shore based torpedo

KonTim

New Member
Could anyone provide me data and informations about fixed torpedo tubes for shore defence?I known that they saw action during WWII.In one case the German heavy cruiser "Blucher" sunk by two 533 mm torpedoes fired from an Norwegian shore torpedo launcher during German invasion in Norway.Do they still in use today by any naval force or being proposed by any naval warfare design office?I think it would be an ideal solution for narrow sea corridors between islands and rocks in environments like the Aegean sea.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Could anyone provide me data and informations about fixed torpedo tubes for shore defence?I known that they saw action during WWII.In one case the German heavy cruiser "Blucher" sunk by two 533 mm torpedoes fired from an Norwegian shore torpedo launcher during German invasion in Norway.Do they still in use today by any naval force or being proposed by any naval warfare design office?I think it would be an ideal solution for narrow sea corridors between islands and rocks in environments like the Aegean sea.
Easier and cheaper to provide sea skimming missiles for the same job - you can stick an Exocet or Silkworm on the back of a six wheeler truck, and hold it twenty miles back from the coast, relying on remote targeting to cue the missile.

The Norwegians or Swedish may still have something in service but I suspect that torpedoes have been superseded by more modern technology. It's very remotely possible that the Iranians have tricked up a launch system for their Shkval clone but somehow I doubt it.
 

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I used to fish at a place in Jervis Bay, NSW, called the tubes. It was a disused land based torpedo site, the tubes were still in place in the 1980,s, there would be pics of them somewhere on te net, famous fishing location for shore based game fish.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The German procurement agency (recently renamed from BWB to BAAInBw) operates a torpedo launch base for testing purposes. The launch base (at WTD71) is situated in such a way that torpedoes launched from it can cover any target in the Eckernförde Bay, a 17-km deep fjord. The base at the end of the fjord is home to the German Navy submarine squadron and the strategic reconnaissance ship group.
 

Sea Toby

New Member
Could anyone provide me data and informations about fixed torpedo tubes for shore defence?I known that they saw action during WWII.In one case the German heavy cruiser "Blucher" sunk by two 533 mm torpedoes fired from an Norwegian shore torpedo launcher during German invasion in Norway.Do they still in use today by any naval force or being proposed by any naval warfare design office?I think it would be an ideal solution for narrow sea corridors between islands and rocks in environments like the Aegean sea.
I am not aware of any as 533 mm torpedoes are very heavy. While torpedoes are effective they are short ranged compared to other weapons which are most likely more moveable. Smaller torpedoes can be engaged with helicopters, a very moveable aircraft.
 

KonTim

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
What i have in mind is the use of torpedoes from fixed buy hidden places in narrow sea straits like those who anyone could find to the Aegean,between islands,rocks islets and rocks.I'm aware that the Greek navy has something in mind too.
 

My2Cents

Active Member
What i have in mind is the use of torpedoes from fixed buy hidden places in narrow sea straits like those who anyone could find to the Aegean,between islands,rocks islets and rocks.I'm aware that the Greek navy has something in mind too.
It is hard to imagine that you could secretly build, man, and operate many of these without being discovered. Once the location is known it is subject to attack aircraft, missiles, gun fire, torpedoes from submarines (if that the torpedo launcher is sub surface), but most critically by naval infantry and SpecOps troops. So you need to keep adding defenses, and pretty quickly you have an impossible to conceal fortress.

Fixed batteries are of little value in modern warfare.
 

PCShogun

New Member
Read up on the Russian VA-111 Shkval-E or Iranian "Hoot" missile, a 533mm super cavitation torpedo with a speed of about 200 knots. Some of these were reported to be based on Iranian offshore platforms.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
What's the purpose for any land based torpedo launch system ? ASW ? well you can't done ASW from Land based station I believe. So then it left only for Anti Surface. Well why using Torps for Anti Surface, when you can choke small straits or archipelago lines with Anti Ships Missiles Mobile platform.

Just like StobieWan says, it's more cost effective and mobile using Land Based Missiles platform. You do not need to build any fixed position, just moving around your mobile platform and radar/sensors units.
 

My2Cents

Active Member
Read up on the Russian VA-111 Shkval-E or Iranian "Hoot" missile, a 533mm super cavitation torpedo with a speed of about 200 knots. Some of these were reported to be based on Iranian offshore platforms.
Sure, they are fast, but basically a ballistic weapon because there is no way to guide them. Short ranged too, 9 miles (15km) for the latest Shkval 2, and probably 5 miles (9km) or less for the Hoot assuming it is reversed engineered from the original Shkval design.

I have a concern about the performance these weapons in the anti-ship as opposed to the anti-submarine role that they were originally designed for. Running shallow (6m) at speeds in excess of 50m/sec any accidental up angle is likely to cause the torpedo to broach and lose the bubble, probably resulting in its destruction.
 

Sea Toby

New Member
What's the purpose for any land based torpedo launch system ? ASW ? well you can't done ASW from Land based station I believe. So then it left only for Anti Surface. Well why using Torps for Anti Surface, when you can choke small straits or archipelago lines with Anti Ships Missiles Mobile platform.

