Long Bow Hell Fire: US Navy solution to Iranian fast attack boats

[Arminkh]

Correct GPS jamming that you mention is one good approach, Cooperative positioning is a Hot topic these days. Which is sensor information which is obtained via each individual system is shared and communicated with other units. A paper in Chinese defence which I accidently saw while researching cooperative positioning for indoor/Outdoor positioning showed they managed to enhance the precision of the salvo missile launch CEP by 3 dB minimum per 4 missile which seems to be right on the theory of it when cooperating. Besides cooperation gives one system benefit of seeing what it may not see individually which is in case of GPS where each individually requires 4 Sattelites to be present one may not see all 4 and one may see more than 4 where its position and targeting information would help those in need as well.

Most probably as you say these systems use Fusion of sensor inputs which is cheap now (dirt cheap) and also get reference targeting form the mother ship and adjacent ships. If so making the scene dirty and severing the link is the solution. GPS jamming that you mention is useful but should be in the whole theater. By such sensor Fusion they also made jamming difficult but not impossible. They might see better but if what they all see lacks precision they are still blind. Also spoofing the GPS system and the link is other methods. I believe the easiest is wide GPS jamming, extreme targeted noise on the used bands and increased radar clutter. These are all cheap to make.

Are you working on indoor positioning?

 

[C130]

These Hellfires can be launched from the choppers as well right?


Well then you missed the news. too bad.

yeah and from drones as well.

Actually , Iran's tactics have matured as well with the production of new cruise missiles .

Iranian speedboats don't go any closer to a US warship than 50-30km radius . that means with this standoff capability , USN should come up with far better tactics than this one .

i think this missile is a good deterrent when it comes to somali pirates , but when it comes to IRIGCN , it won't score one single kill .

remember that these kinda cruise missiles are all fire-and-forget . meaning that the boat can just shoot the missile and run away : at incredible speeds and quite frankly do a considerable damage with just one shot

this is what happens after a zuni rocket hits a US carrier :

Snake's venom (zahre mar) .

too much smilies kid

that tactic could expose the crew :not to the US warship's range - but to the fighter jet's HARM missile .

closing up to 50km in PG can be safer than using those kinda missiles who need radars on the host ship

the zuni rocket only caused a A-4 Skyhawk to catch fire (zuni warhead didn't explode) which in turn caused 1,000 pound dumb bombs to explode from the heat.

such a thing wouldn't happen again, and if it did bombs are coated to withstand the heat or til firefighters can put the blaze out

 

[Siavash]

Are you working on indoor positioning?

Yes for some time I did. Precisely 2 years.

The data a tracking mechanism requires is:
1- Its own position (GPS, INS based kinematic calculation)
2- Its reference position (Precise known reference location (Ship Coordinates, beacon coordinates, ...)
3- Sensory information or observables from the tracked target (velocity, acceleration, signal RSSI (either reflection of Radar or Transmitted signal from target)), visual reference like the one obtained from IR or Computer Vision approaches.
4- Low overhead of communication all and processing power to form a a feasible Bayesian estimation of all input data.

To attack 1) Spoofing, GPS jamming, Electromagnetic interference (against cheap MEMS IMU's if any), Vibration attacks against more expensive fiber optic or laser based IMU's
To attack 2) Severe connection between the ship and the unit. Fooling reference of the unit in believing its position. Spoofing and taking over the link. Taking out references from ship to satellite. In case of CV aided reference position using target blobs blinding the image taking satellite which Iran already has achieved and demonstrated in RQ-170 case.
To attack 3) all above plus mudding the scenery in visual, electromagnetic and Infrared domain and also building radar decoys artificially. feeding reflections that do not exist to the participating radar.

