Naval and Defense News

[Zojirushi]

Doom and gloom might be warranted when the PRC homeports a CVBG in Cuba or something like that, and performs FONOPs up and down the Californian coast a few times a year. The front lines in this hypothetical fight are right off the PRC's coastline.

PRC has long land borders with Russia and India (and a bunch of other countries too), is in a frozen civil war with Taiwan, and has Japan right off their coast, and Australia well positioned to interdict SLOCs too.

The US has long land borders with only Canada and Mexico, it is hardly a comparable situation.

[thewood1]

"Doom and gloom might be warranted when the PRC homeports a CVBG in Cuba or something like that"

Maybe in five years, but there's a very good chance China won't be able to afford to do that.

[Twistedpretzel]

Then the question becomes if conflict is inevitable should we allow force parity before initiating? Tough nut to crack, hopefully it doesn't happen but that is a very optimistic hope.

[KLAB]

https://en.topwar.ru/188648-azerbajdzha ... ozduh.html
I-Derby ER in Azerbaijani service carried by MiG-29.
Question is wether the 29 got a radar and EW upgrade to take advantage of the improved missile.
K

[kevinkins]

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/china ... bor-coming

[Blast33]

he U.S. Navy says it plans to begin converting the first of its Zumwalt class destroyers to fire the service's future Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic weapons, or IRCPS, in the 2024 Fiscal Year. The launchers for these missiles, which will be loaded onto the ship's inside triple-packed Advanced Payload Module canisters, will replace the 155mm Advanced Gun Systems on these stealthy destroyers. The Navy decided back in 2016 not to buy any ammunition for those guns due to ballooning costs, rendering them effectively dead weight and prompting discussions about the possibility of installing other weapons in their place.

Lieutenant Aldridge said that the IRCPS launch systems would only occupy spaces previously occupied by the Advanced Gun Systems (AGS) and that there are no plans to add any additional vertical launch system (VLS) cells to the Zumwalt class destroyers. The DDG 1000s each have 80 Mk 57 VLS launch cells.

At present, these cells are expected to be loaded with a mix of SM-2 Block IIIAZ and Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) surface-to-air missiles, the latter of which can be quad-packed into a single cell, as well as Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. Of course, other types of missiles, such as variants of the ever-more-capable SM-6 family, could be added to the destroyers' arsenals in the future, as well.


The Navy did not confirm to Naval News how many IRCPS missiles the converted stealth destroyers will be able to carry at once, though it has been reported that up to 12 of these weapons could be loaded onto each ship in the future. This would mean two APMs would take the place of each of the AGS turrets. This may seem like a limited number, but each one of these missiles will reportedly be some 34 and a half inches in diameter and could be 30 feet or more in length. By comparison, a Tomahawk has a length of some 20 and a half feet, including a rocket booster necessary to fire it from a VLS cell, and less than 20 and a half inches in diameter.

IRCPS' expected dimensions are based on what is known about the U.S. Army's ground-based Dark Eagle Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) system. Dark Eagle and IRCPS are using the same missile design, with a common unpowered hypersonic boost-glide vehicle on top, with how they are launched being the only difference between the two.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42963/the-navys-stealth-destroyers-will-have-their-deck-guns-replaced-with-hypersonic-missiles

[Broncepulido]

Historical but probable of interest for most of us (Joint UK/Australia development of missile weapons and space systems, as Black Knight, in Woomera and similar 1946-1980), free 596 pages download!:
https://www.dst.defence.gov.au/sites/de ... t%20HR.pdf

[stilesw]

Hi Broncepulido,

Thanks for providing this reference. I've added it to the unofficial Dropbox Command reference library.

Unofficial - i.e. not sponsored by WarefareSims, MatrixGames, Slitherine, their employees, relatives, pets or ancestors.

As always, any forum member can have access to this Dropbox resource. Just PM me with your email address.

-Wayne Stiles

[kevinkins]

https://www.fltimes.com/news/nation/bal ... d8ed4.html

History does repeat itself.

[maverick3320]

ORIGINAL: Blast33

he U.S. Navy says it plans to begin converting the first of its Zumwalt class destroyers to fire the service's future Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic weapons, or IRCPS, in the 2024 Fiscal Year. The launchers for these missiles, which will be loaded onto the ship's inside triple-packed Advanced Payload Module canisters, will replace the 155mm Advanced Gun Systems on these stealthy destroyers. The Navy decided back in 2016 not to buy any ammunition for those guns due to ballooning costs, rendering them effectively dead weight and prompting discussions about the possibility of installing other weapons in their place.

