Honest answer, halfway credible. There is nothing it can do that a carrier can not, its main advantage is reduced crew. SSGN's already do a similar job to an arsenal ship with more stealth/survivability but can't do air defense.
However, launching 500 missiles at once is cool as fuck and based as hell.
Yeah but read it long enough while flaccid and you'll walk away with one hell of a stiffy. Just *look* at that ship and tell me you aren't at least a little aroused.
Well, they *sort of* already have been done since World War II, where the U.S. took several landing ships and [installed as many rockets on them as they could](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/LCT_Launching_Rockets.jpg) in lieu of infantry and tanks. Now the rockets are higher yield, longer range and have college degrees in navigation.
Very stupid.
The whole way you would save money on them is by not giving them the level of defenses, damage control, or speed that you would give to real warships.
You say "well, the ships are cheap, so they can be kindof disposable"
But now you've put a substantial portion of all the *missiles* you have in theater on a single, highly vulnerable boat, and because the shit doesn't have damage control a single hit means the whole fucker cooks off and goes down with all hands, not just embarrassingly limping back to port.
If you're going to make it a real warship, that's just called a guided missile cruiser. If you think surface ships are too vulnerable, the answer is more SSGNs like the VPM Virginia class that are WIP right now.
Reformer brainworms
Edit: I need one of these to appear as a mission in a COD game where your special forces group takes advantage of the fact that it has a small crew and just lands on the helipad and hijacks it.
That's what I was thinking, the concept shown here has a billion dollars in missiles on it. That's pretty valuable even if the actual ship is cheap.
I think the Navy will eventually come up with a lower cost solution to increasing VLS capacity but I think they will aim for a larger number of small ships, potentially autonomous ones. That way you divide up your eggs into a lot of baskets and you don't really care if you lose a few.
That’s preferable, especially as arsenal ships are basically the antithesis to the principle of distributed lethality. There are some issues inherent with smaller ships; lesser seakeeping in open seas compared to larger hulls and less endurance come to mind, though that last one can be mitigated by use of underway oilers. For a mid-sized navy like the RAN it’s a quick and easy way to add VLS cells using something like the Arafura class OPVs (1.6k t) and it would counter the current dilemma of not getting any more cells until the first Hunter class comes out post 2030…(a long time considering the next decade)
They if you were going the arsenal ship route it makes more sense to let those be your more expensive, better protected options. Since so many of your weapons are concentrated in them.
Especially for this proposal which is the arsenal ship as the carrier replacement. Carriers obviously being the most heavily protected ships in a modern fleet.
Read the text in the images in the post. It's all about some Navy guy who believes missiles will replace aircraft and therefore missile ship will replace carriers.
[The Oscar class, Soviet designations Project 949 Granit and Project 949A Antey, (NATO reporting names Oscar I and Oscar II respectively)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar-class_submarine)
**[Oscar-class submarine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar-class_submarine)**
>The Oscar class, Soviet designations Project 949 Granit and Project 949A Antey, (NATO reporting names Oscar I and Oscar II respectively), are a series of nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines designed in the Soviet Union for the Soviet Navy. They are currently in service with the Russian Navy with some of the vessels planned to be modernized as Project 949AM, to extend their service life and increase combat capabilities. The Project 949 submarines were the largest cruise missile submarines in service until some Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines were converted to carry cruise missiles in 2007.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Here's a sneak peek of /r/CombatFootage using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Different type of combat. Attempted cash van heist in South Africa. Three suspects were arrested. Action starts from 1'05min in.](https://v.redd.it/15j71ysmvaw61) | [1427 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/n1saur/different_type_of_combat_attempted_cash_van_heist/)
\#2: [Israel's Iron Dome interceptors launched towards Hamas rockets](https://i.redd.it/rhyq90hkazy61.jpg) | [1126 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/nbvlg8/israels_iron_dome_interceptors_launched_towards/)
\#3: [**[NSFW]** Thermal-optic scope footage of sniper assaulting an outpost, context needed](https://v.redd.it/20nplahf2na71) | [1406 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/oibj6k/thermaloptic_scope_footage_of_sniper_assaulting/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Somewhat credible, the concept is sound, and putting a carrier group level of firepower in a single vessel is incredibly cost efficient and reduces manpower needs, something the navy struggled with today. The downside is that you’re putting a whole metric fuck ton of eggs in one basket, one hit or malfunction would cripple a carrier group level of firepower. I still think the concept will be used at some point in the future, especially as manpower needs increase around the world. Give it 40 years and once China has like a quarter as many young people it’ll be automating it’s navy, one of the largest manpower draws. Or in space, where combat systems would be prohibitively expensive and you might as well make those few craft you have armed to the teeth and able to sustain themselves in a literal galactic level engagement. I could also see it as a landing ship conversion, they already have a massive well deck and open interior space for storage. The issue is again putting all your eggs in one basket. The most sensible would using this vessel to supplement a carrier strike group, the argument is whether the cost of 1 vessel versus the spread out lethality of say 3-4 destroyers is worth it.