All above is possible in very cheap way even per speed boat.
Sorry for lengthy text, I enjoyed writing it :p

One thing I was thinking now was: If they could manufacture small solenoid based Gauss capsules and fill a cluster ammunition case with it and detonate them all while swarming on top of the theater like blanketing the 1000*100 meter diameter around it while swarming the target it may produce enough EMP and Vibration to defuse the IMU and navigation on board the hellfires if any. Also it will make a lot of cluster and smokescreen for blocking radar and computer vision references. The clusters are very simple and small and may cost less than 10$. A battery operated + permanent magnet type outer shell and a solid conducting inner shell with Aluminium powder along its axis that when detonated would push the inside core as fast as possible outwards and produce immense H field. The aluminium powder affects the radar and the H affects the IMU sensors and the cluster detonation causes the vibration needed for on board IMU's to lack precision on flight. The smoke blocks sattelite vision and the IR should be countered by phosphorus decoys tailing the speed boats.
The cluster should be launched by artillery for cheap delivery and coordinated using CC4. It will end when the fake swarm ends and prepare the theater for main attack. remember the artillery barrage just needs to cover the area and no precision on hitting any but detonating at multiple heights covering the scenery. Such mechanisms can be fired from the RC boats itself maintaining a field while approaching. Everything dirt cheap to maintain the GDP ratio!

One needs to make the cartoon for it.

 

[Oldman1]

well if that's the stragety they would be dead meat.

lauching 10+ C-701 just themselves would overwhelm a LCS. would only need one to hit to cripple it.

You are assuming the LCS would go in by itself.

Actually , Iran's tactics have matured as well with the production of new cruise missiles .

Iranian speedboats don't go any closer to a US warship than 50-30km radius . that means with this standoff capability , USN should come up with far better tactics than this one .

i think this missile is a good deterrent when it comes to somali pirates , but when it comes to IRIGCN , it won't score one single kill .

remember that these kinda cruise missiles are all fire-and-forget . meaning that the boat can just shoot the missile and run away : at incredible speeds and quite frankly do a considerable damage with just one shot

this is what happens after a zuni rocket hits a US carrier :

Snake's venom (zahre mar) .

too much smilies kid

that tactic could expose the crew :not to the US warship's range - but to the fighter jet's HARM missile .

closing up to 50km in PG can be safer than using those kinda missiles who need radars on the host ship

Bad comparison since it was an accident that cause that, not by a missile. And small boats are just not fast enough to outrun a missile, tests have shown that. And considering there are fighter bombers, submarines, unmanned boats, as well as surface ships helicopters all combine and coordinated to prevent and destroy swarm boats.

 

[Siavash]

New project! See if I can get NSERC funding for it. Even better DARPA! They need to test their LCS response precisely so they need this project. Coordinated speed boat anti LCS counter measure using CC4, cooperative positioning, central network missile defence link and coastal radar and satellite coarse imagery.

The project is to launch and calculate collective response for counteracting LCS hellfire defence in final approach (1 to 8 km to target). Propose maneuvering and coordinate orchestrated counter measure with remaining nodes at real time.

 

[Oldman1]

How many Hellfires can they carry? The low tech counter act is to launch preliminary cheap aluminium coated fiber glass RC's fast boats and draw the Hellfire attention of the USN and deplete the stocks of the particular ship and then launch the actual attack in presence of EECM and decoy along with cruise missile and supersonic anti ship missiles.

Basically what this article is saying the automated vertical launch has matured in hitting multiple individual targets. Well that is what expected isn't it. I mean you expect USN have intensive counter measures and have 100% response but are they able to achieve the same firepower in long run near the coastal waters? I doubt they could and eventually they will be overpowered.

This precise and automated fire power which is excellent by the way, still does not provide solution against fast underwater submarines or Hoot torpedoes. Still the USN ships are vulnerable in Persian Gulf and near coast waters which is expected anyways and that is what Iran wants. Keep them far and be safe.

Also the technology (Fire and Forget) relies heavily on onboard and on missile radar and detection mechanism for precise targeting and distinguishing targets. It is sufficient for Iran to provide surface clutter (easy and cheap to produce) along with its fake swarm attack and deplete the arsenal even further. I would like to know in case of heavy jamming, Decoy and shadow Radar targets if the system is still maintaining its 7:1 ratio.

