Maybe an Idea for future CAS-Assets

[Der Zeitgeist]

U.S. Troops Can Now Call in Tomahawk Cruise Missiles for Close Air Support - And that’s not the old munition’s only new trick

In a test on Jan. 29, a team of U.S. Marines called in an upgraded Tomahawk, called a “Block IV,” to quickly strike a nearby target—just like the Marines routinely do with their artillery, Harrier attack jets and Cobra helicopter gunships.

 

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/u-s-marines-can-now-call-in-tomahawk-cruise-missiles-for-close-air-support-2a8aa4a64428

[Imperial Grunt]

Sweet!

[niall78]

Unit cost of a Tomahawk “Block IV”  :  $1.59 Million

 

Can't see this getting used with any regularity as a tactical asset on the battlefield.

 

A Hellfire missile comes in at about $110,000. A GBU-12 Paveway II at about $22,000.

Edited February 13, 2015 by niall78

[Imperial Grunt]

Nope. Probably not. But one or two called in on a HVT spotted by a MARSOC team deep in Indian country.....yep.

[niall78]

Nope. Probably not. But one or two called in on a HVT spotted by a MARSOC team deep in Indian country.....yep.

Maybe but unless the target is static time to target would be an issue as I think all Tomahawks are ship or sub mounted. So again more a strategic asset than a tactical asset.

[Codename Duchess]

Maybe but unless the target is static time to target would be an issue as I think all Tomahawks are ship or sub mounted. So again more a strategic asset than a tactical asset.

With a 1500+ NM range, you get a lot of loiter time. If tempo was high and # of strategic targets low, it wouldn't be unreasonable for multiple to be loitering in an area not far behind the FEBA waiting for targets of opportunity. That is one option being considered by Navy leadership.

[Michael Emrys]

One thing against the idea is that once launched, the round must be expended even if no valid target makes an appearance. At the present time there is no way for a CM to return to base and land to fight another day. Whether they could, say, be fitted with parachutes that would open when fuel is expended or ordered shut off so as to make a relatively soft landing and recovery is not for me to say.

 

Michael

[Codename Duchess]

I wouldn't imagine these would be used in an environment that wasn't target rich or in a prolonged andccontinuous conflict. They won't retrofit existing Tomahawks with a recovery system, they'll just use them when they can guarantee someone somewhere will have a target. Tomahawk is old and the last batch has been ordered with a replacement missile starting development/procurement in 2017. Right now, the Navy cannot reload VLS at sea, so these won't be wasted.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Highly unlikely you would seee Tomahawk Cruise missiles beng used as a support weapon in a tactical fight. Yo would have more luck getting a MOAB air strike!

[womble]

Once they get to the age where they'll be decommissioned if not used, it's probably cheaper to fire them on "speculative" loiter paths and have them ditch back at sea if no targets materialise than it is to pay for the decommissioning...

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

It's really something I think the SOF community will get the most mileage out of.  While drones are handy, they also have a pretty tell tale audio signature (think, do the Tribal regions in Pakistan get much air traffic?).  It's the sort of thing that a ground observer could call within a certain window, and get the same results with no warning except for the missile's terminal phase.  It's too expensive for massed battlefield use, and the reaction time is well suited to "Shiek Muhammed and Abu Abdul Mutleb are sitting down for tea and terrorism" sort of strikes, but less so "Three tanks in the open fire for effect!"

 

If they ever do include MRLS type weapons into the game, ATACMS would be interesting purely because it has been employed in a more conventional artillery role (largely because of COIN mind you), but offers the same sort of profile that a tactical Tomahawk would.