of submarines. The British also use them on subs.
Everett Tackett, business-development manager of the Tomahawk at Missile Systems, said the technology plan has four goals:
• Integrate a target seeker into the nose of the missile. • Add an advanced sensor to process radar and radio emissions from ships like destroyers, cruisers and aircraft carriers. These electronic signatures are like a thumbprint to identify the right target. Since the upgraded missile could fly 1,000 miles to a crowded coastline, "We want to make sure it goes after the right ship," Tackett said. • Increase the missile's bandwidth, or data capacity, for its Internet data link. • Improve the warhead to penetrate a big warship. "This is technology that really doesn't exist today," said Raytheon spokesman Mike Nachshen.
This would not be a missile designed to combat pirate ships off Somalia.
So, what potential future threat would prompt the Navy to have Raytheon produce it?
The U.S. Navy might want a longer-range Tomahawk because China's navy "keeps getting better and better," said GlobalSecurity.org military analyst John Pike. "This would give you the ability to shoot your anti-shipping missile at a Chinese ship protected by land-based aviation without putting your ship in harm's way," Pike said.
The Chinese also began producing a lot of mobile ballistic missile launchers about a decade ago and continue to build up an arsenal of medium-range missiles that could hit Taiwan, he said.
Pike said that unlike China's strategic ballistic missiles, which are far inland, these tactical missiles are deployed in bunkers close enough to the coast to be destroyed by a longer-range, more powerful Tomahawk.
Key milestones in Raytheon's Tomahawk program
1997: Raytheon takes over development and production of the Tomahawk after its acquisition of Hughes Aircraft Co. Hughes had acquired the Tomahawk when it acquired the missile business of General Dynamics, which had developed the Tomahawk and introduced it to fleet use in 1983. The Tomahawk Block IV, also called the Tactical Tomahawk, is proposed with new guidance and other features at lower cost.
1998: Raytheon Missile Systems wins a $256 million contract to develop the Tomahawk Block IV. It calls for delivering 1,353 missiles to the fleet beginning in 2003. The new Tomahawk can be retargeted in mid-flight, loiter over a battlefield for more than two hours and transmit images.
2002: Raytheon and the Navy complete the first demonstration test flight of the Tomahawk Block IV off the California coast north of Los Angeles. In October, the company wins an initial $36 million low-rate production contract.
2003: Navy ships reportedly fire 740 Tomahawks in the first 12 days of the Iraq war to take out targets such as air-defense installations. The Navy awards Raytheon a $225 million contract to produce upgraded Tomahawks.
2004: Raytheon delivers the first production model of the Tomahawk Block IV to the Navy. Raytheon is later awarded an initial $287 million contract for large-scale production, part of a program worth up to $1.6 billion over five years.
2006: Raytheon is awarded a $346 million production contract to supply the U.S. and British navies with the Tomahawk Block IV. The contract includes production of 473 missiles, including 65 for a torpedo-tube-launched version for the United Kingdom.
2008: Raytheon delivers the 1,000th Tomahawk Block IV to the Navy and completes the integration of the missile onto the U.S. Navy's newest fast-attack submarine. The Block IV missile sees its first combat action in an undisclosed counterterrorism operation.
2009: Raytheon says it plans to adapt its Tomahawk cruise missile to a naval combat role by adding the ability to hit moving surface targets and a new warhead.
SOURCES: Raytheon, U.S. Navy, Star archives Contact reporter Enric Volante at 573-4129 or evolante@azstarnet.com.
In the future, the Tomahawk cruise missile could be modified to hit a warship from 1,000 miles away. raytheon
Better use of this of this $1M missle.....
Use it to kill a $500M plus warship and take out forward agressor projection than destoying a small factory (unless of course it produces baby formula) that is worth a couple of million.
Couldn’t a predator drone or any other launch platform, with a Hellfire missile, currently do the same thing?
Given the Tomahawk’s relatively slow speed, would it not be vulnerable to CIWsystems on the sea where it’s ability to fly the nape of the geography is lost?
This is not the first time TLAM would be used in an anti-ship mission. The old TASM was the early TLAM (Bravo variant) anti-ship missile but was replaced by other less expensive weapons such as Harpoon with reduced range.
It’ll have to move a lot faster than it does now. A quick glance at wikipedia tells us that the missile is subsonic, which means it could be shot down by a sailor or marine with a GPMG strapped to the railing, never mind CIWS or Aster/PAAMS....
This is interesting because back in the days there was an anti-ship variant known as TASM. It was removed from the fleet in the mid-90s. It was *not* the same missile as the land-attack version. I can’t speak for the new one, but the old versions were not interchangeable; they were either anti-ship or land-attack variants.
A Tomahawk doesn’t cost a million dollars, has a greater range and is faster than a Predator. Each Predator requires a trained operator; a few people can launch dozens of Tomahawks. Tomahawks are launched from a ship’s Vertical Launching System or from a submarine, which you can’t do with a Predator. It’s radar cross-section is pretty small, and it would most likely be a sea-skimmer, so while anti-missile systems would be a threat, probably not much of one.
not with the speed required and a 1000mi range
Lets just bring back the TLAM-N.
We should have never taken it out of the inventory.
To a degree, but Tomohawks carry MUCH bigger payloads than Hellfires, which are effective on tanks but not so effective on heavily armored battleships...
That’s not what’s important here, the contract and the district funding is what is important. LOL
Probably not as well. The slow-flying predator would have to be directed to the area first and get off a shot from within the target ships air defense envelope. I don't think a Hellfire has a large enough warhead to take out anything larger than a patrol craft anyway.
A Hellfire has a tiny warhead that wouldn’t make a dent in a capital ship. A Tomahawk can carry close to a ton of explosives or a nuclear warhead.
I wonder if a hybrid solution would be cost effective: a fuel-efficient Tomahawk-style turbojet stage, which drops off when within 50 miles, and a supersonic ramjet stage which gets it the rest of the way.
Hellfire would just scratch a big ship. However, the bigger Predator-B (Reaper) has a 3,000 lbs payload, enough to carry two 1400 lbs Harpoon missiles
But a Tomahawk is used up in each mission, while a Predator can launch one or two Harpoon missiles, then return for reload/refuel.
The Predator/Reaper are great against enemies who either cannot shoot back, or airspace that has been sanitized. Against a foe that has a real level of capability, the Predator and Reaper (and even the FR favorite, the A-10 Warthog) are simply targets.
A Predator armed with Hellfires would be great against, say, Somali pirates, but in a future confrontation with China they wouldn't even get close. Furthermore, even if we had a magical Predator that manages to teleport 100 feet away from the target, the hellfire missile would most probably simply kill a couple of sailors and leave a scorch mark.
The new Tomahawk gives long-range capability against (say) Chinese navy ships, and that is something that no Drone currently active (note: active) can be able to do.
It is a fact that some day the United States will have to fight a near-peer enemy, and the day that happens will be the day when people realize that all enemies do not necessarily live in tents and fornicate with camels.
The Harpoons are used up too. We're confusing the weapon with the launch platform.
I'm strictly a surface guy, but I have never heard of a Predator being outfitted with Harpoons, let alone two of the suckers! That would be a hell of a dramatic boost in their capabilities.
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.