In a letter dated 13/03/2024 from the Earl of Minto to Lord West of Spithead, information came to light regarding the ability of the future Fleet Solid Support ships to replenish Vertical Loading Silos at sea, as raised during a debate following a Lord’s statement on the situation in the Red Sea.
“During the debate on 29 February, you asked about the ability of the future Fleet Solid Support (FSS) ships to replenish Vertical Loading Silos at sea.
The current design specification for the future FSS ships does not include the ability to replenish Vertical Launch Silos (VLS) at sea. However, it is recognised that at-sea replenishment of VLS could offer an operational advantage in the sustainment of deployed maritime forces. The Ministry of Defence has been closely following the work of the United States Navy in its investigation of reloading VLS at sea (also known as underway replenishment). Considering the operational context and the available technology, the Ministry of Defence is also actively investigating options for alternative means of replenishing VLS, including underway replenishment.
The Royal Navy continually assesses and reviews its technology and the possibility of integrating different weapons systems into our ships.”
In an article by DefenseNews, it was reported that in early October, the U.S. Navy reloaded a destroyer’s missile tubes using a crane on an auxiliary ship pulled alongside the destroyer, rather than a crane on an established pier.
Reloading a vertical launching system, or VLS, is a challenging maneuver, given the crane must hold missile canisters vertically, while slowly lowering the explosives into the system’s small opening in the ship deck, you can read more about this effort here.
As I understand it the USN has been playing around trying to get a safe way to do this for a couple of decades and not got very far at all.
Actually, the US Navy is making progress. It has a system called TRAM for replenishing VLS cells. It has been successfully demonstrated in port and the crucial sea trials will be conducted this year.
Unfortunately doesn’t help with the problem of getting the missiles from a ship’s magazine/hold to the launcher.
I believe that TRAM has been around for several decades in some form or another, and has up until now never successfully been demonstrated actually at sea in real conditions, otherwise you would be using such a system now.
Good luck with it anyway, it is a significant challenge to get right.
The link you just posted states
“ The TRAM then lowers the canister into a cell of the VLS, demonstrated here with an empty canister on a mockup of a VLS module.”
That is so important… I hope the trials succeed. Being and lasting as un properly translated it may be is key in Red Sea and in Pacific Ocean. It may become very hard to keep a Frigate or a Destroyer at the fore front of a force for more that a day.
Regarding close range defense, some successes have been achieved lately by the French Navy in the Red Sea with main artillery (76mm Oto Melara, the Italian gun) and with helicopter + side monted 7,62mm machine gun). Though, missiles replenishment are still crucial for safer long range engagement.
If you can stop the pendulum effect – it isn’t just as missile it is a missile in a heavy container…..
The only way this works is to cross deck horizontally and then use a local erector module to put it vertical and lower in.
That’s TRAM but it doesn’t solve the problem of getting the missile to the VLS.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/02/us-navy-set-to-trial-vls-reloading-system-at-sea/
Sounds like the old VLSW plan that was never used.
Were they in a canister?
The Missile, yes. But Canister was transferred in a Transit Frame.
yeah. its been a difficult problem to solve. the US approach now which they’ve already deployed in the pacific are large USVs with VLS cells that tag along with the strike group and are networked into the AEGIS/CEC system. relatively simple and affordable way to add more self defense missiles and once they’re empty they could go alone to a port to reload and then rejoin the group. if you google ‘US navy ghost fleet’ it looks like they’ve already successfully tested SM-6 integration with it and have 4 in service with more being built and can theoritically operate with… Read more »
We just need to develop a VDS – Vertical Download System!
It does seem silly that millions are spent on developing VLS to launch missiles when a bit of effort should have been thought about how to load them safely and quickly.
I know from working in shipyards that moving and positioning hanging (suspended) long & heavy objects is very difficult and dangerous – without the added risk of rocket fuel and explosives. So trying this whilst at sea would be a major risk.
Lessons can be learnt from oil and gas offshore industry and their use of heave compensation systems for running tubing, radioactive source tools and TCP (tubing lined with explosive charges) into wellls. Could imagine for smaller missiles (CAMM) a milk crate type setup could be possible but may require use of a retractable gantry type system.
