Russia and China are developing hypersonic weapons too "hot" for current U.S. Navy air defense weapons to handle. Here a Russian Kinzhal hypersonic missile sprints during a test run in March 2018.
Hypersonic weapons are here. These are missiles that can achieve speeds ranging from Mach 5 to a theoretical upper limit of Mach 25, or 317 miles per minute. Further, these missiles are capable of flight profiles below traditional radar horizons and may arrive on target by following unpredictable flight paths. Both the Chinese and Russians have been developing hypersonic weapons for some time with some claims to success.
Meanwhile, in the United States, hypersonic research has been going on for decades; however, only recently has interest in a developmental push surged, and this seems to be largely a reaction to foreign efforts. While developing hypersonic missiles may be desirable to keep pace in offensive weapons, it must be understood that there is no defensive system—on any U.S. Navy ship class—capable of engaging a hypersonic weapon.
As the Soviets began to develop anti- ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) in the 1950s, the U.S. Navy’s response was to develop surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) capable of shooting them down. This dynamic—U.S. SAMs vs. enemy ASCMs—has described the struggle ever since. The issue always has been close fought, but this much is true today: While the U.S. Navy has increasingly emphasized ballistic missile defense, Russia, in particular, has continued to push forward in ASCM technology, and in so doing, it may have stolen a lead.
Today, some threat missiles are simply too “hot” to be engaged by U.S. Navy systems. Even new systems and a return to strategies aimed to “shoot the archer, not the arrow” (to destroy the launch system before the release of weapons) cannot address every already-fielded threat.
And things are getting worse. Hypersonic threats are beyond the ability of any current U.S. systems to engage. Fortunately, there may be the shape of a solution forming on the horizon—the Surface Navy Laser Weapon System (SNLWS). The first of these laser systems, “HELIOS” (High-Energy Laser with Integrated Optical dazzler and Surveillance) already is being developed and tested in the fleet. Though HELIOS is limited to short-range, defensive missions, and will not be capable of ASCM engagement, it does begin to describe a path forward. More advanced systems may evolve from the HELIOS template, and these follow-on systems may possess the capability to destroy ASCMs in flight.
Fundamental problems, beyond laser technology, attend the development of a larger, more capable laser weapon. According to the Congressional Research Service, the following question remains unanswered: Will the kinds of surface ships the Navy plans to procure in coming years have sufficient space, weight, electrical power, and cooling capability to take full advantage of SNLWS?1
Today, no ship class, including the Zumwalt (DDG-1000)-class destroyers, possesses all the attributes necessary to support an anti-ASCM-capable laser, even if one did exist; including:
• The hull space to accommodate laser-supporting systems, including powerful cooling systems.
• An engineering plant able to instantaneously, intelligently, and automatically route massive amounts of power.
• The capability and capacity to generate the massive amounts of excess power that will be demanded by a sophisticated laser weapon.
The Zumwalt-class ships, which are capable of generating 50+ megawatts of excess power, are a step in the right direction.
What about the Navy’s Future Surface Combatant (FSC)? In July, the Program Executive Officer for Ships, Rear Admiral William Galinis, said the Navy is “still in the very early stages of concept development” on the large combatant piece of the FSC family of systems. What is clear, though, is that “the initial concepts start with a DDG-51 Flight III combat system, and we build off that.”2
While the design of the FSC continues, the specter of adversary hypersonic antiship missiles looms. When will the FSC family arrive? The first ship of the class won’t be seen until late in the 2020s. In the meantime, while Flight III DDGs are capable ships, they never will be up to the blindingly difficult task of engaging incoming hypersonic missiles. They do not have enough room for the weapon or the power-generation capability required.
Like it or not, a race is on, and hypersonic weapons will give total ascendancy to the offense in a sea fight.
1. Congressional Research Service, “Navy Lasers, Railgun, and Gun-Launched Guided Projectile: Background and Issues for Congress,” 1 August 2018.
2. Megan Eckstein, “PEO Ships: Future Surface Combatant Hull Still Undecided, But Will Use Flight III DDG-51 Combat System,” USNI News, 11 July 2018.
Captain Eyer served in seven cruisers and commanded three Aegis cruisers: the USS Thomas S. Gates (CG-51), Shiloh (CG-67), and Chancellorsville (CG-62).