MST Project: New Tomahawk RPC

32
The US military industry continues to develop weapons for the naval forces. Prospective designs are created both from scratch and on the basis of already existing types of weapons. So, a few days ago it was announced that the development of a promising anti-ship missile based on one of the most common types of weapons was about to begin. If such plans are successfully carried out, a product capable of attacking and destroying surface targets will reappear in the Tomahawk family of missiles.

On August 16, the US publication USNI News reported on ongoing work in the field of further development of weapons fleet. According to recent reports, the naval command and Raytheon are close to signing a contract to modernize one of the existing rocket models weapons. After signing the required documents, Raytheon will begin to design and manufacture new systems, proposed for installation on existing types of renewable missiles.



The agreement on carrying out the required work has not yet been concluded, but should appear in the very near future. The exact timing of the work has not yet been announced, but some estimates are already known. So, the head of the naval aviation Captain Mark Johnson noted that if the design contract is immediately signed, it will take several years. Then a few more years are expected to be spent on testing and verification. Only then will the command of the naval forces, confident in the new missile, be able to adopt it. The fleet will have to pay for the work, but funding will begin only after the command is convinced of the correctness of the project.


TLAM missile hit a moving target. Photo by US Navy


The goal of the new project, which received the working designation Maritime Strike Tomahawk (“Tomahawk” for sea strikes ”), is the processing of one of the existing serial missiles, according to the results of which it will be able to destroy surface targets. As a base for a promising anti-ship missile, it is proposed to use the BGM-109 Block IV Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) product designed to destroy enemy ground targets.

In the framework of the Maritime Strike Tomahawk / MST new project, a deep modernization of the onboard electronic equipment of the rocket is proposed. The base missile, designed to attack ground targets with known coordinates, is equipped with inertial and satellite navigation systems that bring it to the desired point. To hit moving surface targets, the Tomahawk anti-ship variant needs its own means of searching for targets. As a result, when developing a new project, a company-developer will have to seriously rework the existing electronics complex.

According to already known data, the promising MST rocket will have to receive improved communications, as well as modern navigation systems, which will provide accurate access to the area where the target is located. Target detection in the final flight segment is supposed to be performed using a specially designed homing head. As follows from the statements of officials, while the customer and the project performer have only a general idea of ​​the appearance of the promising RCC, however, they have not yet determined the exact composition of the required units.

For example, the type of homing head is not yet determined. Fleet specialists and Raytheon companies are currently working on this issue and are trying to determine the most effective version of target detection instruments. At the moment, the most likely is the use of a complex homing system, which will include passive and active means of searching for targets, primarily radar ones. However, for now this is only an assumption, and real missiles can get other means of homing.

As a carrier of new equipment it is proposed to use the existing Tomahawk Block IV serial rockets. Among other things, it will allow organizing the release of anti-ship missiles as part of the repair and upgrading of existing products. In the foreseeable future, the Pentagon plans to launch a program to upgrade and extend the life of existing missiles, and the production of Maritime Strike Tomahawk products may be carried out in parallel with other activities.

According to current plans, in 2019, the industry will have to start updating existing missiles in the TLAM version. By this time, it is expected to complete part of the work on the MST project and conduct a series of tests. Serial anti-ship "Tomahawks" will go to the troops no earlier than the beginning of the next decade. This weapon will be used in conjunction with other family systems that have the highest possible degree of unification.

It should be noted that the current MST project is not something new and original in the context of the development of the Tomahawk family of rockets. In the past, anti-ship missiles Tomahawk TASM were in service. Unlike other products of the family, they were completed with an active radar homing head, which allowed them to independently find a moving surface target. Despite this equipment, the TASM-type anti-ship missiles did not differ much from the other weapons of their family.

In the late eighties, the command of the naval forces of the United States decided to abandon the anti-ship "Tomahawks", completely transferring their functions to products of the Harpoon family. Now the Tomahawk missiles were responsible only for the destruction of ground targets, while the defeat of the ships was assigned to the "Harpoons". The operation of TASM missiles ceased in the early nineties. The overwhelming majority of such products were converted by the TLAM project and transferred to the category of weapons for ground attack.

