The United States Navy in the Cold War Era: What ifs.

[dragoon500ly]

(Primary source material is the 13th Edition of the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet by Norman Polmar and the Naval Historical Center)

Heavy Aircraft Carrier (CVA) On 29 July 1948, construction of five "supercarriers", for which funds had been provided in the Naval Appropriations Act of 1949. The keel of the first of the five planned postwar carriers was laid down on 18 April 1949 at Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding. The program was canceled on 23 April 1949, United States was not completed, and the other four planned carriers were never built.

The primary drive behind the design was the development of a carrier using the new jet aircraft. The new jets were faster, larger and much heavier that the WW2-era aircraft used on the Essex and Midway-class carriers. It was anticipated that the aircraft would have a much longer range thus allowing the carrier to operate further away from any targets. These requirements would require that the ship’s strength deck would have to be the flight deck rather than the hanger deck as in traditional US carrier design. The heavier flight deck meant that the ship would have a greater tendency to roll in rough seas, since a much larger part of the ship’s weight would be high above the waterline.

Due to the anticipated size of the new aircraft, the CVA would be flush-decked, meaning that the design would have no island superstructure. This resulted in two major concerns;

1) How would the exhaust gas from the power plants be diverted from the flight deck? The USN’s first carrier, USS Langley, had been built flush-decked and this problem caused a great many problems that were never satisfactory resolved.

2) Were are the necessary radar equipment to be mounted ? One possible solution was for a command ship to remain close by, carrying the task force commander and the necessary radar equipment. The USS Northampton (CLC-1) would be built to fulfill this mission. Another solution was for an airborne early warning radar to be carried among the air group.

It was finally assumed that the CVA would not operate by itself, but in conjunction with traditional fleet carriers as a complementary bomber-carrier. There was a great deal of debate on the CVA’s mission. One viewpoint was that the ship would carry a group of large bombers that would be secured to the flight deck with no hanger space as the bombers would be too large to be moved via the ship’s elevators. This allowed for munition to be reduced as multiple strikes would be unlikely. A hanger area for a small fighter contingent and a small magazine for nuclear weapons storage were provided.

The final design included a more balanced air group but would be able to support the heavier nuclear-armed bombers. It would be equipped with four deck edge elevators (three waist and one stern) as well as four catapults (two forward and two waist). The CVA would be able to launch and simultaneously recover aircraft. Estimated cost was $189 million dollars (equivalent to $1.66 billion in 2020).

Unfortunately, the CVA concept as a nuclear-armed bomber carrier was viewed as a challenge to the USAF’s monopoly on strategic nuclear weapons delivery.

Looking to cut the military budget and accepting without question the Air Force argument on nuclear deterrence by means of large, long-range bombers, Secretary of Defense Louis A. Johnson announced the cancellation of construction of United States, on 23 April 1949, five days after the ship's keel was laid. Secretary of the Navy John Sullivan immediately resigned, and Congress held an inquiry into the manner and wisdom of Johnson's decision. In the subsequent "Revolt of the Admirals" the Navy was unable to advance its case that large carriers would be essential to national defense.
Soon afterward, Johnson and Francis P. Matthews, the man he advanced to be the new Secretary of the Navy, set about punishing those officers that let their opposition be known. Admiral Louis Denfeld was forced to resign as Chief of Naval Operations, and a number of other admirals and lesser ranks were punished. The invasion of South Korea six months later resulted in an immediate need for a strong naval presence, and Matthews' position as Secretary of the Navy and Johnson's position as Secretary of Defense crumbled, both ultimately resigning.

Displacement: 66,000 tons standard, 83,000 tons full load. Length: 1,030ft (314m) at waterline; 1,088ft (331.7m) overall Beam: 125 feet (38.1m) Flight Deck: 190 ft (57.9m) Propulsion: (8) 1,200psi Foster-Wheeler boilers; (4) Westinghouse steam turbines totaling 280,000shp; driving four screws. Speed: 33 knots Range: 12,000nm at 20kts Crew: 3,019 officers and enlisted, 2,480 air wing officers and enlisted, total of 5,499 officers and enlisted Armament: (8) 5in/54 caliber guns in single mounts; (16) 3in/70mm AA guns in eight twin mounts; (20) 20mm/70 autocannons (single, dual or quad mounts were debated).

[dragoon500ly]

Sea Control Ship (SCS) In the late 1960s, studies by US Navy identified a potential requirement for large scale convoy operations in the event of a war with the Soviet Union. In order to compensate for a shortage of escort ships, it was suggested that helicopters operating from small helicopter carriers could fill the gap. When Elmo Zumwalt became Chief of Naval Operations in 1970, he seized on the idea of small helicopter carriers as part of his "High-Low" plan in which large numbers of cheaper lower capability ships would be built to supplement existing expensive high capability ships. The proposed small carrier, which was named the Sea Control Ship (SCS), was required to provide continuous airborne cover of two anti-submarine and one airborne early warning helicopters, as well as carrying VSTOL fighters to stop Soviet long-range aircraft (like the Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear") from shadowing convoys and directing submarines and surface ships against them. This resulted in a requirement to carry 14 helicopters and three VSTOL fighters such as the AV-8 Harrier. It was hoped that production SCSs could be built for $100 million each, an eighth of the price of a full sized aircraft carrier.
In 1971 USS GUAM (LPH-9), was used as a test vessel. Testing began on 18 January 1972. In 1974 she was deployed to the Atlantic Ocean. The vessel was equipped with AV-8A Harrier STOVL fighters and SH-3 Sea King ASW helicopters. The tests were completed in July 1974.
The lead ship was planned for the fiscal year 1975 shipbuilding program. However, Congress refused to authorize the ships because of their limited capability and strong opposition by the advocates of large carriers. The SCSs were smaller than most fleet aircraft carriers, and the concept was seized upon by nations wanting inexpensive aircraft carriers. Spain's PRINCIPE DE ASTURIAS, and her smaller cousin ship, Thailand's HTMS CHAKI NARUEBET, were based on the final US Navy blueprints for a dedicated sea control ship, but with the addition of a ski-jump ramp and follow a similar mission profile.

Displacement: 9,770 tons light; 13,735 tons full load Length: 620ft (190m) Beam: 80ft (24m) Draft: 21.62ft (6.59m) Propulsion: (2) General Electric LM2500+gas turbines, single shaft, 45,000shp; (3) 2500Kw ship service generators. Speed: 26kts; 24kts sustained Crew: 76 officers, 624 enlisted Armament: Two Mk15 Phalanx CIWS Aircraft Carried: (3) AV-8A Harrier VTOL; (17) SH-3 Sea King ASW helicopters
Aviation Facilities: Flight Deck: 545 x 105ft (166.1 x 32m) Enclosed Hanger: 19ft (5.8m) high Aircraft Elevators: 60,000lb (27.2mt) lift capacity Centerline: 60x30ft (18.3x9.1m) Stern: 35x50ft (10.7x15.4m) JP-5 Fuel Capacity: 950 tons (861.8mt) Aviation Ordnance: 180 tons (163mt)

[dragoon500ly]

VSTOL Support Ship During the mid-1970s there was increased USN interest in VSTOL aircraft, with a major analysis known as the Sea-Based Air Master Study developing a long-term program for several categories of VSTOL aircraft.
Admiral Zumwalt's successor as CNO, James L. Holloway III abandoned plans for the SCS and instead proposed a larger and faster design, the VSTOL Support Ship, or VSS. By June 1976, it was planned that the VSS would be 690 feet (210 m) long and would be powered by four General Electric LM2500 gas turbines driving two propeller shafts (essentially double the machinery of the single shaft SCS) which would give a speed of 29 knots (54 km/h; 33 mph). It would carry 22 helicopters (16 H-53 Sea Stallions and six LAMPS light helicopters) together with four Harriers. Holloway hoped to develop a series of advanced V/STOL aircraft, including a supersonic fighter and a utility aircraft for Anti-Submarine and Airborne Early Warning duties which could operate from the VSS as well as from the Navy's existing carriers, although these types were never fully defined. The need to accommodate the new designs resulted in the carrier's design being reworked in February 1978 as the VSS II. This design had a larger hangar and greater beam than the original design to allow the potentially larger advanced aircraft to be carried, and carried substantially more aviation fuel.
A third variant, the VSS III, evolved by July 1978 as a result of a requirement to protect the ship's magazines. In order to cope with the extra weight of the armor, the ship had a new hull form with less freeboard but allowing greater speed. The final VSS III design was 717 feet (218.5 m) long overall and 690 feet (210.3 m) at the waterline, with a beam of 178 feet (54.3 m) and a draft of 24 feet 4 inches (7.42 m). Displacement was 20,116 long tons (20,439 t) light and 29,130 long tons (29,600 t) full load. As well as the ship's aircraft, two quadruple Harpoon anti-ship-missile launchers were to be mounted on the fantail, with two Phalanx Close-in weapon systems were to be fitted. A complement of 49 officers and 910 other ranks were to operate the ship while the ship's air wing had 87 officers and 541 other ranks. The final configuration is described below.

Displacement: 20,115 tons light; 29,130 tons full load Length: 690ft (210.4m); 717ft (218.6m) oa Beam: 178ft (54.3m) Draft: 25.5ft (7.7m) Propulsion: (4) General Electric LM2500 gas turbines; 2 shafts; 90,000shp Speed: 30kts Manning: 97 officers and 910 enlisted, air group of 87 officers and 541 enlisted; total of 184 officers and 1,451 enlisted. Armament: (2) Mk15 Phalanx CIWS Air Group: 8 AV-8A Harrier VTOL; 6 SH-2F Sea Sprite and 16 SH-3 Sea King ASW helicopters

[dragoon500ly]

Medium Aircraft Carriers In the early 1970s, the United States Navy, following the doctrine of Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Elmo Zumwalt for larger numbers of smaller and cheaper ships, initiated design studies for a "minimum-cost" carrier of 50,000–60,000 tons. The new design was planned to be much cheaper than nuclear-powered carriers (a cost target of $550 million was set in 1972) but still be suitable for replacing the ageing Midway-class aircraft carriers. Work on the project (designated T-CBL) was stopped however, when the US Congress made statements encouraging all major warships to be nuclear-powered, and in 1976 an order was placed for a fourth nuclear-powered Nimitz-class aircraft carrier.

Later that year, however, US President Gerald Ford cancelled the order for the fourth Nimitz, stating that instead, two CVVs, medium-sized, conventional-powered carriers which were expected to mainly operate V/STOL aircraft would be built. The existing T-CBL design formed the basis for the new CVV, this being of the required size, while capable of operating all existing conventional carrier aircraft (this proved important as the hoped-for supersonic V/STOL fighters did not come to fruition).

The CVV carried a smaller air group than existing supercarriers (i.e. about 60 compared with about 90 for the nuclear-powered Nimitz class or the conventional-powered Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carriers) and had two steam catapults rather than four, and three arrestor cables instead of four. The CVV also had a less powerful power plant, with steam turbines fed by six boilers generating 100,000 shaft horsepower (75,000 kW) in a two-shaft arrangement, compared with the 280,000 shaft horsepower (210,000 kW) delivered to four shafts of the larger carriers, giving a speed of 28 knots (52 km/h) compared with over 31 knots (57 km/h). While slower than earlier carriers, this was still sufficiently fast to keep up with carrier task forces. Not all of the design features in the CVV were less capable than earlier carriers, however, as the carrier was planned to have improved protection for the ship's magazines and to be protected against under-keel explosions.