Lieutenant Aldridge said that the IRCPS launch systems would only occupy spaces previously occupied by the Advanced Gun Systems (AGS) and that there are no plans to add any additional vertical launch system (VLS) cells to the Zumwalt class destroyers. The DDG 1000s each have 80 Mk 57 VLS launch cells.

At present, these cells are expected to be loaded with a mix of SM-2 Block IIIAZ and Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) surface-to-air missiles, the latter of which can be quad-packed into a single cell, as well as Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. Of course, other types of missiles, such as variants of the ever-more-capable SM-6 family, could be added to the destroyers' arsenals in the future, as well.


The Navy did not confirm to Naval News how many IRCPS missiles the converted stealth destroyers will be able to carry at once, though it has been reported that up to 12 of these weapons could be loaded onto each ship in the future. This would mean two APMs would take the place of each of the AGS turrets. This may seem like a limited number, but each one of these missiles will reportedly be some 34 and a half inches in diameter and could be 30 feet or more in length. By comparison, a Tomahawk has a length of some 20 and a half feet, including a rocket booster necessary to fire it from a VLS cell, and less than 20 and a half inches in diameter.

IRCPS' expected dimensions are based on what is known about the U.S. Army's ground-based Dark Eagle Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) system. Dark Eagle and IRCPS are using the same missile design, with a common unpowered hypersonic boost-glide vehicle on top, with how they are launched being the only difference between the two.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42963/the-navys-stealth-destroyers-will-have-their-deck-guns-replaced-with-hypersonic-missiles

Does anyone else feel like the US navy is just lost right now?

[AndrewNguyen1984]

ORIGINAL: maverick3320

ORIGINAL: Blast33

he U.S. Navy says it plans to begin converting the first of its Zumwalt class destroyers to fire the service's future Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic weapons, or IRCPS, in the 2024 Fiscal Year. The launchers for these missiles, which will be loaded onto the ship's inside triple-packed Advanced Payload Module canisters, will replace the 155mm Advanced Gun Systems on these stealthy destroyers. The Navy decided back in 2016 not to buy any ammunition for those guns due to ballooning costs, rendering them effectively dead weight and prompting discussions about the possibility of installing other weapons in their place.

Lieutenant Aldridge said that the IRCPS launch systems would only occupy spaces previously occupied by the Advanced Gun Systems (AGS) and that there are no plans to add any additional vertical launch system (VLS) cells to the Zumwalt class destroyers. The DDG 1000s each have 80 Mk 57 VLS launch cells.

At present, these cells are expected to be loaded with a mix of SM-2 Block IIIAZ and Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) surface-to-air missiles, the latter of which can be quad-packed into a single cell, as well as Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. Of course, other types of missiles, such as variants of the ever-more-capable SM-6 family, could be added to the destroyers' arsenals in the future, as well.


The Navy did not confirm to Naval News how many IRCPS missiles the converted stealth destroyers will be able to carry at once, though it has been reported that up to 12 of these weapons could be loaded onto each ship in the future. This would mean two APMs would take the place of each of the AGS turrets. This may seem like a limited number, but each one of these missiles will reportedly be some 34 and a half inches in diameter and could be 30 feet or more in length. By comparison, a Tomahawk has a length of some 20 and a half feet, including a rocket booster necessary to fire it from a VLS cell, and less than 20 and a half inches in diameter.

IRCPS' expected dimensions are based on what is known about the U.S. Army's ground-based Dark Eagle Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) system. Dark Eagle and IRCPS are using the same missile design, with a common unpowered hypersonic boost-glide vehicle on top, with how they are launched being the only difference between the two.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42963/the-navys-stealth-destroyers-will-have-their-deck-guns-replaced-with-hypersonic-missiles

Does anyone else feel like the US navy is just lost right now?

Welcome to the club. Oh and haven't you seen the wargames that we've tried with the Chinese military as the opponents...They outnumber us in nearly all categories and the tech gap has narrowed big time and perhaps in some cases gotten ahead of us. And our military is stretched to the breaking point and now with the US seemingly falling apart...yeah. Just so depressing.

[Boagrius]

ORIGINAL: maverick3320

ORIGINAL: Blast33

he U.S. Navy says it plans to begin converting the first of its Zumwalt class destroyers to fire the service's future Intermediate-Range Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic weapons, or IRCPS, in the 2024 Fiscal Year. The launchers for these missiles, which will be loaded onto the ship's inside triple-packed Advanced Payload Module canisters, will replace the 155mm Advanced Gun Systems on these stealthy destroyers. The Navy decided back in 2016 not to buy any ammunition for those guns due to ballooning costs, rendering them effectively dead weight and prompting discussions about the possibility of installing other weapons in their place.

Lieutenant Aldridge said that the IRCPS launch systems would only occupy spaces previously occupied by the Advanced Gun Systems (AGS) and that there are no plans to add any additional vertical launch system (VLS) cells to the Zumwalt class destroyers. The DDG 1000s each have 80 Mk 57 VLS launch cells.

At present, these cells are expected to be loaded with a mix of SM-2 Block IIIAZ and Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) surface-to-air missiles, the latter of which can be quad-packed into a single cell, as well as Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. Of course, other types of missiles, such as variants of the ever-more-capable SM-6 family, could be added to the destroyers' arsenals in the future, as well.


The Navy did not confirm to Naval News how many IRCPS missiles the converted stealth destroyers will be able to carry at once, though it has been reported that up to 12 of these weapons could be loaded onto each ship in the future. This would mean two APMs would take the place of each of the AGS turrets. This may seem like a limited number, but each one of these missiles will reportedly be some 34 and a half inches in diameter and could be 30 feet or more in length. By comparison, a Tomahawk has a length of some 20 and a half feet, including a rocket booster necessary to fire it from a VLS cell, and less than 20 and a half inches in diameter.

IRCPS' expected dimensions are based on what is known about the U.S. Army's ground-based Dark Eagle Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) system. Dark Eagle and IRCPS are using the same missile design, with a common unpowered hypersonic boost-glide vehicle on top, with how they are launched being the only difference between the two.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42963/the-navys-stealth-destroyers-will-have-their-deck-guns-replaced-with-hypersonic-missiles

Does anyone else feel like the US navy is just lost right now?

Not really. The issues with the Zoomies are largely a vestige of the peace dividend identity crisis that many military branches experienced across the globe in the post-Cold War period. Good that they are getting something useful in lieu of the AGS, it should suit them well.

[Tcao]

https://apnews.com/article/china-beijing-taiwan-tsai-ing-wen-3f3f4b8af3ae2d6679855be5e97f6f48

Taiwan deploys advanced F-16V fighter jets amid China threat

[Dysta]

ORIGINAL: Tcao

advanced

I have difficulty to comprehend the meaning of “advanced” in Taiwanese standard, when in fact China has 3 kinds of stealth fighters in the air, and rumored a stealth bomber being teased multiple times for the future reveal. And not to mention thousands of munitions ranged from smart guidance aerial bombs, to precision-strike ballistic missiles that rumored to capable of dotting parking and taxiing aircrafts on the airfield, rather than large static facilities.

I hope whoever piloting those Vipers really know what kind of “vemon” they are playing with.

[CAS_2021]

Indian Navy’s firepower got a major boost with the induction of INS Visakhapatnam, one of the four stealth guided-missile destroyer ships under Project 15B, at the Western Naval Command in Mumbai on Sunday.

Minister of Defence Rajnath Singh along with top naval commanders was in attendance at the induction ceremony of the indigenously built Visakhapatnam, seen as another Atmanirbhar success story in the field of defence manufacturing.

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh hailed INS Visakhapatnam as a symbol of the growing maritime prowess of the country and a major milestone in achieving Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision of ‘Make in India, Make for the World’.

[BeirutDude]

So on Taiwan, my personal take (and it goes for the Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia as well) is it (they) are indefensible in the short run. The trick is to make them as indigestible as possible. If I were calling the shots (and thank God I am not) the Ukraine would be flooded with ATGMs, MANPADs, and other weapons systems to make Putin's task that much harder. For Taiwan. land based/boxed ASCMs and SAMs to take their toll on any PRC invasion force. That won't stop the PLA/PLAN/PLAAF but will make them pay for every inch of Taiwanese ground.