Wild option. Airlander 10 or 50 to lift and drop such cartons using DP and wireline latching.
It’s been tried by the USA before. But it didn’t particularly work, will have to see how this one goes
I’ve never really understood how hard this actually is…. it’s such a Limiting factor, It just seems crazy that Reloads can only happen in Port…. just take HMS Diamond for example…. She had to sail back to Gib from the Red Sea area …….. PS, Am I still here ? 🤔
Afternoon Ms Marple 😊. Historically/hysterically (anyone’s choice), in days of sail,when wooden ships had battle/weather damaged masts yardarm , self maintenance, making and restepping same to make good.repairs to masts,yardarms.Ok,modern electronics are a bit twitchy but has to be able to survive in stowage at sea ??must be a bit of leeway? Can we not trust a good respectable piece of Seamanship here.Surely we haven’t lost this skill, I say this respectfully.ok back to me hole.👌👍🙃🕳️
Damn,lip stall again 🙃🕳️
“Hysterically” I think you are spot on ….. 😆
Slightly off topic, but remaining on the subject of replenishment of missiles for naval vessels, the German Navy is getting a bit of stick from inside the German Parliament and from the German media regards its SM2 missile stocks: (taken from the 2nd March from Naval news) Missile Woes For German Navy Amid Red Sea Operation The Red Sea-deployment of German warship “Hessen” was off to a start with mixed results this week, as missile woes for the German Navy are clouding two successful drone-interceptions. The F124 Sachsen-class anti-air warfare frigate assigned to EUNAVFOR Aspides had arrived in the theatre… Read more »
Omg. That’s crazy. Very expensive warship. No reloads. That’s insane.
Slightly off topic, but remaining on the subject of replenishment of missiles for naval vessels, the German Navy is getting a bit of stick from inside the German Parliament and from the German media regards its SM2 missile stocks: (taken from the 2nd March from Naval news) Missile Woes For German Navy Amid Red Sea Operation The Red Sea-deployment of German warship “Hessen” was off to a start with mixed results this week, as missile woes for the German Navy are clouding two successful drone-interceptions. The F124 Sachsen-class anti-air warfare frigate assigned to EUNAVFOR Aspides had arrived in the theatre… Read more »
the weird thing is that the US doen’t seem to have had any problems (that we know of) and have taken down more Houti drones/missiles than anyone else
Lord Templar wrote: “”the weird thing is that the US doen’t seem to have had any problems (that we know of) and have taken down more Houti drones/missiles than anyone else”” The article I culled the above from went into great detail regards the differences between the SM2 Missiles the Germans use (and the supporting radar systems) and the ones the US uses. I didn’t want to bore the pants off folks with such , so left it out, but here is a large part of what i left out: European APAR-radar facing obsolescence-challenges This leaves the Block IIIA-variant, which… Read more »
thx
I read that Naval News article as well, and after I had sneered at our allies being under equipped for warfare I started to wonder how many outfits of missiles per ship we actually hold, and therefore how long we can keep knocking down the opposition. I appreciate that the idea of a short intense war has rather been kicked into touch with the events of the last two years, and it would be enlightening to be a fly on the wall as the MOD argues the toss with the Treasury as to what stocks of all types of ammunition… Read more »
The German Navy should of brought Aster missiles, and CAMM, and do away with X-Band.
OR they could have just done it properly like the Danes did.
The Danes just recently tested SM-2 for the first time, until now they were FFBNW.
👍, afternoon Farouk.
It was suggested when Germany announced the 100 billion euro boost to the defence budget that at least 20 billion euro would need to be spent on munitions, due to low stock levels
i guess some didnt get the memo
It seems that it is going to take a long time to catch up with all the spares and munitions shortages as well as pushing ahead with buying new equipment. It was also suggested that the German MOD is some what risk aversion with placing new orders. A few year ago the German defence minster decided a JIT system was a good idea for spares and munitions, despite being told that it wasn’t a good idea
Slightly off topic as well: interception success of 3 Houthi ballistic missiles by French frigate Alsace using Aster missiles. 3 missiles used for 3 threats. One for each, strike!
