What's the manufacturing cycle (for lack of a better term) for those weapons? In other words, how long from "Start the line" to finished weapons on the way to the ships that will carry 'em, and how many are typically in a batch?
It's one thing not to worry in the immediate time frame -- aka "kust now" -- about how to reload, perhaps cuz there are other things to worry about. It's quite another not to worry about it for what... 32 yrs? We're far past Admiral Beatty's line at Jutland, that "There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today." No, there's something wrong with our entire bloody way of thinking, teaching, training, learning and doing business.
Note the need for additional forward bases in the Western Pacific....perhaps some of those islands we liberated in WWII that had good anchorages and are large enough to host such facilities again? I think those are on a map somewhere...
As to the reloading at sea, I don't get why they don't use guides to slide the missiles in...it would protect them, guide them to minimize swing due to ship movements, and allow them to slip right in. They are just rectangular funnels, if you will, that attach to the tops of the VLS tube on the ship and are moved from tube to tube. The reason it is difficult to manage is they allow the tubes to freely swing on the line from the crane. Stabilizing the bottom in the guide means no more swing to arrest, slides right in.
The Constellation class have 4 x 8 VLS array. Would it be possible to replenish the Constellation class at sea? Instead of a crane spanning 8 cells on Burkes, the crane is only spanning 4 cells on the Connies. That sounds like that would be doable at low sea states.
"The contract is to buy a total of 154 Block V Tomahawk missile systems, with 54 systems going to the Marine Corps, 70 to the Navy and 30 to the Army, according to the May 24 Defense of Department contract awards
The 70 Tomahawks in the contract issued this week are for missiles the Navy is purchasing with Fiscal Year 2022 funding. The service is seeking to buy 23 Tomahawk missile systems in FY 2023, zero in FY 2024, 26 in FY 2025, 58 in FY 2026 and 58 in FY 2027, according to the Pentagon’s most recent five-year spending plan."
Obviously we're planning another 72 hour conflict with China.
Of course the resupply ships will become targets as well. Particularly in an environment where drones have the ability to find targets at extreme ranges. This will require assets to protect these resupply ships.
Build or rent vessels that can carry VLS cells that can be remotely launched by any Navy ship with VLS launch capability that has run out of munitions. Each of those low-tech VLS ferries could have a small Navy detachment of techs and security personnel. Any civilian hull could be retrofitted for this. Build enough of them to have them forward deployed or to account for attrition enroute. Whatever it takes so that you don't run out of ammo in a gunfight. I have no confidence they'll ever solve the rearming at sea problem. Do something now, or just don't commit to a war you cannot win.
- Lumber and oil and gas industry have robot arms they should be looking at for this. Also, leave the ships with the sensors forward and have fast ferries bring rounds up from further afield whether ship transfer or at a loading pier.
The punch list of "oh crap" crises moments of our own making never ceases to amaze me. A fleet that has sailed with 1000's of VLS tubes for decades has yet to resolve how to reload a VLS in theatre. Never saw this one coming.
Fall back on Plan Orange and (re)build an Advanced Base in the Marshall Islands to resupply and refuel.
What's the manufacturing cycle (for lack of a better term) for those weapons? In other words, how long from "Start the line" to finished weapons on the way to the ships that will carry 'em, and how many are typically in a batch?
It's one thing not to worry in the immediate time frame -- aka "kust now" -- about how to reload, perhaps cuz there are other things to worry about. It's quite another not to worry about it for what... 32 yrs? We're far past Admiral Beatty's line at Jutland, that "There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today." No, there's something wrong with our entire bloody way of thinking, teaching, training, learning and doing business.
Note the need for additional forward bases in the Western Pacific....perhaps some of those islands we liberated in WWII that had good anchorages and are large enough to host such facilities again? I think those are on a map somewhere...
As to the reloading at sea, I don't get why they don't use guides to slide the missiles in...it would protect them, guide them to minimize swing due to ship movements, and allow them to slip right in. They are just rectangular funnels, if you will, that attach to the tops of the VLS tube on the ship and are moved from tube to tube. The reason it is difficult to manage is they allow the tubes to freely swing on the line from the crane. Stabilizing the bottom in the guide means no more swing to arrest, slides right in.
How many TLAMs can we strap to the deck of an oil platform resupply ship, since those are the only hulls we might be able to crank out fast?
The Constellation class have 4 x 8 VLS array. Would it be possible to replenish the Constellation class at sea? Instead of a crane spanning 8 cells on Burkes, the crane is only spanning 4 cells on the Connies. That sounds like that would be doable at low sea states.
"The contract is to buy a total of 154 Block V Tomahawk missile systems, with 54 systems going to the Marine Corps, 70 to the Navy and 30 to the Army, according to the May 24 Defense of Department contract awards
The 70 Tomahawks in the contract issued this week are for missiles the Navy is purchasing with Fiscal Year 2022 funding. The service is seeking to buy 23 Tomahawk missile systems in FY 2023, zero in FY 2024, 26 in FY 2025, 58 in FY 2026 and 58 in FY 2027, according to the Pentagon’s most recent five-year spending plan."
Obviously we're planning another 72 hour conflict with China.
Of course the resupply ships will become targets as well. Particularly in an environment where drones have the ability to find targets at extreme ranges. This will require assets to protect these resupply ships.
Remember all those AD and AS types we threw away so we could be "Transformational"? Gee, who'd guess that we need them again?
Build or rent vessels that can carry VLS cells that can be remotely launched by any Navy ship with VLS launch capability that has run out of munitions. Each of those low-tech VLS ferries could have a small Navy detachment of techs and security personnel. Any civilian hull could be retrofitted for this. Build enough of them to have them forward deployed or to account for attrition enroute. Whatever it takes so that you don't run out of ammo in a gunfight. I have no confidence they'll ever solve the rearming at sea problem. Do something now, or just don't commit to a war you cannot win.
- Lumber and oil and gas industry have robot arms they should be looking at for this. Also, leave the ships with the sensors forward and have fast ferries bring rounds up from further afield whether ship transfer or at a loading pier.
Then, more useful rounds quad packed like GLSDB.
Have fun. They’ll betray you, monetize it, and exploit your coffins. They don’t know how to do anything else.
The punch list of "oh crap" crises moments of our own making never ceases to amaze me. A fleet that has sailed with 1000's of VLS tubes for decades has yet to resolve how to reload a VLS in theatre. Never saw this one coming.
one need only look at photos of replenishment at sea during WW2 to realize that we lack that capability today
"Praise the Lord and pass the Ammunition". (If you have any).
Whats the PLANs plan to reload their ships?