The Carter administration from 1977 onwards continued with the CVV program, by now expected to cost $1.5 billion per ship compared to $2.4 billion for a Nimitz, vetoing congressional attempts to vote $2 billion towards construction of a fourth Nimitz, although plans for a second CVV were abandoned. When it was realized that a repeat of USS John F. Kennedy, the last conventionally powered large carrier to be built would only cost about $100 million more than the CVV, while being much more capable, the Navy and the Secretary of Defense Harold Brown recommended that a repeat John F. Kennedy be included in the 1980 shipbuilding program instead of the CVV, but this was rejected by Carter, partly based on the lower life-cycle costs of the smaller ship with its smaller airwing. Following is the design Congress was willing to accept; however, the ship was strongly opposed by proponents of the nuclear-powered NIMITZ, especially Admiral Rickover, and none were authorized.

Displacement: 52,200 tons standard; 62,427 tons full load Length: 912ft (278m) waterline; 923ft (281m) overall Beam: 126ft (38m) waterline; 256.5ft (78.2m) flight deck Draft: 34ft (10m) Propulsion: (2) steam turbines; (2) shafts; 100,00shp Speed: 27.8kts Range: 8,000nm Crew: 4,025 (including air wing) Armament: (3) MK15 Phalanx CIWS Aircraft: 55-65

[dragoon500ly]

Strike Cruiser The strike cruiser (CSGN) was an outgrowth of the DLGN concept, developed in 1973-1974 as an enlarged DLGN intended to specifically to carry the Aegis weapon system. As more weapons were added (Harpoon and Tomahawk missiles) the ship was enlarged and the twin reactor D2G propulsion plant was upgraded.

The basic CSGN design was an improved CGN-38 class hull with several thousand tons of armor added. This would have been the first armored ship built by the USN since the USS LONG BEACH. The additional displacement would have reduced speed to 28-28.5kts; accordingly, the design was lengthened until at least 30 knots could be achieved, resulting in a very shallow draft.

Initially the ship was to only carry the Phalanx CIWS; however, in an effort to make the ship more competitive than the proposed Aegis-armed destroyer (DG/Aegis and later DDG/CH-47), an 8-inch Mk71 Lightweight Gun was fitted forward.

The ship was proposed as a carrier escort, with up to four CSGNs being considered to screen each carrier. The cost of the lead strike cruiser in fiscal 1976 was estimated $1.371 billion and she was to be have been completed in December 1983.

After the initial concept was ignored by Congress, the Naval Sea Systems Command hurriedly developed a Strike Cruisers Mark II design retaining the same armament but adding a flight deck, presenting a superficial similarity to the Soviet KIEV class VTOL carriers. However, the U.S. ship, with two Mk26 launchers and two 8-inch lightweight guns, would have had an enlarged island structure incorporating hangers for six AV-8A/B Harriers VTOL fighters and three SH-60 ASW helicopters. A further modification to the Mark II design considered a hanger below the flight deck, resulting in a design somewhat similar to the Navy’s light carrier of World War Two (CVL 22-30). That design would have carried about 18 Harriers on a displacement of 18,000 tons. Below is the Mark II stats:

Displacement: 15,900 tons standard; 17,210 tons full load Length: 666ft (203.1m) waterline; 709ft 7in (216.28m overall Beam: 76ft 5in(23.29m) Draft: 22ft 4in (6.81m) Propulsion: (2) pressurized water D2G General Electric nuclear reactors, (2) shafts, 60,000shp
(2) 2,000 kW (2,700 hp) diesel generators (6) ship service turbo generators Speed: 30+ knots Crew: 454 Armament: (2)2 Mk26 missile launchers with SM2MR Block III/IV SAMS and ASROC 64 missiles forward, 64 missiles aft (4)2 Mk143 Armored Box Launchers each with 4 BGM-109 Tomahawk missiles
(4)4 Mk141 Launchers, each with 4 RGM-84 Harpoon missiles (1)1 8”/55 caliber MCLWG (forward) (2) Mk15 Phalanx CIWS (midships) (3)2 Mk32 SVTT with Mk46 ASW torpedoes Air Group: (6) AV-8A/B Harrier VTOL; (3) SH-60B ASW helicopters

[dragoon500ly]

Typhon-class Frigate In the early 1960s, the USN planned to construct a class of at least seven DLGNs fitted with the Typhon AAW system. The Typhon consisted of an advanced radar/fire control system plus a medium-range missile to replace the Terrier and long-range missile to replace the Talos then being fitted to U.S. warships. Construction of the lead ship was to begin in 1963-64.

The high costs of the Typhon DLGN led Secretary of Defense McNamara to cancel the program late in 1963. The system’s SPG-59 fixed-array search/tracking radar was tested in the guided missile ship NORTON SOUND (ABM-1). Several Typhon concepts and features were later incorporated into the subsequent Aegis system.

Displacement: 9,750 tons standard; approx.. 12,000 tons full load Length: 650ft (198.2m) waterline Beam: 64ft (19.5m) Draft: 21ft (6.4m) Propulsion: (2) pressurized-water D2G reactors; 2 shafts Speed: 30+ knots Crew: approx. 500 Missiles: (2)1 Typhon long-range launcher (60 missiles) (1)2 Typhon medium-range launchers (80 missiles each) (1)2 Mk42 5in/54mm guns (one fore and aft) ASW Weapons ASROC fired from Typhon ling-range launcher (3)2 12.75in (324mm) torpedo tubes with Mk46 ASW torps

[chico20854]

Thanks for these Dragoon! Keep them coming!

Have you looked at Norman Friedman's Illustrated Design History series of books? They are excellent and have tons of details on these programs.

[dragoon500ly]

Thanks for these Dragoon! Keep them coming!

Have you looked at Norman Friedman's Illustrated Design History series of books? They are excellent and have tons of details on these programs.

working on acquiring the series, but I do favor Polmar's works, bit more balanced.

[JHart]

I saw the model or photo of the model for the Strike Cruiser mkII in the '80s and thought it was f'in awesome! A self defending CV. Would love to see a modern version for carrying F-35s. Impractical, but cool.

[dragoon500ly]

A large number of destroyer designs were developed by the USN from the 1950s onwards. The current Aegis program (manifested in the CG-47/DDG-51 designs) originated in 1963 with the Advanced Surface Missile System (ASMS). As the development of the large Typhon missile frigate (DLGN) began to encounter difficulties, the ASMS effort was undertaken, partially based on the expectations of new solid-state electronics.

The development was protracted and in 1971 the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Zumwalt, directed a design effort to provide the smallest possible ship that could carry the new air-defense weapons/electronics system. The initial goal was a displacement of 5,000 tons, but that was soon raised to 6,000 tons. Several designs were put forward, with the more austere versions having a single Mk26 Mod 1 missile launcher for surface-to surface missiles as well as ASROC, a small sonar and a helicopter landing deck but no hanger. By early 1973, the design had been recast, with two Mk13 launchers (a total of 80 missiles but no ASROC capability), plus a full LAMPS facility for one helicopter. The desire for longer-range as well as nuclear SAMS led to still another recasting, this time to provide the Mk26 Mod 2 launcher (with 64 missiles).

However, congressional confusion, the change of the CNO in mid-1974, and advocacy of an all-nuclear Aegis by Admiral Rickover led to the demise of the DG(Aegis) in favor of various DLGN-type designs as well as the CSGN strike cruiser.

The ARLEIGH BURKE-class represents a return to the DG(Aegis) concept. The availability of the vertical-launch missile system (90 weapons) and improvements in the SPY-1 radar coupled with the deletion of the LAMPS helicopter facilities as well as one 5-inch gun permit the construction of a smaller Aegis ship, as envisioned in the early 1970s.

[dragoon500ly]

During the late 1970s, the Navy proposed the construction of a class of small frigates (FFX) for use by the Naval Reserve Force. These ships were intended to augment the Olive Hazard Perry-class ships in the ASW role in low-threat areas. A class of approximately twelve ships was planned with the lead ship intended for authorization in FY 1984. For reasons not fully clear, although such ships would have had marginally effective ASW capabilities, the FFX class was not started. Subsequently, the Naval Reserve Force has been provided with frigates of the Knox and Perry-classes to replace their current aging Gearing-class ships.

Known characteristics include a full load displacement or 2,000---2,400 tons; a speed of 25 knots; a range of 5,000nm at 16---18knts; a crew of 120 men; facilities for one SH-2F LAMPS I; provisions for two triple Mk32 324mmTT w/Mk46 ASW torps; gun armament included a single Mk42 5in/54 gun and a Mk15 Phalanx CIWS.

[dragoon500ly]

During the late 1970s, the Navy planned to construct a class of Surface Effect Ship (SES) frigates in the mid-1980s. These ships were to be based on a 3,000-ton SES prototype that was to be constructed in 1980-1984. This ship was to have been capable of speeds as high as 80 to 100 knots with a trans-ocean design and to have carried frigate-type weapons, including two LAMPS helicopters.

The Secretary of Defense decided in May 1976 to proceed with the design and construction of a 3,000-ton, “weaponized” prototype SES. This followed 10 years of extensive conceptual and technical development. A contract for design with an option to construct was awarded in December 1976 to Rohr Marine, Inc. of San Diego. The ship was to be completed during FY 1983. Subsequently, the Carter Administration cancelled the SES program in its entirety.

In addition to high speed, the SES program offered a large amount of usable space which would have provided flexibility in the installation of weapons and sensors, with ample space to hangar and operate two helicopters. Also, the design provided considerable stability in heavy seas.

Displacement: 3,000 tons full load Length: 270ft (82.3m) oa Beam: 108ft (32.9m) Draft: 14ft (4.3m) on cushion; 31ft (9.5m) off cushion Propulsion: (4) Pratt & Whitney FT9 gas turbines; (4) waterjet propulsion units; (2) General Electric LM2500 gas turbines; (6) lift fans Speed: 80+kts on cushion Crew: 125 Helicopters: 2 SH-2 Sea Sprite LAMPS III Weapons: “FF/FFG weapons suite”

[dragoon500ly]

The USN built one ship and converted another specifically for use as major command ships, while a third such ship was planned for conversion.

The heavy cruiser NORTHAMPTON (CA-125), cancelled in 1945 while under construction , was subsequently in 1948 as a tactical light command ship (CLC-1) and completed in that configuration in 1953. After operating as a fleet flagship, she was reconfiguration to serve as a National Emergency Command Post Afloat (NECPA) in 1961 and re-classified as CC-1. She was decommissioned in 1970 and laid up in reserve until stricken in 1977.

The light carriers WRIGHT (originally CVL-49) and SAIPAN (CVL-48) were similarly designated for conversion to the NECPA role. The WRIGHT, also designated AVT-7 while in reserve, was converted in 1962-1963 and became CC-2; she operated in the NECPA role until 1970 when she was laid up in reserve. She was stricken in 1977.

