Looking to the West: CRAW's tiny torpedo will change the US submarine fleet

46
The submarine fleet of the United States is awaiting revolutionary changes thanks to the creation of the newest antitrust force. This opinion expressed the publication The Drive.





In the fiscal year's request for the US Navy's 2020 fiscal year, the “Anti-torpedo Compact Program weapons rapid attack (ATT CRAW) "in light of the ability to connect this product to the AN / BYG-1 control system. The latter plans to equip promising submarine cruisers with ballistic missiles of the Columbia class, multi-purpose submarines of the Virginia type (Block IV and V modifications), as well as future Australian diesel-electric submarines of the Ataka class.

Work on small-sized anti-torpedo has been underway for more than ten years as part of the CVLWT project. Its core is a “frame” on which warheads can be placed and, depending on the combat mission, various systems optimized for certain functions. The power supply system works by immersing lithium in gaseous sulfur hexafluoride, which leads to a violent chemical reaction, which, in turn, generates steam that drives the turbine engine. This mechanism allows the torpedo to perform accelerated acceleration.

With a 6 ¾ inch diameter (approx. 170 mm) and a length of about 85 inches (2160 mm), the CVLWT is significantly smaller than the latest versions of the Mk 48 heavy torpedo, which is now the standard weapon of this type for US Navy submarines. Mk 48 have a diameter of about 21 inches and a length of 228 inches. The typical weight of a mini-torpedo, about 220 pounds (100 kg), is also more than 16 times lighter than its heavy counterpart.

So we are really talking about a tiny torpedo.


- a look from the West.

Several CVLWT variants have already been developed, the most well-known of which is the CAT product, also referred to as ATT. It is designed to destroy incoming torpedoes, crashing into them or destroying an explosion of a warhead. The sonar, capable of operating in both active and passive modes, interacts with the IMU inertial measurement unit, which allows the torpedo to perform more precise movements, increasing maneuverability and accuracy.

The versatility of the new ATT CRAW modification lies in the ability to carry out offensive actions, in particular, attack small targets, such as unmanned surface or underwater vehicles. Theoretically, anti-torpedoes of this type can be loaded into launchers of submarines designed for firing Tomahawks. A swarm of anti-torpedoes launched from here will make it possible to suppress the defense of large pennants of the enemy fleet.

There is a possibility that the Navy can use CRAW to conduct underwater mining. In this case, due to the small dimensions of the product, it becomes more difficult for the enemy to detect the danger, it becomes possible to create more extensive minefields.

The multipurpose nature of the mini-torpedo can transform the concept of submarine warfare of the Navy [...] This revolutionary ability may well become a reality in the next few years.


- sums up the specified edition.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    46 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +1
      April 12 2019 07: 01
      The multipurpose nature of the mini-torpedo can transform the concept of submarine warfare of the Navy [...] This revolutionary ability may well become a reality in the next few years.
      And no one thought that the merikathos was sleeping. No, it brains and goes hungry.
      1. +20
        April 12 2019 07: 18
        Quote: aszzz888
        brains and goes hungry

        Interesting. what would Russian scientists invent, if they had funding at the level of American military programs. Probably another galaxy has already been conquered lol ... And these are simply "brainwashed and banished." lol
        1. +2
          April 12 2019 07: 49
          A little earlier at 5.05 an article was posted https://topwar.ru/156666-antitorpedy-my-poka-vperedi-no-nas-uzhe-obgonjajut.html
          about what we have in this regard.
          1. 0
            April 12 2019 10: 11
            My article on it: Tripwire - the problem killer of the Russian "Poseidon"
            http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2019-02-15/6_1034_tripwire.html
        2. 0
          April 12 2019 08: 33
          That's why there is no such funding.
        3. +3
          April 12 2019 09: 21
          these concepts are not connected alas. o [at] having a larger budget does not mean a greater exhaust in the final product.
        4. +5
          April 12 2019 09: 43
          Interesting. what would Russian scientists invent, if they had funding at the level of American military programs.

