Up-arm the Fleet II: Electric Boogaloo
...MK-41 for all my friends...
I’d like to revise and extend my remarks from my post this March, Up-arm the Fleet? With What?
There is a limiting factor to my argument that I have no one but myself to blame for in the subtitle:
To hell with your RCS. I want more weapons topside, now.
If you want to hear the topside thoughts, give the linked-post above a read. What I’d like to ponder this fine Tuesday is something below decks. Nothing new, really. Nothing that needs to be invented. Nothing that requires all that much more than…space below deck.
Right now, the smallest standard installation of the MK-41 VLS system is a single-module 8-cell package, 4x2.
It is not a small bit of kit.
The basic module is available in two sizes: strike and tactical length. The strike module is approximately 25 feet (7.6 meters) long and capable of launching large missiles, such as those that support sea-based midcourse ballistic missile defense and long-range strike. The tactical module is approximately 22 feet (6.7 meters) long and is capable of accommodating the same missile types as the strike length with the exception of the Tomahawk cruise missile and missiles designed for a ballistic missile defense role.
But it can bring a lot to the table.
The launch control system features an open, distributed architecture that allows for easy integration of future technologies. Open architecture both in the weapon control interface and the missile mechanical and electrical interface allows the system to support any missile in any cell. This is a capability unique to MK 41 VLS. The missiles currently integrated with MK 41 VLS include Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM), Tomahawk Cruise Missile, Standard Missile 2, Standard Missile 3, Standard Missile 6 and Vertical Launch ASROC (VLA). Lockheed Martin has consistently demonstrated the ability to integrate new weapons. Future missile integration could include Long Range Anti-ship Missile (LRASM), Common Anti Air Modular Missile (CAMM), ASTER, Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon (FC/ASW) and Barak.
As we outlined in some detail in the March post linked to above, and over the last few decades on a regular basis here and on the Midrats Podcast, when the next big war arrives, every ship that comes in for maintenance is going to have (we hope) scores of people scrambling about installing weapons anywhere the engineers will let them when reality reminds everyone that war at sea is a nasty and dangerous place once the enemy can shoot back.
We also have Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), the distributed lethality concept, quad-packed ESSM, and, really, if you can add two VLS cells here, and two VLS cells there, and then do that to four ships that otherwise would not have them…after a while, you have quite a bit more to play with in the aggregate.
Anyway, when the enemy is coming at you up close and personal, you cannot have enough weapons.
Where to put them? We have more options than you think.
That big 8-cell module isn’t something you can shoehorn in via a SHIPALT willy-nilly, even if you are an LPD-17 Class ship that was designed for but not fitted with the MK-41 VLS.
What if you could break that 8-cell into smaller bits from 1x1, 2x1, 2x2 etc to fit what space you could find?
Lucky for us, that solution already exists. Nod to the thinkers at LMT.
BEHOLD the ‘A Name Only an Engineer Would Love” …. Single Cell Launcher.
Lockheed Martin has developed a scalable, modular, flexible missile launcher to provide an improved capability for navies around the world. The Single Cell Launcher maximizes commonality through use of the structure, software and electronics associated with the combat proven MK 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS)…leveraging the latest state-of-the-art MK41 VLS launch control system, MK 25 Quad Pack Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) Canister and a scalable, mechanical structure.
Yes, I struggle through marketing-speak too—but this is the life we have chosen.
This design provides a flexible system that is easily configurable, particularly where size and space concerns are paramount. SCL was designed to meet the need for a smaller, lighter and more flexible launcher for smaller ship classes which supports naval fleets around the world.
I don’t know about you, but this is just plain sexy.
OK, so here is what I’d like to see at peace when we have some time and the ability to scale up hardware production, because this will unquestionably be asked for at war where we don’t have the time or hardware.
Get a few teams of young engineers with the best software out there. Give each team a random selection of USS, USNS (soon USS), and USCGC in active service or expected to be in active service and give them the simple task: “Tell me where you can put these on your ship, and the tradeoffs for doing so.”
For each ship, give me three options
Low impact
Medium impact
Maximum load”
Tell them you want your first brief in 14 days.
Then, look over at the Lockheed guys and tell them, “Make the electronics, CEC, and CIC interface common and simple—and do it now.”
Then, get out of their way with a departing quote from The Great Man:
Chop, chop. Peace is a luxury and we are all about to have to learn to live on poverty wages.
The 14 day time limit is critical. Any decent team consisting of a naval architect, a marine engineer, a sensors guy, and a software engineer can provide a solution (with believable outcome tolerances) for each ship class in a fortnight. Give the team more time than that and all of the Good Idea Faeries will come out of the woodwork.
There is actually a third version of the Mk 41, the self-defense module. This is considerably shorter and is designed for quad-packed ESSM. The Austalians used this version when they upgraded their Perry-class frigates when they put an eight-cell Mk 41 in front of their single-rail Standard launcher to give each ship an additional 32 ESSM.