We will see how much reserves we have. And also how many times Houthis wants to give it a try…
Thanks, hadn’t heard of that, but good news. Whilst on the subject of Ballistic anti ship missiles. Ive read that the houthis demand a ship stops and that allows them to target the ship .
How about having a “grid” system layout permanently fitted above the silos, and you can load the missile flat onto a frame, that is fitted to the grid. It is then moved to sit above the empty silo, the missile is raised up, but as it is now part of the ship, it remains in the correct vertical position, relative to the ship and can then be winched down into the housing.
I haven’t perhaps explained it in the best terms, but hopefully those with an engineering bent, will understand what I am trying to say.
See what you mean. Will be interesting to see what the US are trying
That’s kind of what I had in mind too, although with a framework “tower” that would run along the grid to sit behind the cell that needed reloading as well; the top of the round would then be winched up the tower, with the base of the round sliding along the horizontal frame until its sitting directly over the VLS cell vertically and supported at top and bottom- to prevent any twisting/bending issues in heavy seas.
Joe16, fancy forming a company to propose it 😀
Haha, I’m kind of tempted to draw it up and submit to someone, but don’t know enough about the top of the VLS cells to work it out. I doubt that kind of info is open source…
I am sure we have someone on here, with sufficient knowledge to provide us with the required info.
Lets name the company “VLS Top Loader Ltd” 😀
Yeah, there’s certainly some knowledgeable people on here, to bad you can’t tag people in posts…
I like VLS Top Loader, although the Carry On nature of Sailorboy’s “Rigid Insertion” description is difficult to ignore!
That would be a long container, containing the cartridge of the missile, positioned above the silo, stabilised maybe by topods, which then lowers the cartridge into the silo?
It will be top of the container that would need to held in a rigid fixed position.
Maybe easier to have a quad of container of cartridges, positioned above silos?
If I recall correctly, the missile is already in a box/container and called an ‘All-Up Round’, so no need to mess with additional packaging as such. In my head (very difficult to get across simply with words), there’s a rolling 2-axis system that is placed along each edge of the VLS farm, similar to a 3D printer but obviously very much bigger. Where the 3D printer’s head would be is a square “feed piece” that would be moved to go straight over the VLS cell to be reloaded. There are then two rails, one that attaches horizontally and one that… Read more »
I’m with you with this, but first let’s wait for Gunbuster or DaveyB to OK it, just to make sure we’re not spouting nonsense I’m not sure why the “rigid insertion” (don’t take that out of context) isn’t the obvious method for at sea VLS. I’m sure the Navy would let Mark F engineering ltd have a play on a T45 if it meant the possibility of at sea replenishment in future. The issue of course would be getting the thing into the frame in the first place, though it would be horizontal then. Maybe some sort of rail system… Read more »
Yeah, we’ll see if we get shot down in flames by the morning..! That is the big question, and is down to where the RAS point is compared to the VLS- honestly no idea. When I worked offshore, we’d sling palletised loads anywhere that the boom could reach without snagging- so if the new FSSS have a crane they could sling them straight next to the VLS farm. Not sure whether that would work, though. A rail system, sounds like you’ve been watching Under Siege?! That could also work, although again no idea of the layout. Depending on space, even… Read more »
Not sure whether a magazine would be worth it, that’s the concept of the VLS to act as launcher and magazine all in one go. Therefore, the key is getting missiles from RAS to the VLS, for which a factory style rail system would be ideal, with an added horizontal movement to access a grid of cells within the VLS.
How big is this frame that is being suggested? And where would it be stowed? An Aster 30 is getting on for 5 meters tall.
I was imagining the rail grid running along the top of the VLS between where the hatches open. If you look at a T45 VLS, even with the new Sea Ceptor,(probably outside the remit of this concept, or it would have its own small version) there is a space down the middle of the Sylver to fit a frame of almost any size; https://www.navylookout.com/ royal-navys-type-45-destroyers-reaching-their-full-potential-with-addition-of-sea-ceptor-missiles/ That would be the Sylver sorted, which is the hardest thing to reload, as you say, due to the sheer size of the missiles. A miniaturised version would do for CAMM on T45 and T26… Read more »
I’m still lost as to what your suggesting the 5m tall canister with missile inside has to be held vertically above the VLS tube and lowered in. How does the canister get from the deck or stores ship, probably stored horizontally, to the VLS.
