Navies with SM-1 AAW missiles

[contedicavour]

Now that the OH Perrys in the USN inventory don't have SM-1 anymore, how long can the other countries operating this missile still keep it operational ?

Each navy has to have enough missiles, but also the technology to keep them and the Mk13 launcher operational...

We're talking about Spain (6 ships), France (2), Italy (2), Turkey (7), Chile (2), Australia (4 ships), Poland (2), Bahrain (1), Taiwan (8), ...

If this system were to become not operational anytime soon, a lot of navies would see their AAW capability decrease very fast

cheers

 

[Big-E]

Thats the reason the USN stripped the SM-1 launchers off the OHPs, so they can give the spares to the countries that do operate them.

 

[Aussie Digger]

This is one reason why Australia has selected the SM-2 Block IIIA standard SAM system, besides being the most up to date version of SM-2 capable of being fired from a "rail launcher".

The SM-2/ESSM/Phalanx combo of our FFG's together with upgraded radar/fire control systems will ensure our AAW capability until our AWD's are in-service, when they will take a quantum leap with SM-6 most likely to be introduced...

 

[Big-E]

when they will take a quantum leap with SM-6 most likely to be introduced...

ERAM is gonna rule!:australia :usa

 

[contedicavour]

This is one reason why Australia has selected the SM-2 Block IIIA standard SAM system, besides being the most up to date version of SM-2 capable of being fired from a "rail launcher".

The SM-2/ESSM/Phalanx combo of our FFG's together with upgraded radar/fire control systems will ensure our AAW capability until our AWD's are in-service, when they will take a quantum leap with SM-6 most likely to be introduced...

My understanding is that your 4 remaining and updated OHPs will use ESSM only from the recently installed VLS. Am I wrong ?
If I understand correctly, the Mk13 launcher can launch SM-2 IIIA ? Doesn't it reduce the range and capability considerably ?

cheers

PS : I am however aware your new DDGs will however use SM-2 IIIA and be comparable to the latest batch of Burkes.

 

[contedicavour]

Thats the reason the USN stripped the SM-1 launchers off the OHPs, so they can give the spares to the countries that do operate them.

Do you have an idea of how many hundreds of SM-1s still exist in the USN inventory ? With more than 40 NATO and Allied ships using this system, I hope the stock is > 800 :frown

cheers

 

[Big-E]

Do you have an idea of how many hundreds of SM-1s still exist in the USN inventory ? With more than 40 NATO and Allied ships using this system, I hope the stock is > 800 :frown

cheers

Just the SM-1s stripped off the hulls gives you well over a thousand maintained missiles... Were cool.

 

[Aussie Digger]

From what little I understand of the Mk13 launcher/SM-2 matter, the lack of a 3D radar system on the FFG's is of more significance to their overall capability than the launcher itself. Apparently Block IIIA is the last edition of SM-2 that CAN be fired from a rail launcher (later versions are all VL models) so I don't imagine they are too bad. At any rate they are a quantum leap over the SM-1.

You are correct about ESSM on RAN FFG's. They are fired from a solitary 8x cell Mk 41 VLS installed in front of the Mk 13 launcher on our FFG's, during the FFGUP upgrade program our remaining 4 are going through. As their is only a single VLS only 32 ESSM missiles can be carried on the FFG compared to (potentially) 64x on ANZAC frigates, were the 2nd VLS to be installed.

 

[contedicavour]

Great news on both fronts then
> there's enough SM-1s for 40 ships for another 10 years (good, our last DDGs with SM-1s will be deleted approx 2016 unless modernized with EMPAR/Aster30) supposing a minimum stock of 25 missiles will do
> we could still buy SM-2 IIIA for use on the Mk13, even if range will surely be not the full 170km

By the way, I just got the news the Aster 30 has reached a target at 120km range and 20km height. Still below the SM-2 IIIA/B, but coming closer

cheers

 

[Jtimes2]

Big E is right; the USN specifically retired the type to conserve the spares and tech support resources for overseas users. Even after the these are exhausted, foreign users can continue (on their own dime) to obtain spares/support from Raytheon and GD. Bahrain, for example, has an open-ended contract for this already set up to support Standard on the Sabha.

In NATO, I think the overriding logic here is that by the time USN surplus spares are exhausted, the OHP's will be nearing the end of their hull lives in first-tier navies like Spain and will be able to "pass down" spares and actual rounds to more cash-strapped NATO navies like Turkey and Poland who's OHP hulls will have to serve longer.

Outside NATO, you might see some modifications like the RAN made with the VLS installation; perhaps in the Taiwanese ships. Remember that the Taiwanese were very crafty with their old Gearing class DD hulls; constantly reequipping them with SAMs and SSMs up through the 1990s.

 

[Sea Toby]

Lets not forget there are other guided missile frigates and/or destroyers with the Mk 13 SAM launchers for SM-1s besides the OH Perry class FFGs, Japan has several, France, Italy and Chile (former Netherlands) have two each.

More than likely most of these ships will be gone from everyone's fleet in 15 years, along witht he SM-1s missiles.

 

[contedicavour]

Big E is right; the USN specifically retired the type to conserve the spares and tech support resources for overseas users. Even after the these are exhausted, foreign users can continue (on their own dime) to obtain spares/support from Raytheon and GD. Bahrain, for example, has an open-ended contract for this already set up to support Standard on the Sabha.

In NATO, I think the overriding logic here is that by the time USN surplus spares are exhausted, the OHP's will be nearing the end of their hull lives in first-tier navies like Spain and will be able to "pass down" spares and actual rounds to more cash-strapped NATO navies like Turkey and Poland who's OHP hulls will have to serve longer.

Outside NATO, you might see some modifications like the RAN made with the VLS installation; perhaps in the Taiwanese ships. Remember that the Taiwanese were very crafty with their old Gearing class DD hulls; constantly reequipping them with SAMs and SSMs up through the 1990s.

Yes right. However all the equipment was available back then (the early '80s) to brighten up the old Gearings : Harpoons, Phalanx, SM-1s...
Curiously now there are a lot of relatively young ships but not enough equipment (unless one can afford ESSM and SM-2 III) to arm them appropriately.
Good proof that it ain't steel anymore that costs most on ships

cheers

 

[contedicavour]

Lets not forget there are other guided missile frigates and/or destroyers with the Mk 13 SAM launchers for SM-1s besides the OH Perry class FFGs, Japan has several, France, Italy and Chile (former Netherlands) have two each.

More than likely most of these ships will be gone from everyone's fleet in 15 years, along witht he SM-1s missiles.

Or we'll update those ships. The 2 French Cassard AAW frigates and the 2 Italian De la Penne DDGs will be updated shortly with better radars and software and could be updated in mid-life update with Sylver VLS for Aster missiles so that the ships would be almost as well armed as the Horizon and FREMM.

cheers