In the recent past, several countries of the world presented promising anti-ship missiles of various models. The use of new ideas and technologies has led to a marked increase in the basic tactical and technical characteristics of such weapons. First of all, the firing range increased significantly. At the same time, new foreign missiles along the radius of action bypassed American products from Harpoon, which became a direct threat to the US Navy. In search of a solution to the existing problem, it was decided to return to the previously rejected ideas and create a new version of the Tomahawk rocket, designed to attack ships.

A few years ago, the defense industry and the military of the United States began exploring the issue of creating a promising ammunition within an existing family. During these studies, theoretical studies were carried out, and in addition, various tests were organized. With the help of all these events, it was possible to determine the real prospects of the new proposal.

In January, 2015, the US Navy, together with Raytheon, tested a Tomahawk Block IV serial missile equipped with a new target designation system. The missile test launch from the USS Kidd destroyer launcher (DDG-100) ended in a successful defeat of a moving surface target. Properly organized intelligence system made it possible to track the location of the target and transmit relevant data to the missile board. Despite the complexity of this task, the training goal was hit with acceptable accuracy.

Such tests confirmed the possibility of using Tomahawk missiles as weapons for hitting moving surface targets. Flight characteristics, first of all maneuverability, proved to be sufficient for solving such problems. The successful defeat of a moving target with external target designation made it possible to proceed with the development of a full-fledged anti-ship missile, capable of independently finding targets in the specified area and then destroying them.

According to the latest data, to date, the Pentagon and the Raytheon company have worked out a number of questions in the context of the Maritime Strike Tomahawk project and have formed some requirements for such weapons. Certain questions still remain unresolved, but apparently the search for the required ideas is only a matter of time. In the very near future, a contract should appear for the execution of the necessary work, according to the results of which, at the beginning of the next decade, the naval forces will receive a new weapon.

The main objective of the new MST project is to increase the range of anti-ship missile weapons. Rockets of the Harpoon family, depending on the modification, can hit targets at distances of no more than 260-280 km. The range of flight "Tomahawks" in different versions can reach 1300-1500 km. In addition, the latter, differing in large size and weight, are capable of carrying a more powerful warhead. Thus, the MST anti-ship missile must surpass existing weapons in the most serious way in terms of its main characteristics and capabilities.

Serial anti-ship missiles of a new type - with the successful implementation of all the necessary work - will go into service after the 2020 year. Together with such weapons, the American fleet will receive new opportunities, as well as be able to increase its combat potential. Also, such rearmament will be a symmetrical response to foreign successes in the field of rocket technology. The appearance of new missiles could have a noticeable effect on the situation in a number of areas of the oceans, where in the foreseeable future the interests of the United States and other countries may collide.

At the moment, a serious problem for the United States Navy is the lag behind foreign countries in the range of anti-ship missiles in use. The newest Chinese and Russian anti-ship missiles are capable of flying up to several hundred kilometers — many times farther than the American Harpoons. As a result, US naval connections may face serious risks. In certain situations, the fight against enemy ships can only be entrusted to airplanes or submarines with appropriate weapons, which will keep the enemy at a sufficient distance. However, the absence of its own missiles to attack surface targets will lead to certain restrictions.

The appearance of an anti-ship missile with a range of more than 1000-1300 km will lead to understandable consequences. Thanks to such weapons, the US Navy will have a noticeable advantage over the leading fleets of other countries, which will make it possible to draw up new plans with less concern about the risks associated with foreign weapons. Under certain circumstances, an MST rocket can even for several years become a universal and irrefutable argument with a uniquely high potential. However, this requires that other countries in the near future do not create their weapons with similar capabilities.

An interesting feature of the new project Maritime Strike Tomahawk is the approach to creating weapons. The Pentagon does not want to develop a completely new RCC, but at the same time considers it necessary to create it on the basis of an actively operated product. Moreover, serial missiles can be produced by repairing and re-equipping already finished products stored in naval arsenals. Such an approach will allow not only to carry out the desired rearmament, but also to get some savings.

For obvious reasons, the appearance of the Tomahawk rocket of the MST version will lead to certain consequences not only in the context of the development of the US Navy. The very fact of the start of the development of such RCC is a signal to foreign creators of such weapons. The appearance of an anti-ship version of an existing high-performance missile is a serious threat, and new designs of similar weapons with corresponding capabilities should be a direct response to it. It is possible that Russian or Chinese enterprises have already begun work on such weapons, and in the foreseeable future they will be able to present their response to the American Maritime Strike Tomahawk.

In recent years, there has been noticeable progress in the field of anti-ship missile weapons in the world, but some of the main trends simply passed by American weapons. Now the Pentagon and Raytheon intend to work together to solve existing problems and give the fleet new weapons that can ensure superiority over competitors. According to existing plans, the situation in the oceans may change already at the beginning of the next decade. Time will tell what follows the emergence of the MST production rockets.


On the materials of the sites:
https://news.usni.org/
http://businessinsider.com/
http://globalsecurity.org/
http://armyrecognition.com/
http://missilethreat.csis.org/
32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. ZVO
    +1
    23 August 2017 06: 59
    At least 1500 kilometers.
    The most important thing (at launch ranges farther than the palm) is target designation ...
  2. +5
    23 August 2017 07: 10
    As the carrier of the new equipment, it is proposed to use the existing serial Tomahawk Block IV missiles.

    that is, subsonic. For missile defense ships, although an unpleasant, but not too difficult goal
    1. 0
      24 August 2017 22: 10
      And this depends on how many missiles will be in the salvo. To bring down one is a simple matter, but if they fly into fifty at once?
      1. 0
        31 January 2018 14: 46
        Yes, even how much ... it all depends on the number of tons of metal per second how much your CIWS can produce in that direction.
  3. +2
    23 August 2017 07: 27
    The wax-ups of the present Berks are essentially toothless against enemy ships, except for some modifications with Harpoons. What is a harpoon? Also not God knows that, a small subsonic anti-ship missile system for arming boats. In principle, the Tomahawk once had an anti-ship modification, which was safely buried in favor of railguns. So you have to go back to square one, although in fact it is high time to have supersonic anti-ship missiles. And as I heard, they say, based on the SM-6, they saw this one. It seems there is a good range and speed. But the warhead of 100 kg does not cause laughter besides laughter.
    1. +4
      23 August 2017 09: 01
      100 kg for incapacitation most modern ships are over the eyes.
      1. +3
        23 August 2017 12: 43
        Quote: demiurg
        100 kg for incapacitation most modern ships are over the eyes.

        bully Are you sure?
        1. +1
          23 August 2017 16: 12
          If the explosion demolishes / damages all radars, the ship will be considered combat-ready, then having the ability to conduct hostilities?
          1. +3
            24 August 2017 07: 51
            Quote: demiurg
            If the explosion demolishes / damages all radars, the ship will be considered combat-ready, then having the ability to conduct hostilities?

