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: Thermobaric warheads for anti-ship weapons
HeavyD    9/21/2014 5:11:23 PM
Does anyone know whether thermobaric warheads are being considered/developed for anti-ship missiles? Thermobarics are absolutely devastating against structures...imagine what a successful detonation would do within the confines of a ships hull or superstructure. But is that the challenge - successful detonation in a marine environment?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
keffler25       9/21/2014 7:16:59 PM
Open air blast would have serious effects on sensors, but hardened structures would shrug off effects. For ships SAP grenades are still the preferred WTG. 
Does anyone know whether thermobaric warheads are being considered/developed for anti-ship missiles?

Thermobarics are absolutely devastating against structures...imagine what a successful detonation would do within the confines of a ships hull or superstructure.

But is that the challenge - successful detonation in a marine environment?

 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       9/22/2014 1:23:50 AM
Does anyone know whether thermobaric warheads are being considered/developed for anti-ship missiles? Thermobarics are absolutely devastating against structures...imagine what a successful detonation would do within the confines of a ships hull or superstructure. But is that the challenge - successful detonation in a marine environment?
Thermbarics, or fuel-air explosive, require air for oxidizer, they also lack fragmentation to penetrate bulkheads.  The compartmentization of the vessel limits the volume of air and therefore the yield, and depending on the fuel in the warhead may even exceed the maximum ratio at which detonation, or even combustion, can take place.  Maximum effect would be a detonation in the engineering spaces, which are the largest volume in the ship, but you are still likely to have greater effect with a conventional explosive warhead.
 
Thermobarics are effective against structures if they exceed the pressure to buckle the walls, or provide openings for the fuel cloud to enter before detonation.  Civilian structure are not designed to withstand the pressure.  Military vessels are, and are designed to contain internal explosions, and with the hatches battened down for combat present no paths for the fuel cloud or pressure wave to enter from an external explosion.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    To Echo Others   10/10/2014 2:42:26 PM
I think the Chinese/Soviet/German warheads with their multiple EFP warheads would be more dangerous, to a vessel's, structure than a thermobaric one.  As I understand it, the Styx & it's Chinese knock-offs & the German Kormoran have a warhead that detonates EFP projectiles, circumferentially...this will yield multiple  bulkhead, structural element compromises, & multiple fires, in multiple compartments.  Remember fire is the real ship killer, not holes in the hull.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics