DavidD wrote:brar_w wrote:
Two things stood out and have far reaching implications. First that there is official, at the highest uniform level, acknowledgement of the success of the medium-intermediate range ASBM capability. Second is that they are just not carrier killers. As far as fleet implications, this reinforces that the large-surface-combatants aren't going anywhere. As a "fighting" posture the forward deployed surface combatants, with/without a carrier, need layered ballistic missile defense for both themselves, the vessels they are escorting and forward deployed troops. That and top notch C-ISR, and deception to deny long range tracking and targeting. The need for large magazines, and sensors isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Large magazines aren't gonna do it, they need to step up on the other methods you mentioned. No matter how many missiles a shop can carry, a land-based attacker can always overwhelm with numbers.
Yes and No. There are no viable non-kinetic hard kill options for against this threat inside of 15 years.
But No one is/was/has been relying on large magazines alone. But a layered ballistic missile defense is almost becoming a criteria of entry given even Japan is adding more AEGIS BMD vessels to its fleet. It is one solution that is on the extreme right of launch. The things that you have to bring to bear are C-ISR, strike, soft kill (Electronic Attack), deception and target overload. The idea isn't just to sit around and let missiles come to you and defeat until you go winchester. You are correct in that if this was the approach (relying on interceptor magazine alone) then you are going to be at the loosing end of this exchange. The idea is to be in an at risk area, bring all your capability to bear, do what you have to do and get out. The USN/USAF has tremendous ISR and C-ISR capability in the region. Same for space and counter space. And a very large long range fires capability. And the USN fleet is upgrading its Electronic Attack capability rapidly. Even bi-static modes for the SPY-6 radar are being developed. So it is the collective whole that you have to move and advance in order to be better "defended" against medium and intermediate range targeting capability. Keep in mind that the ISR and fire-control chain at 2000-3000 km range is going to be substantially large for the PLAN. And this is where attack each element within that chain. This is how you win a missile exchange.
Just relying on your ability to shoot down these things kinetically isn't going to suffice by itself. You have to go after the kill chain using your own offensive and soft-kill capability. But certainly when it goes kinetic, you need a substantial magazine do all of those things. This is where how many VL cells you can employ within a region matters. Both on your sub-surface and surface fleet. You need magazines to shoot down satellites, long range AAW missiles to shoot down ISR assets, long range land attack weapons to shoot down terrestrial EW radars and ISR capability etc etc. An intermediate ranged anti-ship weapon is going to rely on a heavy ISR kill chain for targeting and discrimination (counter counter targeting etc). You can use your own intermediate ranged fires to deny or degrade that. At the end, a "salvo fight" comes down to how much total capability you have. If you have small magazines you are forced to make trades. If you can commit a large magazine to the region you bring both adequate offense and defense. The idea being to pace the threat in a way that maintains your ability to maneuver forces despite the threat of these intermediate systems. For that you need to attack the problem from multiple dimensions i.e. degrade your enemies ability to kill you by making the targeting more difficult, force the enemy to maneuver his forces to account for your offensive capability, and then ultimately have the ability to shoot down a portion of the magazine that your enemy possesses. The SM-3 family isn't just a long range BMD weapon. It is a proven and legitimate counter space capability especially with the newer blocks which significantly increase the defended area.
There is a good reason that the USN's first conventional hypersonic weapon is an intermediate ranged system. This is the type of offensive capability that you need to leverage to degrade the enemies ability to target you at those ranges. But again, whether that is how many submarines you have, or how many surface ships you have it all only works if you have a sizable magazine. Hence my emphasis on the large surface combatant force structure that has the magazine capacity where they can carry both offensive and defense in adequate amounts and not be forced towards trading one at the expense of the other. There are talks about adding the Virginia Payload Module's tubes on surface ships to allow for IR-CPS hypersonic weapon capability. You can't really do that on a Frigate even one as large as the FFG(X) without severely impacting its defensive capability. You can begin adding that to your future destroyers and cruisers or retrofitting on the few large surface combatants that you currently have that can accommodate that. So a large magazine, in and of itself, isn't a be-all-end-all solution. But a large and right type of magazine is certainly a starting point for all of your other capability to work. Without it you severely limit your choices and are basically kicked out of the region.
As air-defenders like to say - Air and Missile defense keeps you in the fight long enough for you to win it by other means. This is also true for ballistic missile defense. So it is a starting point.