I don't see this to be a deal breaker but it will push the boundaries of a successful swarm attack on USN. Iam sure Iranian engineers do have the solution in hand for this as well.

Unless USN could beam the ship up or cloak it (Startrek type) I doubt it would be successful in fully defending any ship in coastal waters so close to shore.

Other aspect of such game is the cost. A such hellfire would cost 50 to 110K $ each mass produced. A RC aluminum coated fiber glass boat would cost 2K$ each max. A swarm attack of 200 dummy RC boats would be equivalent to 2 hellfire cost. Considering the total number of hellfires produced during 2011-2014 tops to 24000 units and considering the in battle ratio to be lower than 7:1 (lets say 15% loss) it requires Iran to prepare a stock of 22K inflatable, partially coated fiber glass with depth charge head against the presence of maximum 24K hellfires in the region for a maximum of 100 or less successful fake swarm attacks against USN and depleted the local stock. Meanwhile move in with all other tools in place to take out all near and offending ships. Lockheed Martin needs to ramp up production. When such war happens I will make sure to buy their stock.

I am sure they have found counter balance already. It is not a big deal. By the way In terms of AI, Telemetry and control and CC4 Iran is also a capable adversary. What we can think of they think 100 times better.

How many Hellfires can they carry? The question is how many platforms we have that can carry Hellfires. Helicopters, fighter planes, C-130s, drones, as well as LCS can carry multiple Hellfire missiles. And also considering Griffin missiles as well with similar capabilities. Or using Brimstone missiles. You have to remember that the U.S. has the ability to manufacture many more missiles.

 

[Siavash]

How many Hellfires can they carry? The question is how many platforms we have that can carry Hellfires. Helicopters, fighter planes, C-130s, drones, as well as LCS can carry multiple Hellfire missiles. And also considering Griffin missiles as well with similar capabilities. Or using Brimstone missiles. You have to remember that the U.S. has the ability to manufacture many more missiles.

No doubt on US and Allies manufacturing power when in need. I am counting on local real time availability and platform availability in real time. Overwhelming the defence and depleting it local stockpiles prior to main attack to say. So they don't have enough in response to actual attack. Not even days but hours and quarter hours. Time to run 8km with fast boat times 3 or times to cross Persian Gulf time 2 with fast boat. Time to salvo SSM on supply ships. Such scenario I mean.

A scenario where close coastal defence clears low altitude of AH-64 attacks. High Anti air defence makes air attack costly and local fake speed boat defence depletes the defences right before main attack in a long theater not sustainable for attacking force to cover all together.

Manufacturing, storing and hiding it all along the coast + intelligent command and control software and automation is the key. It is possible and it is cheap. Do you agree? DO you see any holes in it?

 

[Oldman1]

It seems like the missile gets its original target coordinates from the ship or another missile so it must implement some type of GPS navigation system in order to approach the general position of the target and then on the terminal phase it will use its own seeker to home.

Using the GPS jamming system that Iran posses can probably interfere with the first phase and push the missile off track.

Hellfire missiles doesn't use GPS.

No doubt on US and Allies manufacturing power when in need. I am counting on local real time availability and platform availability in real time. Overwhelming the defence and depleting it local stockpiles prior to main attack to say. So they don't have enough in response to actual attack. Not even days but hours and quarter hours. Time to run 8km with fast boat times 3 or times to cross Persian Gulf time 2 with fast boat. Time to salvo SSM on supply ships. Such scenario I mean.

A scenario where close coastal defence clears low altitude of AH-64 attacks. High Anti air defence makes air attack costly and local fake speed boat defence depletes the defences right before main attack.

Well the U.S. forces as well as possible allies will mostly involved in a scenario where they destroy air bases as well as naval bases and clear out any SAMs detected and other coastal defenses. Usually we always prefer air superiority and overwhelming force in the first days of combat these days.

 

[Siavash]

Hellfire missiles doesn't use GPS.

Great no GPS is even better. Although a differential one may be interesting on board. So it is only Radar based.