So: 1. The missile canister is winched or craned aboard. Probably with a RAS rig or by crane to the area around the VLS. 2. The canister is secured in the frame. This would have lower tolerances than the actual insertion as that is the stage we are trying to make easier. Would also happen while horizontal to avoid pendulum effect. 3. The frame is moved to the VLS. This is the bit I’m personally still not sure about (the RAS point on a T45 is a mighty long way from the VLS). I’d envisaged using a rail system to… Read more »
Yes, in any reloading scenario being looked at by the USN, RN, or us amateurs on here, the 5 m cannister has to end up vertical before it goes in. It’s a big challenge. What I’d been talking to Sailor Boy and Mike F about was in my head, which is difficult to explain without pictures (I’m a simple man like that). Apologies for the cut and paste, but this is what I am trying to visualise, AUP meaning All-Up Round, which I believe is the fancy name for the missile in its cannister: there’s a rolling 2-axis system that… Read more »
Well, there’s been no thought of a magazine for VLS rounds because there’s been no way of reloading them before. If they come up with one, then it may make sense, unless we’re expecting every task group involving an escort to have a replenishment ship with them.
Either way, whether it’s from RAS or magazine, a rail system would be a good idea for future vessel types.
Why have an internal magazine when you can have an external one, in other words a VLS. Why choose to have missiles you can’t fire immediately. Drone and missile swarms are the future, or so I’m told, so having missiles ready to fire should be the priority. The issue is how best to move a reasonable number of canisters from the support ship to the VLS in a typical RAS window i.e. not taking an entire day. I think your scrolling 2-axis method is better than a plain rail, with more flexibility and less requirement for space between the cells.… Read more »
FSS needs this capability as clearly demonstrate with latest operations in the Gulf of Aden. All modern warships have a vertical launcher systems and if is a no brainer to have a capability to reload. FSS will require 2 x 30T sea capable cranes, Yoko fenders and decent mooring equipment. You also need decent weather conditions and still waters as you would not be able to do this underway unlike the old “Seadart” system as there is no solid RAS store points forward on T23 or T45 unlike a T42 and I’ve see nothing being designed for T26, T31, T32… Read more »
True what you say but given this capability would mean spending more money on FFS ,hrrr UK government don’t spend Money 😞💰💰
In which case the UK deserves every thing it gets!!!! Let’s hope we next sack all politicians and ask the last 25 years worth to repay their salaries as they all committed fraud on the British public
Sounds good to me 👍
Perhaps the answer is the often proposed arsenal ship or unmanned missile barge. It could even be a semi submergible hybrid craft. A vessel jammed to the gunnels with several hundred ready to go VLS missile cells. That can keep pace with the fastest and be fully controlled by the task force it accompanies. It’s certainly the way to win the missile numbers game without going crazy. Replenishment being the simple matter of sending another arsenal ship along with the RFA vessels, accompanied by a Destroyer to do the targeting. I’m sure the RFA would welcome such a well armed… Read more »
You just described an SSGN
Not quite Peter, although it’s just a matter of scale. My knowledge of the navy is limited but Naval Warfare these days, seems to be a numbers game. The aim being to saturate, overload, confuse an enemies ability to defend itself. Be that at sea or targets on land. If an enemy could launch 300 missiles plus decoys, against our current CSG. Would that be enough to guarantee sufficient hits to sink our flat tops? Convert existing Atlantic Conveyor type container carriers/vessels. Pact the things with as many VLS cells as possible. (400, 500, 600 or more depending on the… Read more »
OK….. so which one of you now is Jim ? …… FFS…. 😂
Can see why the Royal Navy are interested in at sea replenishment of VLS when the surface fleet has small numbers of (in Sea Viper more than Sea Ceptors case) really expensive missiles and little-no gun capability beyond last ditch point defence.