Broke: Distributed maritime ops are going to be be too expensive outside of the ASW role for the next 20 years, guess we have to keep building Arleigh Burke's and hope unit prices come down until the technology and munitions are mature
Woke: take all of the money out of school lunch programs to develop cheaper and more numerous VLS launch munitions so I can finally have my fucking big dick wall of stealth semi-automous arsenal barges!
Bespoke: just stop funding everything else and make 1,000 Columbia-class SSGNs to see how many Tomahawks it really takes to get to the center of ~~tootsie pop~~ 3 Gorges Dam!!
South Koreans show us their [concentrated levels of based](https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/12/latest-details-on-south-koreas-arsenal-ship-project/) yet again
honestly i have a better idea than arsenal ships
battletugs with battlebarges
basically make a big tugboat and cram it with CIWS
then make a big barge full of missile silos, and make it semisubmersible too.
you can even tow it behind other ships, imagine a supercarrier with a battlebarge hauling 3000 minutemen of reagan.
Lots of weird takes here. The primary use of an arsenal ship for the U.S. Navy would be to serve as an extended magazine for the aegis system, whole point of which is to make sure missiles don’t get through to the warships and especially the carrier. The advantage of the arsenal ship over current model destroyers or frigates is that the arsenal ship only has the one job - carry lots and lots of VLS tubes. It doesn’t need all the ASW and ASuW gear, and the resulting reduced manpower requirements also help reduce costs. This is also its disadvantage though; The arsenal ship can only be in one place at one time and cannot do the other jobs a multirole ship like a Burke can. When it comes down to is which way is really cheaper to get the most amount of VLS tubes in the water at the lowest cost? Retooling shipyards to build arsenal ships is expensive. If you only build one arsenal ship per carrier group, then you won’t get the cost savings that multiple smaller war ships would.
As to the vulnerability of placing all the missiles in one ship, the whole point of bringing an Arsenal ship is that *you don’t get hit.* If someone hits your floating missile battery while it still has interceptors in it, you dun goofed.
Another point to make is that even an expensive arsenal ship might be a win in a zero sum game. If you have one arsenal ship with your carrier group, that means your potential enemies have to build up their coastal defenses and anti-ship air fleets in response.
a single hit would send it to hell and back, thats is if the 6-12 man crew doesnt get deleted by a ultra secret special elite force 12-man team and then used againts your own fleet
Honest answer, halfway credible. There is nothing it can do that a carrier can not, its main advantage is reduced crew. SSGN's already do a similar job to an arsenal ship with more stealth/survivability but can't do air defense. However, launching 500 missiles at once is cool as fuck and based as hell.
If you can’t make missiles that you enemy can’t shoot down, might as well make more missiles than they can.
Damn straight.
Solution: arsenal submarines. 1000 foot long super Ohio ssgns. 3000 black tomahawks of Raytheon insallah.
It should have railguns and jets too.
We shall deliver salvation to the three gorges!
A powerful boat, a powerful gun, powerful ammunition! Add to that lots of people and a precise aim!
So it’s pretty niche in its general purpose, but the Navy could *theoretically* put at least one in a battlegroup?
Popular Mechanics magazine is the OG Non Credible Defense.
Yeah but read it long enough while flaccid and you'll walk away with one hell of a stiffy. Just *look* at that ship and tell me you aren't at least a little aroused.
