Youtube link to the technology in question. But what is seen is a ship launching a small missile horizontally that subsequently goes underwater for ~5 seconds before igniting and roaring out of the water and going on a vertical trajectory. I can’t for the life of me think why such a system would be useful. So is this a gimmick or does it have a real purpose?
Maybe it isn’t deliberate. Maybe it “falls” into the water before it’s ignited.
Maybe to keep the blast from the rocket exhaust off of the deck of the ship?
At first it looked like a dud, but I wonder if it’s back heavy and needs to hit the water so that it can be orient itself up before it launches. It could be a way to retrofit that type of gun with that type of rocket.
This would be my WAG also. The delay seems to be enough time for the ship to get the ____ out of the way.
(fill in the blank)
But it looks like two are shot during the video and between 20 seconds apart so I don’t think a dud is a good explanation. The heat idea is interesting as it could also keep the huge amount of smoke away from the ship as well.
From poking around a little bit I have seen it suggested that the missile is being launched from a torpedo tube, which isn’t designed to be aimed upward and probably isn’t built to withstand the back blast from the rocket. This setup would allow any ship without torpedo tubes the ability to deploy missiles without major retrofits.
That makes a lot of sense. Since it’s a missile and not a projectile all it needs is a stable place to launch from. So, you either need to devote space on the deck or design it to launch from the water. The water option gives you the added features of saving deck space and possibly protecting the ship and crew from launch failures.
From what I can see from poking around the Web, it’s the Russian RPK-6 "Vodopad" (SS-N-16 “Stallion” SSM). This postin another thread elsewhere claims to list the Vodopad’s stats from Friedman’s The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapons Systems. I don’t know if the missile directly impacts the target or drops a homing torpedo when the rocket motor cuts out. One version has a nuclear depth charge.
Basically, it’s a missile you can launch from a torpedo tube. Why would you want to do that? To save you having to build a launcher that can take backblast and be swiveled like a purpose built missile launcher. Alternately, so you can fire the thing underwater in the first place.
It sure looks intentional to me. It obviously gets clear of the ship before igniting the main rocket. One serious failure mode in rockets is explosion at lift off. You don’t want that on the deck. Plus, the debris from igniting near the ship is a problem. Ignition in the tube is a real bad idea too.
Its used on submarines as well, and was primarily an anti-submarine weapon.
The main goal is a/ ability to be launched from torpedo tubes and b/ to be able to get to the target without being detected as an incoming torpedo by the target submarine, because its in the air rather than in the water until its very close.
Otara
In the air, there’s nothing for the rocket to push against. It needs the water to be able to launch.
What if the ship is on a treadmill?
Um… missile?
If the target submarine can’t hear the firing ship, that missile must have a very long range. Sonar can detect ships from dozens to even hundreds of miles away, and it’s almost impossible to believe the sub couldn’t hear the underwater ignition of the rocket motor.
One of the main criticism of the SUBROC family of weapons – these are anti-submarine torpedoes fired from ships on a rocket booster – is that even with the rocket assist, they are so short range that the ship has to get withing range of the submarine to deploy it. That’s a large part of why helicopters have become so integral to anti-sub operations. The helicopter is essentially invulnerable and the ship doesn’t have to make itself vulnerable.
And I have to wonder – if the missile is such a long range weapon, how is it going to be targeted? If the ship is outside of sonar range of the sub, the sub is very probably out of sonar range of the ship. Though I suppose there will be times when they are both within hearing range of each other, but neither is within weapons range of the other.
A lot of missiles are designed to be fored by attack submarines, so this would simply be an easy way to use the same missile from a surface combat vessel.
The standard NATO anti-ship missile, the AGM-84 Harpoon, was originally designed to be fired from surface vessels and then was reengineered for submarine (and aircraft) use as well. Had it started out as a submarine weapon I imagine they’d use it the same way as this weapon. If it works, it works.
[QUOTE=Boyo Jim]
And I have to wonder – if the missile is such a long range weapon, how is it going to be targeted? If the ship is outside of sonar range of the sub, the sub is very probably out of sonar range of the ship.
[/QUOTE]
Anti-Ship missiles are usually guided to the general area of the target by a preset guidance program, which can be delivered to the missile’s targeting system in any number of ways. Harpoon uses some form of GPS guidance to find a particular point on the ocean. Sonar would be one way to get the initial targeting data, but a sub could even get that information from a friendly ship or radar. Once the weapon reaches a preset point close to the target, it then activates its own active sensor suite to find and hit the target.
Most anti-ship missiles are sea skimmers - they fly close to the water for most of the trip, making them hard to detect - so they couldn’t really use an active targeting system until they get close, anyway.
It could have a sodium igniter for the rocket stage. Combine that with simple fins to re-orient and see above notes on retrofitting torpedo launchers.
You are kidding. Right? If your theory is correct jets would never get off the ground.
Sorry, my question wasn’t clear. If the ship can sire it so far from a sub that the sub can’t hear it, it’s very likely that the ship can’t hear the sub. So how does the ship even know there’s a sub out there to shoot at? If the noise is picked up by an ASW plane or helicopter, it would seem way more likely that the plane or helicopter would be the one launching weapons.
It doesn’t. Surprise!