San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System?

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 >> San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/13/2016 12:36:40 AM

SSN754planker

Posts: 448
Joined: 10/2/2013
Status: offline

Link here

interesting concept.

_____________________________

MY BOOK LIST
ST1/SS SSN 754

Post #: 1

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/13/2016 1:48:10 AM

Dysta

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

If Hawkeye cannot watch over the amphibious operation, the LPD will have to protect themselves with Aegis, and giving target information to the escorts.

The thing is, both long range ASuM and SAM from rivaling sides are the reality, and they will try to stop everything that will initiate the land invasion, so why it has to be LPD take all the risk at near-shore, instead of escorting AEW or armed warships?

_____________________________

(in reply to SSN754planker)

Post #: 2

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/13/2016 2:01:27 AM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Pretty sure at one point this ships design included one VLS forward. Not sure why that got changed.

_____________________________

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 3

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/13/2016 3:03:10 AM

SeaQueen

Posts: 1451
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline

Cost cutting. Decreased technical risk. None the less, many in the Navy remained interested in the idea of an amphib that could engage in operations detached from an ARG without an escort so they left the space for it with the idea that they might add it back in later. Remember, the LPD-17 had a rocky start as a program, being behind schedule and over budget in the design phase, with numerous quality control problems as the first ships were launched. I think a lot of people looked at it as a possible way to decrease the demand for CRUDES.

Additionally, there's doctrinal problems with the idea. If air dominance is a prerequisite for amphibious assault, under what conditions would you use an AEGIS equipped amphib off on its own? What is the AEGIS supposed to protect it against? You probably wouldn't land if there were still CDCMs, aircraft and other ASCM shooters out there, and if there were you'd probably send an escort even with the AEGIS. Does it add that much more protection? Are we having so much trouble protecting amphibs that they need an AEGIS of their own? Wouldn't the Marines rather have an DDG-1000 with them anyhow if the opposition is so stiff? They use amphibs for humanitarian assistance/disaster relief and AEGIS can be used as a air traffic control radar, but that's an awful fancy radar to use for just landing airplanes.

All in all, if I had to bet, this one is probably going to face an uphill climb if you ask me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Pretty sure at one point this ships design included one VLS forward. Not sure why that got changed.

< Message edited by SeaQueen -- 4/15/2016 9:09:17 PM >

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 4

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/13/2016 3:02:41 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Yeah just looking at it from the gaming standpoint it seems to be a big mismatch in terms of purpose. I could see a RAM or maybe even a VLS for fire support weapons but not a primary AAW combatant. My only other thought is perhaps it would be better to take on the original VLS (and now Russian position) of putting a common VLS on everything with a set of weapons that could be fired etc.

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to SeaQueen)

Post #: 5

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/13/2016 5:02:47 PM

hellfish6

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

There's been some talk of using the LPD hull for a BMD cruiser. Maybe this is just someone referring to that? IIRC the VLS on the San Antonio-class was only to support ESSM for self-defense.

_____________________________

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 6

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/13/2016 11:26:51 PM

Tailhook

Posts: 293
Joined: 1/18/2015
Status: offline

I imagine this is more for distributed lethality and reducing the "lighter" loads of CRUDES rather than an all in one package thing.

(in reply to hellfish6)

Post #: 7

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/14/2016 2:05:10 AM

cf_dallas

Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline

For perspective, Aegis with a 16-cell VLS full of ESSM provides roughly the same missile capability (and likely better electronics) against air-breathing targets as the original Mk26-armed Tico.... 64 vs typically 68 SAMs, and ESSM has about 75% of the range/altitude performance of an SM-2MR. Nowhere near as capable as today's ABCDs, but mothing to sneeze at either. And very capable of creating a "bubble" around a landing area.

< Message edited by cf_dallas -- 4/14/2016 2:07:53 AM >

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to Tailhook)

Post #: 8

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/14/2016 4:36:55 AM

Dysta

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

Well, how much room will the LPD have to use for both Aegis and 2 8-cell VLS batteries? It has to keep the hanger and dock big enough for Ospreies and LCACs.

< Message edited by Dysta -- 4/14/2016 4:38:21 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to cf_dallas)

Post #: 9

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/14/2016 5:30:52 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Might also be driven by the threat.