The SAIPAN, designated as AVT-6 while in reserve after World War Two, began conversion too CC-3 in 1964, but was instead completed as a major communications relay ship in 1966 (renamed ARLINGTON and classified AGMR-2).

In the NEPCA role these ships were to provide afloat facilities for the President in the event of a national emergency or war.

[chico20854]

The USN built one ship and converted another specifically for use as major command ships, while a third such ship was planned for conversion.

The heavy cruiser NORTHAMPTON (CA-125), cancelled in 1945 while under construction , was subsequently in 1948 as a tactical light command ship (CLC-1) and completed in that configuration in 1953. After operating as a fleet flagship, she was reconfiguration to serve as a National Emergency Command Post Afloat (NECPA) in 1961 and re-classified as CC-1. She was decommissioned in 1970 and laid up in reserve until stricken in 1977.

The light carriers WRIGHT (originally CVL-49) and SAIPAN (CVL-48) were similarly designated for conversion to the NECPA role. The WRIGHT, also designated AVT-7 while in reserve, was converted in 1962-1963 and became CC-2; she operated in the NECPA role until 1970 when she was laid up in reserve. She was stricken in 1977.

The SAIPAN, designated as AVT-6 while in reserve after World War Two, began conversion too CC-3 in 1964, but was instead completed as a major communications relay ship in 1966 (renamed ARLINGTON and classified AGMR-2).

In the NEPCA role these ships were to provide afloat facilities for the President in the event of a national emergency or war.

Some more on CC-1, the Northampton is here (https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2021/09/22/wwii-warships-as-floating-white-houses/).

I'm going to weave a similar concept into the history thread, stay tuned!!!

[dragoon500ly]

A precursor to the V-22 Osprey, the Bell XV-15A is a tilt-rotor technology demonstration aircraft. This was an early entry in the Joint Service Advanced Vertical Lift Aircraft program of the early 1970s. Considered to be the second successful experimental tiltrotor aircraft and the first to demonstrate the concept's high speed performance relative to conventional helicopters. One of the major problems with the early tiltrotor aircraft designs was that the driveshafts carrying power from the fuselage out to the wingtip rotors, along with the gearbox and tilting mechanisms at the wingtips, had substantial loads placed upon them and were heavy. They were transferring large amounts of power and torque long distances for an aircraft power transmission system.

The XV-15 experimental aircraft introduced a major design concept advance: instead of engines in the fuselage, the XV-15 moved the engines out to the rotating wingtip pods, directly coupled to the rotors. The normal path for power was directly from the engine into a speed-reduction gearbox and into the rotor/propeller without any long shafts involved. There was still a driveshaft along the wings for emergency use to transfer power to the opposite rotor in case of engine failure, but that shaft did not normally carry any power loads, making it lighter.

The tilting engine concept introduced complexities in the design of the engines and engine pods to be able to shift from operating horizontally to operating vertically. Those problems were addressed fairly early in the XV-15 program.

The XV-15 first flew on 3 May 1977. Flowing wind tunnel and flight testing by Bell at the Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California the aircraft was moved to NASA Dryden at Edwards Air Force Base, California. The XV-15 flight testing continued expanding its flight envelope. It was able to successfully operate in both helicopter and normal aircraft flight modes and smoothly transition between the two. Once the aircraft was considered sufficiently tested, it was returned to Ames Research Center for further testing.

Its first public appearance was at the 1981 Paris Air Show where it was the hit of the show with its maneuverability wowed the audience. The XV-15s were a standard demonstration in the annual summer airshow at the co-located Moffett Field Naval Air Station for several years during the 1980s. Both XV-15s were flown actively throughout the 1980s testing aerodynamics and tiltrotor applications for civilian and military aircraft types that might follow, including the V-22 and AW609 program.

The first XV-15 prototype aircraft, N702NA, was transferred back to Bell for company development and demonstration use. On 20 August 1992, the aircraft crashed while being flown by a guest test pilot. He was lifting off for a final hover when a bolt slipped out of the collective control system on one pylon, causing that rotor to go to full pitch. The aircraft rolled upside down out of control and crashed inverted. While significantly damaged, the aircraft was largely structurally intact and both the pilot and copilot escaped with only minor injuries from the crash. The cockpit of the aircraft was salvaged and converted for use as a flight simulator.

The second XV-15 prototype, N703NA, was used for tests to support the V-22 Osprey military tiltrotor program and Bell/Agusta BA609 civilian medium tiltrotor transport aircraft. It continued in primarily NASA test operations until September 2003. The shortest takeoff distance was achieved with the nacelles at 75 degrees angle.

The Fédération Aéronautique Internationale classifies the XV-15 as a Rotodyne, and as such it holds the speed record of 456 kilometers per hour (283 mph), and the 3 km and 6 km time-to-climb.

SPECIFICATIONS
Crew: 2
Capacity: up to 9 passengers if seats fitted/3,400lbs (1,542kg) max payload STOL
Width: 57ft 2 in (17,42m overall with rotors turning
Height: 12ft 8in (3.86m) over tail fins. 15ft 4in (5m) with nacelles vertical
Wing Area: 169 sq ft (15.7 square meters)
Empty Weight: 9,570lbs (4,341kg)
Gross Weight: 13,000lbs (5,897kf) VTO
Max. Takeoff Weight: 15,000lbs (6,804kg) STO
Fuel Capacity: 229 US gal (867L) in four wing tanks
Powerplant: 2 × Textron Lycoming LTC1K-4K turboshaft / turboprop engines, 1,550 shp (1,160 kW) each normal takeoff power (10 min max)
Main Rotor Diameter: 2x25ft (7.6m)
Main Rotor Area: 981.8sq ft (91.21 square meters) total
Max. Speed: 332knts (615km/h) at 17,000ft (5,182m)
Cruise Speed: 303kts (561km/h) at 16,500ft (5,029m)
Never Exceed Speed: 364kts (674km/h)
Range: 445nm (824km) with max fuel
Service Ceiling: 29,000ft (8,800m)
Service Ceiling OEI: 15,000ft (4,572m)
Hover Ceiling IGE: 10,500ft (3,200m)
Hover Ceiling OGE: 8,650ft (2,637m)
Rate of Climb: 3,150ft/min (16.0m/s) at sea level

[dragoon500ly]

Designed as an integrated air-defense system for the USN, replacing the Talos/Terrier/Tarter SAMs. It consists of the RIM-50A Typhon LR and the RIM-55A Typhon MR paired with the AN/SPG-59 radar. Replaced by the Standard MR/ER missile program due to costs of the Typhon system.

Development of Typhon was initiated in the late 1950s, as the existing Talos, Terrier, and Tartar long-, medium-, and short-ranged missiles were considered to be approaching obsolescence; in the event of a mass attack by Soviet bomber forces, the requirement for each missile to have its own dedicated target illuminator would lead to rapid saturation of the defensive system. The Typhon system, developed under a contract awarded to the Bendix Corporation, would overcome this through the use of the AN/SPG-59 electronically scanned array radar system, capable of tracking and engaging multiple targets simultaneously.

The missile system to complement the radar was originally named Super Talos (long-range) and Super Tartar (short-range), but to avoid confusion with upgrades for the existing missiles was soon renamed Typhon. Typhon LR, the only version of the Typhon missile system to be test-flown, was ramjet-powered and was capable of intercepting high-speed aircraft and missiles, engaging targets in the Mach 3–4 range at between 50 feet (15 m) to 95,000 feet (29,000 m) altitude and 6,000 yards (5,500 m) to 110 nautical miles (130 mi; 200 km) range; a secondary capability in the surface-to-surface role, capable of targeting enemy ships, was also included in the specification. While primarily intended to be armed with a conventional high explosive warhead, Typhon LR was designed to be capable of carrying the W60 nuclear warhead.

Typhon MR was designed to be capable of intercepting aircraft at between 50 feet (15 m) to 50,000 feet (15,000 m) in altitude and 3,000 yards (2,700 m) to 25 nautical miles (29 mi; 46 km) range but had yet to enter testing before the Typhon project was canceled.

In March 1961 the first test launches of the SAM-N-8 Typhon LR took place;
beginning in 1962, the test ship USS Norton Sound entered refit to install the Typhon Weapon Control System to allow at-sea tests to be undertaken. However, the expense of the Typhon system, combined with the technical issues encountered during development, meant that the program was canceled in November 1963. The conversion of Norton Sound was allowed to be completed to provide test data, the ship recommissioning in June 1964; following the tests the Typhon equipment was removed in July 1966.

Specifications, Typhon LR
Weight: 1,700lbs (770kg) w/o booster. 3,620lbs (1,640kg) w/booster.
Length: 15ft 6in (4.72m) w/o booster. 27ft 7in (8.41m w/booster.
Diameter: 16in (410mm) missile. 18.5in (470mm) booster.
Warhead: 150lb (68kg) HE warhead or W60 nuclear warhead (yield est. 2.0kt)

[dragoon500ly]

This prototype supersonic United States Navy fighter was built in 1977. The XFV-12 design attempted to combine the Mach 2 speed and AIM-7 Sparrow armament of the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II in a VTOL (vertical takeoff and landing) fighter for the small Sea Control Ship which was under study at the time. On paper, it looked superior to the subsonic Hawker Siddeley Harrier attack fighter. However, it was unable to demonstrate an untethered vertical takeoff and its inability to meet performance requirements terminated the program.

In 1972, the Navy issued a request for proposals for a next generation supersonic V/STOL fighter/attack aircraft. Rockwell's design with the XFV-12 won against Convair's proposal with the Convair Model 200. The XFV-12A, despite its concept being considered risky compared to that of the Harrier, was selected for development.

To reduce costs, the nose from a Douglas A-4 Skyhawk and intakes from the F-4 Phantom were used. Engine rig testing began in 1974. Free-flight model tests conducted at the NASA Langley full-scale wind tunnel showed the projected thrust augmentation levels were highly optimistic, and that the aircraft would most likely be incapable of vertical flight on the thrust available, while the design remained suitable for conventional flight.

The XFV-12 used a thrust augmented wing concept in which exhaust would be directed through spaces in a wing opened up like venetian blinds to increase available lift, somewhat like Lockheed's unsuccessful XV-4 Hummingbird. Such arrangement restricted weapons carriage to under the narrow fuselage and two conformal missile mounts. Its canards were extremely large, with almost 50% of the area of the wings, making it effectively a tandem wing. The 30,000 lbf (130 kN)-class afterburning turbofan engine had enough thrust to lift the weight of the 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) aircraft. It was modified to further increase thrust for vertical lift. The rear engine exhaust was closed and the gases redirected through ducts to ejector nozzles in the wings and canards for vertical lift.

Ground testing of the XFV-12A began in July 1977, and the aircraft was officially rolled out at the Rockwell International facility in Columbus, Ohio on 26 August. Due to increasing costs, the construction of the second prototype was abandoned.

Tethered hover tests were conducted in 1978. Over the course of six months, it was determined that the XFV-12A design suffered from major deficiencies with regard to vertical flight, especially a lack of sufficient vertical thrust. Lab tests showed 55% thrust augmentation should be expected; however, differences in the scaled-up system dropped augmentation levels to 19% for the wing and a mere 6% in the canard. While the augmenters did work as expected, the extensive ducting of the propulsion system degraded thrust, and in the end the power-to-weight ratio was such that the engine was capable of vertically lifting only 75% of the weight of the aircraft in which it was mounted.

