Quote:
|
Originally Posted by B.Smitty
Well I doubt it could be an actual charge, the VLS cells aren't designed to handle those types of pressures.
|
I suspect you are right; I used poor terminology. A booster of some sort or weight would certainly be the order of the day.
Quote:
|
Plus, I doubt the SDB's electronics could either.
|
I am not sure for at least two reasons. First, SDB's electronics have to be proof to the various forces and shocks of whatever the deployment aboard the F35 would bring. Secondly, electronics and telemetry have long been been capable of withstanding a beating as evidenced by the USAR's Copperhead round and the work of Canada's own Dr. Bull.
Quote:
|
And, IIRC, GBU-39's are looking to cost around $50k each right now, so it wouldn't be as cheap as an unguided gun round.
|
As to cost, I have two points as well. First, economies of scale viz the widespread use of the the GBU-39 aboard F35 aircraft both foreign and domestic should be taken into account. Secondly, the cost of gee whiz rounds for the proposed AGS ala DDX/DDG is expected to run towards $100,000, if IIRC.
Too, one accurate, effective and relatively smart round is probably worth more than a fusilade of lower cost and dumb rounds in the grand scheme of things but ultimately there are are various levels of cost v. volume considertions.
If my understanding of the dimensions is correct, if we assume, say, at least a 300 pound booster for our hypothetical critter, I suspect that three of them might stack where one TLAM resides in existing VLS cells.
On a related note, this kind of GBU-39 hybrid might be saboted and fired from the MLRS and HIMARS platforms as well as a navalized variant such as the POLAR proposal.
Quote:
Personally, I'd like to see the development of a small, relatively inexpensive cruise missile that could be packed four or more per VLS cell. Something like the USAF SMACM or Top Cover UAV
Top Cover is particularly interesting, IMHO. It's meant to be a hybrid UAV and cruise missile with up to 24 hours of endurance and the ability to carry sensors and a warhead.
|
These ideas are not without merit but I should point out that as we discuss these technologies I am a satisfied Lockheed-Martin shareholder (LMT on the NYSE).
SMACM is nice but something like that is ultimately probably best dropped on demand from Earth orbit if you really think about it. As to Top Cover, I can see a few problems with that.