What's new

The U.S. Navy's New Torpedo Could Be Big Trouble for Russia and China

F-22Raptor

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
16,980
Reaction score
3
Country
United States
Location
United States
The U.S. Navy is now prototyping a new, longer range and more lethal submarine-launched heavyweight Mk 48 that can better destroy enemy ships, subs and incoming weapons at longer ranges, service officials said.

Many details of the new weapon, which include newer propulsion mechanisms and multiple kinds of warheads, are secret and not publically available. However, senior Navy leaders have talked to Scout Warrior about the development of the weapon in a general sense.

Naturally, having a functional and more high-tech lethal torpedo affords the Navy an opportunity to hit enemies at further standoff ranges and better compete with more fully emerging undersea rivals such as Russia and China.

Progress with new torpedo technologies is happening alongside a concurrent effort to upgrade the existing arsenal and re-start production of the Mk 48, which had been on hiatus for several years.

Navy officials did add that some of the improvements to the torpedo relate to letting more water into the bottom of the torpedo as opposed to letting air out the top.

The earlier version, the Mk 48 Mod 6, has been operational since 1997 – and the more recent Mod 7 has been in service since 2006.

Lockheed has been working on upgrades to the Mk 48 torpedo Mod 6 and Mod 7 – which consists of adjustments to the guidance control box, broadband sonar acoustic receiver and amplifier components.

Tom Jarbeau, Director and General Manager of Targets, Torpedoes and Sensors, Lockheed Martin, told Scout Warrior in an interview that Lockheed is now delivering 20-upgrade kits per month to the Navy.

Part of the effort, which involves a five-year deal between the Navy and Lockheed, includes upgrading existing Mod 6 torpedoes to Mod 7 as well as buying brand new Mod 7 guidance control sections.

The new Mod 7 is also resistant to advanced enemy countermeasures.

Modifications to the weapon improves the acoustic receiver, replaces the guidance-and-control hardware with updated technology, increases memory, and improves processor throughput to handle the expanded software demands required to improve torpedo performance against evolving threats, according to Navy information on the weapon.

The Mod also provides a significant reduction in torpedo radiated-noise signatures, a Navy statement said.

Alongside Lockheed’s work to upgrade the guidance technology on the torpedo, the Navy is also preparing to to build new Mk 48s.

Upgrades to the guidance control section in includes the integration of a system called Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System, or CBASS – electronics to go into the nose of the weapon as part of the guidance section, Jarbeau explained.

“This provides streamlined targeting and allows the torpedo to transmit and receive over a wider frequency band,” Jarbeau said.

Jarvo added that the new technology involves adjustments to the electronic circuitry in order to make the acoustic signals that are received from the system that allow the torpedo to better operate in its undersea environment.

“Digital information is used to guide the torpedo,” Jarbeau said.

Upgrades also consist of movement to what’s called an “Otto fuel propulsion system,” he added.

Lockheed will deliver about 250 torpedoes over the next five years. The Mk 48, which is a heavy weapon launched under the surface, is quite different than surface launched, lightweight Mk 54 torpoes fired from helicopters, aircraft and surface ships.

The Navy’s Mk 48 torpedo is also in service with Australia, Canada, Brazil and The Netherlands, Jarbeau said.

A Mk 48 torpedo is 21 inches in diameter and weighs 3,520 pounds; it can destroy targets at ranges out to five miles and travels at speeds greater than 28 knots. The weapon can operate at depths greater than 1,200 feet and fires a 650-pound high-explosive warhead.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...rpedo-could-be-big-trouble-russia-china-20548
 
.
Still waiting for the 200 mile range torpedo.
 
.
Still waiting for the 200 mile range torpedo.
174nm, 320km? How? How would you target that?

Mk48 range x speed:
38 km (24 mi; 21 nmi) at 55 kn (102 km/h; 63 mph) or
50 km (31 mi; 27 nmi) at 40 kn (74 km/h; 46 mph)

320km takes at least 3hrs and 8 minutes at 50kn. It is 8.4x the max range of Mk48 at high running speed.
It would take the supercavitating 200kn Shkval 52 minutes...
 
.
174nm, 320km? How? How would you target that?

"For example, today’s torpedo has an effective range of 10 miles, he said. But he challenged the research community to develop a propulsion system to bring the torpedoes miles, and one group delivered that. Another group delivered a 200-mile propulsion system.