Following the tests, and with the program suffering from cost overruns, the Navy decided the XFV-12A was not worth further development and canceled the project in 1981.

Specifications
Crew: 1
Length: 43ft 11in (13.39 m)
Wingspan: 28ft 6.25in (8.6932 m)
Height: 10ft 4in (3.15 m)
Wing area: 293 sq ft (27.2 m2)
Empty weight: 13,800lb (6,260 kg)
Gross weight: 19,500lb (8,845 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 24,250lb (11,000 kg)
Fuel capacity: 2,763L (730 US gal; 608 imp gal) in two fuselage bladder tanks and two integral wing tanks
Powerplant: 1 × Pratt & Whitney F401-PW-400 afterburning turbofan engine, 30,000lbs with afterburner.
Maximum speed: Mach 2.2-2.4
Thrust/weight: 1.5 (conventional)
Take-off run: 300 ft (91 m) at 24,250lb (11,000 kg)
Guns: 1 20mm M-61 Vulcan cannon w/639 rounds
Missiles: 2 AIM-7 Sparrow (carried under fuselage) and 2 AIM-9L Sidewinder AAMs or 4 AIM-7s

[Raellus]

I don't know if it's within the scope of this thread, but the Navy almost got a single seat A-6 instead of the A-7 Corsair II.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navy-nearly-got-a-single-seat-a-6-intruder-instead-of-the-a-7-corsair-ii

-

[dragoon500ly]

I don't know if it's within the scope of this thread, but the Navy almost got a single seat A-6 instead of the A-7 Corsair II.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navy-nearly-got-a-single-seat-a-6-intruder-instead-of-the-a-7-corsair-ii

-

And a two seater A-7 for the carrier groups.

What's interesting for me is the sheer number of projects that were dreamed up in the 1960s-70s.

[dragoon500ly]

Another “aircraft carrier” concept that continues to receive support from some officials of the Department of Defense is the Mobile Offshore Base (MOB). A MOB is a large, mobile sea base, made up of modular components that are towed to the crisis area and assembled at sea.

These platforms referred to in the Bottom-Up Review as “floating islands”, would be capable of operating from 150 to almost 300 aircraft, depending on the type, including C-130 and even C-17 transports as well as large amounts of dry and liquid cargo. Although not directly comparable to aircraft carriers, MOBs could reduce the requirement for carriers in some areas, where ample time, resources, and security are available to deploy and assemble the platforms.

These platforms would be non-self-propelled. One CAN study addressed the MOB concept comprising six modules assembled to form a platform 3,000ft (914.6m) and 300ft (91.46m) wide. Another concept being developed by McDermott International and Babcock & Wilcox provides for a platform 4,925ft (1,502m) long and 500ft (152m) wide. This design has five separate modules to be towed and assembled at a remote location. The assembled displacement at operating draft would be 1,700,000 tons. Massive amounts of cargo could be transported and stored in the individual sections.
The MOB concept would be the largest floating structure ever built. However, with the available offshore drilling platform and related technology, and the use of subcomponents, there is considered to be little risk in the construction of the platform.

A MOB also could be used to rearm surface ships and submarines and refuel surface ships.

In 2001, the Institute for Defense Analysis, a DoD sponsored think tank, thinks that a MOB would be less cost-effective than nuclear-propelled carriers or high-speed cargo ships for projecting U.S. military power into distant regions. By one estimate, one MOB module would cost about $1.5 billion, meaning a set of modules 5,000ft long would cost $8 billion.

Critics also have cited the loss to explosion of a huge floating oil platform off Brazil in 2001 to warn that such massive structures filled with ammunition and fuel, are too vulnerable to accidents in sea and enemy attacks.

Supporters point that MOB-type platforms would complement, not replace, aircraft carriers. The Department of Defense is sponsoring ongoing studies of the MOB concept , and the Navy’s 30-year shipbuilding plan submitted to Congress in 2003 has $100 million in FY 2008 and $900 million in FY 2009 for construction of a MOB. However, these funds may have been inserted as a “place holder” to ensure Navy participation in the project should the Department of Defense continue to show interest.

From 2003 onward, the MOB concept has received less support because of the efforts of Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Vern Clark to develop the “Sea Base” concept.

[dragoon500ly]

The Navy’s response to Secretary Rumsfeld’s 10-30-30 strategy will be centered in large part on Admiral Clark’s sea basing concept. Derived in part from the Maritime Prepositioning Ships (MPS) initiated in the early 1980s, the plan provides for a large operating base that can be established rapidly (within 10 days) in a forward area, some 25-100 miles offshore of the objective.

This sea base will consist of Maritime Prepositioning Force (MPF) ships and, most likely, amphibious and replenishment ships. It will not be centered on “floating islands” or the Mobile Offshore Base Systems (MOBS), although some proponents in the Department of Defense and industry continue to propose the latter. Indeed, there are promoters of a sea base large enough to support operations by C-130 and C-17 cargo aircraft.
The MPF ships will differ greatly from current MPS ships in that they will be larger and will:

1) have facilities for troops to come aboard at sea, be berthed, and “marry up” with their equipment.

2) be able to put those troops ashore in a combat environment.

3) provide command and control, medical and resupply functions.

4) remark troops after the operation for rehabilitation and the reconditioning or replacement of their equipment, with additional supplies and equipment brought on board.

5) move with the sea base to another location, with the embarked forces ready for combat within 30 days.

Thus MPF ships will be more complex (and more expensive) than the MPS ships.

Although MPS ships will not be capable of operating C-130 conventional aircraft; a variety of fixed-wing Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) aircraft, including AV-8B Harriers and MV-22 Ospreys, as well as helicopters, will operate from the sea base. Hopefully, the potential for eventual operations of larger VTSOL aircraft, including a Bell quad-rotor aircraft that could be the size of a later Hercules, will be incorporated into the MPF design.

[dragoon500ly]

For the ground pounders among us, a cruise missile submarine is a submarine that carries and launches cruise missiles (SLCMs and anti-ship missiles) as its primary armament. Missiles greatly enhance a vessel's ability to attack surface combatants and strike land targets, and although torpedoes are a more stealthy option, missiles give a much longer stand-off range, as well as the ability to engage multiple targets on different headings at the same time. Many cruise missile submarines retain the capability to deploy nuclear warheads on their missiles, but they are considered distinct from ballistic missile submarines due to the substantial differences between the two weapons systems' characteristics.

Originally early designs of cruise missile submarines had to surface to launch their missiles, while later designs could do so underwater via dedicated vertical launching system (VLS) tubes. Many modern attack submarines can launch cruise missiles (and dedicated anti-ship missiles) from their torpedo tubes while some designs also incorporate a small number of VLS canisters, giving some significant overlap between cruise missile submarines and traditional attack submarines. Nonetheless, vessels classified as attack submarines still use torpedoes as their main armament and have a more multi-role mission profile due to their greater speed and maneuverability, in contrast to cruise missile submarines which are typically larger slower boats focused on the long distance surface strike role.

The United States Navy's hull classification symbols for cruise missile submarines are SSG and SSGN – the SS denotes submarine, the G denotes guided missile, and the N denotes that the submarine is nuclear-powered.

The USN’s first SSG were developed in the early 1950s to carry the SSM-N-8 Regulus missile. The first of these was a converted World War II era Gato-class submarine, USS Tunny, which was fitted with a hangar capable of carrying a pair of Regulus missiles. Tunny was used as a test-bed for developing techniques of use for the missile system, before a second boat, USS Barbero was subsequently converted. From 1957, these two boats undertook the first nuclear deterrent patrols.

Subsequently, two larger diesel submarines of the Grayback-class were purpose built for the carriage of the Regulus missile, with each capable of accommodating up to four missiles, while a further boat, the nuclear-powered USS Halibut, could carry up to five missiles. Between September 1959 and July 1964, the five Regulus missile boats undertook deterrent patrols in the Pacific Ocean, in concert with the newly commissioned George Washington-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) in the Atlantic, until sufficient SSBNs were in service to replace them.

The SSM-N-8A, better known as the Regulus I was deployed from 1955 to 1964. It is a turbojet-powered second generation cruise missile with a 500nm range at a speed of Mach 0.85 with a circular error probable (CEP) of 0.5% at this range. and carrying a 3,000lb warhead such as the W5 (available with yields of 6/16/55/60/100 or 120kt) or W27 (1.5kt) nuclear warheads.

After being launched, the Regulus I would be guided toward its target by control stations, typically by submarines or surface ships equipped with guidance equipment. It could also be flown remotely by chase aircraft. Later, with improved navigational equipment, one submarine could guide it.

The first launch from a submarine occurred in July 1953 from the deck of USS Tunny, a World War II fleet boat modified to carry Regulus. Tunny and her sister boat USS Barbero were the United States' first nuclear deterrent patrol submarines. They were joined in 1958 by two purpose-built Regulus submarines, USS Grayback and USS Growler, and, later, by the nuclear-powered USS Halibut. Halibut, with its extremely large internal hangar could carry five missiles and was intended to be the prototype of a whole new class of cruise missile firing SSGN submarines.

The Navy strategy called for four Regulus missiles to be at sea at any given time. Thus, Barbero and Tunny, each of which carried two Regulus missiles, patrolled simultaneously. Growler and Grayback, with four missiles each, or Halibut, with five, could patrol alone. Operating from Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, the five Regulus submarines made 40 nuclear deterrent patrols in the Northern Pacific Ocean between October 1959 and July 1964, including during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. According to the documentary "Regulus: The First Nuclear Missile Submarines" by Nick T. Spark, their primary task in the event of a nuclear exchange would be to eliminate the Soviet naval base at Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. These deterrent patrols represented the first ever in the history of the submarine Navy and preceded those made by the Polaris missile firing submarines.

The Regulus firing submarines were relieved by the George Washington-class submarines carrying the Polaris missile system. Barbero also earned the distinction of launching the only delivery of missile mail (yes they did pack mail for delivery to shore, just to prove they could.)

Additional submarines including USS Cusk and USS Carbonero were equipped with control systems that allowed them to take control of a Regulus in flight, thus extending its range in a tactical situation.

Regulus was also deployed by the U.S. Navy in 1955 in the Pacific onboard the cruiser USS Los Angeles. In 1956, three more followed: USS Macon, USS Toledo, and USS Helena. These four Baltimore-class cruisers each carried three Regulus missiles on operational patrols in the Western Pacific. Macon's last Regulus patrol was in 1958, Toledo's in 1959, Helena's in 1960, and Los Angeles's in 1961.

Ten aircraft carriers were configured to operate Regulus missiles (though only six ever launched one). USS Princeton did not deploy with the missile but conducted the first launch of a Regulus from a warship. USS Saratoga also did not deploy but was involved in two demonstration launches. USS Franklin D. Roosevelt and USS Lexington each conducted one test launch. USS Randolph deployed to the Mediterranean carrying three Regulus missiles. USS Hancock deployed once to the Western Pacific with four missiles in 1955. Lexington, Hancock, USS Shangri-La, and USS Ticonderoga were involved in the development of the Regulus Assault Mission (RAM) concept. RAM converted the Regulus cruise missiles into an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV): Regulus missiles would be launched from cruisers or submarines, and once in flight, guided to their targets by carrier-based pilots with remote control equipment.