I understand the risk of pendulum motion if the canister is handled with a crane, but: Why don’t we use a rigid frame to hold the missile? You’d have it on rails able to access each of the cells, and capable of lifting itself to vertical to slide the missile into the tube. Surely then you’d be able to crane the missile across by RAS, then have a rail system to move the whole shebang to the VLS where it gets lifted into the cells. I’m fully expecting this idea to be nonsense and please tell me if it is,… Read more »
Exactly….. it’s all a bit odd to my way of thinking…..
No, I had a very similar setup in my mind in my response to Mark F above.
I am an engineer (although electrical, so not so applicable to this), and I’m struggling to see the problem with it.
Potentially it’s to do with the required grid/frame over the VLS getting in the way or being damaged by the heat of a launch? Only thing I can think of…
I’m going to officially close this thread and get behind Mark F above; he had the idea first, albeit independently, and has a business model set up.
There is precedent for installing long thin dangerous things in a large matrix of vertical tubes.
That’s a nuclear reactor core and replenishment system. Thought obviously Dungeness is by the sea not in it.
I don’t understand why someone doesn’t develop a launch tube that has a means of being reloaded from the side or bottom. Automated reloaded from below deck allowing for less tubes needed, and quick loading of suitable missile for the task in hand.
That’s how old missile launchers worked, but apart from the limited ammo space you then are limited on how many missiles you can launch at a time
Sea Dart was loaded that way, it could also be replenished at sea. As I understand it the Americans reloaded SM-2 at sea with a compact crane onboard. Although the reloading rate was something akin to three per hour in a moderate sea state. Given Sea Ceptor is relatively small for a missile, I would have thought its an idea worth trying by the Royal Navy.
I’m not sure replenishment at sea is worth the effort. We just need more Gibraltars. Bahrain, Oman and Cyprus? We should make better use of the bases and alliances we have across the globe.
This is the most realistic and feasible solution. ALL of these overseas territories need to become small outstations with dock facilities for repair and replenishment.
Oman is being actively developed to handle two carriers, not necessarily QE2 class.
Design a missile with a reusable first stage, then borrow Elon Musks technology to return the launcher to its silo and add a new second stage and warhead.
Simples………. Or maybe not 🙂
Haha. You need milimetre precision to load the missile
VLS resupply into tubes at sea was with the old kit (VL Seawolf) a massive explosive accident waiting to happen, and it was rightly binned. The RAS part of ammo resupply is the easy bit. Heavy Jackstay from the supply vessel to the receiving vessel RAS Point. After that you need to move the ammo from the RAS dump to the mag. For things like bulk ammo on pallets it’s a pallet truck, fork lift or manual handling and simply break down the load and use block and tackles with cruets to move between decks.( LPDs are easy we had… Read more »
The reality….
Earthing pole with line and earth plate, and sorry too say Real Field Gunner’s they’d been in their late 40ts by now just aving a laugh at how the RN has got so sophisticated with technology that it has forgotten how too accomplish a mundane task of resupply .Someone somewhere must have thought got a great idea how about Vertical launch canisters ,when questioned how would you reload ,their reply was probably ,we’re leave that upto the Navy too sort out their good at doing tasks with no outside input and money they have this chap called Heath Robinson he’ll… Read more »
The real issue is that a ship or USV are now effectively an outdated technology.
When either can carry say 120 vls missiles, it” s easy to see why in the Red Sea troubles a few ships with 120 missiles are no match for a 10,000 missile coast country.
In 500 years, these 120 VLS missile hulls barely outshine Sir Walter Raleigh’s 1589 ship that boasted 59 guns. We haven’t got far.
Hardly outdated. If the Military was allowed gloves off they would clear a zone 50km back from the coast of a threat, sod the civvy casualties. Anything or anyone in a third country supplying drones or tech would have. Mr Tomahawk knocking on the door.
You do what the political masters allow you to do.
You would think this would be an essential requirement for any system now…..
The answer is a collapsible gantry crane or hoist that can run on rails beside the silo and be loaded up with a missile then move it above and lower into place. Similar to an over the bed hoist system used in hospitals. They work really well and are very accurate for placement. Minus the sea state and movement obviously.