It really does not need much range to be an anti-torpedo weapon and in a littoral situation being able to put several on an ASW helo or even a multi pack on an asroc style weapon.
@@briananthony4044 Please 15 minutes at 50 kts, it does not have the useable internal volume, to pack that much energy in even if you use Otto fuel II. No way in hell. Methinks 4,500 to 6,000 yards at 35 to 40 kt tops in all the way terminal attack mode using a 14 to 20 hp class engine, assuming a very high quality Fire control solution. Runtime in search/aquisition mode at say 15 to 18 kts maybe 10 to 12 minutes tops assuming energy is held in reserve for a terminal attack run of say 2,500 yards at 35 kts. Assuming it use a high energy solid fuel or a high energy liquid fuel & oxidiser (not likely at all but possible) to power a ultra compact turbine not a swash plate engine. If its battery driving a multi speed electric motor, numbers go way down, especially range. Its a torpedo confrigured to hunt SSKs or SSBN in littoral waters, with a sort of volumetric fire salvo of 4, 6 or even 8 or mayhaps more, attack on a uncertainsh target say within a fire control solution of 90% CEP of 5 or 6 square miles. Doctrine maybe mount 4 rocket delivery torpedos per Mk 41 launcher silo, with a range of say upwards of 40,000 yds at M 0.85. Or deep penteration/intrusion into maritime bastion drones/RPV carrying upwards of a loadout of 4 torps.
@HVAC Quality Assurance I just gave them the answer. Its a simple answer any 1st year enginnering student, worth his/her salt on his first degree engineering course could answer. Nothing special. Note i don't have a first basic entry level degree.
At 6.75" in diameter it is almost the same diameter as the AIM-120 (7"). On another note if they equipped the VLWT with a breaking-parachute, encapsulated it and fitted it with either the Mk-72 booster (Used as the first-stage in the SM-2,3&6) or the booster used for the ASROC-VL you'd get ASROC-lite that could be fired from the Mk-41 VLS.
if the race for anti-torpedo torpedo is getting actual attention then it is possible to have anti-anti-torpedo torpedo in development and then there will be anti-anti.. ception :D
if this is launched by the vessel targeted by an enemy torpedo, then why should it be fast? the target (torpedo) is coming your way. only enough speed to handle course. Also low speed allows better listening for the incoming torpedo? Has torpedo evasion tactic changed in the last twenty years? Depending on (detection) range, I would think the method is go to ring up max turns, as soon the propellers are max RPM, do a half S -turn (towards, then away) putting the wake wall between you and the torpedo? If you are carrier, this is where you escort does his duty. Also, how about just dropping a big depth charge set to detonate as the torpedo approaches? the big bubble should break any wire and make it difficult for its own sensors to reacquire target?
Fast is better for different reasons. For anti-torpedo, I would say, it would be, the faster the anti-torpedo, the earlier you know you have to fire another one (or salvo) in case it failed to intercept. Faster intercept-weapons also gives you more time when trying to intercept a threat to one of the other ships in the group. Furthermore, the control-fins are not in the torpedo's wake (behind the screws) but in the surrounding water. More speed means more actuation (the ability to change direction) in this case. Low speed is better for the signal-to-noise-ratio, but the primary target is a loud torpedo, not a 'trying-to-stay-silent' submarine. This torpedo has a frontal area that is 10 times smaller than a 533mm torpedo (0,023 m^2 versus 0,223 m^2). Ten times less water to move out of the way, means less noise at the same speed (don't know how much though). Don't know if tactics changed but the first rule of warfare is to not be at the spot where the enemy strikes when he strikes. So doing evasive everything is still in the play-book, I assume. Same goes for the 'leave the big lady alone and pick me, pick me!'-behaviour of the escorts (but it is hard to fool a modern torpedo). Dropping a depth charge in front of a torpedo would work but is just as difficult as hitting the torpedo itself. But at a cost of loosing track yourself because no acoustic listening device is going to like that blast. The lightweight torpedo is relative quite and only makes noise when on target and is therefore more appealing. Anyway, my two cents.
...I thought about this 30 years ago while serving on the USS Henry M. Jackson, a weapons like this one that could be lunch from the 6" launcher, and hit oncoming torpedoes...
LW Torps are usally shaped charge to requiring a direct hit so this oen also has a normal presure detonation function to mess up incoming Torpedos by messing up their sesor systems whie detonating near them?
