U.S. Navy's Plans for a Huge Ballistic Missile Defense Ship

[Peter1469]

U.S. Navy's Plans for a Huge Ballistic Missile Defense Ship (http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-navys-plans-huge-ballistic-missile-defense-ship-14920)
A good investment considering Chinese, North Korean, and Iranian moves.


The U.S. Navy has been in discussions with shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls about the possibility of building a missile defense variant of the San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock (LPD-17). The new vessel could eventually be equipped with new radars, railguns and lasers.

The massive 25,000-ton troop carrier has the size and weight margins for the mission, according to industry officials. “You can put a lot of additional weight on the ship and you can put … some modern technologies like ballistic missile defense radars that are very heavy,” Huntington Ingalls vice president Brian Cuccias told reporters at the Surface Navy Association symposium (http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2059) this week, according to National Defense Magazine.


Many analysts and retired service officials have suggested building a ballistic missile defense ship using the San Antonio’s hull—which could accommodate a huge number of missile tubes in addition to the lasers and railguns. Nor would the ship necessarily need to be solely dedicated to the missile defense mission—with its massive hull, the ship could be used for everything from humanitarian and disaster relief, to command and control, to hosting special operations forces in addition to having the firepower of a major surface combatant. If built, it would be the largest surface combatant built for the U.S. Navy since the Second World War.

Read more at the link.

[Don]

I'm wondering if they mean a ship that carries missiles to defend itself and other ships in the area or if the missiles are to be used to intercept enemy missiles. If they are intercept missiles are they meant to intercept things like cruise missiles and anti ship missiles or intercontinental ballistic missiles fired from land and submarine?

Either way its a good idea and I'm glad the USN is moving into the future. I remember a few years back when they were talking about the F-22's avionics and what it was capable of. The F-22 could not only fire multiple air to air missiles at different targets and then fly away from threats it could also control missiles fired from other aircraft. They were speculating but they said if it could do that it could be used to control missiles carried by something like a B-2 missile carrier. A flying missile truck. That's the kind of technology we need to defeat an enemy that might have superior numbers of aircraft using a fraction of that number of our own aircraft. During WWII Germany did have some superior equipment but we overwhelmed them with sheer numbers of tanks and planes. We could now do the opposite and defeat an enemy that had the superior numbers with our much much better technology.
Of course that assumes we don't share all the tech with our enemies or make it easy for them to steal it.

[Peter1469]

Our enemies steal all of our new technology.

[RollingWave]

I'm wondering if they mean a ship that carries missiles to defend itself and other ships in the area or if the missiles are to be used to intercept enemy missiles. If they are intercept missiles are they meant to intercept things like cruise missiles and anti ship missiles or intercontinental ballistic missiles fired from land and submarine?

Either way its a good idea and I'm glad the USN is moving into the future. I remember a few years back when they were talking about the F-22's avionics and what it was capable of. The F-22 could not only fire multiple air to air missiles at different targets and then fly away from threats it could also control missiles fired from other aircraft. They were speculating but they said if it could do that it could be used to control missiles carried by something like a B-2 missile carrier. A flying missile truck. That's the kind of technology we need to defeat an enemy that might have superior numbers of aircraft using a fraction of that number of our own aircraft. During WWII Germany did have some superior equipment but we overwhelmed them with sheer numbers of tanks and planes. We could now do the opposite and defeat an enemy that had the superior numbers with our much much better technology.
Of course that assumes we don't share all the tech with our enemies or make it easy for them to steal it.

No, it specifically says rail gun (which for a simplified explanation, is basically a cannon round that is sped up not by gunpowder, but by a rail of electro magnet, it can reach speeds well exceeding current cannons and missiles) and lasers, meaning the next generation weapons, this couple with the ship's size, means by default I assume that it is a nuclear reactor ship, maybe even a very significantly bigger nuclear reactor than the carriers, because rail gun and lasers would all eat up energy like crazy.


Our enemies steal all of our new technology.

Most of those aren't exactly secret tech, lasers and railgun concept have existed at least since WW2, the problem is actually implementing them successfully is much easier said than done.

anyway, as an ex-navy and military tech fan this is obviously exciting, though I figure that the risk is obviously submarines and long range torpedos in general.

I do wonder, isn't it possible to just make very large torpedos that can travel a long distance by itself? (like a few hundred km) if I was in charge of making weapons to take down the USN that would certainly be what I think of . they shouldn't be THAT expensive, and if you launch them in mass it's impossible to avoid, and there's no real known effective measure to destroy torpedos in water . only to avoid them. but with modern computer improvements, it's possible to design what is essentially a unmanned kamakazi small submarine fleet that can be programmed to travel long distance, then turn on it's detectors in certain area, if they detect certain patterns then go into fire mode etc. you can even drop them with old style bombers at a long range.

I think that might be the future, especially for people who want to deal with the USN, underwater drones basically. (of course, the difficulty is that you can't really send commands to these guys when they're under water. so there is the risk that they uncontrollably blew up things that they weren't suppose to.)

[Peter1469]

Great points!


No, it specifically says rail gun (which for a simplified explanation, is basically a cannon round that is sped up not by gunpowder, but by a rail of electro magnet, it can reach speeds well exceeding current cannons and missiles) and lasers, meaning the next generation weapons, this couple with the ship's size, means by default I assume that it is a nuclear reactor ship, maybe even a very significantly bigger nuclear reactor than the carriers, because rail gun and lasers would all eat up energy like crazy.



Most of those aren't exactly secret tech, lasers and railgun concept have existed at least since WW2, the problem is actually implementing them successfully is much easier said than done.

anyway, as an ex-navy and military tech fan this is obviously exciting, though I figure that the risk is obviously submarines and long range torpedos in general.

I do wonder, isn't it possible to just make very large torpedos that can travel a long distance by itself? (like a few hundred km) if I was in charge of making weapons to take down the USN that would certainly be what I think of . they shouldn't be THAT expensive, and if you launch them in mass it's impossible to avoid, and there's no real known effective measure to destroy torpedos in water . only to avoid them. but with modern computer improvements, it's possible to design what is essentially a unmanned kamakazi small submarine fleet that can be programmed to travel long distance, then turn on it's detectors in certain area, if they detect certain patterns then go into fire mode etc. you can even drop them with old style bombers at a long range.

I think that might be the future, especially for people who want to deal with the USN, underwater drones basically. (of course, the difficulty is that you can't really send commands to these guys when they're under water. so there is the risk that they uncontrollably blew up things that they weren't suppose to.)