Despite being the U.S. Navy's first underwater nuclear capability, the Regulus missile system had significant operational drawbacks. In order to launch, the submarine had to surface and assemble the missile in whatever sea conditions it was in. Because it required active radar guidance, which only had a range of 225nm, the ship had to stay stationary on the surface to guide it to the target while effectively broadcasting its location. This guidance method was susceptible to jamming and since the missile was subsonic, the launch platform remained exposed and vulnerable to attack during its flight duration; destroying the ship would effectively disable the missile in flight.

Following the delivery of the 514th missile, Regulus I was phased out in January 1959. Many of the missiles were expended as targets or converted into target drones.

[dragoon500ly]

A second generation supersonic Vought SSM-N-9 Regulus II cruise missile with a range of 1,200 nautical miles and a speed of Mach 2 was developed and successfully tested, including a test launch from Grayback, but the program was canceled in favor of the UGM-27 Polaris nuclear ballistic missile.
The Regulus II missile was a completely new design with improved guidance and double the range, and was intended to replace the Regulus I missile. Regulus II-equipped submarines and ships would have been fitted with the Ships Inertial Navigation System (SINS), allowing the missiles to be aligned accurately before take-off.

Forty-eight test flights of Regulus II prototypes were carried out, 30 of which were successful, 14 partially successful, and four failures. A production contract was signed in January 1958 and the only submarine launch was carried out from Grayback in September 1958.

Due to the high cost of the Regulus II (approximately one million dollars each), budgetary pressure, and the emergence of the UGM-27 Polaris SLBM (submarine-launched ballistic missile), the Regulus II program was canceled on 18 December 1958. At the time of cancellation Vought had completed 20 Regulus II missiles with 27 more on the production line. Like its fore-bearer, the Regulus II ended its service life as target drones.

[dragoon500ly]

With the introduction of Tomahawk, the Sturgeon, Los Angeles, Improved Los Angeles, and Virginia-class SSNS were used to carry the missile in is anti-ship and land attack versions.

For the most part, Tomahawks would be fired from the torpedo tubes. The Improved Los Angels and Virginia-class boats use a Vertical Launch System with twelve Tomahawks.

The Ohio-class SSGN concept converts Trident missile tubes 1 and 2 to be permanently modified for five-man SOF lock-in/lock-out and for attaching ASDS (Advanced SEAL Delivery System) and DDS (Dry Dock Shelters). The remaining 22 Trident missile tubes are modified to accept modules/canisters that can store seven TLAM (Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles) or other strike missiles. However, if the ASDS or DDS are mounted, not all tubes can be used for missiles.

The three configurations are:

Maximum Strike---launch tubes 3-24 are fitted with missile canisters (154 TLAMs); all 154 missiles can be fired within six minutes.

Strike/SOF---launch tubes 5-24 are loaded with 140 TLAMs. Tubes 3 and 4 are loaded with SOF stowage canisters; two ASDS vehicles carried.

Strike/SOF---launch tubes 7-24 are loaded with 126 TLAMs. Tubes 5 and 6 are loaded with additional SOF stowage canisters; Tubes 1-4 are blocked by two DDS.

Additional temporary bunks and hot bunking can provide accommodations for up to 100 SOF personnel for short periods. Normally, 66 SOF personnel are carried.

Plans are in place for the SSGNs to be capable of supporting, launching, and recovering UUVs (Unmanned Undersea Vehicles) and UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles).

[dragoon500ly]

The Assault Ballistic Rocket System (ABRS) is being proposed for installation on the Navy’s NEWPORT-class landing ships to provide fire support for amphibious assaults. The unguided rocket and launcher are adopted from the U.S. Army’s Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS).

nder current proposals, each LST would be fitted with two 12-rocket launch systems on the ship’s after decks. Up to 156 reloads could be provide in 12-rocket containers. Additional proposals have been made to backfit the ABRS to SPRUANCE-class destroyers and the concept of a LST conversion to a “rocket monitor,” carrying several launchers. No procurement decision has been made by the Navy.

Weight: 686lbs per rocket

Length: 12ft 11in (3.94m)

Diameter: 8.9in (227mm)

Propulsion: solid-propellant rocket

Range: 10+nm

Guidance: ballistic

Warhead: 352lbs conventional (644 M-77 grenades)

[dragoon500ly]

The Anti Submarine Warfare Stand Off Weapon (ASW SOW) is intended to replace the submarine-launched SUBROC anti-submarine weapon beginning in the early 1990s. Whereas SUBROC is a nuclear-only weapon, the ASW SOW may have a nuclear and conventional capability. In the later configuration carrying the Mark 50 Advanced Lightweight Torpedo. The ASW SOW should be capable of ranges out to at least the second convergence zone (approximately 60nm) or double the range of the SUBROC.

The ASW SOW would be launched form the standard 21in (533mm) submarine torpedo tubes. The missile would be encapsulated, with the capsule shed when it reaches the surface, after which the missile travels on a ballistic trajectory to the target. Over the target, the warhead or torpedo would be released.

During the concept stage the Navy envisioned a common ASW stand-off weapon for surface ships and submarines. The technical and program difficulties proved too great, however, and the surface-launched weapon became the Vertical-Launch Anti Submarine Rocket (VLA).

Weight: approx. 2,700lbs

Length: approx. 21ft (6.4m)

Diameter: approx. 21in (533mm) encapsulated

Propulsion: solid-propellant rocket

Range: approx. 60-90nm

Guidance: ballistic then terminal acoustic homing with the Mk 50 ALWT

Warhead: Nuclear (W55 warhead) or Mk50 ALWT

[chico20854]

The Anti Submarine Warfare Stand Off Weapon (ASW SOW) is intended to replace the submarine-launched SUBROC anti-submarine weapon beginning in the early 1990s. Whereas SUBROC is a nuclear-only weapon, the ASW SOW may have a nuclear and conventional capability. In the later configuration carrying the Mark 50 Advanced Lightweight Torpedo. The ASW SOW should be capable of ranges out to at least the second convergence zone (approximately 60nm) or double the range of the SUBROC.

Was this the same project as the Sea Lance?

[dragoon500ly]

Was this the same project as the Sea Lance?

This was the original concept of what would become Sea Lance. The primary difference was that ASW SOW was intended from the start to be primarily a nuclear delivery system, then the option of the Mark 50 ALWT as an alternative warhead.

Later (mid-80s) it was determined that the concept of one weapon for both surface and submarine had too many technical and program difficulties and the decision was made to split with Sea lance being the sub-version and the Vertical Launch ASROC (VLA) developed as the surface version.

Of interest is that Boeing's internal name for this was originally Seahawk until the Navy designated it Sea Lance.

[dragoon500ly]

GUIDED MISSILE DESTROYERS: Advanced Destroyer Design DD(X) Units Fiscal Year Status 1 ship 05 Planned 1 ship 06 Planned 1 ship 07 Planned 2 ships 08 Planned 3 ships 09 Planned 8 ships per year 10-13 Planned 8 ships per year 14-18 Planned

Displacement: approx. 14,000 tons full load

Length: approx. 183.0m overall Beam: approx.24.0m

Draft: approx. 8.4m

Propulsion: 4 Rolls-Royce MT30 gas turbines; approx. 100,000+shp;
electric drive; 2 shafts

Speed: approx. 30+kts Personnel: approx. 127-175

Aircraft: 1 or 2 MH-60R Seahawk; 3 Vertical Take-off Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (VTUAVs)

Weapons: Peripheral VLS for SM2MR/TLAM (approx. 80 missiles); (1)2 155mm Advanced Gun Systems (AGS); 2 Mk110 57mm/70-caliber Radars: SPY-3 multifunction Sonar: not determined

Note: The planned follow-up to the ARLEIGH BURKE call as the Navy’s primary surface combatant. The lead design agent for the program if Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls Shipyard and includes Raytheon, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Bath Iron Works as subcontractors. The contract for $2.9 billion is for the design, construction and testing of eleven major subsystems of the ship. Construction of the lead ship is not included in the award. This is a departure from the aborted ZUMWALT/DD 21 program, whose construction of the lead ship, series production, service-life maintenance and other cost-reduction features.

The DD(X) design has a wave-piercing, tumblehome hull configuration and a block, low-radar-cross-section superstructure. The guns will have two AGS with a reported 600-round magazine per gun. The design will have ‘peripheral’ VLS cells rather than the usual centerline ‘blocks; configuration of the Mk 41 VLS. Also referred to as the AVLS, it differs from the Mk41 in having four-cell modules installed along the perimeter of the ship rather. This arrangement will reduce the ship’s vulnerability to a single missile, shell or bomb hit.

All previous USN gas-turbine destroyers, as well as the TICONDEROGA class cruisers, had General Electric LM2500 gas turbines. DD(X) will be the first modern US warship with an all-electric drive and an integrated power architecture. Employing electric drive is expected to: reduce ship costs; reduce ship signatures, especially noise; reduce fuel consumption; reduce maintenance requirements; reduce manpower requirements and increase available power for sensors and weapons.
The key element of the integrated power architecture is a single-source generator for all of the ship’s power requirements. Instead of a reduction gear to convert the turbine power into propulsive power as in previous cruisers /destroyers the DD(X) engine will power an electric generator, the electricity produced is then carried via cable to a motor drive, this eliminates the requirement for the gas turbines to be aligned with propellor shafts, permitting considerable flexibility in ship design. In addition, the turbines can be operated at their most fuel-efficient speeds with the motor drive making changes in shaft turns/speed.

[dragoon500ly]

LAND-ATTACK MISSILE DESTROYER: “Zumwalt” class This program was canceled in 2001. Department of Defense officials cited the large size of the ship, although it probably would have been a small percentage larger than the replacement DD(X).

The lead ship was to be authorized in FY 2004 and placed in commission in 2008; follow-on ships were to reach the building rate of three per year. The design featured a large number of vertical-launched missiles (256 missiles) and long-range guns for land attack/fire support and a very small crew (approx. 95 personnel).

Designed up to 20,000 tons were considered, although a ship of approx. 15-17,000 tons appeared most likely.

The DD 21 program replaced the DD(V) program, which had sought to determine the characteristics for a new guided missile destroyer to begin construction in the FY 1998 shipbuilding program. In the event, it was decided to continue construction of the ARLEIGH BURKE class (Flight IIA) into the 21st century.

The Navy’s cost goal was $579 million per ship by the fifth unit. With two shipyards expected to produce the DD 21 class, that cost goal would have applied to hull number 9 or 10. The first few ships were to cost approximately $1.5 billion per unit.

[dragoon500ly]

IMPROVED “ARLEIGH BURKE” CLASS (FLIGHT III) This is a proposed enhancement of the ARLEIGH BURKE design, the principal changes being the provision of a two-helicopter hanger and reduced radar and infrared signatures. This variant would have displaced 10,722 tons full load: weapons and sensors would have been similar to the basic BURKE class except for the provision of an improved SPY-1 radar, designated the SPY-1E in some publications. Development of this design was halted in favor of the DD 21/SC 21 program.

