The future of surface raiders?
- Thread starter kilo
- Start date
contedicavour
New Member
Yes but they have too short autonomy at sea to be comparable to the original WW2 surface raiders. Besides, they are very vulnerable to air attacks.Fast Patrol Boats can see like guerilla warfare at sea
cheers
The flip side though is a boat swarm on radar looks like an armored division in the middle of a desert.Fast Patrol Boats can see like guerilla warfare at sea
Also known as a shark feast after an air raid.
contedicavour
New Member
Oh yes just send up a couple of helos with 4 AS15TT or Skua or Marte Mk2A ASMs and they'll erase a whole fleet of FACs in a couple of minutes.The flip side though is a boat swarm on radar looks like an armored division in the middle of a desert.
Also known as a shark feast after an air raid.
You don't even need to have an aircraft carrier around.
cheers
contedicavour
New Member
Well RAM has 10km range and 76/62 12km in anti-aircraft mode.Maybe not if the FACs are equipped with 76mm guns and RAM besides their AShMs.
Some helis might not be enough for saturating their defence.
A helo can just remain outside the 12km limit, fire off 4 ASMs, go back to the ship to rearm and come back and shoot another volley until the time the FACs cannot cope anymore. Marte Mk2A is a very impressive weapon capable of blowing up a 60-metre FAC with only one hit.
That's why I consider FACs without air cover as sitting ducks.
cheers
For sure FACs used in open water are dead meat.
But if they use coastal lines and isles for cover they may have a chance to close in to the target.
And are the helicopters able fly back and rearm fast enough before some FACs close in to their motherships at high speed?
If the first helicopter attack failes you may not have enough time to rearm your helicopters.
But if they use coastal lines and isles for cover they may have a chance to close in to the target.
And are the helicopters able fly back and rearm fast enough before some FACs close in to their motherships at high speed?
If the first helicopter attack failes you may not have enough time to rearm your helicopters.
some of the modern FACs are really stealthy, how close does a helo need to get to one before it can even detect it? And also, what helo actually carries 4 AShM?Well RAM has 10km range and 76/62 12km in anti-aircraft mode.
A helo can just remain outside the 12km limit, fire off 4 ASMs, go back to the ship to rearm and come back and shoot another volley until the time the FACs cannot cope anymore. Marte Mk2A is a very impressive weapon capable of blowing up a 60-metre FAC with only one hit.
That's why I consider FACs without air cover as sitting ducks.
cheers
Couple points.
There is no indication that stealthy FACs would ever be used in swarming attacks, they are better designed for covert strike. They are also very expensive and only available to certain nations.
Thinking about tactical and strategic use of motherships would imply they wouldn't be close to shore. The point for a mothership is to provide OTH standoff weapons support and OTH logistical support to smaller units deployed closer to shore. How many FACs would go off chasing motherships into blue water?
I think a very valid concern exists with helicopter assault against FACs that are armed with certain AAW weapons. The 2003 Iraq War exposed that even the heaviest helicopters like the Apache are highly vulnerable to "wall of steel" gun attacks, the most likely defensive weapon in a large a swarm of FACs. Alternatives would be CH-130 gunships or A-10s, both land based US Air Force platforms.
So a question I would raise is what suitable countermeasure other than attack helicopters exists or could be deployed from a mothership to strike against heavily armed littoral FAC squadrons with FAC based AAW defenses?
There is no indication that stealthy FACs would ever be used in swarming attacks, they are better designed for covert strike. They are also very expensive and only available to certain nations.
Thinking about tactical and strategic use of motherships would imply they wouldn't be close to shore. The point for a mothership is to provide OTH standoff weapons support and OTH logistical support to smaller units deployed closer to shore. How many FACs would go off chasing motherships into blue water?
I think a very valid concern exists with helicopter assault against FACs that are armed with certain AAW weapons. The 2003 Iraq War exposed that even the heaviest helicopters like the Apache are highly vulnerable to "wall of steel" gun attacks, the most likely defensive weapon in a large a swarm of FACs. Alternatives would be CH-130 gunships or A-10s, both land based US Air Force platforms.
So a question I would raise is what suitable countermeasure other than attack helicopters exists or could be deployed from a mothership to strike against heavily armed littoral FAC squadrons with FAC based AAW defenses?
Well, I think incorporating OTH standoff weapons support into a mothership would be a design decision. I could just as easily see one who's sole purpose was OTH logistics and/or transport of smaller units and have let DDG/DD(X) provide the firepower.Couple points.
There is no indication that stealthy FACs would ever be used in swarming attacks, they are better designed for covert strike. They are also very expensive and only available to certain nations.
Thinking about tactical and strategic use of motherships would imply they wouldn't be close to shore. The point for a mothership is to provide OTH standoff weapons support and OTH logistical support to smaller units deployed closer to shore. How many FACs would go off chasing motherships into blue water?
The Apache vulnerability in OIF and Operation Anaconda was due to the decision to fly low-n-slow over enemy-held territory. This exposed them to all manner of 'trashfire' including AAA up to HMGs, RPGs, recoilless rifles and so on.I think a very valid concern exists with helicopter assault against FACs that are armed with certain AAW weapons. The 2003 Iraq War exposed that even the heaviest helicopters like the Apache are highly vulnerable to "wall of steel" gun attacks, the most likely defensive weapon in a large a swarm of FACs. Alternatives would be CH-130 gunships or A-10s, both land based US Air Force platforms.
This wouldn't be the case with swarming FACs. Even stealthy ones could be detected at significant distances, and the number of targets would be orders of magnitude lower than during OIF/Anaconda (where a target might be one guy manning a DShK or packing an RPG).
Still, a 57mm or RAM launcher would pose a significant risk to a Helo launching Hellfires.
Helo-launched AShMs, OTOH, easily out-range anything short of a good-sized SAM. Targetting would have to be off board via BAMS GHawk, MMA or whatever.
Well, my guess fixed-wing NavAir would be employed first, if available.So a question I would raise is what suitable countermeasure other than attack helicopters exists or could be deployed from a mothership to strike against heavily armed littoral FAC squadrons with FAC based AAW defenses?
Given that FACs have limited range and endurance, one could hit their ports and refueling points and just wait for them to run out of gas.
Personally, I'm less worried about large fleets of stealth FACs in our opponent's inventories than them using stolen or captured merchant vessels and other small civilian craft.
In crowded waters, we may have to search each ship and boat to determine friend from foe.
Last edited:
contedicavour
New Member
What matters most against a strong coastal force of FAC(M)s is ensuring air superiority and having enough helos and/or UAVs to locate those missile boats.
If the allied fleet has at least half a dozen ships with helo platforms and long range AAW cover (SM2 or Aster-30), then the FAC(M)s don't stand a chance.
Helos flying at minimum 250 km/h top speed vs the FACs' 30kn (60 km/h approx) have enough time to launch ASMs, go back and reload... and the AAW air cover ensures that no enemy jet can shoot down the attacking helos.
cheers
If the allied fleet has at least half a dozen ships with helo platforms and long range AAW cover (SM2 or Aster-30), then the FAC(M)s don't stand a chance.
Helos flying at minimum 250 km/h top speed vs the FACs' 30kn (60 km/h approx) have enough time to launch ASMs, go back and reload... and the AAW air cover ensures that no enemy jet can shoot down the attacking helos.
cheers