Sub Deployable AA Launcher

[deathjester]

How about this for creating a naval air defence zone:  submarine launched mines which contain a seawolf type AA missile.  These launchers can be activated by the sub, or surface ships, and would only require tracking and guidance radars. 

[Weaver]

I remember a semi factual novel in which a Soviet submarine trailed a buoyant package on the surface that had an IR scanner and vertically-launched SA-13-derived SAMs. That was for self-defence only though.

[ChernayaAkula]

There's the IDAS (Interactive Defence and Attack System for Submarines) (CLICK!), which is being developed for German Type 212 submarines.


Pic from linked Wikipedia article

Don't know whther it could be modified to loiter on the surface, though. Since it' launched directly form the tube and not started from a container, I reckon some more comprehensive re-design would be needed.

[Hobbes]

There was also a proposal for Blowpipe (?), a six-round launcher on a telescoping mount next to the periscope.

There are some problems with your air-defence mine proposal:
- the radar needs to be above the waves, so your mine gains a huge amount of topweight that must be compensated.
- the SeaWolf system (director, electronics) isn't exactly small.


It might be feasible to do this with an IR-guided missile, so you can use the missile seeker instead of a separate director. Even then, you need a way to check that the target you're tracking really is the enemy. 

[Weaver]

There was also a proposal for something called SIAM (Self-Initiated-Anti-Aircraft Munition), which was a land-based "anti-aircraft mine" that worked a bit like a CAPTOR mine. When it detected an aircraft in the area, it launched a missile vertically, which then conducted it's own 360 deg sweep to find the target and then homed in on it. You could see this idea being applied to a floating mine-type launcher. Problem is, as Hobbes points out, you still need early warning. IIRC, SIAM could only really detect targets overhead pre-launch.

[deathjester]

There was also a proposal for Blowpipe (?), a six-round launcher on a telescoping mount next to the periscope.

There are some problems with your air-defence mine proposal:
- the radar needs to be above the waves, so your mine gains a huge amount of topweight that must be compensated.
- the SeaWolf system (director, electronics) isn't exactly small.


It might be feasible to do this with an IR-guided missile, so you can use the missile seeker instead of a separate director. Even then, you need a way to check that the target you're tracking really is the enemy. 

I was thinking of the radar system being aboard the submarine.  Sonar systems can hear approaching low altitude aircraft quite well, from what I hear, and they could then stick up the Periscope, and find out what is approaching.  If it is hostile, activate the radar and the missiles - most periscopes incorporate both ESM and Radar antennae, so it should be quite quick reacting.  Also, I was thinking that it could be used by surface vessels to create a larger air defence perimeter, or even a fire trap, where incoming hostiles are attacked by missiles from in front, and behind!

[Hobbes]

The last place a submarine wants to be when there are aircraft around is on the surface. Having a radar up and radiating is even worse.

[ChernayaAkula]

<...> Sonar systems can hear approaching low altitude aircraft quite well, <...>

If the rumours are anything to go by, a dived NATO sub in the Atlantic could hear the Tupolev Bears............flying over the Pacific. 

[deathjester]

The last place a submarine wants to be when there are aircraft around is on the surface. Having a radar up and radiating is even worse.

Periscope depth - see, and not be seen....!
Besides, the radar is only for target aqquisition/missile guidance - the rest of the time, they just listen, and watch the ESM monitors.

[Fulcrum]

<...> Sonar systems can hear approaching low altitude aircraft quite well, <...>

If the rumours are anything to go by, a dived NATO sub in the Atlantic could hear the Tupolev Bears............flying over the Pacific. 

Yeah, a SOSUS station recorded that Bear flying over it's location.

[Joe C-P]

Subs greatest asset is stealth. Shooting off a missile is not guaranteed to take out the prosecuting aircraft, there may be more than one aircraft, and definitely reveals its position. However, it wouldn't hurt to say you've fielded such a system, maybe even demonstrate it openly, because then the enemy has to take it into consideration.

[Cliffy B]

Don't know how true it is but didn't the Russians keep (or still do?) some man portable IR SAMs on board their subs just in case?

[Fulcrum]

It is possible with SA-7 Strela's

[Weaver]

Don't know how true it is but didn't the Russians keep (or still do?) some man portable IR SAMs on board their subs just in case?

As far as I know, that's true: there's a watertight tube in the top of the fin which stores an SA-13 or some-such and a few rounds. I don't think the intention is for a functional submarine to use it as part of normal operations though: it's more of a last-ditch defence if the sub is stuck on the surface either due to damage or special operations.

[Weaver]

There's the IDAS (Interactive Defence and Attack System for Submarines) (CLICK!), which is being developed for German Type 212 submarines.

That article makes a couple of dubious claims:

It claims the IDAS as the first missile capable of defending a submarine against aircraft. Wrong: the Vickers SLAM (6 x Blowpipes wrapped around a TV camera on the top of a mast) was fully developed and tested in the 1970s, and reportedly, the Israeli submarines of the time were fitted "for but not with" the system.

It also claims that it's the first missile that is fired directly from a torpedo tube without a capsule. This is nonsense: SUBROC didn't use a capsule and nor do some of the various Russian systems.