“So what happens when you have a 100 or 200 mile torpedo? You start thinking, your whole picture of the world changes when you do that,” Connor said at an event hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the U.S. Naval Institute.

You stop thinking in terms of what is the bearing and range from my ship to the target, and you start thinking a lot more in terms of geographic coordinates. And the bosses that we work for start thinking of torpedoes as underwater Tomahawks because they can go to the appointed place at the appointed time, they can be potentially redirected and, although it’s our job to get them to the fight, we might easily hand over the terminal homing of one of our torpedoes to somebody else who happens to have better information at the time that that torpedo is going to do the last leg of its journey.”"

From:
https://news.usni.org/2015/05/14/comsubfor-connor-submarine-force-could-become-the-new-a2ad-threat

Later in the article it mentions UAVs as being a possible candidate for guidance, but I would imagine that 3rd party UUVs and other subs would also be able to guide them.
 
.
Later in the article it mentions UAVs as being a possible candidate for guidance, but I would imagine that 3rd party UUVs and other subs would also be able to guide them.
Seahake Mod ER has a range of 140 km at ' over 40kn'.
https://www.atlas-elektronik.com/what-we-do/naval-weapons/seahaker-mod4/

2a).jpg

http://survincity.com/2013/04/germanys-submarine-distance-record-torpedo-seahake/
http://www.nafomag.com/2014/11/atlas-elektronik-gmbh-at-ideas-2014-in.html

SeaHake mod 4 ER on the photo posted is of greater length than the standard torpedo series DM2A4 of 6.6-7m with range 55km. IIRC almost 11m.
 
.
Seahake Mod ER has a range of 140 km at ' over 40kn'.
https://www.atlas-elektronik.com/what-we-do/naval-weapons/seahaker-mod4/

2a).jpg

http://survincity.com/2013/04/germanys-submarine-distance-record-torpedo-seahake/
http://www.nafomag.com/2014/11/atlas-elektronik-gmbh-at-ideas-2014-in.html

SeaHake mod 4 ER on the photo posted is of greater length than the standard torpedo series DM2A4 of 6.6-7m with range 55km. IIRC almost 11m.
Are current torpedo tubes , be it on sub or ship, capable to launch this? ie. do they have the length?
 
.
Are current torpedo tubes , be it on sub or ship, capable to launch this? ie. do they have the length?
I would hardly think Atlas would develop this ER version of D2A4 if there were no sufficiently long torpedo tubes to launch it. As I indicated, I recall reading somewhere 11m, but I may be wrong and have not been able to find a ref. for it. But definitely over 7m (the standard D2A4 is 6.6m IIRC).

Modern Western 533mm torpedoes tend to vary in length between 5.5 and 7m. Russian 533mm heavyweight torps between 7.4 and 7.9m. Their 650mm torpedoes are 11m (come to think of it, I think that is where my idea of 11m originated). The implication of the existence of torpedoes of this length implies the existence of launch tubes able to handle them.

DTA-53 Set of Double-Tube Torpedo Tubes
Torpedo’s bore, mm 533
Overall dimensions, mm:
  • Length 8,440
  • Width 1,550
  • Height 1,580
http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/558/561/

TR-203 Set of Torpedo Tubes
Torpedo’s bore 533
Overall dimensions, mm:
length
ТR-203/1 9440
ТR-203/2 9440
ТR-203/3 9440
ТR-203/4 9440
ТR-203/5 9440
width
ТR-203/1 760
ТR-203/2 1800
ТR-203/3 2550
ТR-203/4 3300
ТR-203/5 4050
height
ТR-203/1 1310
ТR-203/2 1640
ТR-203/3 1640
ТR-203/4 1640
ТR-203/5 1640
http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/558/559/

21 inch submerged torpedo tubes (1944)
"Current torpedo tubes are of two lengths, bow tubes being 252 inches, stern tubes 276 inches, over all length, not including doors."
https://maritime.org/doc/fleetsub/tubes/chap2.htm
US submarine tubes were 6.4m and 7m during WW2.

Above water tubes were 8.2m overall
https://archive.hnsa.org/doc/destroyer/ddtubes/index.htm#pg4

Wartime German tubes: the tubes had an internal diameter 553,6 mm and total length of 755,2 cm.
http://www.ubootwaffe.pl/en/u-boats/equipment/torpedo-tubes-of-german-u-boats
 
Last edited:
.
@Penguin, so could we assume that in this case this is not a torpedo but a submerged missile?
 