@@jamesricker3997 Well it would only have to destroy/damage the sensitive sonar on board sonar to rebuce its efectiveness to that of a thrown stone. Directly destroying i dont know since making a direct hit on an incoming torp is way more dificult than doing the same on a multi thouthend ton sub and i dont think a LW Torp has enogh ummps to be in the close detonation is enogh category especally due to the way their warheads usally work. in that sense it would be more intesting to see how they arceive the adverticed Anti Torp capability be it improved computing to having a high chance to get an intercept to an variable warhead that can act either as a chaped charge or an overpresure one depending on its target profile to even a warheard that dosnt have much killing power at all but generate enogh noise to burn out sonar receivers at a limited range.
Probably a variety of warheads based on intent. As point defense you probably have a concussion warhead (perhaps with localized electrical pulse) designed to break the wire and foul the sonar and electronics. You could have a tensile net warhead that ejects a wide arc high strength netting into the path of the torpedo to ensnare it, wrapping around the prop/pumpjet, masking the surface of the sonar to interfere with transmission and reception, and to induce massive drag which effectively mission kills the weapon by slowing it down while burning the fuel twice as fast.
Even OPVs & ASW boats getting harder to kill by subs, & vice versa. Who runs out 1st of antitorpedo torpedoes is the most likely loser in undersea battle. Naval warfare rewrite continues on...
The US Navy has literally a hundred ships with offensive anti-ship missiles. That doesn't seem like "very few." 68 Arleigh Burke and 22 Ticonderoga with Tomahawks and Harpoons, plus 10 Freedom-class with the Naval Strike Missile. And they all have guns - still a useful offensive weapon against low-tech enemies. Of course even on its best day the entire Royal Navy could be sunk by a few US attack subs. Even if the RN can detect and attack one or two, the US has too many. And the RN is the best navy in the world after the US in quantity and quality. China has more ships afaik, but currently most are easy prey to Western navy ships.
Let’s see if our Navy (disclosure: I’m a retired MCPO) is smart enough to require the winner of the production contract ONLY use American produced components. NOTHING in this torpedo should be produced in China!
Nothing in the US arsenal is made in china. The US is one of the few nations with total military sustainability. The Navy a few years back actually did a crackdown on contractors who were contracted to refurbish computer components for the SH-60s. In order to make more profit, the Contractors used Chinese labor, and after two helicopters went down. They were investigated and arrested.
It's amazing how the US military and NATO keep going for smaller, more precise compact surgical weapons while Russia goes for progressively more massive weapons for maximum collateral damage
Phillip Mulligan you are pretty ignorant. This is still a prototype in USA and the Russians already have a similar system, Paket-E/NK, IN SERVICE, on multiple platforms. Do your homework before you talk, because you make a fool of yourself.
Sell it to Ukraine so get the manufacturing companies to produce to a tune of 100 million dollars worth. Ukraine can use its Turkish drones as platform to destroy Russian ships and submarines.
It's a bit like an underwater sidewinder.
Just make sure the warhead is working when you shoot it at a underwater mig15
An anti-torpedo torpedo. Very much a needed defensive weapon for carriers (and other surface ships).
I'm waiting for a large torpedo to be developed that can launch its own anti-anti-torpedo torpedo.
@@donjones4719 We don’t even have anti-anti missile missiles.
I heard you like torpedoes...
@@Joshua_N-A Tom Cruise's pick-up line when he makes the Bottom Submarine version of Top Gun.
I went to PSU for many years, and know well the Lab.. Good work to all
I actually knew right from the start there was going to be absolutely no mention of range:)
Yes, it is classified unfortunately (like most of the performance data and technical specifications of the VLWT)
Perhaps 15 minutes at 50 knots. Has to be fast enough to engage a torpedo, have enough endurance to be useful.
It really does not need much range to be an anti-torpedo weapon and in a littoral situation being able to put several on an ASW helo or even a multi pack on an asroc style weapon.
@@briananthony4044 Please 15 minutes at 50 kts, it does not have the useable internal volume, to pack that much energy in even if you use Otto fuel II. No way in hell. Methinks 4,500 to 6,000 yards at 35 to 40 kt tops in all the way terminal attack mode using a 14 to 20 hp class engine, assuming a very high quality Fire control solution. Runtime in search/aquisition mode at say 15 to 18 kts maybe 10 to 12 minutes tops assuming energy is held in reserve for a terminal attack run of say 2,500 yards at 35 kts. Assuming it use a high energy solid fuel or a high energy liquid fuel & oxidiser (not likely at all but possible) to power a ultra compact turbine not a swash plate engine. If its battery driving a multi speed electric motor, numbers go way down, especially range.
Its a torpedo confrigured to hunt SSKs or SSBN in littoral waters, with a sort of volumetric fire salvo of 4, 6 or even 8 or mayhaps more, attack on a uncertainsh target say within a fire control solution of 90% CEP of 5 or 6 square miles. Doctrine maybe mount 4 rocket delivery torpedos per Mk 41 launcher silo, with a range of say upwards of 40,000 yds at M 0.85. Or deep penteration/intrusion into maritime bastion drones/RPV carrying upwards of a loadout of 4 torps.
@HVAC Quality Assurance I just gave them the answer. Its a simple answer any 1st year enginnering student, worth his/her salt on his first degree engineering course could answer. Nothing special. Note i don't have a first basic entry level degree.
Is it available on Amazon now? I'd need it for my kayak.
Splashing jerks in Motorboats - Hang on to your hats :'D
Screw that. I need one for my daily commute.
Amazing, thanks for sharing!!!
Waiting for a Sub brief
It's about time this capability was fielded.
At 6.75" in diameter it is almost the same diameter as the AIM-120 (7").
On another note if they equipped the VLWT with a breaking-parachute, encapsulated it and fitted it with either the Mk-72 booster (Used as the first-stage in the SM-2,3&6) or the booster used for the ASROC-VL you'd get ASROC-lite that could be fired from the Mk-41 VLS.
I guess they will mount it on an F-18 and retire the P-8's. ;)
@@KB4QAA Growlers. The centerline could be equipped with a MAD pod. Just hope the wings are strong enough to carry 4 of these torps.
What size warhead does that have on it?
Leonardo from Italy came out with 5inch Black Scorpion torpedo
Nice ☺️👍
Any coverage for IDEF 2021?
if the race for anti-torpedo torpedo is getting actual attention then it is possible to have anti-anti-torpedo torpedo in development and then there will be anti-anti.. ception :D
I'm working on a shoulder launched version for sinking fishing boats.
Fishing boats with .50 cal?
Had no idea carriers were capable of launching these things already... anti-torpedo torpedos :o
Supposedly they remove this capability...
I think they ran into technical difficulties and shelved the project. Looks like they may have finaly come up with a fix.
Hmmm definitely would have some very flexible options to deploy it on a wide range of platforms.
Its a close range defensive countermeasures spud.
if this is launched by the vessel targeted by an enemy torpedo, then why should it be fast? the target (torpedo) is coming your way. only enough speed to handle course. Also low speed allows better listening for the incoming torpedo? Has torpedo evasion tactic changed in the last twenty years?
Depending on (detection) range, I would think the method is go to ring up max turns, as soon the propellers are max RPM, do a half S -turn (towards, then away) putting the wake wall between you and the torpedo? If you are carrier, this is where you escort does his duty.
Also, how about just dropping a big depth charge set to detonate as the torpedo approaches? the big bubble should break any wire and make it difficult for its own sensors to reacquire target?
Fast is better for different reasons. For anti-torpedo, I would say, it would be, the faster the anti-torpedo, the earlier you know you have to fire another one (or salvo) in case it failed to intercept. Faster intercept-weapons also gives you more time when trying to intercept a threat to one of the other ships in the group.
Furthermore, the control-fins are not in the torpedo's wake (behind the screws) but in the surrounding water. More speed means more actuation (the ability to change direction) in this case.
Low speed is better for the signal-to-noise-ratio, but the primary target is a loud torpedo, not a 'trying-to-stay-silent' submarine.
This torpedo has a frontal area that is 10 times smaller than a 533mm torpedo (0,023 m^2 versus 0,223 m^2). Ten times less water to move out of the way, means less noise at the same speed (don't know how much though).
Don't know if tactics changed but the first rule of warfare is to not be at the spot where the enemy strikes when he strikes. So doing evasive everything is still in the play-book, I assume. Same goes for the 'leave the big lady alone and pick me, pick me!'-behaviour of the escorts (but it is hard to fool a modern torpedo).
Dropping a depth charge in front of a torpedo would work but is just as difficult as hitting the torpedo itself. But at a cost of loosing track yourself because no acoustic listening device is going to like that blast. The lightweight torpedo is relative quite and only makes noise when on target and is therefore more appealing.
Anyway, my two cents.
So now the torpedoes will carry interceptor interceptors, lol.
...I thought about this 30 years ago while serving on the USS Henry M. Jackson, a weapons like this one that could be lunch from the 6" launcher, and hit oncoming torpedoes...
LW Torps are usally shaped charge to requiring a direct hit so this oen also has a normal presure detonation function to mess up incoming Torpedos by messing up their sesor systems whie detonating near them?
