New attack method against naval vessels ?

panzerjager SG

Talking about this topic relating to the latest in 3D warfare battle management.

Ever wondered why the sensor packages are grouped accordingly,
meaning...

- radar for air and surface threats
- sonar for underwater threats

The term 'surface' means anything just in the positive vertical direction above sea level, for radar to detect something like a ship or even a sea-skimming missile if possible (not withstanding problem of radar clutter at sea)

But, there is no sensor for 'anything just in the negative vertical direction beneath sea-level'. There is supposed to be another blind or dead zone in this region which sonar would be har-pressed if not impossible to detect anything other than wave motion etc.

This could be a very critical area to exploit in terms of attack methods against surface vessels - e.g. wave-riding weapons ?

Hope this is being understood and done with by the local military/navy guys....

spencer99 SG

Great! you have just stumbled upon an idea which will make terrorists' sucide boats "invisible" to conventional sensors, they can built a "boat that can skim amongst the waves and collide on unaware naval ships.

<sk> SG

Hm... are you in the water or out of the water? if you're either in the water nor out of the water, does that mean you're in a void? Some sort of space void or blackhole? Wrong duh!

You're either in the water or hovering just above the water!

panzerjager SG

Ja, and don't forget, with every weapon (poison), there is a counter-weapon (antidote), and both could originate from the same source Smile

panzerjager SG

Ok, but wat I really mean is dat to sonars there realistically should exist a blind/dead spot/zone (or void as you call it). The effects of chopping of waves and the wake of vessels at the surface present noise to the sonar. So it's this so-called 'magical' region that can be exploited militarily to deploy munitions or other payloads against enemy combatants. To make an analogy from nature regarding such a movement pattern, is to look at how water/sea snakes traverse the surface....To realise this in a war machine would require to consider the sea-state condition in which the weapon is preferred to be deployed, this indirectly dictates whether the intended targets will be underway at sea or during port-of-call. This in turn indirectly relates to the delivery methods of the weapon, even considering clandestine operations.

To speak again of the thread that was provoked by this idea, actually it is not a new idea as the tangoes would probably have been practising this tactic. Most experienced of all being the LTTE and lately al-Qaida. A semi-inflated dinghy stable enough to float a load of explosives and at least one driver is as good as equivalent to such a system - the dinghy would be bobbing in and out of water within the intended blind zone.

Anyhow, even special forces could be practising this method. Even without a dinghy, they can just bottoms-up their knotted trousers and do the same, carrying satchel charges to enemy boats

ferret69 SG

Dude, a semi-inflatable dinghy would be detectable by commercial ship radar and land-based port radar systems (I won't say more, Coast Guard reservist), it's all a matter of adjusting your radar gain. On moderate sea states in litoral waters, you can forget about using this tactic unless you wanna sink down with your load of explosives in even slightly rainy weather (have you tried bailing water from a dinghy while it was raining?).

The only thing I can think of which would be moderately successful is to have a scuba diver with hand carried explosives and attaching it to the target's ship hull (preferably under the cover of darkness). Of course the target ship should not be moving at all.

You'd have more luck taking a sampan, fill it up with fish and packing explosives beneath and when checked, say you're taking the fish from a kelong to the market. The standard counter is to check all boats plying the area or just restrict all civilian craft from entering an area.

As for military tactics, the one I can remember is subs following commercial shipping to mask their noise signature. Quite effective.

panzerjager SG

But of course...but wat I mean is tangoes approaching normally towards vessels. Diversions could be made to draw all visual detection away from the direction of attack. The dinghy is deployed right 'under the nose' of the radar coverage. All this could happen within 2 minutes. The alert response rate onboard the vessel may not be quick enough under normal conditions. The vessel can't possibly refrain from standing off all nearby vessels.

A sidetrack...countermeasures against boarding teams....this method could be used as decoy against fast approaching boarding vessels...when the suspected vessel is 'inadvertently' overtaken and forcibly boarded, the explosives could be deployed against the interceptor vessel alongside broadsides, destroying the boarding party in the process.

Shotgun SG

I can foresee no other guidance for such a weapon other than Laser. Like you said, the blind zone just +/- 3 feet from the surface is a quite a "magic region." But still the guidance can give the weapon away, unless its really guided by a Mk1 Brain and Mk1 eyeball.

Torpedoes that skim the sub-surface can be given away only when it gets near. The cavitation noises would probably be enough to give it away, unless it is traveling at really slow speeds. Being nearer to the surface also affects the effectiveness of its guidance and "pathfinding."

Perhaps a platform for launching missiles would be more appropriate. A stealthy UCNV, Unarmed Combat Naval Vehicle. Which can potentially carry and exocet, guided via video link, until it fires the weapon?

agsm1 SG

You young dudes, if you can think of it, then somebody better had thought of it already. So, stop blowing hot air, its not a remarkable find, it just shows how little you and I understand by the term, sea level.

Shotgun SG

so agsm1, r u saying that we should jsut close this forum and just not discuss things that perhaps are already in existence?

kurios55 SG

There is technique called "swarming" where multiple small boats packed with explosives converge on the target vessel from multiple vectors. They can interspersed with boats that carry nothing and/or personnel carrying RPGs. This presents defenders with a dilemma as to which boats to engage.

Most effective when in littoral waters where reaction time and distance to target is minimal.

While not in the so called dead space, these type of attacks can cripple warships if employed correctly e.g. USS Cole.

panzerjager SG

There is known research into employing underwater machines that propel like marine animals, e.g. articulated streamlined bodies with flexible multi-segments, swinging left and right like fish bodies with fin-like stabilizers.

By adding synthetic membrane, embedded with shielded bioelectronics, a robotic shark could be used to scout out target vessel weak spots and engage from there

|-|05| SG

we’re talking about naval combat vessels or just naval vessels in general?

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

It is not impossible to get an overlap, radar can be tuned to penetrate water to a moderate depth, and sonar can pick up above surface contacts as well. Subs can actually hear helicopters flying above them.

Also, you don't have to look directly for the contact, you can look for the telltale disturbances made by it, ie. MAD, IR, wake and the like.

wd1 SG

yeah once ships start getting 360-degree EO/IIR/TI sensors like the F-35's DAS then such waveriding weapons will find the going much harder...
combine it of course with CIWS/RAM or at least those funky typhoon guns our LSTs have.

Altrex SG

i hope that panzerjager is not talking abt shadow zones

shadow zones have existed in EM and acoustics since the beginning of such technologies

shadow zones will always be there and there are ways to get around shadow zones