Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine

Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series

Message

IWS -> Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/11/2015 11:04:32 PM)
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?

NakedWeasel -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/11/2015 11:56:05 PM)
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.

Dysta -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 12:19:29 AM)
Sounds like a cheaper solution from MK-60 CAPTOR torp-mine.

Pergite! -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 11:30:54 AM)
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.

Dysta -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 12:23:06 PM)
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.

wild_Willie2 -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 1:20:22 PM)
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.

Pergite! -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 1:26:28 PM)
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.

Pergite! -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 1:41:58 PM)
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.

wild_Willie2 -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 3:02:08 PM)
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.

Pergite! -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/12/2015 3:19:14 PM)
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. [image]https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/1301199458076909997.jpg[/image] B52�s dropped dropped 16 inert Mk62s on manoeuvres in the baltic this summer.

Dysta -> RE: Quickstrike ER: A (potential) Precision Standoff Naval Mine (9/13/2015 12:53:22 AM)
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.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.078125