Anti-Torpedo CIWS

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

fitz RE:Anti-Torpedo CIWS 1/26/2006 8:25:41 AM

"How difficult can it be to make this antitorpedo CIWS? Your sonar can tell the position, depth, speed and course of the torpedo. You know the sink rate of your depth charge, hence you know the time it takes to get to the torps depth. In that time how far ahead of where it is, will the torp have travelled? And the spot above that point, is where you throw/mortar/rocket the charge to on the waters surface..." And how many dozens, if not hundreds of false alarms are going to be generated. And how precise is that sonar data going to be, keeping in mind the huge number of false alarms? How much ammunition are you going to have to carry for this anti-torpedo weapon. I could name, probably 9-10 firm programs for anti-torpedo hard-kill defenses that have been initiated in the west since 1945. Every single one of them failed for those reasons. Every one. Recall that during the Falkland Islands conflict the Royal Navy, the pre-eminent ASW force in the world at the time, expended something like 250 rather spendy ASW torpedo's and an equal number of depth charges and never even came close to hitting a single submarine. Not once. Do you really think its going to be that easy to hit a torpedo?!?!?!

Quote Reply

Yimmy RE:Anti-Torpedo CIWS 1/26/2006 11:20:45 AM

"Recall that during the Falkland Islands conflict the Royal Navy, the pre-eminent ASW force in the world at the time, expended something like 250 rather spendy ASW torpedo's and an equal number of depth charges and never even came close to hitting a single submarine." I think a certain (ex) Argentinian submarine would argue that.

Quote Reply

Francois RE:Anti-Torpedo CIWS 1/26/2006 8:28:34 PM

fitz :Recall that during the Falkland Islands conflict the Royal Navy, the pre-eminent ASW force in the world at the time, expended something like 250 rather spendy ASW torpedo's and an equal number of depth charges and never even came close to hitting a single submarine. Well, if I can count well, one was caught on surface and desabled by a Lynx in Georgia isl., and the other was hidding between two rocks with its CCS not functioning per lack of maintainance, so couldn't launch. What is your point? What is said, regarding HK torps, is that, so far, the most promising way is there. And I was quoting ppl working on the subject, not from my mind!

Quote Reply

fitz RE:Anti-Torpedo CIWS 1/26/2006 8:36:52 PM

"I think a certain (ex) Argentinian submarine would argue that." Really? I hate to stray off-topic but for clarification... "Teh magnitude of the British ASW helplessness in the Falkland's conflict is best illustrated by one of the final observations related to me by the HDW chief combat systems engineer. Having learned first-hand of the futile torpedo attacks, and having also been aware of the massive expenditure of ASW ordnance by the British, he asked the captain of the San Luis what it was like to have been under counterattack by the British after his abortive torpedo attacks. "Attakc?", came the reply. "There was no effective counterattack. I don't think they knew were were there until they heard our torpedo's in the running, and then the erratic nature of those weapons behavior apparently prevented them from tracing the torpedoes back to our position. We were NEVER under direct attack." Captain Charles H Wilbur, USN(R), USNI Proceedings March 1996

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust Anti-Torpedo CIWS 1/26/2006 8:57:12 PM

"What is said, regarding HK torps, is that, so far, the most promising way is there. And I was quoting ppl working on the subject, not from my mind! " the last UDT I attended had a number of sessions on emerging counter torpedo systems. Out of the 7 systems discussed, only one has appeared in the public domain. The data shown for HK torpedo systems was rather impressive - and it certainly wasn't "pie in the sky" stuff. There are certainly solutions able to have greater success in killing an incoming torpedo - the principle issue is what developments take place with new torpedo technologies. The emerging technologies for torpedoes are going to make life interesting for any vessel. At the risk of generalising, at the skimmer level I'd rather have to deal with a supersonic cruise missile than have to deal with some of the new torpedo solutions.

Quote Reply

westwords2020 RE:Anti-Torpedo CIWS 1/27/2006 12:56:39 PM

A 6.5 inch countertorpedo has been developed by Penn State University that is compatible with sub countermeasures tubes and could probably be carried by surface ship.

Quote Reply

Weasel RE:Anti-Torpedo CIWS 1/27/2006 2:14:40 PM

You know, Sound and sonar is a wonderful thing, but what people seem to forget is that it is very sensitive, so it follows that it would be easy to knock out (pure speculation upon my part). I would look at making an array on a submersible that would collect and refocus the sound from a surface vessel pinging and use it to destroy the surface vessel's sonar (or render it useless for a period of time). Then I would launch the fish. Makes life very difficult for the defender when he can't see or hear. Anyway, it always comes back to how difficult it is to defeat an underwater threat.

Quote Reply

1 2