ASW technologies and techniques

[Todjaeger]

Okay, this category has been dead for quite a bit. However, I find I have a question about the ASW weapon potential for skimmers.

With rare exceptions, it seems that heavyweight 21"/533 mm torpedoes are now strictly the domain of subs.

The torpedoes fired from surface vessels for ASW ops are 324 mm lightweight torpedoes.

How viable would it be for a corvette, frigate or destroyer to carry LWT's for use aboard an ASW helicopter, but use heavyweight torpedoes for direct fire against sub contacts and/or surface vessels?

Is the potential range advantage for a heavyweight torpedoe negated by limitations in sonar systems for determining target data at range? Or is the signicantly greater space and weight of a 533 mm torpedoe, and the limitations that imposes on launchers and magazine storage deemed 'worse' than having a larger number of LWT's?

For the handful of surface vessels which do carry heavyweight torpedoes (AFAIK usually MTB's) I believe they are for defensive use in littoral waters against larger surface vessels. While such smallcraft do not usually have much in the way of sonar/subhunting kit, could the torpedoes carried be used or re-programmed for use vs. submarines?

-Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

I think the interesting developments are about the high altitude torps and the development of CEC for other assets to update and guide once they hit the water....

 

[My2Cents]

With rare exceptions, it seems that heavyweight 21"/533 mm torpedoes are now strictly the domain of subs.

The torpedoes fired from surface vessels for ASW ops are 324 mm lightweight torpedoes.

How viable would it be for a corvette, frigate or destroyer to carry LWT's for use aboard an ASW helicopter, but use heavyweight torpedoes for direct fire against sub contacts and/or surface vessels?

Is the potential range advantage for a heavyweight torpedoe negated by limitations in sonar systems for determining target data at range? Or is the signicantly greater space and weight of a 533 mm torpedoe, and the limitations that imposes on launchers and magazine storage deemed 'worse' than having a larger number of LWT's?

For the handful of surface vessels which do carry heavyweight torpedoes (AFAIK usually MTB's) I believe they are for defensive use in littoral waters against larger surface vessels. While such smallcraft do not usually have much in the way of sonar/subhunting kit, could the torpedoes carried be used or re-programmed for use vs. submarines?

-Cheers

Russian cruisers and destroyers still mount heavy weight torpedo launchers. This may reflect a philosophy that any conflict will be initiated by them with surprise, allowing them to start within effective range. Trading a cruiser or destroyer for a carrier would definitely be worthwhile.

There are also some torpedo boats still in use in confined areas with lots of places like islands to hide. All new designs appear to have converted to missiles.

The problem is the effective range {(torpedo speed setting- target vessel top speed (assuming it attempts to evade the torpedo at launch) ) x the endurance of the torpedo at the speed setting} of conventional heavyweight torpedoes against likely targets is generally too short, generally less than 12 miles for a 30knot target, for a surface vessel to get close enough to launch without being detected and sunk in the open ocean. The Shkval obviously doesn’t have this problem, but has an even shorter range and cannot home on the target.

For antisubmarine work the extra range is of little value compared to deploying lightweight torpedoes from helicopters or using standoff systems such as ASROC.

 

[Volkodav]

The Mk 48 HWT was designed as a dual role surface and sub surface launch weapon and I believe the California and possibly the Virginia Class DLGs (CGs) were designed for the weapon but it was never fitted.