As we have previously discussed, the gunboat version of the WWII
PT boat was the most effective form of the PT Boat (“PTboat”) and, along with its surveillance (ISR) duties, were the most
useful functions. Interestingly, we have
modern PT boat equivalents in the Mk VI and, in a larger form, the Cyclone
class, although both are being eliminated from service. There have been other small boats, as well,
in recent decades. The Navy, although it
has toyed with small boats from time to time, has rejected all attempts at
establishing a persistent small boat naval component within the fleet.
Pivoting our thinking away from the ship-sinking role for
the PT-ish boat (we’ll use the term ‘PT boat’ in a generic sense for the rest
of the article) and keeping in mind that the most effective use was as
barge-busting gunboats and ISR, we could easily imagine a very useful PT boat
component in the Navy, today. For
example, we could flood the Persian Gulf with PT boats to monitor and eliminate
Iran’s maritime harassment, ship seizures, and ship mining. Of course, that would require us to have the will
to use force, as necessary, otherwise there would be no point.
Weapons
Consider the impressive density and types of weapons on PT
gunboats. As an example, listed below is
the weapons fit on PT-596 later in the war:
PT 596
In addition, many PT boats added various types of weapons as
desired and as availability allowed.
Such ad hoc weapons included the 37 mm anti-tank gun, depth charges,
mounted bazooka, .30 cal MG, 40 mm dual, 20 mm dual, 81 mm mortar, and so
forth.
All that weaponry was packed on an 80 ft boat! We struggle, today, to mount one CIWS on a 500+
ft Burke.
Now, consider modern equivalent PT boat weapons on a small
boat. With such a boat, what kinds of
missions could we effectively perform?
Missions
Here’s a partial list of missions that could be performed by
a modern PT gunboat:
Note: None of the
above missions are major war missions.
The PT boat is simply not suited for major combat, today. It would, however, offer benefits in the
pseudo-peacetime role as long as we’re willing to use them forcefully, when
necessary.
It’s also noteworthy that the missions we’ve discussed
generally occur at a useful level, meaning at the source of problems rather
than at the high end, geopolitical level where we wind up having Burkes
standing by watching bad actors instead of taking action because we’re too
afraid of escalation or international hurt feelings.
One argument against a modern PT boat is that they’re
rendered ineffective by the whole ‘don’t fire until fired upon’ philosophy that
so many people believe is some kind of ironclad, mandatory requirement that
prevents us from using force. This,
however, is complete bilgewater. There
is nothing in the law or the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) that
prohibits US forces from firing first if they feel sufficiently
threatened. That a prohibition against
firing first appears in some Rules of Engagement is a purely self-imposed constraint
and, arguably, contradicts the military Code of Conduct.
For example, if an Iranian boat makes an attack run on a US
vessel, we should assume it’s real and fire first. We are not responsible for reading the
enemy’s mind. We cannot depend on past
behavior to know for certain that the attack run is just a bluff. Indeed, the local commander would be derelict
for not taking action if it did turn out to be a real attack. Most importantly, after a few Iranian boats
are destroyed while attempting reckless harassment, they would stop harassing
us, knowing that to do so is fatal. Iran
is responsible for the consequences of its own stupid acts. It’s not our job to be responsible for their
stupid behavior and to rescue them from the consequences of their own stupid
behavior.
Additional benefits of a PT gunboat, authorized to take
appropriate action, would be that it would provide low level command
opportunities and would be a great way to begin identifying personnel with
actual combat mindsets and promoting them into higher commands instead of the
cowering crap we have for captains and admirals today.
What do you think?
Are there useful missions for a modern PT gunboat?
______________________________
- 4x torpedo
- 1x M4 37 mm autocannon
- 2x Mk50 5” Rocket Launcher
- 2x Twin .50 cal MG
- 1x 20 mm single
- 1x 40 mm single
- Persian Gulf anti-Iranian maritime harassment
- Philippines anti-Chinese patrol
- Fishery anti-Chinese incursion patrol
- Africa and South America riverine patrol and raid
- Anti-terrorism
Not entirely sure about what weapons I'd want on this, but as long as the cost is reasonable I like the concept.
ReplyDeleteAn EW version could be interesting too.
"An EW version could be interesting too."
DeleteYes, I described something very close to this in the linked story. The caution here is figuring out a viable CONOPS for a EW version withing the constraints of the described missions. Is there a need for EW within those missions? If so, what type and to what degree? Keep in mind that an 80 ft (to pick a number for discussion) boat can't mount giant antennae, transmitters, receivers, and power generating units. Will the size and power constrained capabilities be useful within the mission context? Answer those questions and you'll know exactly what type of EW gunboat you need ... if any.