            laughing I’ll tell you about two interesting cases related to RCC (and note these RCCs are not axes at all wink ).
            So...
            1979 year, KChF training ground near Snake Island.
            Characters; RKR "Admiral Golovko" and BT "Kherson Komsomolets".
            Golovko fired the P-35 anti-ship missile for the Prize of the USSR Navy, for a surface target traditionally imitating the USA Cleveland-class light cruisers.
            BT "Kherson Komsomolets" was a group of support ships and guards of the firing area.
            P-35 instead of a shield in the area of ​​about. Snake was at the last moment aimed at ... the ship of protection of the firing area BT "Kherson Komsomolets". The missile clearly captured the designated target and how a bullet went through the wooden minesweeper body. There were no losses among drugs.
            Episode No. 2.
            Characters;
            854-th OBRP (metro Khersones).
            The motor ship "Pavel Vereshchagin" (Donuzlav area).
            On the 24 of April of the 2000 of the year, the P-35B anti-ship missile launched from the coastal anti-ship complex 3M44 "Redoubt", fell into a bulk carrier, broke through the wheelhouse and sank. The diameter of the inlet was 2 meters, the outlet - 4 meters. At the same time, one of the crew members was wounded - 37-year-old electrician Vadim Ponomarenko.
            So my dear demiurg, once at a time you don’t have to hi
        2. mvg
          0
          23 August 2017 18: 45
          Well, if 200 kg, blown up NEAR the destroyer, destroy the ship, then 100 kg warhead blown up inside the ship, plus kinetics, plus unburned fuel ... There will be Khan Berk. And explosives in warheads can be laid more seriously than trinitrotoluene.
          1. 0
            24 August 2017 22: 14
            Modestly so notice that 200 kg BB and 100kg Warhead - this is directly a very big difference.
            1. mvg
              0
              25 August 2017 08: 53
              Yes, do not talk about modesty. Not the best quality in a person.
              Warhead Harpoon and Tomahawk more than 200 kg (221 and 450, respectively). So "little will not seem to anyone." For aluminum ships is enough.
        3. 0
          31 January 2018 14: 48
          My friend, what do you think there isn’t one rusty Block Buster or Tallboy in the warehouse? Do you think these toys can not be hung on the B-1 or F-111? Do you think you can not redo the plumage and guidance on the principle of J-DAM? You are naive
      2. 0
        30 November 2017 15: 25
        Quote: demiurg
        100 kg to disable most modern ships for the eyes.

        The SM-6 has a kinetic warhead, the warhead -100 kg is an option that will drastically reduce the range and speed of the rocket.
  4. +1
    23 August 2017 07: 38
    Larger range is certainly good, but what about the subsonic speed of the ax? Despite all the agility, the ax is vulnerable in the final section of the trajectory.
    1. +1
      23 August 2017 10: 42
      Rather, it is not a matter of speed, but of maneuverability.
      The interception from the ship is now carried out by a missile defense in the opposite direction - in the forehead.
      Speed ​​matters less.
      But it’s more difficult to react to missile defense of the Kyrgyz Republic.
      1. +4
        23 August 2017 16: 19
        Speed ​​also matters - the higher it is, the less time it takes for an air defense to react. And if the detection range is not long, due to stealth technologies, for example, and the speed is supersonic or hyper, then the air defense in general may not have time to do anything. And for a slow-moving target, you can work out several times.
      2. 0
        24 August 2017 01: 08
        Speed ​​is not comparable more important.
        When the target is several times slower, its maneuverable characteristics do not matter. But when the speed is comparable and higher, then the importance of maneuvering increases sharply. For clarity, imagine instead of the RCC, a tortoise crawling a snake, and you, in the role of missiles, going to her to intercept. The result is clear.
        However, subsonic missile maneuvers make sense for evading ZAK shells. But, the closer to the ship, the smaller the amplitude of the maneuvers of the RCC, and accordingly, the easier it will be to take the lead for the queue. So the speed oh how it does not hurt.
        1. 0
          24 August 2017 10: 44
          "For clarity, imagine instead of RCC, a tortoise crawling a snake, and you, in the role of SAM," ///