Well the U.S. forces as well as possible allies will mostly involved in a scenario where they destroy air bases as well as naval bases and clear out any SAMs detected and other coastal defenses. Usually we always prefer air superiority and overwhelming force in the first days of combat these days.

True indeed therefore, localization of defence was the doctrine used in mosaic defence. Each hiding defence system requires to be independant. Coastal batteries hidden and mobile or submerged. Should not be allowed to be destroyed unless captured. Air superiority needs to be denied as log as possible or in short time frames (possible but costly). Automation and reduced man power to activate and operate is a key. I believe they all know what we know and moving towards it. In 15 years or so it is doable and I believe they already have put much in place. But in 15 years technology also matures so who knows.

In a Bayesian network system the capability goes when all system goes and reduces but not diminishes when a node is taken out. I believe since 1995 Iran was trying to integrate all defence systems towards such system. Something Obama is talking about for GCC. The strategic depth of the system is the key for it to survive so it requires multiple layers of detection and overlap and high capable individual cells. Don't know the current status but at the time they were capable people leading it. Bottom line it is possible to disrupt such LCS defences with cheap solutions I believe for short time and inflict significant damage.

 

[Viper0011.]

Not on it's own. But coupled with a narrow strait of Hormuz, and land based missile systems, it could 'balance' the power with any navy.

Really, you think the commanders in the USN, who've ran wars for a century now (modern history), don't know the basics? They'll park their AC's in a place where even a 9 MM bullet from a Pistol would come hit them? Common man. Grow up!!!

The USN would take her assets a few hundred miles away and the dance with B1's, B2's, -22's, -18's,-15's and -16's, supported by Guided Missile Destroyers would begin!!! And there ain't no speed boats 200 miles away!!!

 

[Oldman1]

No doubt on US and Allies manufacturing power when in need. I am counting on local real time availability and platform availability in real time. Overwhelming the defence and depleting it local stockpiles prior to main attack to say. So they don't have enough in response to actual attack. Not even days but hours and quarter hours. Time to run 8km with fast boat times 3 or times to cross Persian Gulf time 2 with fast boat. Time to salvo SSM on supply ships. Such scenario I mean.

Manufacturing, storing and hiding it all along the coast + intelligent command and control software and automation is the key. It is possible and it is cheap. Do you agree? DO you see any holes in it?

Well the problem is that its kind of hard to hide in the water unless you are a submarine. And with advanced recon drones like UUVs, unmanned helos, unmanned planes and unmanned surface ships that can watch the waters in real time. Not going to be easy unless you are a submarine as I have stated before. Not to mention AWACs or Joint Stars aircraft and other aircraft that detects movement on ground or on surface.

 

[Siavash]

Really, you think the commanders in the USN, who've ran wars for a century now (modern history), don't know the basics? They'll park their AC's in a place where even a 9 MM bullet from a Pistol would come hit them? Common man. Grow up!!!

The USN would take her assets a few hundred miles away and the dance with B1's, B2's, -22's, -18's,-15's and -16's, supported by Guided Missile Destroyers would begin!!! And there ain't no speed boats 200 miles away!!!

I think in 15 years from now no non stealth US fighter would be useful. Even tomahawk/cruise attacks would be neutralized to a high percentage. Tactical Nuclear would be your response on all coast line and strategic defence centers.

 

[Oldman1]

Great no GPS is even better. Although a differential one may be interesting on board. So it is only Radar based.
.

Actually Hellfire missiles they tested can lock on to target after launch without the need for radar guidance from the host hip. After all it needs to hit moving targets hence why there is no GPS involved.

Its almost similar to the new Tomahawk missile test the U.S. Navy wanted real time targeting to hit moving ships from a thousand miles away and cannot depend on GPS. Fighter bombers and AWACs aircraft can guide it in real time. Don't want to hit the wrong ship.

Forgot to mention self guided LRASM as well that doesn't require GPS whether destroyed or jammed. Just only need to be told where to go.