Just like StobieWan says, it's more cost effective and mobile using Land Based Missiles platform. You do not need to build any fixed position, just moving around your mobile platform and radar/sensors units.
200 knots isn't Mach 2, no where close. Have you priced 533 mm torpedoes compared to longer range surface to surface missiles? Obviously not...
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
200 knots isn't Mach 2, no where close. Have you priced 533 mm torpedoes compared to longer range surface to surface missiles? Obviously not...
Well 533mm torpedoes do priced cheaper than SSM Missiles, however when you put it on shore, most of the time you need fixed positions. In sense you need several fixed positions for shore torpedoes, while with mobile land based SSM, you can have one battery of them moving around on your need in covering similar size of area.

That's mean more economical, with more capabilities. Besides looking the price of Chinese C-705 SSM compared to German Atlas Electronic SUT (both being offered for licensed production and for case of German 533mm SUT already being licensed produced in Indonesia), the costs is not much different. Sorry can't give you the comparison, is not a public data, only have a chance to take a peek on that.
 

PCShogun

New Member
200 knots isn't Mach 2, no where close. Have you priced 533 mm torpedoes compared to longer range surface to surface missiles? Obviously not...
No doubt that a fixed torpedo platform may not be the best idea in the modern age, however, the original thread was asking about known examples of land based torpedo positions and that was all my answer was meant to provide.

Leaked (stolen) documents show that the Hoot is indeed a copy of the Russian Shkval torpedo. A newer, liquid fuel variant with throttled engines and thrust vectoring is supposed to exist that greatly increases the range while reducing the speed, until the final sprint. Still even if the range were doubled, it falls far short of a surface to air missile.
 

My2Cents

Active Member
Leaked (stolen) documents show that the Hoot is indeed a copy of the Russian Shkval torpedo. A newer, liquid fuel variant with throttled engines and thrust vectoring is supposed to exist that greatly increases the range while reducing the speed, until the final sprint. Still even if the range were doubled, it falls far short of a surface to air missile.
Actually the Shkval 2 is supposed to work the other way around. A quick sprint to the target area, then it slows down and behaves like a conventional homing torpedo. It makes more sense than a blind dash at the last moment.

Missiles, unlike torpedoes, can use the terminal high speed dash because it does not blind their sensors.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Missiles, unlike torpedoes, can use the terminal high speed dash because it does not blind their sensors.
Technically it does, if we're talking about real high speed, such as experienced by hypersonic reentry vehicles (e.g. Falcon and other HTVs, more generally MARVs).
 

PCShogun

New Member
Actually the Shkval 2 is supposed to work the other way around. A quick sprint to the target area, then it slows down and behaves like a conventional homing torpedo. It makes more sense than a blind dash at the last moment.

Missiles, unlike torpedoes, can use the terminal high speed dash because it does not blind their sensors.
Probably true, but the documents said that the missile could "Creep" to the target area and then "Dash" to the target. I'll have to see if I can find it again.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Probably true, but the documents said that the missile could "Creep" to the target area and then "Dash" to the target. I'll have to see if I can find it again.

The Skval concept was to launch at high speed and then sweep at terminal range. It was NOT the other way around.

BTW the USN tested high speed "supersonic" torpedoes in the mid 60's - some 30 years before the Sovs/Russians. It was headed up by Dr John Sirmalis

There's a reason as to why "supersonic" torpedoes have limited utility.....
 

My2Cents

Active Member
Technically it does, if we're talking about real high speed, such as experienced by hypersonic reentry vehicles (e.g. Falcon and other HTVs, more generally MARVs).
Correct. That is why those Chinese "Carrier Killer" IRBM's won't hit the carrier as fast, or be as hard to intercept, as some people like to claim. The missile has to slow down below Mach 6 so they can see the carrier, and the missile is coming in high so they are easy to detect.
 

PCShogun

New Member
The Skval concept was to launch at high speed and then sweep at terminal range. It was NOT the other way around.

BTW the USN tested high speed "supersonic" torpedoes in the mid 60's - some 30 years before the Sovs/Russians. It was headed up by Dr John Sirmalis

There's a reason as to why "supersonic" torpedoes have limited utility.....
You are correct, I found the paper.

The paper was part of a Seminar by Akash Mankar on "Cavitation and Supercavitation" discussed the Shkval and other cavitation weapons being researched.

It states, as you also point out, that:
"The Shkval is fired from the standard 533-mm torpedo tube at a depth of up to 328 ft (100 m). The rocket-powered torpedo exits the tube at 50 knots (93 kmh) and then ignites the rocket motor, propelling the weapon to speeds four to five times faster than other conventional torpedoes. The weapon reportedly has an 80 percent kill probability at a range of 7,655 yd (7,000 m).

The torpedo is guided by an autopilot rather than by a homing head as on most torpedoes. The initial version was unguided. However, the Russians have indicated there is a homing version that starts at the higher speed but slows and enters a search mode."

The paper also describes Supercavitating projectiles used to clear mines. Such as RAMICS (Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System) using 20m projectiles that are stable in both air and water, and AHSUM (Adaptable High-Speed Undersea Munitions ) Adaptable Kinetic Kill projectiles. Sort of an underwater Phalanx system.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The paper also describes Supercavitating projectiles used to clear mines. Such as RAMICS (Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System) using 20m projectiles that are stable in both air and water, and AHSUM (Adaptable High-Speed Undersea Munitions ) Adaptable Kinetic Kill projectiles. Sort of an underwater Phalanx system.
Incorrect. I had some peripheral involvement with RAMICs. It was not an underwater phalanx system

It was an airborne single shot operator managed anti semisubmerged/submerged system
 
Top