          In the USSR, they gave enough money. As a result, 59 modifications of tanks, a bunch of piece copies of ships for the Navy, dozens of projects of the same type of missiles, etc. were created. Actually, the amount of money does not lead to efficiency, rather the opposite. What we are now seeing with US weapons systems. Any modest cost-optimized weapon system with understandable characteristics, intelligible missions, and accessible to mid-level personnel is often much more effective than a multi-billion dollar wunderwolf "for everything at once", which is difficult to maintain and finish to the end.
          1. +4
            April 12 2019 13: 28
            Yes, of course, 30 years have passed since the USSR is gone, but in science and defense, we are still eating up the legacy of "ineffective investments." While in the world, with all the trillion-dollar infusions of the West into science, nothing radically new has been invented. In addition to the information sphere.
            1. 0
              April 13 2019 10: 22
              You confuse the effectiveness of spending on basic science and the effectiveness of spending on the purchase of weapons. Science yes, still feeds. And those weapons are mostly in a landfill.
        5. +1
          April 12 2019 16: 05
          Quote: orionvitt
          Interesting. what would Russian scientists invent, if they had funding at the level of American military programs.


          And even if a bunch of high-ranking loafers at every step did not put sticks in the wheels and steal less.
        6. 0
          April 13 2019 23: 23
          So we are really talking about a tiny torpedo.

          Our answer to Chamberlain:
          "Within the framework of the Anti-Antitorpeda-2007 program, the state corporation Rusnano attracted additional investments for the early completion of work on the creation of a domestic nanotorpeda." - said on April 13, 2019 the chairman of the board of Rusnano Anatoly Chubais.
          Recall that the project was created as an asymmetric response to the possibility of the appearance of ATT CRAW anti-torpedoes in the near future - a development funded by the Pentagon - and is currently at the preliminary design stage.
          It is assumed that a cluster of such anti-antinan torpedoes (100-200 billion pieces, the so-called "nanostart") will be able to confidently hit an ATT CRAW class anti-torpedo at distances of up to several thousand nanometers. The dimensions, speed and other technical characteristics of the nanotorpedo have not yet been disclosed. The principle of operation of the engine and the scheme of target destruction are also unknown.

          - based on materials from the site "Military Review"

          - a joke))
      2. +4
        April 12 2019 08: 02
        Quote: aszzz888
        And no one thought that the merikathos was sleeping. No, it brains and goes hungry.

        They’ve been crushing this little man for ten years, if not more.
        https://topwar.ru/29214-vms-ssha-proveli-pervoe-ispytanie-protivotorpednoy-sistemy.html
        Someone is going to equip all the ships with anti-torpedoes by the year 2035, and someone puts hypersonic missiles into service. Everything is not in the horse feed)))
      3. +2
        April 12 2019 08: 29
        Yeah. Somehow with lasers and railguns, they didn’t really do it, now they are developing a torpedo on a steam move. These are not new physical principles at all, but modernization of the 19th century. Oh well. Let them dare, if there is nowhere to put the loot. recourse
    2. +3
      April 12 2019 07: 02
      The logical development of armaments, technology does not stand still, anti torpedoes, anti missiles, from passive types of protection to active ones.
    3. +3
      April 12 2019 07: 19
      The work has been going on for more than a decade and
      This revolutionary ability may well become a reality in the coming some years.
      But it may not. And they (the Americans) are still trying to explain something to us about the "cartoons"?
    4. +2
      April 12 2019 07: 20
      The product is quite attractive, two in one (attack and defense).
      I think this is a "challenge" (including) to "Poseidon".
      The question is, is the system capable of individually controlling each torpedo in a swarm?
      All that remains is the development of EFFECTIVE signal simulators, submarine complexes of false marine targets.
      1. +1
        April 12 2019 07: 41
        I think that with such dimensions her powder will not be enough to dive for 1 km - chemical fuel is stupidly small. This is clearly a near zone and self-defense. Moreover, from torpedoes, and not from rocket launchers, otherwise not a turbine is needed
        1. +1
          April 12 2019 10: 15
          he has a turbine
          and there are many more 1 km
          1. +1
            April 12 2019 11: 04
            Quote: Fizik M

            he has a turbine

            The usual combined cycle torpedo, only small. What they usually call a turbine or a water jet is actually just a pair of screws in an annular casing. Range is directly dependent on size and speed.
            1. -2
              April 12 2019 11: 10
              Quote: Gray Brother
              Normal steam-gas torpedo, only small.

              there is a CLOSED CYCLE turbine on a gray hesaflord
              Quote: Gray Brother
              What they usually call a turbine or a water jet is actually just a pair of screws in an annular casing.

              in fact YOU are absolutely incompetent
              1. +2
                April 12 2019 11: 10
                Quote: Fizik M
                am CLOSED CYCLE turbine on gas-fluorine gray

                One hell. She twists the screw.
              2. +2
                April 12 2019 17: 58
                in fact YOU are absolutely incompetent

                I am also incompetent, without any irony I say. Some things in the article seem strange to me, for example, this one:
                The power system works by immersing lithium in gaseous sulfur hexafluoride, which leads to a violent chemical reaction, which, in turn, generates steam
                . During the reaction of sulfur hexafluoride with lithium, lithium fluoride and lithium sulfide are formed, the substances are quite refractory and completely non-volatile. What pair is mentioned in the article? What, the heat of this reaction boil water? But this requires very tricky heat exchangers and is hardly simple. The easiest way to generate a vapor-gas mixture is by catalytic decomposition of hydrogen peroxide or its reaction, for example, with hydrazine. But it already was (and is) in the mass of other designs. But how really? Maybe someone will explain clearly?
                1. 0
                  April 13 2019 10: 52
                  Quote: astepanov
                  But this requires very tricky heat exchangers and is hardly easy. The simplest way is to generate a vapor-gas mixture by catalytic decomposition of hydrogen peroxide or by its reaction, for example, with hydrazine. But it was (and is) in the mass of other structures. And how really? Maybe someone will state clearly?

                  can just read
                  ATT ESA is similar to that on the MK50 torpedo
                  1. +1
                    April 13 2019 12: 57
                    Yes, there is a Rankine cycle, a cooler - sea water, a water-jet propulsion device, it works from a steam turbine. The burning of lithium in SF6 is an energy source.
      2. +1
        April 12 2019 10: 10
        The mass of 100 kilograms - and what kind of warhead there is a maximum of 40 kilograms - is cumulative whether it will be effective against submarines with a double strong hull - this is an open question.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
    5. +1
      April 12 2019 08: 10
      Yes, article translation delivers .... lol
    6. +3
      April 12 2019 08: 47
      Actually, the author shouldn't be too much emphasized on the prefix "anti". Somewhere in the 50-60s of the last century, the name "anti-missile" was popular ... then, somehow, it settled down and in the "first place in use" in military terminology, "Russian" names were established: "anti-missile (interceptor missile) "," counter-torpedo (torpedo-interceptor) "...
      1. -2
        April 12 2019 10: 16
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Actually, the author shouldn't be too much emphasized on the prefix "anti"

        anti-torpedo is TERM
        1. 0
          April 12 2019 10: 20
          Quote: Fizik M
          anti-torpedo is TERM

          Who ? In our country, in my opinion, "counter-torpedo" is often used in military terminology .... "journalistic fabrications" are not an example ...
          1. 0
            April 12 2019 10: 28
            everyone has
            including TTZ
            Government contracts
            documentation of complexes
            1. +1
              April 12 2019 10: 49
              Check it out! Usually, with "anti" I did not come across! hi
              1. -4
                April 12 2019 10: 50
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                Check

                sorry, but YOU didn’t have a "checker"
                1. +3
                  April 12 2019 11: 04
                  But you did not measure!
                  1. -3
                    April 12 2019 11: 11
                    Quote: Nikolaevich I
                    But you did not measure!

                    You got it yourself and showed lol
                    had laughing
                    1. +3
                      April 12 2019 11: 33
                      Well, everyone judges according to the measure of his "indisposition"!
                      1. -6
                        April 12 2019 11: 34
                        Quote: Nikolaevich I
                        your "ailment"!

                        so you showed it! lol
                        1. +2
                          April 12 2019 12: 03
                          As A. Batalov said, I practically have no flaws! Yes I can only mention other people ... wink
    7. +1
      April 12 2019 09: 05
      This thing can be used for ... and even "various" ... True, the "caliber" is too small ... it will not be enough! Not Russian size! stop I would be satisfied with a "caliber" of 220-240 mm Yes Well, if any of my whim for other people's money, then this device can be tried to apply not only as a counter-torpedo; but also as counter-sabotage, anti-landing ammunition and, on the contrary ... sabotage ammunition for attacking river boats, floating conveyors, pontoon ferries, bridges ....
      1. 0
        April 12 2019 10: 58
        pontoon ferry, bridges ....
        For the concrete bulls of a major bridge, this torpedo is like an elephant's pellet. A shallow bridge on a small rivulet ... will this diver chtol aim and launch from the nearest reeds? With pontoons, too, everything is sad. They are multi-chamber. And a separate section is quickly replaced.
        1. 0
          April 12 2019 11: 03
          Quote: abrakadabre
          For concrete bulls of a large bridge, this torpedo is like an elephant pellet.

          It is difficult for you to argue in this case ...
          Quote: abrakadabre
          a small bridge on a small river ... is it a scuba diver chtol will aim and run from the nearest reeds?

          Why not ? If in "some countries" there are such bridges as Uncle Matroskin's shoe polish!
          1. 0
            April 12 2019 11: 07
            If in "some countries" there are such bridges as Uncle Matroskin's shoe polish!
            I guess, yes. A kind of river torpedo for sabotage. It is dragged almost in the cradle of the motorcycle or in the newfangled buggy for special forces, it is unloaded to the shore and along the channel of the river on manual control. You can even with an analog periscope (camera). I went straight, took aim, plunged completely and forward, accelerating to defeat.
      2. -4
        April 12 2019 11: 34
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        True, the "caliber" is too small ... it will not be enough! Not Russian size! I would be satisfied with a "caliber" of 220-240

        here you are right
    8. +1
      April 12 2019 11: 01
      In contrast to our "Poseidon" ....... well, let it be, time will tell ....
      1. The comment was deleted.
    9. Quote: Berkut24
      Interesting. what would Russian scientists invent, if they had funding at the level of American military programs.

      In the USSR, they gave enough money. As a result, 59 modifications of tanks, a bunch of piece copies of ships for the Navy, dozens of projects of the same type of missiles, etc. were created. Actually, the amount of money does not lead to efficiency, rather the opposite. What we are now seeing with US weapons systems. Any modest cost-optimized weapon system with understandable characteristics, intelligible missions, and accessible to mid-level personnel is often much more effective than a multi-billion dollar wunderwolf "for everything at once", which is difficult to maintain and finish to the end.


      A large number of design bureaus led to various developments that could be used later. Which happens sometimes when development comes from dusty shelves.
      Lack of competition leads to stagnation.
    10. +1
      April 13 2019 14: 30
      How is the St. Petersburg "Gidropribor" looking at this topic? Earlier, in the Soviet years, it was obligatory, albeit with a delay, our colleagues received from the Central Committee the task of "catching up with the enemy's torpedo." am
    11. +1
      April 14 2019 06: 47
      Maybe a small torpedo can be loaded into a jet bomb. It will be faster.

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"