          You reason humanly. And for a computer, for software - another
          logics. Two options: 1) the path is straight - therefore, the path and
          the meeting point is fundamentally possible to calculate. What the computer will do,
          moreover, the speed of the target does not matter, the computer is anyway faster.
          2) the trajectory is uncertain (maneuvers). Comp - I pass, does not miscalculate.
          The missile defense is launched approximately, and then - the hope for the GOS and its small "brain"
          and "eyes" (IR video). The probability of interception is reduced.
          1. +1
            24 August 2017 13: 27
            The logic is essentially the same - to turn all the time to the goal or meeting point. Simply, a person will not fuss in response to the slightest turn of a turtle, for he is smart and lazy)))
            1. 0
              24 August 2017 13: 32
              In missile defense, man is not at work. This is a "battle of robots." After all, oncoming speeds are summed up. No professional reaction helps anymore.
              Yes, and in fighter aircraft, man has lived for the past two to three decades. recourse
      3. 0
        24 August 2017 07: 42
        The linear velocity multiplied by the angular velocity is the coefficient of overcoming missile defense / air defense.
        There is no arguing against mathematics.
      4. 0
        31 January 2018 15: 04
        Missile defense is made easier ... a pair or a quad GAU-8 / GSh-6-30 and four ammunition cars))) Although how to maneuver, but when instead of air around solid metal a lot comes up.
  5. +1
    23 August 2017 12: 16
    Quote from an article: "...So, the head of naval aviation programs captain mark johnson noted that the immediate signing of a design contract would take several years. Then a few more years are supposed to be spent on tests and checks...."
    For all the seriousness of the material, this source is rather insignificant. You never know what whole captain, even if he is Mark Johnson (it's about like Ivan Petrov in our transcription). Is it worth it to refer!
  6. +1
    23 August 2017 15: 23
    Such a range is certainly a plus, but otherwise slow-moving, not performing anti-aircraft maneuvers, the Kyrgyz Republic will be easy prey for modern naval air defense. Sense will be only with massive hits. Or are they preparing them against our ships? Then yes, we now have a Tugan with medium and short range ship air defense systems. And long-range air defense is not for the Kyrgyz Republic.
    1. +1
      27 August 2017 04: 18
      “Tomahawk missiles weigh 3,500 pounds with a booster and can travel at subsonic speeds up to 550 miles per hour at ranges greater than 900 nautical miles. They are just over 18-feet long and have an 8-foot, 9-inch wingspan. ”
         Not very slow if the speed is about 900 km / h.
      “The Tomahawk missile has also demonstrated an ability to use its on-board camera to take a picture of a potential target, send it to a command center and then loiter until instructed to destroy that target,” Raytheon officials told Scout Warrior.
      The technology was used last year in a test-firing of a Tomahawk launched off a Navy surface ship off the coast of California, Chris Sprinkle, Raytheon Tomahawk program manager, told Scout Warrior in an interview last year.
      “We are taking advantage of the capability that is already in the weapon. It took a picture of a target area and sent it to a controller. The controller selected the target out of the photo and gave those coordinates to the weapon, ”Sprinkle said.”
         In addition, amazing maneuverability was created in order to change goals either at the discretion of the operator. When approaching, it can take pictures, transfer it to the operator and he will reassign the target. I don’t think that the missile defense of an enemy ship will bring down a missile that does not fly into the ship, and this missile can “pretend” that it is flying past.
      1. +1
        27 August 2017 11: 53
        Modern ship's air defense missiles are being shot down, 900 km / h is slow-moving, and phased array ship-borne air defense radars detect targets like KR on water for several tens of kilometers. Problems will be only with a massive strike, with the depletion of the stock of anti-missile.
        But on our ships, outdated medium-range air defense (Calm for example), the damage rate of the KR is about 0,6, the maximum ammunition is 36 missiles, i.e. a maximum of 18 shot down missile defense systems, plus near-range air defense will intercept something (needles, barrels), for a total of 20-25 pieces they will fit in the most favorable conditions, everything else will pass.
      2. 0
        30 November 2017 15: 28
        Quote: eklmn
        and this rocket can “pretend” to fly by.

        Whistle, light a cigarette ...
  7. 0
    23 August 2017 20: 43
    They seem to be developing a specialized LRASM and will soon adopt it, why do they need the anti-ship Tomahawk?
    1. +1
      24 August 2017 22: 16
      Likely to reuse existing production facilities and possibly already manufactured missiles. Budgets - they’re not rubber, even among amers.
  8. 0
    28 August 2017 16: 40
    based on the fact that the marine version of the caliber has a range of about 300 km, then the marine version of the tomahawk will have approximately the same range. That is, no problem with the US Navy's lag in the RCC area will be solved (neither in speed nor in distance), they just have at least some RCC, unlike the current situation
  9. 0
    30 November 2017 15: 23
    Oh my God! AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!! Well these dumb Americans.