Vertical launch systems (VLS) represent a pivotal advancement in missile launch technology, especially when integrated into naval vessels like ships and submarines. These VLS systems consist of multiple cells, each capable of housing one or more missiles. What sets VLS apart is their ability to store missiles in a vertical position, simplifying the launch process as there’s no need to transfer the missiles to a separate launch platform.
VIDEO:
Have you ever wondered how the world came to possess vessels with an impressive 60 to 100 Universal Vertical Launch System (UVLS) cells on a single platform? For those unfamiliar with UVLS, it signifies a versatile approach to missile deployment. It means that a family of missiles or various missile designs can be modified to fit within a standard canister. These missiles are always ready for action and can be fired at a moment’s notice, whether for defense or offense. This system offers unmatched flexibility, allowing for the deployment of missiles with different roles within the same canister, effectively fine-tuning the loadout for specific mission profiles.
So, how did the world come to have such a large number of UVLS cells on a single vessel? The answer takes us back to the 1970s and 1980s, on the other side of the Iron Curtain. The Soviet Union, wary of the surface dominance imposed by Western fleets, particularly their aircraft carriers, opted for an alternative approach to neutralize these formidable adversaries. Instead of engaging in a conventional face-off, the Soviets explored every possible means of countering an aircraft carrier battle group (CVBG).
To achieve this, they commissioned a series of vessels that can aptly be described as “carrier killers.” These vessels, while formidable in their own right, were complemented by over 200 Soviet Air Force bombers like the Tu-16 and Tu-22M, each capable of carrying 2 to 3 Anti-Ship Missiles (AShMs). Even more concerning were the 100 corvettes and frigates armed with 4 to 6 AShMs each. The overarching strategy was to employ a mix of assets to execute a tactic known as saturation attacks. This tactic involved launching so many missiles that the enemy’s Air Defense (AD) systems couldn’t neutralize them. Importantly, not all of these missiles carried high-explosive warheads; some were nuclear.
The United States Navy (USN), in contrast, relied on twin-arm launchers, which were severely limited in their rate of fire. These launchers were suitable for engaging dispersed targets over time but were ill-suited for saturation attacks. So, what was the solution? Enter VLS, the answer to all these challenges. VLS allows missiles to be launched in rapid salvos, significantly improving response times for saturation attacks.
Depending on the realistic force concentrations of the Soviet fleet and the fact that every USN CVBG would have 3 to 4 escorts in peacetime and 5 to 6 in wartime, they decided to equip the Ticonderoga-class Flight II (referred to as Flight II due to the introduction of the Mk 41 VLS) with 122 VLS cells. It’s important to note that the first five of the 27 Ticonderoga-class cruisers had 2 Mk 26 dual-arm launchers with 68 reloads. In practice, this meant that every incoming threat had 2 Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs) fired at it for engagement, potentially allowing a Flight II Tico to engage 60 incoming missiles alone. The Vertical Launch System was a critical component of the Aegis Combat System, seamlessly integrating all sensors on the vessel through sensor fusion. This capability allowed different weapons to engage targets located by different sensors.
A single Ticonderoga-class cruiser could effectively counter threats from:
- 30 to 35 Soviet bombers in an all-out air attack (note that Soviet AShMs often outranged Western fighters).
- 2 to 3 Kirov-class cruisers if they emptied their angled launchers.
- 2 to 3 Oscar-class submarines if they emptied their silos.
- 15 corvettes, and more.
Considering that each CVBG consisted of a mix of Ticonderogas and several Spruance-class destroyers, the Ticonderoga was ideally positioned to defend the CVBG against such aggression, with adequate air cover. However, it’s worth noting that a Ticonderoga only carries 80 SAMs, with Anti-Submarine Rocket (ASROC) and Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) making up the remainder of its arsenal. It’s astonishing that the USN now boasts 22 of these cruisers and 66 of the slightly less armed but more capable Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, with 20+ under construction or funded.
But did the Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burke classes completely neutralize the Soviet threat? Not entirely. There was a small issue with the Aegis system, which has only recently been addressed. The Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) was the primary weapon for engaging aerial targets. Being a Semi-Active Radar Homing (SARH) missile, it required a dedicated radar to illuminate the target. This role was performed by the AN/SPG-62 fire control radar, with only 4 present on Ticonderoga-class ships and 3 on Burke-class ships. Consequently, the actual engagement capacity was not 60 targets but rather a multiple of 3 or 4, depending on how many targets the AN/SPG-62 radar could illuminate or how many missiles it could guide.
The emergence of Active Radar Homing (ARH) missiles like the SM-6 and Enhanced Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) allowed each missile to engage a different target, irrespective of illumination. Thus, only vessels equipped with SM-6 and ESSM could theoretically engage 60 targets at once when discussing the USN. Moreover, the new AMDR on Flight III Burke-class vessels would further enhance survivability against saturation attacks, as it can guide many more missiles due to its AESA technology compared to the PESA SPY-1.
Following the groundbreaking initiatives by the USN’s major surface combatants, other navies have followed suit. One of the most remarkable examples is the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), which introduced an Aegis-equivalent system in two sizes. The smaller 7,500-tonne Type 052D features 64 UVLS cells, while the much larger 12,000-tonne Type 055 boasts 112 VLS cells. Both of these types are equipped with ARH SAMs and advanced AShMs for countering and executing saturation attacks. It’s worth noting that we have yet to see a true UVLS system for SAMs and AShMs in service on Russian or Indian surface combatants. Other major naval powers have relied on using Aegis and/or Mk 41 VLS on their own designs.
In conclusion, the advent of Vertical Launch Systems has revolutionized naval warfare, providing unparalleled flexibility and firepower. These systems have played a pivotal role in countering threats and executing complex mission profiles, making them a cornerstone of modern naval warfare.