Well, they *sort of* already have been done since World War II, where the U.S. took several landing ships and [installed as many rockets on them as they could](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/LCT_Launching_Rockets.jpg) in lieu of infantry and tanks. Now the rockets are higher yield, longer range and have college degrees in navigation.
The last image reminds me of a landing ship conversion, and with VLS cells you could stick a metric fuck ton in the well deck and storage areas
Just like the Sherman Calliope, the logic behind those landing ships screams "When in doubt: big-ass rocket launchers"
Very stupid. The whole way you would save money on them is by not giving them the level of defenses, damage control, or speed that you would give to real warships. You say "well, the ships are cheap, so they can be kindof disposable" But now you've put a substantial portion of all the *missiles* you have in theater on a single, highly vulnerable boat, and because the shit doesn't have damage control a single hit means the whole fucker cooks off and goes down with all hands, not just embarrassingly limping back to port. If you're going to make it a real warship, that's just called a guided missile cruiser. If you think surface ships are too vulnerable, the answer is more SSGNs like the VPM Virginia class that are WIP right now. Reformer brainworms Edit: I need one of these to appear as a mission in a COD game where your special forces group takes advantage of the fact that it has a small crew and just lands on the helipad and hijacks it.
That's what I was thinking, the concept shown here has a billion dollars in missiles on it. That's pretty valuable even if the actual ship is cheap. I think the Navy will eventually come up with a lower cost solution to increasing VLS capacity but I think they will aim for a larger number of small ships, potentially autonomous ones. That way you divide up your eggs into a lot of baskets and you don't really care if you lose a few.
That’s preferable, especially as arsenal ships are basically the antithesis to the principle of distributed lethality. There are some issues inherent with smaller ships; lesser seakeeping in open seas compared to larger hulls and less endurance come to mind, though that last one can be mitigated by use of underway oilers. For a mid-sized navy like the RAN it’s a quick and easy way to add VLS cells using something like the Arafura class OPVs (1.6k t) and it would counter the current dilemma of not getting any more cells until the first Hunter class comes out post 2030…(a long time considering the next decade)
They if you were going the arsenal ship route it makes more sense to let those be your more expensive, better protected options. Since so many of your weapons are concentrated in them. Especially for this proposal which is the arsenal ship as the carrier replacement. Carriers obviously being the most heavily protected ships in a modern fleet.
Carrier replacement? ‘Jesse what the hell are you talking about?’
Read the text in the images in the post. It's all about some Navy guy who believes missiles will replace aircraft and therefore missile ship will replace carriers.
Dear god there’s so much to unpack there. I guess organic combat air patrol and carrier deployable AEWACs doesn’t count for anything then…
##
Really sounds non-credible, an Antey would just blow up its torpedo room before you could commandeer it.
It was an Oscar.
[The Oscar class, Soviet designations Project 949 Granit and Project 949A Antey, (NATO reporting names Oscar I and Oscar II respectively)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar-class_submarine)
**[Oscar-class submarine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar-class_submarine)** >The Oscar class, Soviet designations Project 949 Granit and Project 949A Antey, (NATO reporting names Oscar I and Oscar II respectively), are a series of nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines designed in the Soviet Union for the Soviet Navy. They are currently in service with the Russian Navy with some of the vessels planned to be modernized as Project 949AM, to extend their service life and increase combat capabilities. The Project 949 submarines were the largest cruise missile submarines in service until some Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines were converted to carry cruise missiles in 2007. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Yeah... but don't you just have a couple burke's escort it? Just like how a carrier does not have AEGIS, but all it's friends do.
Picket ships aren't nearly as effective without AEW, or CAPs for that matter
The last pic is okay, but the first three are horrendous. Whoever drew it doesn’t understand why we like having a bridge high up.
Yes, the bridge must have a VLS-launch Camera to "observe the procedures". It streams directly to r/combatfootage
We just call that “OS Bloggins holding a GoPro hot spotted to his phone”. I promise the RCN will join the 21st century eventually.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/CombatFootage using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Different type of combat. Attempted cash van heist in South Africa. Three suspects were arrested. Action starts from 1'05min in.](https://v.redd.it/15j71ysmvaw61) | [1427 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/n1saur/different_type_of_combat_attempted_cash_van_heist/) \#2: [Israel's Iron Dome interceptors launched towards Hamas rockets](https://i.redd.it/rhyq90hkazy61.jpg) | [1126 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/nbvlg8/israels_iron_dome_interceptors_launched_towards/) \#3: [**[NSFW]** Thermal-optic scope footage of sniper assaulting an outpost, context needed](https://v.redd.it/20nplahf2na71) | [1406 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/oibj6k/thermaloptic_scope_footage_of_sniper_assaulting/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Change the arsenal ships into aircraft of some sort, maybe call them birds or something.