.
@Penguin, so could we assume that in this case this is not a torpedo but a submerged missile?
SeaHake mod 4 ER remains a torpedo in most respects. The main difference is in the size of the battery section and how it is guided (beyond 50km the normal wire-guidance using optical fibre no longer is an option). I think the same applies pretty much in the case of the Mk48 in the first post.

"a missile is a self-propelled precision-guided munition system, as opposed to an unguided self-propelled munition, referred to as a rocket"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile

All torpedoes these days are self-propelled and these days either guided or homing (I don't think straight-running contact torpedoes are in use anywhere anymore). In that sense a normal torpedo classifies more like a missile. Closer to a missile as we know it, would be a supercavitating torpedo (which has a different propulsion system resulting in much higher speeds) like the Russian Shkval. But Shkval lacks the sophisticated guidance/homing capabilities of regular torpedoes (wireguidance not being practical and homing ability limited by high speed, which renders sonar/hydrophone unusable)

KGquuXI.jpg

P15A Kolkata class destroyer. Ship beam (width) = 17.4 m
Item 5 = L&T 533mm fixed dual torpedo launch tubes
These tubes are at least half the ship's width (beam) i.e. at least about 8.7m long of which not all is 'barrel'. This matches quite closely to the 8.4m Russian DTA-53 (IN uses Russian 533mm torpedoes on its destroyers and frigates)
 
Last edited:
.
a good torpedo needs a good sub to launch it. I like the Virginia class, but a dozen or so *black holes* diesel electric subs are needed in the USN.

buy 12 Soryu class from Japan?? for like $500 million each. operate them solely in the South China Sea, you got plenty of sea bases to operate them out of like Japan,South Korea,Australia,Guam, and Diego Garcia...and maybe India??
 
.
a good torpedo needs a good sub to launch it. I like the Virginia class, but a dozen or so *black holes* diesel electric subs are needed in the USN.

buy 12 Soryu class from Japan?? for like $500 million each. operate them solely in the South China Sea, you got plenty of sea bases to operate them out of like Japan,South Korea,Australia,Guam, and Diego Garcia...and maybe India??
Some conventional subs , like Dutch Zwaardvis class (also used by Taiwan) and successor (Walrus) and Japanese Uzushio class and successors (including Soryu), are based on the hullform of USS Barbel (three boat class of SSKs, built 1956 – 1959). It can't be too hard for the US to come up with a modern day SSK based on this boat.

Barbel.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbel-class_submarine

Commissioned: January 17, 1959
Decommissioned: December 4, 1989
The BARBEL itself was sunk as a target on January 30, 2001 at 032° 19' 08.0" North, 121° 36' 16.0" West at a depth of 1972 fathoms.
ss580_1.jpg

ss580_2.jpg

http://www.navysite.de/ss/ss580.htm

ANother Barbel Class SS being scrapped @ Los Angeles - 01.05.1997
299198.jpg

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=299198
 
.
Some conventional subs , like Dutch Zwaardvis class (also used by Taiwan) and successor (Walrus) and Japanese Uzushio class and successors (including Soryu), are based on the hullform of USS Barbel (three boat class of SSKs, built 1956 – 1959). It can't be too hard for the US to come up with a modern day SSK based on this boat.

Barbel.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbel-class_submarine

Commissioned: January 17, 1959
Decommissioned: December 4, 1989
The BARBEL itself was sunk as a target on January 30, 2001 at 032° 19' 08.0" North, 121° 36' 16.0" West at a depth of 1972 fathoms.
ss580_1.jpg

ss580_2.jpg

http://www.navysite.de/ss/ss580.htm

ANother Barbel Class SS being scrapped @ Los Angeles - 01.05.1997
299198.jpg

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=299198


cheaper and quicker to just buy a sub that's already designed and proven....plus ourships that can build submarines are already dedicated to building Virginians and the next gen SSBN
 
.
cheaper and quicker to just buy a sub that's already designed and proven....plus ourships that can build submarines are already dedicated to building Virginians and the next gen SSBN
Sorry, but US will never buy non-US major equipment. Ain't going to happen.
 
. .

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom