Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Does the U.S.N. use the anti-ship tomahawk or not?
jessmo_24    12/18/2006 2:41:39 AM I have heard somewhere that its not in use any more. Isnt the possible to use the block 4 for anti-ship duty?
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
gf0012-aust       12/18/2006 3:31:37 AM


I have heard somewhere that its not in use any more.

Isnt the possible to use the block 4 for anti-ship duty?

why would you use a TLAM for anti-shipping?
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       12/18/2006 5:01:21 PM
In the 80's there was a special varient of the Tommahawk with a ~450km range and speed of ~0.7 mach, specially designed as an anti-ship version, but was withdrawn from service in the 90's.

As according to my memory of a book I have upstairs.

Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer       12/18/2006 5:33:19 PM
The TASM?  It's in Dangerous Waters, but the manual says that it has been withdrawn from service and it's only there because of artistic licence.
Quote    Reply

jessmo_24       12/18/2006 8:05:15 PM
Because it has far more range than anything the chinese can mount on
a ship.

Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/18/2006 8:43:59 PM

Because it has far more range than anything the chinese can mount on
a ship.

there's a bit of a fallacy with thinking that range gives you depth of flexibility - it doesn't.  It also gives the other side more time to apply countermeasures - and to work out what is firing at them due to weapons characteristics.
if you want to kill a skimmer - the best choice is a sub.

Quote    Reply

Blackshoe    Daydreams   12/20/2006 1:35:56 AM
TASM, Sure pull the trigger and stay the hell out of its way!
Wait, there might be a place for this in the order of battle, but it would require an important augment.  Man in the loop control and sensor feedback to an operator. Sort of an ROV-TASM. I've alway though that the real thing the Tomahawk lacked was a return to base feature.
Quote    Reply

KlubMarcus       2/8/2007 2:36:01 AM
The TASM isn't in service anymore. But there's no reason why the Navy can't order more if they wanted them, plus upgrades from today's level of technology. Yes, you "should" be able to use a Block 4 TLAM against a large ship that isn't moving too fast. It's supposed to have some sort of optical or IR camera and it can be remote-controlled to hit any new targets that are detected.
Quote    Reply

scuttlebut steve    what about TLAM   2/9/2007 8:24:49 PM
can the land attack tomahawks attack ships effectively?
Quote    Reply

Rasputin       2/9/2007 8:45:12 PM
Maybe it's because the ruskies, Indians, Taiwanesse and possibly the chinese navies all have supersonic speed ramjet powered anti ship missiles that move at twice or 3 times the speed of the slow cruise tomahawk. If the hostiles approach innocently and come within range of their "ruskie sunburn" supersonic missile range. Then even if the tomahawk or harpoon were fired from the USN vessel, the enemy ramjet missile when fired later would still be able to hit the USN ship before the radar operator learns of any tomahawk strike.

None the less I believe the USN is developing their own "sunburn" or they are going to buy the Taiwaneese design and make it in the USA.

Quote    Reply

KlubMarcus       2/9/2007 11:19:23 PM
The US Navy prefers to use aircraft to attack enemy warships. They just launch wave after wave of aircraft carrying Harpoons, HARMs, and all sorts of guided glide/free-fall bombs until the enemy vessels run out of defensive missiles. Then it's all over for the bad guys. At that point you can send a helicopter to sink the enemy warship. I think the US Navy should develop a long-range supersonic anti-ship missile, too. It will give them the option to launch a counter-attack within minutes of a surprise attack. Airstrike can take hours to plan, prep, launch, and hit the enemy.
Quote    Reply
1 2