 

[Siavash]

Well the problem is that its kind of hard to hide in the water unless you are a submarine. And with advanced recon drones like UUVs, unmanned helos, unmanned planes and unmanned surface ships that can watch the waters in real time. Not going to be easy unless you are a submarine as I have stated before. Not to mention AWACs or Joint Stars aircraft and other aircraft that detects movement on ground or on surface.

That is true especially in shallow waters of Persian Gulf with max depth of 40 but what about artificial storage systems opening to the sea. They have plenty of time to build and hide some of the defences and it would be extremely difficult to take them all out or even bomb them when they are hardened and naturally covered in 1400 km coast line and the key is launch and operate fast before response is matured and ready (Arial, Naval, ...)

The thing is the scenarios tells both the defence system and the attacking parties need to involve automation and fast response time. Technology and manufacturing and planning is the key and the defensive units have the upper and to having the element of surprise on their defensive positions and their operate cheaper. At the end if US and allies want an attack like the D-day, lets not fool ourselves, no beach is harder than Utah, Omaha, Gold , Juno and Sword. But it is all about cost and time! Would it be worth it or not .

 

[Oldman1]

The U.S. Just Tested a Stealthy Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile | The National Interest Blog

The U.S. recently tested a new long-range anti-ship missile that is designed to counter the growing anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities of states like China and Iran.

On Monday, the U.S. announced that the Navy, Air Force and DARPA conducted a successful test of their Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) earlier this month at the Sea Test Range in Point Mugu, California. According to the press release, during the test: “a B-1B bomber released the LRASM prototype, which navigated a series of pre-planned waypoints to verify aerodynamic performance. In the final portion of the flight, the missile detected, tracked and avoided an object that was deliberately placed in the flight pattern to demonstrate LRASM’s obstacle-avoidance algorithms.”

In the press release, Capt. Jaime Engdahl, the Navy program manager in the LRASM Deployment Office (LDO), said that the missile will “deliver game-changing capability to our warfighters in theater as quickly as possible.”

The LRASM, which is manufactured by Lockheed Martin, has a reported range of 500 nautical miles and carries a 1,000-lb. penetrator and blast-fragmentation warhead. It is primarily designed to provide the U.S. Navy and Air Force with a precision-guided long-range stand-off capability that can survive in aggressive electronic warfare environments. To achieve this, it uses on-board sensors and a semi-autonomous guidance system to reduce its dependence on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) platforms, network links and GPS navigation. It also employs “innovative terminal survivability approaches and precision lethality” to avoid advanced enemy countermeasures while still reaching its intended target.

(Recommended: 6th Generation Fighter Jets Will Be Slow and Unstealthy)

The missile’s development underscores the degree to which the U.S. military is planning on fighting in contested electronic warfare environments in the future, as well as how far America’s current anti-ship capabilities have eroded. The program was begun under DARPA in 2009 and leverages existing technology of the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile Extended Range (JASSM-ER) program. Its development is being fast tracked under the Pentagon Better Buying Power 3.0 program with the expectation that it will serve as a stopgap solution to compensate for the Navy’s aging RGM’s Harpoon anti-ship missiles (The U.S. Navy also recently tested a sea-based Tomahawk land attack missile against a moving maritime target. The TLAM, however, requires in-flight communication updates to adjust its flight path. It does boast nearly twice the range of the LRASM).

The LRASM is expected to become operational in 2018 when it is integrated on to the Air Force’s B-1 Lancer. Shortly thereafter, it will be integrated on to the Navy’s F/A-18 Super Hornet. Last year, DARPA began the competition for its successor, the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW)/Increment 2 anti-ship missile, which is expected to reach initial operational capability around 2024.

(Recommended: A New, "Super" F-35 to Rule the U.S. Military?)

The LRASM had previously been tested twice in 2013 when it still a DARPA demonstration program. Following those successful tests, the U.S. Air Force and Navy joined DARPA in spearheading the program under the LRASM Deployment Office (LDO). This month was the first time the LRASM had been tested since that office was established. This also appears to be the first time ts obstacle-avoidance capabilities were tested.