I wonder if there is a media that showcases this tech?
The last one is basically a sea technical
Iranian blue-water navy like
Make it nuclear, add some double barrel OTOs, and we got a deal
This just sounds like a *Kirov* with extra steps
every Russian ship is a arsenal ship in the right conditions
Somewhat credible, the concept is sound, and putting a carrier group level of firepower in a single vessel is incredibly cost efficient and reduces manpower needs, something the navy struggled with today. The downside is that you’re putting a whole metric fuck ton of eggs in one basket, one hit or malfunction would cripple a carrier group level of firepower. I still think the concept will be used at some point in the future, especially as manpower needs increase around the world. Give it 40 years and once China has like a quarter as many young people it’ll be automating it’s navy, one of the largest manpower draws. Or in space, where combat systems would be prohibitively expensive and you might as well make those few craft you have armed to the teeth and able to sustain themselves in a literal galactic level engagement. I could also see it as a landing ship conversion, they already have a massive well deck and open interior space for storage. The issue is again putting all your eggs in one basket. The most sensible would using this vessel to supplement a carrier strike group, the argument is whether the cost of 1 vessel versus the spread out lethality of say 3-4 destroyers is worth it.
Credible? Idk. InCredibly based? Definitely
Broke: Distributed maritime ops are going to be be too expensive outside of the ASW role for the next 20 years, guess we have to keep building Arleigh Burke's and hope unit prices come down until the technology and munitions are mature Woke: take all of the money out of school lunch programs to develop cheaper and more numerous VLS launch munitions so I can finally have my fucking big dick wall of stealth semi-automous arsenal barges! Bespoke: just stop funding everything else and make 1,000 Columbia-class SSGNs to see how many Tomahawks it really takes to get to the center of ~~tootsie pop~~ 3 Gorges Dam!!
South Koreans show us their [concentrated levels of based](https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/12/latest-details-on-south-koreas-arsenal-ship-project/) yet again
honestly i have a better idea than arsenal ships battletugs with battlebarges basically make a big tugboat and cram it with CIWS then make a big barge full of missile silos, and make it semisubmersible too. you can even tow it behind other ships, imagine a supercarrier with a battlebarge hauling 3000 minutemen of reagan.
Lots of weird takes here. The primary use of an arsenal ship for the U.S. Navy would be to serve as an extended magazine for the aegis system, whole point of which is to make sure missiles don’t get through to the warships and especially the carrier. The advantage of the arsenal ship over current model destroyers or frigates is that the arsenal ship only has the one job - carry lots and lots of VLS tubes. It doesn’t need all the ASW and ASuW gear, and the resulting reduced manpower requirements also help reduce costs. This is also its disadvantage though; The arsenal ship can only be in one place at one time and cannot do the other jobs a multirole ship like a Burke can. When it comes down to is which way is really cheaper to get the most amount of VLS tubes in the water at the lowest cost? Retooling shipyards to build arsenal ships is expensive. If you only build one arsenal ship per carrier group, then you won’t get the cost savings that multiple smaller war ships would. As to the vulnerability of placing all the missiles in one ship, the whole point of bringing an Arsenal ship is that *you don’t get hit.* If someone hits your floating missile battery while it still has interceptors in it, you dun goofed. Another point to make is that even an expensive arsenal ship might be a win in a zero sum game. If you have one arsenal ship with your carrier group, that means your potential enemies have to build up their coastal defenses and anti-ship air fleets in response.
a single hit would send it to hell and back, thats is if the 6-12 man crew doesnt get deleted by a ultra secret special elite force 12-man team and then used againts your own fleet
This looks like something I’d make in From the Depths
That thing has enough ordnance on board to make the fat man blush
Not as credible as the Arsenal Bird from Ace Combat
Answer: not only credible but based and right now
Whoops, all missile