[dragoon500ly]

The purpose-built SSKs were small (1,000 ton, 59.75m) hunter-killer submarines, intended to lie in wait to intercept Submarine submarines off their home ports and in narrow waterways. Several hundred were to be produced in the time of war. They were originally assigned -number ‘names’ and were given fish names in 1955. The BASS and BONITA were reclassified SS in 1959 for use in the training role; the BARRACUDA was changed to SST in 1959 for the training role.

[dragoon500ly]

The SST-1 and SST-2 were small (310 ton, 40.53m) submarines intended for training and target use. The MACKEREL was ordered as AGSS-570 and completed as SST-1. Originally assigned T-number ‘names,’ they were given fish names in 1956. Decommissioned 1973.

[dragoon500ly]

World War Two cruiser programs reached hull number CL-140 (with hulls 154-159 being canceled in 1945). All heavy (CA), light (CL), and anti-aircraft (CLAA) cruisers were numbered in the same series. Only one ship was added to this series in the postwar period, the LONG BEACH, ordered as CLGN 160, was changed to CGN-160, and was completed as CGN-9.

Further ‘cruiser’ construction was halted in favor of the smaller and less expensive ‘frigates’ that could carry most of a cruiser’s armament.

One cruiser hull was completed as a command ship after the war, the NORTHAMPTON. Begun as a heavy cruiser (CA-125), she was canceled in 1945 when partially complete; she was reordered in 1948 and completed as a tactical command ship in 1953 (CLC-1) and later changed to a national command chip (CC-1). She was stricken in 1977.

[dragoon500ly]

After World War Two the US Navy established the classification of hunter-killer cruiser (CLK) for a planned series of small cruisers intended for ASW operations against high-speed submarines. Only the lead ship, NORFOLK, was completed; she was reclassified as a frigate (DL-1) while under construction. She was employed mainly in ASW test and evaluation activities. Decommissioned 15/1/70 and stricken 1/11/73. Sister CLK-2 New Haven was canceled in 1954.

[dragoon500ly]

The proposed Long-Range Dual-Mode Missile was envisioned as a long-range (over 100nm) missile for launching from Aegis ships. The missile would have been used against incoming anti-ship missiles launched at long ranges, attack bomber aircraft, and electronic jamming aircraft. At one point, it was envisioned that the airframe could be used for the ASW SOW.

The project was not pursued because of technical difficulties and uncertainty over how to conduct the outer air battle to defend battle groups against attacking Soviet cruise missile aircraft.

[dragoon500ly]

The Medium-Range Air-to-Surface Missile was a joint Navy-Air Force program to develop an air-launched missile with a 250nm range for delivering submunitions against runways. Originally to be a (shortened) variant of the Tomahawk, during early development significant changes were made to most components, reducing the commonality with Tomahawk. The Navy’s interest in MRASM was minimal while the Air Force’s position was divided: The Tactical Air Command (TAC) had limited interest while the Strategic Air Command (SAC) envisioned the MRASM as a useful weapon for the B-52G strategic bomber. The situation was further complicated by the Department of Defense's decision in 1983 to retire 90 of the approximately 150 available B-52G bombers.

The MRASM program was terminated by Congress in 1983. Other weapons that could be adopted to the MRASM role at that time included the Air Force BGU-15, an air-launched glide bomb, and the Navy’s Harpoon, while the Air Force Advanced Cruise Missile (ACM), a “stealth” weapon, could be used by strategic aircraft. Also being planned is an Army-Air Force effort to develop a common Joint Tactical Missile System (JTACMS) that could be ground-launched and carried by strategic and tactical aircraft for “deep attack.”

[dragoon500ly]

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is sponsoring the development of technology for the Self-Initiating Anti-aircraft Missile (SIAM) for use from a submerged submarine against an ASW fixed-wing aircraft or helicopter. The weapon would be launched from special tubes in the submarine and home on the attack. The towed acoustic arrays now used by submarines could detect low-flying aircraft to initiate SIAM launch.

The concept is not new, with one earlier U.S. Navy experiment using variants of the Sidewinder missile being dubbed “Subwinder.” The Royal Navy and Vickers have developed the SLAM (Submarine-Launched Air Missile) in which the submarine surfaces or at least broaches its sail to extend a six-tube Blowpipe missile launcher. The SIAM concept calls for a missile launch while the submarine remains completely submerged.

Ford Aerospace was contracted by DARPA to demonstrate the feasibility of the concept. During the Ford work, test vehicles were successfully launched against QH-50 drone helicopters. The future of this project was not yet been determined. The following characteristics are tentative:

Weight: approx. 150lbs
Length: approx. 8ft 4in (2.5m)
Span: 5 ¾ in (147mm)
Diameter: 5 ¾ in (147mm)
Propulsion: Solid-propellant rocket
Guidance: radar and infrared homing
Warhead: conventional

[dragoon500ly]

While not exactly a “what if”, still an interesting weapon.

The SUBROC (Submarine Rocket) is a rocket-propelled nuclear depth bomb that can be launched from standard 21in submarine torpedo tubes. After being launched, the missile streaks to the surface leaves the water, and then releases the nuclear depth bomb to descend by parachute to the water.

The weapon is analog and therefore is not compatible with U.S. attack submarines fitted with the Mark 117 digital fire control system. Thus, only about 25 submarines of the PERMIT (SSN 594) and later classes can carry the weapon. The remaining missiles are wearing out rapidly and all will probably be discarded prior to the replacement ASW SOW becoming available in the early 1990s.

Weight: 4,000lbs
Length: 21ft (6.4m)
Diameter: 21in (533mm)
Propulsion: solid-propellant rocket and booster
Range: approx.. 25nm
Guidance: inertial
Warhead: Nuclear (W55)
Platforms: Submarines equipped with the Mark 113 analog fire control system only

[Raellus]

I bet something like this would have appeared during the Twilight War. I reckon such a system could be used to "up-gun" USCG vessels. I wonder how feasible it would be to attach the system to something like a merchantman or container ship converted to an escort carrier for VTOL and/or helis.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29335/this-bolt-on-launcher-can-give-nearly-any-ship-the-same-weaponry-as-u-s-navy-destroyer

-

[pmulcahy11b]

I've always thought the A-12 Avenger II (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_A-12_Avenger_II)would have a presence in the Twilight War, providing the stealth attack platform that would (IRL) be provided later with the F-35.

[Homer]

Another program that would have survived in a continued Cold War is the FRAM of the Hamilton/Hero class cutters.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/coast-guard-missiles-afterburners/?amp

Harpoons, modernized torpedo tubes, modernized sensor suites and munitions storage would have transformed them into light frigates for escort duty.

The Famous Class would have likewise seen towed array sonar and munitions storage for navy ASW helicopters.

Not a game changer, but definitely another capability to add naval escorts in economy of force theaters. Anecdotally, a friend of mine once attended a naval gunfire familiarization fired by a Hamilton class cutter.

[Matt Wiser]

If the Inflation of the 1970s hadn't bitten, this is what the Navy wanted for AEGIS, namely, CGN-42 onward fitted with the system

[dragoon500ly]

A proposed entry for the USN’s carrier-based fleet defense fighter. It was designed to be able to loiter for extended periods at a relatively long distance from the Navy's aircraft carriers, engaging hostile aircraft 100 miles (160 km) away with its powerful radar and long-range, nuclear-armed, air-to-air-missiles. Since the enemy would be fired on long before they reached visual range, the aircraft had little dogfighting capability and was strictly subsonic. When doubts were expressed about the Missileer's ability to defend itself after firing its missiles, the value of the project was questioned, leading to its cancellation. Some of the Missileer's systems, primarily the engines, radar, and missiles, continued development in spite of the cancellation, eventually emerging on the ill-fated General Dynamics–Grumman F-111B and successful Grumman F-14 Tomcat years later.

In 1957, the USN began the formal process of designing what was termed as the fleet defense fighter. This would be a large aircraft with loiter times on the order of six hours, supported by a dedicated radar aircraft providing early warning. In order to get the loiter times they wanted, the aircraft had to carry a large fuel load and was thus very large. The complex radar required dedicated operators, which resulted in a three-man crew. Additionally, they specified a side-by-side layout so both the pilot and co-pilot could concentrate on a single centered radar display, avoiding duplication of equipment and helping reduce communications errors that could occur if they were looking at different screens. Since dogfighting was out of the question, the aircraft was strictly subsonic and did not require all-round visibility.
The first part of the design began in 1958 with the proposed development of the AAM-N-10 Eagle air-to-air missile (later developmental funding stopped due to budgetary reasons). The Eagle was to be capable of a speed of Mach 4.5, with a range of 110nmi (powered)-160nmi (aerodynamic). It would be capable of inertial guidance with radio correction midcourse and active radar or home-on-jam terminal guidance. While never completed, the Eagle was presumed to fitted with a nuclear warhead.

Westinghouse was contracted to develop the AN/APQ-81 radar for the aircraft. This was an advanced pulse-Doppler radar with a maximum detection range against “bomber” sized targets of 120mi and able to track eight targets at a time when switched to ‘track-while-scan’ mode with a range of up to 80mi.

In order to support the Missileer, Grumman was developing the W2F Hawkeye (fore runner of the E-2 Hawkeye II) airborne early warning aircraft with a search range of up to 200mi.

In order for the F6D to work, a large number of technologies had to work at the same time. Among these were the new engines, radar, missiles, and supporting early warning aircraft. Development of the F6D itself was highly likely to be successful and low cost, but the system as a whole was very risky and expensive. And the F6D was dropped before any airframe was fully developed.

[dragoon500ly]

Did you know that at one time, the General Dynamics-Grumman F-111B was considered as a replacement for the F-4 Phantom II as a long-range carrier-based interceptor? This would be part of the Tactical Fighter Experimental (TFX) in conjunction with the USAF to produce a common fighter for the two services and intended to perform a variety of missions. Its innovations included variable-geometry wings, afterburning turbofans and a long-range radar and missile weapons system.

The F-111B was part of the 1960s TFX program. The USAF's Tactical Air Command (TAC) was largely concerned with the fighter-bomber and deep strike/interdiction roles; their version of the aircraft would be a follow-on to the F-105 Thunderchief fighter-bomber. In June 1960, the USAF issued a specification for a long-range interdiction and strike aircraft able to penetrate Soviet air defenses at very low altitudes and very high speeds to deliver tactical nuclear weapons against crucial targets.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy sought a long-range, high-endurance interceptor to defend its aircraft carrier battle groups against long-range anti-ship missiles launched from Soviet jet bombers, such as the Tupolev Tu-16, Tupolev Tu-22, and Tupolev Tu-22M, along with submarines. The Navy needed a Fleet Air Defense (FAD) aircraft with a more powerful radar, and longer range missiles than the F-4 Phantom II to intercept both enemy bombers and missiles.

The Air Force and Navy requirements appeared to be different. However, on 14 February 1961, Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, formally directed that the services study the development of a single aircraft that would satisfy both requirements. Early studies indicated the best option was to base the Tactical Fighter Experimental (TFX) on the Air Force requirement and a modified version for the Navy. In June 1961, Secretary McNamara ordered the go ahead on TFX despite Air Force and the Navy efforts to keep their programs separate.

