Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval... - 9/11/2015 11:04:32 PM   
IWS

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline 		Quickstrike ER: Precision Standoff Naval Mine


This is... interesting. Apologies if it's been covered before, a search showed nothing.

According to a USAF test, about a year ago:

500lb bomb + quickstrike fuse + JSOW (ER) = precision standoff naval mine (40nm)

Tested & works (dunno about the quickstrike fuse, though)

http://www.au.af.mil/au/afri/aspj/digital/pdf/articles/2015-Mar-Apr/V-Pietrucha.pdf

AWAST has an article too, but it's paywalled.

Seems like a potential (pacific) game-changer to me. One B-2 could carry 80 of them, enough to close a port outside SAM range.

Of course, there's no guarantee we'll buy any.

Other sources, thoughts?





< Message edited by IWS -- 9/12/2015 12:05:25 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/11/2015 11:56:05 PM   
NakedWeasel


Posts: 500
Joined: 1/14/2014
Status: offline 		Interesting. Of course the same aircraft could destroy every ship there with JSOW-Cs and achieve the same results. Or, a SSN could lurk nearby and torpedo any ship that attempts to set sail. Or sink them pierside...

Mining a chokepoint is sort of the "badguy's" game, rather than ours, these days.

_____________________________

Though surrounded by a great number of enemies
View them as a single foe
And so fight on!

(in reply to IWS)
Post #: 2
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 12:19:29 AM   
Dysta


Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline 		Sounds like a cheaper solution from MK-60 CAPTOR torp-mine.

(in reply to NakedWeasel)
Post #: 3
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 11:30:54 AM   
Pergite!

 

Posts: 546
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NakedWeasel
Mining a chokepoint is sort of the "badguy's" game, rather than ours, these days.


Its a very cost efficient way to deny you enemy sea control. Sea denial is a big thing now and I am surprised that there aren't that many scenarios around with the focus on this.

Dropping some mines in the outlet of the Russian naval ports in the Baltic would for example be the first thing on the agenda to even things out in that region if a shooting war would erupt. The same goes for the defence of Taiwan, to hamper a potential Chinese invasion fleet. Not to forget the the border to North Korea, which to my knowledge is the main reason that the US are keeping its large stockpile of land mines and have no interest whatsoever to sing any treaties about them.

Waging a fair war is stupid, and mines are of course a great weapon when used wisely.


(in reply to NakedWeasel)
Post #: 4
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 12:23:06 PM   
Dysta


Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pergite!

Waging a fair war is stupid, and mines are of course a great weapon when used wisely.



In recent decade, nautical mines are becoming less effective against modern degaussed vessels, and not to mention the advance anti-mine operation with UUV or towing baits.

At best, sea mines can only making delay, rather than fending them off.

(in reply to Pergite!)
Post #: 5
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 1:20:22 PM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline 		Mines have always been more of a cheap area harassment weapon then a true area denial weapon, a deadly speed bump more or less. Just like submarines, once they have made their presence known inside an area, most of their effect is gone. The only mine blockade in history that was truly successful was the campaign to mine Japanese ports at the end of WW2. But by then most of the Japanese merchant marine and navy had already been sunk and no organised countermeasure campaign could be waged anymore.

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 6
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 1:26:28 PM   
Pergite!

 

Posts: 546
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dysta

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pergite!

Waging a fair war is stupid, and mines are of course a great weapon when used wisely.



In recent decade, nautical mines are becoming less effective against modern degaussed vessels, and not to mention the advance anti-mine operation with UUV or towing baits.

At best, sea mines can only making delay, rather than fending them off.


Yeah, but that delay could prove to be a war winner...

Besides, I do belive you need to give a lot more credit to modern sea mines. They are designed specifically to foil modern anti mine warfare efforts, and a degaussed hull is not going to help you particular much against a homing acoustic mine.

Hasn't the US gotten three separate mission kills on naval vessels during the last two decades alone? And those where old school mines, even one from WW1 IIRC.

Some light reading on PLAN mine warfare

I think the consensus is that the the only way to effectively counter a mining operation is to strike at it before those mines come in the water. If they however are laid by subs or in this case as stand-off munitions, this of course become a bit more tricky.

(in reply to Dysta)
Post #: 7
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 1:41:58 PM   
Pergite!

 

Posts: 546
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wild_Willie2

Mines have always been more of a cheap area harassment weapon then a true area denial weapon, a deadly speed bump more or less. Just like submarines, once they have made their presence known inside an area, most of their effect is gone. The only mine blockade in history that was truly successful was the campaign to mine Japanese ports at the end of WW2. But by then most of the Japanese merchant marine and navy had already been sunk and no organised countermeasure campaign could be waged anymore.


Roughly 90% of the worlds transport is handled over water. Just the rumour that a a vital shipping lane is mined would constitute more than a "cheap harassment". As an asymmetric weapon its a great choice and it ties up considerable naval efforts in clearing operations.

< Message edited by Pergite! -- 9/12/2015 2:42:24 PM >

(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 8
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 3:02:08 PM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline 		Yes, mines are also a great and relatively cheap psychological weapon especially again insurance companies ;)

Again, once they have made their presence known inside an area, most of their effect is gone for military purposes.

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to Pergite!)
Post #: 9
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/12/2015 3:19:14 PM   
Pergite!

 

Posts: 546
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wild_Willie2

Yes, mines are also a great and relatively cheap psychological weapon especially again insurance companies ;)


Yeah, that Libya incident right? Did they ever get that sorted out properly?

quote:


Again, once they have made their presence known inside an area, most of their effect is gone for military purposes.


As I said, it causes delays and frictions and also a real problem if you either needs to get into or out of the area that is mined off. Destruction of hardware is not always necessary to create a desired military effect.


B52´s dropped dropped 16 inert Mk62s on manoeuvres in the baltic this summer.






(in reply to wild_Willie2)
Post #: 10
RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff N... - 9/13/2015 12:53:22 AM   
Dysta


Posts: 1909
Joined: 8/8/2015
Status: offline 		The only thing like I said before, is the CAPTOR -- a real game-changing torpedo-mine that could prove its' deadly denial.

And it is early-80s tech ever since, though unlike MK62, it is also stationary when deployed. Somehow a floating mine with sea glider and GPS would be a really menacing denial weapons.

(in reply to Pergite!)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.000