Trident forward based launch phase ABM?

Submarines of every nation and era.

Trident forward based launch phase ABM?

Dannytoro
Joined: 26 May 2011, 01:26

06 Dec 2017, 10:33 #1

In this day and age of netcentric shared awareness; could it not be possible to cross hatch THAAD's  and GBI control and guidance technology to create the ultimate slap down weapon for use on small arsenal crazed states like North Korea and Iran? Just a thought.
"That's Mr. Esquimaux Savage to you"
Reply

kell553
Joined: 08 Jan 2004, 00:04

06 Dec 2017, 15:48 #2

A submarine is a very expensive platform to dedicate to this type of mission. Not to mention any requirements for platform based guidance of the missiles in flight. And it would take a much needed SSN/SSBN out of the production cycle.
If your going to build a dedicated ABM platform to park off a 2nd/3rd world hole I'd start with the LPD frame and go from their. Or reconfigure the DDG1000s and give them that mission...hoping their propulsion doesn't [email=cr@p]cr@p[/email] out on them again and leave them stranded off NorK.
Never use a small caliber bullet on a large caliber man.
Reply

Dannytoro
Joined: 26 May 2011, 01:26

06 Dec 2017, 20:36 #3

kell553 wrote: A submarine is a very expensive platform to dedicate to this type of mission. Not to mention any requirements for platform based guidance of the missiles in flight. And it would take a much needed SSN/SSBN out of the production cycle.
If your going to build a dedicated ABM platform to park off a 2nd/3rd world hole I'd start with the LPD frame and go from their. Or reconfigure the DDG1000s and give them that mission...hoping their propulsion doesn't [email=cr@p]cr@p[/email] out on them again and leave them stranded off NorK.
My idea would that no modification of the Ohio class boat would be needed. Or at least be kept to a very minimum.  And that you need not dedicate one for the mission. Merely for instance place 4-6 ABM variants in bays just as normal. If you think about it, doing so would still keep the nuclear strike mission the primary mission. But with the added benefit of being on patrol against ICBM rogue states too.
"That's Mr. Esquimaux Savage to you"
Reply

Phoenix04
Joined: 18 Jun 2015, 07:51

07 Dec 2017, 07:22 #4

How much time between detection, launch and interception?  How vulnerable would a sub be during this time?

I agree with kell553 that other platforms would be better suited to the task.
Reply

WarshipAdmin
Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 09:15

07 Dec 2017, 09:37 #5

badguy launches fake_icbm
good_guy detects launch from periscope depth (how)?
good_guy launches ABM
badguy detects launch of ABM
badguy launches subkiller
"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters."
- Frank Lloyd Wright (1868-1959)
Reply

Dannytoro
Joined: 26 May 2011, 01:26

07 Dec 2017, 14:03 #6

The submarine does not have to have any form of detection gear. It's the exact same principle where any sensor detecting a target can be read on the tactical display and give queuing information to other assets in theater.

 It's how a Humvee with ZERO radar can launch an AMRAAM based on queuing from say an AEGIS equipped warship. This has been a demonstrated capability for nearly a decade now.

 As long as the boomer has it's trailing wire comm deployed it needs not surface or change depth at all.

 And why on earth would the cash strapped USN need to re-invent the wheel building a new platform when a Boomer does the job for no added expense?

 And the benefits are massive. The Kinematic performance of a Trident are many orders of magnitude greater then anything coming out of a stock VLS tube. Speed, Slant range, Altitude. Heck, you could even puts it's MIRV capability to use and create an instant EKV mine field. Greatly enhancing PK % on a Rogue shot ICBM.
"That's Mr. Esquimaux Savage to you"
Reply

kell553
Joined: 08 Jan 2004, 00:04

07 Dec 2017, 15:54 #7

Trailing wire coms is VLF and that takes a significant amount of time to send a message.
So by the time someone/thing has detected a launch, evaluated it as an actual launch, passed the info to a VLF transmitter, sent the message, sub receives the message a launch happened, sub comes to PD and starts to spin up missiles and prepare for launch (itself a significant time period) to establish data link, acquires data link, transfer target data to missile system, and then launch....well, by the time all of that has happened the missile is not only past the point of boost interception, its likely already hit its target.
And the second everyone else has detected that a submarine has launched a missile (in a non-planned testing scenario) you have now put the rest of the nuclear nations with ICBMs in a bad position of waiting to see what this sub launched and where its going and at what point do they authorize our own nuclear counterstrike.

Sorry, but a submarine is just the wrong platform to use in this type of mission.
Never use a small caliber bullet on a large caliber man.
Reply

Dannytoro
Joined: 26 May 2011, 01:26

07 Dec 2017, 20:08 #8

kell553 wrote: Trailing wire coms is VLF and that takes a significant amount of time to send a message.
So by the time someone/thing has detected a launch, evaluated it as an actual launch, passed the info to a VLF transmitter, sent the message, sub receives the message a launch happened, sub comes to PD and starts to spin up missiles and prepare for launch (itself a significant time period) to establish data link, acquires data link, transfer target data to missile system, and then launch....well, by the time all of that has happened the missile is not only past the point of boost interception, its likely already hit its target.
And the second everyone else has detected that a submarine has launched a missile (in a non-planned testing scenario) you have now put the rest of the nuclear nations with ICBMs in a bad position of waiting to see what this sub launched and where its going and at what point do they authorize our own nuclear counterstrike.

Sorry, but a submarine is just the wrong platform to use in this type of mission.
Say what? The Trident is ejected from it's tube by flash steam expansion. There is no "spinning up" required. And the Trident ABM, like other current systems could instantly acquire high speed data by data link once it breaks the surface..

As for VLS data rates; at 300 bits per second, a secured launch code transmission can be received in mere seconds, not minutes.

Your also clearly giving the new North Korean ICBM much UN-realistic speed. It takes well over a minute to reach first stage ejection. And even longer to achieve 2nd stage ejection. In fact it's closer  to 4-5 minutes out before passing from boost phase to transit stage. Which is also vulnerable to GBI or a Trident ABM strike. And offers the sweet spot bonus of killing it before any penaids or mirvs could be employed.
"That's Mr. Esquimaux Savage to you"
Reply

Dannytoro
Joined: 26 May 2011, 01:26

07 Dec 2017, 20:29 #9

And btw, the reference I made to Trident superior Kinematic profile? In less then 2 minutes, third stage is taking over; and the missile is smoking along at very brisk 6 KM/Sec.

 It is way faster then the much older technology based North Korean ICBM. Giving it time and more importantly range  to deal with the NOKO missile. In either boost or mid-course transit profile.

 Lastly even IF an Ohio had to surface, what is North Korea going to do about it. Their Navy is terrible. And their ASW capability is nil. They could not hit a surfaced Ohio 50 miles off their coast. Much less one out many hundreds of miles.
"That's Mr. Esquimaux Savage to you"
Reply

US Nuke
Joined: 28 Oct 2017, 04:08

07 Dec 2017, 23:40 #10

Dang non quals
Reply