The USAF and the Navy could only agree on swing-wing, two seat, twin engine design features. The USAF wanted a tandem seat aircraft for low level penetration, while the Navy wanted a shorter, high altitude interceptor with side by side seating. Also, the USAF wanted the aircraft designed for 7.33 g with Mach 2.5 speed at altitude and Mach 1.2 speed at low level with a length of approximately 70 ft (21 m). The Navy had less strenuous requirements of 6 g with Mach 2 speed at altitude and high subsonic speed (approx. Mach 0.9) at low level with a length of 56 ft (17.1 m). The Navy also wanted a 48-inch (120 cm) radar dish for long range and a maximum takeoff weight of 50,000 pounds (23,000 kg). So McNamara developed a basic set of requirements for TFX based largely on the Air Force's requirements. He changed to a 36-inch (91 cm) dish for compatibility and increased the maximum weight to approximately 60,000lbs (27,200 kg) for the Air Force version and 55,000lbs (24,900 kg) for the Navy version. Then on 1 September 1961 he ordered the USAF to develop it.

The Air Force F-111A and Navy F-111B variants used the same airframe structural components and TF30-P-1 turbofan engines. They featured side by side crew seating in an escape capsule as required by the Navy, versus individual ejection seats. The F-111B's nose was 8.5 feet (2.59 m) shorter due to its need to fit on existing carrier elevator decks, and had 3.5 feet (1.07 m) longer wingspan to improve on-station endurance time. The Navy version would carry an AN/AWG-9 Pulse-Doppler radar and six AIM-54 Phoenix missiles. The Air Force version would carry the AN/APQ-113 attack radar and the AN/APQ-110 terrain-following radar and air-to-ground ordnance.

Lacking experience with carrier-based fighters, General Dynamics teamed with Grumman for assembly and test of the F-111B aircraft. In addition, Grumman would also build the F-111A's aft fuselage and the landing gear. The first test F-111A was powered by YTF30-P-1 turbofans and used a set of ejection seats, since the escape capsule was not yet available. It first flew on 21 December 1964. The first F-111B was also equipped with ejection seats and first flew on 18 May 1965. To address stall issues in certain parts of the flight regime, the F-111's engine inlet design was modified in 1965–66, ending with the "Triple Plow I" and "Triple Plow II" designs. The F-111A achieved a speed of Mach 1.3 in February 1965 with an interim intake design.

The weight goals for both F-111 versions proved to be overly optimistic. Excessive weight plagued the F-111B throughout its development. The prototypes were far over the requirement weight. Design efforts reduced airframe weight but were offset by the addition of the escape capsule. The additional weight made the aircraft underpowered. Lift was improved by changes to the wing control surfaces. A higher thrust version of the engine was planned.

While the F-111 Aardvark would be adopted by the USAF as a strike fighter, the F-111B suffered development issues and changing Navy requirements for an aircraft with maneuverability for dogfighting. The F-111B was not ordered into production and the F-111B prototypes were used for testing before being retired. The F-111B would be replaced by the smaller and lighter Grumman F-14 Tomcat, which carried over the engines, AWG-9/Phoenix weapons system, and similar swing-wing configuration.

[dragoon500ly]

Developed in the early 1970s to replace the impending loss of capability with the decommissioning of the Iowa-class battleships and the Des Moines-class heavy cruisers. The Mark 71 Major Caliber Lightweight Gun (MCLWG) was developed to be fitted to the proposed strike cruisers and to be refitted to selected destroyers.

The Mark 71 is a single barrel adaptation of the triple barreled Mark 16 8-inch/55 found on the Des Moines-class cruisers. The prototype gun mount had a weight of 86 tons and was roughly 20% heavier than the Mark 42 5-inch/54 it would replace. The prototype could fire up to twelve rounds per minute from a 75-round automatic ready service magazine for fixed ammunition when operated by one man. A specially modified Mark 155 computer provided 8-inch/55 ballistics for the Mark 68 gun fire control system. The Mark 71 mount would have a elevation of -5/+65 degrees (30 degrees per second) with a traverse of -160/+160 degrees (also at 30 degrees per second) with a maximum range of 32,000 yards.

Technical evaluation occurred aboard the USS Hull (DD-945), a Forrest Sherman-class destroyer in 1975, with operational testing through 1976. The Operational Test and Evaluation Force determined that inaccuracy made the gun operationally unsuitable, and concluded the lightweight 8"/55 gun would be no more effective than a 5-inch/54 gun firing theorized Rocket Assisted Projectiles, which ultimately never materialized. The report recommended against production or installation of the lightweight 8-inch/55, and program funding was terminated in 1978.

The USS Hull was used for weapon testing from 1975 to 1978 and was the only destroyer ever to be fitted with a 8-inch gun. The mount was removed in 1979 and is now at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren, Virginia.

[dragoon500ly]

An naval gun designed for the Zumwalt-class destroyers of the USN. It is designed for long-range naval gunfire support against shore-based targets. A total of six were built with two being installed on each of the three Zumwalt-class vessels. The USN has made the decision to build any further Zumwalt-class destroyers and has no plans to deploy the AGS on any other ship. The AGS can only use ammunition designed specifically for the system, and only this one type was designed at a November 2016 cost of $800,000 to $1,000,000 per round, in other words the AGS has no ammunition and cannot be used. The AGS is slatted for removal by 2023.

The AGS was originally developed as the Vertical Gun for Advanced Ships (VGAS) and its rounds were developed as guided-munitions for this role. The VGAS was then modified for a more conventional turret arrangement. AGS is designed to delivery a high rate of fire with the VGAS precision munitions. The turret mount allows the use of unguided munitions, which were never developed. AGS is NOT designed to use the same munitions as conventional artillery, so it requires each type of round to be designed and specifically built.
The Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) round for the AGS was to be a major advance. It features separate projectile and propellant portions and was to be highly precise, with a circular error probable (CEP) of 50m or less. Firing tests of the LRLAP reported a range of 68mi. However, due to the very high cost, LRLAP was canceled in 2016 with no plans to replace. In early 2021, the USN was exploring replacing the AGS on the Zumwalts with hypersonic missiles and in March 2022, the Navy announced that the two AGS turrets would be removed to allow the installation of a Vertical Launch System that will accommodate the Common-Hypersonic Glide Body missiles. As the Zumwalts enter their maintenance periods in late 2023, the switch will take place.

The turret weighs 104 tons and the mount has an elevation of +70/-5 degrees. Maximum rate of fire is ten rounds per minute with a range of 83nmi.

[dragoon500ly]

Running from 1 June 1946 to 28 July 1948.

This was the U.S. Navy’s effort to develop surface-to-air missiles with the intent to provide a mid-range layer of fleet air defense, between the short-range anti-aircraft guns and the long-range fighters. A major element pf Bumblebee was the Navy’s need to attack bombers before they could launch standoff anti-shipping weapons, as these aircraft might never enter the reach of shipboard guns.

Bumblebee was originally concentrated on a ramjet powered design and the Applied Physics Laboratory’s PTV-N-4 Cobra/BTV (Propulsion Test Vehicle/Burner Test Vehicle) was first flown in October 1945. Cobra would eventually emerge as the RIM-8 Talos, which entered service on 28 May 1958 aboard the light cruiser USS GALVESTON. As part of the development program, several other vehicles were also developed. One of these was the RIM-2 Terrier, which entered service on 15 June 1956, two years before Talos. Terrier was first installed on the heavy cruiser USS CANBERRA. The Terrier was later modified as a short-range missile system for smaller ships and entered service in 1963 as the RIM-24 Tarter. These three missiles were known in the fleet as the “3 T’s.”

Bumblebee was not the only early Navy SAM project, the SAM-N-2 Lark was rushed into production as a short-range missile to counter the Kamikaze threat, but never matured into an operational weapon. The RIM-50 Typhon was developed to replace the 3 T’s, but was canceled during development. The 3 T’s would be ultimately replaced by the RIM-66/67 Standard, a development of the Tarter.

[dragoon500ly]

This a two-stage medium-range naval surface-to-surface missile and was the earliest SAM to equip the USN. It underwent major upgrades during its service life, beginning as a beam-riding guidance with a 10 nautical mile range (19km) at a speed of Mach 1.8, and ending as a semi-active radar homing guidance with a range of 40nmi (74km) at speeds as high as Mach 3.
The Terrier weighed 3,000lbs (1,400kg)[1,180lbs for the missile and 1,820lbs for the booster]. It was 27ft (8.2m) long, with a diameter of 13.5in (34cm) and was normally fitted with a 218lb (99kg) controlled-fragmentation warhead or it could be fitted with a 1kt W45 nuclear warhead.

When the Terrier was fired it could be followed by its corkscrew contrail, as it progressed to the center of the beam. Reception of its location in the beam was accomplished by a small "Turn-style" antenna at the rear of the missile, this antenna also received the commands for detonation, and self destruct. The self destruct command was sent a few milliseconds after the detonation command. Its HT-3 variant as a Semi-Active homing missile, it followed the reflected energy from the target; however if jamming was encountered it would passively home in on the jamming signal.

The RIM-2E introduced semi-active radar homing, for greater effectiveness against low-flying targets. The final version, the RIM-2F, used a new motor which doubled effective range to 40nmi (74 km).

The RIM-2E introduced semi-active radar homing, for greater effectiveness against low-flying targets. The final version, the RIM-2F, used a new motor which doubled effective range to 40 nmi (74 km).

The Terrier was the primary missile system of most US Navy cruisers and guided missile frigates built during the 1960s. It could be installed on much smaller ships than the much larger and longer-ranged RIM-8 Talos. A Terrier installation typically consisted of the Mk 10 twin-arm launcher with a 40-round rear-loading magazine, but some ships had extended magazines with 60 or 80 rounds, and the installation in BOSTON and CANBERRA used a bottom-loading magazine of 72 rounds.

On April 19, 1972, a Terrier missile fired by USS STERETT shot down a North Vietnamese Air Force MiG-17F in the Battle of Dong Hoi.

[dragoon500ly]

This a long-range naval surface-to-air missiles and was the second SAM to be mounted on USN ships. The Talos used radar beam riding for guidance to the vicinity of its target, and semiactive radar homing (SARH) for terminal guidance. The array of four antenna which surround the nose are SARH receivers which functioned as a continuous wave interferometer. Initial thrust was provided by a solid rocket booster for launch and a Bendix ramjet for flight to the target with the warhead serving as the ramjet's compressor.

The Talos saw relatively limited use due to its large size and dual radar antenna system; there were few ships that could accommodate the large missiles with the AN/SPW-2 missile guidance radar and the AN/SPG-49 target illumination and tracking radar. The 9.9-meter-long, 3½-tonne missile was comparable in size to a small fighter aircraft. The Talos Mark 7 Guided Missile Launching System (GMLS) was installed in three GALVESTON-class cruisers (converted CLEVELAND-class light cruisers) with 16 missiles in a ready-service magazine and up to 30 missiles and boosters in a storage area above the main deck. Nuclear-powered USS LONG BEACH and three ALBANY-class cruisers (converted BALTIMORE-class heavy cruisers) carried Mark 12 Guided Missile Launching Systems fed from a 52-round magazine below the main deck.

The Talos weighed 7,800lbs (3,500kg) [missile weight 3,400lbs and booster weight 2,000lbs]. Length was 32ft (9.8m) and a diameter of 28in (71cm). Warhead was a 211kg (465lb) continuous-rod HE warhead or a W30 nuclear warhead (variable 2–5 kt). Operational range was 50nm (92km) with an operational ceiling of 80,100ft (24,400m) with a max speed of Mach 3.

The initial SAM-N-6b/RIM-8A had an effective range of about 50nm, and a conventional warhead. The SAM-N-6bW/RIM-8B was a RIM-8A with a nuclear warhead; terminal guidance was judged unnecessary for a nuclear warhead, so the SARH antenna was omitted. The SAM-N-6b1/RIM-8C was introduced in 1960 and had double the range, and a more effective conventional continuous-rod warhead. The RIM-8D was the nuclear-warhead version of the -8C. The SAM-N-6c/RIM-8E "Unified Talos" had a warhead that could be swapped while embarked, eliminating the need to waste magazine capacity carrying dedicated nuclear-tipped variants. The RIM-8E also carried an improved continuous-wave terminal homing seeker, and had a higher ceiling reach-out. Some RIM-8Cs were retrofitted with the new seeker, and designated RIM-8F. The RIM-8G and RIM-8J had further radar homing improvements and a new fuel that extended the range to 130nm.

The Talos saw action in Vietnam, with a total of four MiGs being shot down by the USS CHICAGO and USS LONG BEACH. On 23 May, 1968, a Talos fired from the LONG BEACH shot down a Vietnamese MiG at a range of 65 miles. This was the first downing of a hostile aircraft by a missile fired from a ship. The hit also destroyed a second MiG which flew through the debris. In September 1968 Long Beach scored another MiG destroyed at a range of 61 miles. On May 9, 1972 Chicago's forward Talos battery scored a long-range kill on a MiG.

In addition to its anti-aircraft capability, the Talos also had surface-to-surface capabilities.

The RIM-8H Talos-ARM was a dedicated anti-radar homing missile for use against shore-based radar stations. Initial testing of the RIM-8H was performed in 1965, and soon after it was deployed in Vietnam on CHICAGO, OKLAHOMA CITY, and LONG BEACH, attacking North Vietnamese SAM radars. OKLAHOMA CITY fired the first successful RIM-8H combat shot in US Navy history in early 1972. It was also the first combat surface-to-surface missile shot in US Navy history.

[dragoon500ly]

This was a medium range surface-to-surface naval missile. The Tarter was the third of the “3 Ts” that would equip the USN.

The Tartar was born of a need for a more lightweight system for smaller ships, and something that could engage targets at very close range. Essentially, the Tartar was simply a RIM-2C Terrier without the secondary booster. The Tartar was never given a SAM-N-x designation, and was simply referred to as Missile Mk 15 until the unified Army-Navy designation system was introduced in 1963.

The Tartar was used on a number of ships, of a variety of sizes. Initially the Mk 11 twin-arm launcher was used, later ships used the Mk 13 and Mk 22 single-arm launchers. Early versions proved to be unreliable. The Improved Tartar retrofit program upgraded the earlier missiles to the much improved RIM-24C standard. Further development was canceled and a new missile, the RIM-66 Standard, was designed to replace it. Even after the upgrade to a new missile, ships were still said to be Tartar ships because they carried the Tartar Guided Missile Fire Control System.

A dedicated anti-ship version for the Federal German Navy carrying a Bullpup warhead was abandoned when Germany purchased MM38 Exocet instead.

Weight was 1,310lbs (590kg), length was 180in (460cm), diameter was 13.5in (34cm), warhead was a 130lb (59 kg) continuous-rod.
Range varied from 8.7 nm (16.1 km) (RIM-24A); 16 nm (30 km) (RIM-24B); 17.5 nm (32.4 km) (RIM-24C), with a maximum speed of Mach 1.8

[dragoon500ly]

In May 1987, the USN selected a joint venture of Westinghouse Electric Company and Airship Industries Limited of England to build a series of patrol airships.

The design selected provided for a conventional configuration, with an internally fitted radar antenna, and a control compartment mounted beneath the gas bag. Helium was chosen as the lift medium. The diesel engines, with propellors mounted in circular guards or shrouds, are to be used to cruise with the turbojet for sprint operations. A second turbojet engine was proposed that would provide a maximum speed in excess of 90+ knots. In flight refueling would be from surface ships.

Initial operational capability was planned for 1992. But the program budget was cut in later spending.

Length: 423ft (129.0m) Diameter: 136 ½ft (41.6m) Height: 150ft (45.7m) Volume: 2.35 million ft3 Propulsion: 2 CRM BR-1 diesels; 2,000hp each (propellers) 1 General Electric CT7-9 turbojet, 1,800lbs Speed: 45 knots cruising (no-wind conditions); 83 knots maximum Endurance: 72 hours (without in-flight refueling)l 30 days (with in-flight refueling) Ceiling: approx. 10,000ft operating; approx. 15-18,000ft maximum Crew: 12-15 Armament: None Radar: APS-138 air/surface surveillance

[dragoon500ly]

The Sea Vulcan is an adaptation of the GAU-12/U Gatling gun fitted to the AV-8B Harrier II. Intended for small combatants, it was mounted in the Navy’s SES-200 in 1987 for shipboard evaluation.

Produced by General Electric, the five-barrel CUWS uses a linkless ammunition feed system. The magazine holds 500 rounds. The Sea Vulcan can be used with a variety of fire control systems.

The gun System has been proposed with four Stinger MANPADs as the Blazer 25 for the USARMY to mount on the M-2 Bradley combat vehicle. This is to be the principal gun mount candidate for the trouble-plagued Sea Viking special operations support craft.

[dragoon500ly]

Intended to replace the AIM-54 Phoenix in the mid-1990s. The USN awarded contracts to two teams in 1987 for technology demonstration and validation of the AAAM concept.

The AAAM will be designed primarily to counter the Soviet Backfire and Blackjack strike aircraft armed with long-range, stand-off missiles. The AAAM is also intended to counter anti-ship cruise missiles. Missile speed will be faster than the Phoenix on the order of Mach 3+ with a range of 100+nm.

Tentative planning calls for the F-14D to carry up to eight AAAMs, with the F/A-18C to carry at least four.

[dragoon500ly]

The proposed LRDMM (Long-Range Dual-Mode Missile) was envisioned as a long-range (100+nm) missile from Aegis ships. The missile would have been used against incoming anti-ship missiles launched at long ranges, attack bomber aircraft, and electronic jamming aircraft. At one point, it was also envisioned that the airframe could be used for the ASW Stand-Off Weapon (SOW).

The project would be ended due to technical difficulties and uncertainty over how to conduct the outer air battle to defend battle groups against attacking Soviet cruise missile aircraft.

[dragoon500ly]

Formerly the ASW Stand-Off Weapon (SOW), the Sea Lance is a submarine-launched weapon that provides a rocket booster for a Mark 50 ASW torpedo. Although often labeled a successor to SUBROC, the Sea Lance would initially have only a conventional (torpedo) warhead, whereas the SUBROC carries only a nuclear depth bomb. The Sea Lance warhead may thus inhibit its use at longer ranges because of the limited target localization capability of the Mark 50. Plans to provide a nuclear warhead for Sea Lance have been delayed indefinitely.

The Sea Lance is designed for attacks out to the third sonar Convergence Zone (CZ), i.e., approximately 90-100nm. However, when fitted with the Mark 50 torpedo, the effective range will probably by only the first CZ, i.e., some 30-35nm. The weapon is stowed in and launched from a standard 21-inch torpedo tube in a canister, much like the Harpoon anti-ship missile and the CAPTOR encapsulated mine. When the capsule reaches the surface, the missile booster ignites, in effect launching the missile on a ballistic trajectory toward the target area. At a designated point the torpedo separates from the booster, is slowed to re-enter the water and seeks out the hostile submarine.
During the concept stage, the Navy envisioned a common ASW stand-off weapons for surface ships and submarines. The technical and program difficulties proved too great, however, and the surface-launched system became the Vertical0Launch ASROC (VLA).

The Sea Lance is currently one-year behind scheduled, primarily due to the decision in 1986 to emphasize the conventional torpedo as a warhead rather than the nuclear depth bomb.

Weight: 3,100lbs Length: 20 ½ft (6.25m) Diameter: 21 inch (533mm) Range: 100+nm Guidance: ballistic, terminal acoustic homing w/Mk 50 torp Warhead: Mark 50 torpedo

[dragoon500ly]

This remote mount can be fitted with a Mark 19 AGL, a .50-caliber M-2, a 5.56mm M-249 SAW or other automatic weapons. The first two EX-45 mounts provided to the fleet (fitted with .50-caliber machine guns) were installed in the high-speed vessel SWIFT (HSV-2) and a Coast Guard cutter.

Developed by the Office of Naval Research, this mount is a three-axis, gyro-stabilized weapon mount coupled with a laser rangefinder and closed-circuit television. It can be fitted in ships and land vehicles, as well as in small combat craft, including the Marine Corps Small Unit Riverine Craft (SURC).

Afloat testing was conducted in 2004.

[dragoon500ly]

The U.S. Army, Navy, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) have ongoing EMG or rail gun programs. The Fiscal Year 2004 defense authorization required that the Secretary of Defense establish a collaborative program among those organizations for the evaluation and demonstration of EMG technologies and concepts.

The Navy’s program is currently oriented toward providing a long-range EMG as a fire support weapon. It will be possible to install the weapon in the planned DD(X) and CG(X) programs due to these ships are planned to have electric-drive propulsion.

The propelling charge of the EMG has an electrical energy output from 60 to 300 megajoules (MJ), and the projectile acceleration rate is 30,000-45,000Gs. In contrast, the current 5in/54-caliber gun has a muzzle energy of 10MJ and with a rocket-assisted projectile increases this to about 18MJ; the planned 6.1in AGS will have a muzzle velocity in access of 33MJ. The EMG would require a power supply of 15-30 megawatts, and approximately 6 gallons (22.7 liters) of the ship’s fuel would be required to fire each round.
In operational use, the EMG would fire in bursts of ten rounds, using command-guided projectiles or conventional ammunition.

The EMG would fire an inert round, which would use kinetic energy to damage its target. A multiple warhead is possible. The round would have no propellant, as it will be propelled entirely by the electromagnetic process. GPS guidance is projected.

The EMG is also being considered for a shipboard terminal self-defense system against attacking cruise missiles.

There is little publicly available, but these are accepted estimates:
Muzzle Velocity: Mach 6+ Rate of fire: 6-12 rounds per minute Maximum Range: 200+nm

[dragoon500ly]

This weapon was a proposal for the DD 21 land-attack destroyers. Twin 6.1-inch (155mm guns) with a range of about 100nm (185km) and their magazines were to be fitted in a modular mounting that could replace Vertical Launching System (VLS) missile modules.

The gun system was to be fully automated with 1,400 rounds per module (i.e., for two guns). Projectiles up to 6 ½ ft (1.9m) long and weighing 300lbs (136kg) could be handled by VGAS. The sustained rate of fire was to be 15 rounds per minute, per barrel.

In any event, the Navy made the decision not to pursue the development of VGAS.