I've been playing around with amphibious setups and its clear that beachheads are extremely vulnerable. If you look at WWII beach heads, log points etc. modern weapons would devastate them. Doesn't bode well for a lot of nations that are looking at fortifying a ton of small islands in the Pacific!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 10

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/14/2016 5:34:15 PM

Wiz33

Posts: 147
Joined: 5/16/2007
Status: offline

I've always felt that the western navy's approach to protecting high value target (CVN, Amphibs, supply/tanker) is weird as they are so lightly armed. The short range of current CIWS (phalanx/RAM) have such a short engagement window against high speed threats that we need to extend the protection envelope out as much as possible.

< Message edited by Wiz33 -- 4/14/2016 5:35:50 PM >

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 11

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 4/14/2016 5:55:08 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

My uneducated opinion is that this is about the missile attrition battle. There are a limited number of missiles in the fleet. The advanced networking abilities allow the USN to put Aegis and VLS on as ships and let them act as area defense inventory. Of course they also get self defense capability also. Previously, without the network ability, most likely the USN figured if they have to place a capital ship to defend the HVU, it was better to use the room on the HVU for something mission specific.

Also keep in mind the costs of Aegis and the missiles are dropping so financially, to get the same number of missile tubes in the fleet, have fewer capital ships. So maybe the USN strategy is to just put VLS and Aegis on every ship, just to get missile tubes into the attrition fight.

(in reply to Wiz33)

Post #: 12

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 5/7/2016 1:28:37 PM

Araner

Posts: 50
Joined: 10/27/2014
Status: offline

quote:

So maybe the USN strategy is to just put VLS and Aegis on every ship, just to get missile tubes into the attrition fight.

AFAIK thats more or less exactly what the USN strategy is at present- "If It Floats It FIghts". Although I doubt they need to install Aegis on every ship.

quote:

Well, how much room will the LPD have to use for both Aegis and 2 8-cell VLS batteries? It has to keep the hanger and dock big enough for Ospreies and LCACs.

As both mikmyk and the Foxtrot Alpha article pointed out "The class was actually built with an area set aside for a 16 cell Mark 41 vertical launch system." Based on what I've been seeing as current naval/amphibious strategy, I wouldn't be surprised to see them forego the well-deck altogether on LPD-48 as they did with the LHAs. At least this is what they were planning to do with the "BMD SHIP" concept wherein the well-deck would be sacrificed for a godzilla-sized AESA array.

In any case, the concept of arming amphibs certainly fits into official US doctrine over the past year. If there are doctrinal problems, it would be with the larger concept of distributed operations within an A2AD battlespace. This includes the new emphasis on naval OASuW proposed in "Distributed Lethality" but it also includes the USMC focusing on "distributed forward STOVL operations" over traditional beach assault and Army/coastal forces wielding mobile ASMs as proposed in "Archipalegic Defense"...
One important aspect of all this planning that I think gets lost in the buzz is that they no longer seem to view air dominance as a prerequisite for operations. I've been testing out various distrib. conops vs A2AD forces lately and the outcome isn't always pretty... OTOH it does seem to work better than an over-reliance on a carrier air wing with decreasing range and payload capabilities.

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 13

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 5/9/2016 5:07:39 PM

Dysta

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Araner

One important aspect of all this planning that I think gets lost in the buzz is that they no longer seem to view air dominance as a prerequisite for operations.

British Royal Navy won't agree with this, after a disastrous lesson.

_____________________________

(in reply to Araner)

Post #: 14

RE: San Antonio class LPD to get Aegis Combat System? - 5/9/2016 6:09:27 PM

Araner

Posts: 50
Joined: 10/27/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dysta

quote:

ORIGINAL: Araner

One important aspect of all this planning that I think gets lost in the buzz is that they no longer seem to view air dominance as a prerequisite for operations.

British Royal Navy won't agree with this, after a disastrous lesson.

Yes, and while I think the USN/USMC answer to the Falklands comparison would be in the increased capabilities of long range SAMs ala SM-6, there may even be a lesson in the 73' Yom Kippur war where overconfidence in technological superiority led to complacency. From the standpoint of the USMC/Distributed STOVL ops however, it would differ from the Falklands War in that the Falkland islands themselves were considered strategic objectives. Unless a conflict arose over PLA invasion of Senkaku Islands, Pagasa or Taiwan possessions, land terrain would only need to be secured on a temporary tactical basis allowing the MAGTF to determine a field of their own choosing. The assumption being that the combination of tiltrotor-enabled insertion and supersonic STOVL capability will give them more options to deploy and redeploy forward bases before the enemy has time to react.
Again, this implies a major leap of faith in terms of technology, and when you look at past issues with Patriot Missiles etc... the last time we had anything close to a "near-peer" enemy in Gulf War 1, there is still plenty that could go wrong.

(in reply to Dysta)

Post #: 15