It will also damage/destroy incoming Torpedoes with the shock wave generated by the warhead
@@jamesricker3997 Well it would only have to destroy/damage the sensitive sonar on board sonar to rebuce its efectiveness to that of a thrown stone. Directly destroying i dont know since making a direct hit on an incoming torp is way more dificult than doing the same on a multi thouthend ton sub and i dont think a LW Torp has enogh ummps to be in the close detonation is enogh category especally due to the way their warheads usally work.
in that sense it would be more intesting to see how they arceive the adverticed Anti Torp capability be it improved computing to having a high chance to get an intercept to an variable warhead that can act either as a chaped charge or an overpresure one depending on its target profile to even a warheard that dosnt have much killing power at all but generate enogh noise to burn out sonar receivers at a limited range.
Probably a variety of warheads based on intent. As point defense you probably have a concussion warhead (perhaps with localized electrical pulse) designed to break the wire and foul the sonar and electronics. You could have a tensile net warhead that ejects a wide arc high strength netting into the path of the torpedo to ensnare it, wrapping around the prop/pumpjet, masking the surface of the sonar to interfere with transmission and reception, and to induce massive drag which effectively mission kills the weapon by slowing it down while burning the fuel twice as fast.
Hey.. you could put this on a FACM and make it absolutely brutal..
Is this the same weapon used by SSTD?
Yes it is. Watch from 04:10
So basically sub and ship point defense with hedgehog like warhead against subs.
My Bayliner could use one.
And out ranged by all other super powers torpedoes. 😆
They put this on several ships already and the navy said it sucked and pulled it and scrapped the program already.
lightweight torpedo: go for fishing
¿Es como el Torpedo pequeño Escorpión de los Italianos de Leonardo?. Es una buena idea además. 👍
Even OPVs & ASW boats getting harder to kill by subs, & vice versa. Who runs out 1st of antitorpedo torpedoes is the most likely loser in undersea battle. Naval warfare rewrite continues on...
It would seem that very few naval vessels are offensive.
They have defensive weapons.
So what's the point and billions of dollars spent?
The US Navy has literally a hundred ships with offensive anti-ship missiles. That doesn't seem like "very few." 68 Arleigh Burke and 22 Ticonderoga with Tomahawks and Harpoons, plus 10 Freedom-class with the Naval Strike Missile. And they all have guns - still a useful offensive weapon against low-tech enemies.
Of course even on its best day the entire Royal Navy could be sunk by a few US attack subs. Even if the RN can detect and attack one or two, the US has too many. And the RN is the best navy in the world after the US in quantity and quality. China has more ships afaik, but currently most are easy prey to Western navy ships.
Needed in 1942
With the Virginia Class Subs all falling to pieces why even bother?
"My, my."---Marilyn Monroe
Cover it in black rubber and the Kardashians will buy some.
Let’s see if our Navy (disclosure: I’m a retired MCPO) is smart enough to require the winner of the production contract ONLY use American produced components. NOTHING in this torpedo should be produced in China!
@MichaelKingsfordGray You're such a clever chap.
For a Russian...
@@davidb6576 poster is a Retuglian hick. Russian posts are smarter
Nothing in the US arsenal is made in china. The US is one of the few nations with total military sustainability.
The Navy a few years back actually did a crackdown on contractors who were contracted to refurbish computer components for the SH-60s.
In order to make more profit, the Contractors used Chinese labor, and after two helicopters went down. They were investigated and arrested.
I wonder how much of it will be produced in China lol
yall need to know how to white balance
The presenter should ask questions not give the answers first.
what 15kg of warheat? buffffffffffffffffff
Another bluffff like the Coastal ships
Wellll, It would probably be enough for the anti-torpedo part,
but unless you hit a sub or ship right in the propeller ...
It's amazing how the US military and NATO keep going for smaller, more precise compact surgical weapons while Russia goes for progressively more massive weapons for maximum collateral damage
"Big torpedo, little peepee".
Phillip Mulligan you are pretty ignorant. This is still a prototype in USA and the Russians already have a similar system, Paket-E/NK, IN SERVICE, on multiple platforms. Do your homework before you talk, because you make a fool of yourself.
Sell it to Ukraine so get the manufacturing companies to produce to a tune of 100 million dollars worth. Ukraine can use its Turkish drones as platform to destroy Russian ships and submarines.
If the torpedoes aren't lightweight the terrorists will surely win in Afghanistan.
Just asking how much money has China invested in the Penn State or how much money have the professors taken from China and not disclosed it
😱🐷🐷🐷🐷🐷military industry complex.👹