As far as landing any significant U.S./allied SOF, Airborne or Marines, in Taiwan (or the Baltics), IMHO, that's just dumb. Fighting "China's War" as they envision it is a recipe for disaster. Their Achilles heel is trade, resources and power projection. The USN/RN/ Australian Navy/JMSDF are better served destroying anything PLAN/PLAAF going east of the First Island Arc and eventually retaking Okinawa and other Islands lost (and they will be). Meanwhile we destroy China's trade routes/Merchant Marine/Silk Road Initiative infrastructure (bridges) until their economy crashes. Might take a year or two but they will collapse, and that makes any Taiwanese success a Pyrrhic Victory. Bottom line, is we have this idea we have to rush in and save Taiwan (or the Baltics), we can't, but we can take ultimate victory away from them with the long game.

Of course this all assumes nobody gets stupid with nukes...

BTW: I've through about this for a scenario but sinking merchants is pretty boring!

[nogravity]

Hi BeirutDude,

Always enjoy your scenario. About Taiwan, I have relatives on both sides of the Taiwan strait. A big question about Taiwan is the will to fight. This applies to both sides of the strait. My feeling is that on Taiwan's side, very few are willing to fight. Very few despite of the tough talk from pro-Independence camp. Polls after polls indicates few are willing to serve in the armed forces. On the mainland China side, the will of re-unification is strong, especially the younger generation.

As for the long-term consequence. Trade will suffer for China for sure but I doubt its economy will collapse. Keep in mind China had went through the far worst economic environment in 1950-70s and survived.

In the end, it is test of wills for all sides.

[BeirutDude]

ORIGINAL: nogravity

Hi BeirutDude,

Always enjoy your scenario. About Taiwan, I have relatives on both sides of the Taiwan strait. A big question about Taiwan is the will to fight. This applies to both sides of the strait. My feeling is that on Taiwan's side, very few are willing to fight. Very few despite of the tough talk from pro-Independence camp. Polls after polls indicates few are willing to serve in the armed forces. On the mainland China side, the will of re-unification is strong, especially the younger generation.

That is a really interesting point about the morale. We tend to think of S-400 vs. F-35 and other systems but ultimately it is the men and women manning the systems. As an outsider I would agree it seems the morale is on the PRC's side here. Another reason the West should think hard about coming to their aid.

As for the long-term consequence. Trade will suffer for China for sure but I doubt its economy will collapse. Keep in mind China had went through the far worst economic environment in 1950-70s and survived.

In the end, it is test of wills for all sides.

This is not the "Red China" of the 1950-70s. I get the impression that people there expect a better standard of living than they did back then and aren't as willing to suffer depravations. Then again I am getting my information 2nd hand from dubious American news sources. Do you really think your family would suffer personal economic depravations without speaking out. dare they speak out? Then there is the actually strategic resources, POL, and other imports necessary to actually fight a modern war. It is an interesting question.

[Boagrius]

ORIGINAL: Dysta

ORIGINAL: Tcao

advanced

I have difficulty to comprehend the meaning of “advanced” in Taiwanese standard, when in fact China has 3 kinds of stealth fighters in the air, and rumored a stealth bomber being teased multiple times for the future reveal. And not to mention thousands of munitions ranged from smart guidance aerial bombs, to precision-strike ballistic missiles that rumored to capable of dotting parking and taxiing aircrafts on the airfield, rather than large static facilities.

I hope whoever piloting those Vipers really know what kind of “vemon” they are playing with.

I think their life expectancy would be short no matter what they were flying. That said, I wouldn't feel enthusiastic about taking any 4/4.5 gen aircraft into battle in that theatre if (heaven forbid) the balloon ever went up.

[nogravity]

Regarding the will to fight from the mainland China side, my sense while most tend to prefer to have peaceful resolution. The hostile stance from the current Taiwan govt and its support of Hong Kong "revolution" in 2019 had definitely turned their opinion around. Now, most people have given up of any hopes of peaceful approaches. This is a 180 degree change from the previous Taiwanese govt just a few years ago. Now, the only voice is armed resolution. In fact, if they have a general referendum, the vote to forcibly re-unification will win by a wide margin.

From Taiwanese general populace point of view, they want to keep the status quo as long as possible. But if all hell went loose, they want to end it quickly. Some would choose to leave. Few would choose to fight.