"Not entirely sure about what weapons I'd want on this"
The modern equivalent of the WWII weapons. Keep in mind the mission set which will place the gunboats in close combat so ... short range, high explosive, rapid fire, high volume weapons such as grenade launchers, mortars, 20 mm, 40 mm, small rocket launcher, and the like. Presumably, the weapons would be easily swappable to fit the mission.
Anti-ship weapons for island chains. Just have straps on the sides to carry two 400 lb guided torpedoes when desired. One could also carry 1-2 anti-ship missiles, or at least Hellfires missiles with a 20km range. Give them a small electric engine so they can go slow and silent at night, even if just an outboard engine.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.g2mil.com/LCS.htm
"Anti-ship weapons for island chains"
DeleteThe caution here is that before we begin assigning weapons we need to solve the targeting challenges. A small PT type boat isn't going to have sensors with more than horizon range (8-10 mile range given the low mounting) so a multi-hundred mile range weapon is useless. Even a torpedo with a 30-50 mile range needs targeting commensurate with the weapon.
Do you have any thoughts about targeting to go with the weapons?
I would suggest that some the 4 boats in the PT squadron be drone launchers, or you could put the otherwise useless LCS classes to use as PT motherships that could also launch drones. These could provide the initial target discovery.
DeleteDon't forget that small island chains themselves present detection challenges for the enemy trying to detect a PT boat. A low-radar boat can hug close to rocky islands to confuse their radar signature, can travel routes frequented by fishing vessels at night, and other tactics to get within range with having to engage in OTH attacks. Tactics can count for a lot. They would not be applicable for blue water but could be used in an ambush in green water.
"boats in the PT squadron be drone launchers"
DeleteIs there an existing UAV that you know of that would be right size and capable of operating from a small boat while providing long range surveillance?
I ask because a lot of people (not you, I'm sure!) casually throw out the 'use a drone' idea to solve all manner of problems without considering size, weight, and operating constraints along with launch and recovery.
If they just have a perisope mast or a tethered UAV above they can see out quite far. Sailing past the first island chain in the Pacific forces big ships to sail near shore. PT boats may hide in coves during the day and venture out at night on electric power to see what they find. PT boats are needed for CSAR. A big airbattle around Okinawa or Taiwan might leave dozens of naval aviators in the water. And unescorted supply ships would be easy targets.
Delete"a perisope mast"
DeleteBear in mind the physics behind this. The taller a mast is, the greater the stress at the base. This is why ship's masts are quite massively built and, generally, reinforced with some sort of tripod type support. In addition, any weight at the end of the mast magnifies the stress at teh base as a function of length. This is why a feather can break a steel beam if the beam is long enough. So many people think they can simply extend a mast hundreds of feet in the air with a big radar or something at the end. In reality, this is not possible. It would instantly snap the mast.
So, you either need a massively large and supported mast which a PT boat size craft can't support or you need a miniscule sensor with a microscopic field of view.
"PT boats may hide in coves"
This is a romantic notion that is unworkable. A PT boat would need to be refueled for every patrol. How would the logistics of that be accomplished. It won't be with a large, non-stealthy, defenseless mothership as so many would like to believe. It won't be with a secret, hidden base deep inside enemy territory as the Marines seem to believe. So, where and how are the boats refueled and rearmed?
People get caught up in the appeal of a ninja boat appearing out of nowhere but they ignore the practical realities of operating, maintaining, and supplying such a boat.
I know I have whined--I mean suggested--before that they could be use for coastal ASW within the US EEZ. What were called sub-chasers in WW2. We could have a smaller SOSUS style seabed network along the coasts that would feed initial bearing to the sub-chasers who would use a dipping or small hull mounted sonar for the final detection. Operating in packs they could cover a lot of area. And other than torpedoes and maybe a 25 or 30mm cannon, they wouldn’t need much armament as they would have the Air National Guard and air-force proving warning and air cover against enemy surface ships and aircraft. In fact a non-deck penetrating CIWS rescued from being mothballed would be sufficient for engaging small saboteur boats and drones that would be the only real theats so close to our shores.
ReplyDeleteYou could have a squadron for the price a single Burke. They could be cranked out by smaller yards on the Gulf coast instead of the usual overpriced Navy ship-builders. They could even be shared hulls with them operating as CG patrol boats in peacetime for fisheries duty, anti-smuggling, etc. and in wartime add Navy personnel for the sonar and torpedoes in ASW mode.
PT boats could also act as surface escorts for merchant ships to and from the port to the EEZ border where larger vessels could then take over for escorting a convoy. That would provide escort for the merchant marine as they report to their gathering spot for joining a convoy.
I know I have whined--I mean suggested--before that they could be use for coastal ASW within the US EEZ. What were called sub-chasers in WW2. We could have a smaller SOSUS style seabed network along the coasts that would feed initial bearing to the sub-chasers who would use a dipping or small hull mounted sonar for the final detection. Operating in packs they could cover a lot of area. And other than torpedoes and maybe a 25 or 30mm cannon, they wouldn’t need much armament as they would have the Air National Guard and air-force proving warning and air cover against enemy surface ships and aircraft. In fact a non-deck penetrating CIWS rescued from being mothballed would be sufficient for engaging small saboteur boats and drones that would be the only real theats so close to our shores.
ReplyDeleteYou could have a squadron for the price a single Burke. They could be cranked out by smaller yards on the Gulf coast instead of the usual overpriced Navy ship-builders. They could even be shared hulls with them operating as CG patrol boats in peacetime for fisheries duty, anti-smuggling, etc. and in wartime add Navy personnel for the sonar and torpedoes in ASW mode.
PT boats could also act as surface escorts for merchant ships to and from the port to the EEZ border where larger vessels could then take over for escorting a convoy. That would provide escort for the merchant marine as they report to their gathering spot for joining a convoy.
Your comments went to the spam folder - an uncommon but recurring problem. As always, I monitor the folder several times a day and transfer legitimate comments as soon as I see them. I wish there was something more I could do.
DeleteI think your best modern equivalent is the Philippine Acero-class patrol gunboat which is based on Israeli Shaldag. The first thing to not do is focus on a design with traditional VBSS in mind. Don't waste space and weight on a RHIB launch like most patrol boats. there is also a a gravitation between the 28m Mk VI like size and the 35M size. I'd go for the 35M which is actually the length of the German Schnellboats and British Dog boats. That little difference in size can allow for some actual endurance since we aren't very well prepared for providing the forward basing for anything. They could sense with tube launched UAVs like Coyote and fire loitering munitions the same way.
ReplyDeleteI also think a new 55M like Cyclone would be a great next step for Bollinger and possibly some yacht yards if we get a real shipbuilding plan going. That one could have a Vertrp station with a real UAV for ISR.
The grab bag of in service weapons:
Mk 38 mod IV w M2 coax
XM914 w 7.62 coax and Javelin or 2 Stinger
The Vampire 4 x APKWS pods
Switchblade 300/600
Spike NLOS/Hellfire
Griffin (No really seeing the need here unless you mount a RAM launcher (They can load Griffin in RAM cells)
"Philippine Acero-class patrol gunboat"
DeleteAnd even that is nearly 30 ft longer than a WWII PT boat! The idea behind this concept is to use a SMALL, cheap, heavily armed, EXPENDABLE craft. Every foot of length we add and every weapon/sensor just adds cost and detectability which violates the underlying criteria.
I get the impression that you have in mind a true WWII PT boat type to use as an anti-ship platform. You'll note that in the post I listed potential missions and NONE were anti-ship. This is mission creep, already!
DeleteWe have many ways to kill ships and a PT boat would be the least feasible/effective due to logistics, targeting, salvo density, etc.
I know I have whined--I mean suggested--before that they could be use for coastal ASW within the US EEZ. What were called sub-chasers in WW2. We could have a smaller SOSUS style seabed network along the coasts that would feed initial bearing to the sub-chasers who would use a dipping or small hull mounted sonar for the final detection. Operating in packs they could cover a lot of area. And other than torpedoes and maybe a 25 or 30mm cannon, they wouldn’t need much armament as they would have the Air National Guard and air-force providing warning and air cover against enemy surface combatant and aircraft. In fact a non-deck penetrating CIWS rescued from being mothballed would be sufficient for engaging small saboteur boats and drones that would be the the main se/air threats so close to our shores. It could also provide a last-ditch defense against sub-launched anti-shipping missiles.
ReplyDeleteYou could have a squadron for the price a single Burke. They could be cranked out by smaller yards on the Gulf coast instead of the usual overpriced Navy ship-builders. They could even be shared hulls with them operating as CG patrol boats in peacetime for fisheries duty, anti-smuggling, etc. and in wartime add Navy personnel for the sonar and torpedoes in ASW mode.
PT boats could also act as surface escorts for merchant ships to and from the port to the EEZ border where larger vessels could then take over for escorting a convoy. That would provide escort for the merchant marine as they report to their gathering spot for joining a convoy.
It's an excellent idea for peace enforcement, piracy suppression and the like.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it fails utterly in the primary mission of modern USN shipbuilding: giving vast quantities of money to specialist shipbuilders, to the political benefit of the relevant Representatives and Senators. If you try to make it expensive enough for that mission, you end up with the LCS.