Wednesday, November 27, 2024

NMESIS

The Marines have committed to becoming short range, island missile snipers in a poorly conceived and untested concept.  One of the missile-shooting systems is the Navy/Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS – a contrived, convoluted, and ridiculous acronym if ever there was one) which will shoot Naval Strike Missiles from an unmanned Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) which will subsequently be called a Remotely Operated Ground Unit for Expeditionary Fires (ROGUE – oops!  I stand corrected;  this is an even more ridiculous and contrived acronym) vehicle (a glorified jeep). 
NMESIS batteries are composed of 18 launchers which are separated into two platoons of nine launchers each. The platoons are further subdivided into three sections of three launchers each. The USMC plans to field 14 batteries of which three batteries will be deployed to MLRs [ed. Marine Littoral Regiment] while 11 will be deployed to the CONUS in support of MEUs.[1]
Each launch vehicle can mount two missile launch cells giving an entire battery a capacity of 36 missiles.  Although I’ve seen no exact plan, my impression is that each Marine ‘hidden’ base will have perhaps 2-4 launch vehicles for a total capacity of 4-8 missiles.  Not exactly an overwhelming, saturation type striking power, is it?
 
As a mainstay of the Marine Corps’ new approach to warfare, the system has been thoroughly extensively robustly moderately somewhat barely tested. 
Marines from the 2nd Battalion, 11th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, conducted their first testing firing of a Naval Strike Missile (NSM) from the Navy/Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS). According to the press release, the test took place last month at Naval Air Station Point Mugu in California.[1]
 
This marks the third firing of the Raytheon-built NSM from the Oshkosh Defense’s Remotely Operated Ground Unit for Expeditionary (ROGUE) Fires vehicle. The first live fire took place in November 2020, while the second took place in August of 2021 during Large Scale Exercise 21.[1]
Three test firings and we’re ready to make it “a centerpiece of the USMC’s Force Design 2030”[1]?  Anyone recall the WWII torpedo fiasco?  Let’s not extensively test the system;  let’s just anoint it as a mainstay of the Marines combat power and put our faith in manufacturer’s brochures and the Marine’s fantasy wishes.
 
Did you catch the part about just three batteries being assigned to the Marine Littoral Regiments?  That is a frightfully meager amount of firepower to base the entire Marine Corps combat concept on.

NMESIS

 

 
______________________________
 
[1]Naval News website, “US Marines Conduct First NMESIS Launch In Two Years”, Zach Abdi, 19-Jul-2023,
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/07/us-marines-conduct-first-nmesis-launch-in-two-years/
Posted by at
Labels: ,

27 comments:

  1. AnonymousNovember 27, 2024 at 2:42 PM

    I don’t get the point of these jeeps being remotely controlled on an island. I think they are remotely controlled just for marketing and we’re probably talking a pennies worth of flexibility for many dollars worth of complexity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AndyMNovember 27, 2024 at 7:38 PM

      It is about mobility. They can move easily via C-130 or CH-53. Don't forget that they have also already stood up a battery of these with Tomahawk too.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousNovember 30, 2024 at 12:15 AM

      These are remote operated so the missile can fit in the JLTV chassis. They follow a manned vehicle leader and are controlled with a leashed remote control when they occupy a position.

      14 batteries of 36 each is over 400 missiles without reload. They may want to re-consider the type of missile since the NSM production capacity is something like 50 or 75 per year and the Navy gets the priority for their ships followed by the Army’s MDTFs. Marines are far down on the waiting list and may not get too many missiles before 2030.

      Delete
    3. AndyMNovember 30, 2024 at 1:47 PM

      They are opening a second line in Norway this year and the additional new lines in Australia and the U.S.

      Delete
  2. AnonymousNovember 27, 2024 at 3:26 PM

    " island missile snipers"

    This idea itself is stupid. You need to land on an island first! Why not shoot directly from ships like Burke?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousNovember 27, 2024 at 7:20 PM

      This is a better choice, Pentagon should develop a similar one. It is big enough to fire missiles, much better than marines and ship:

      https://armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2024/exclusive-china-develops-new-unmanned-submarine-to-increase-covert-naval-warfare

      Delete
    2. AndyMNovember 27, 2024 at 7:40 PM

      Agreed, but Burke's first, best capability is AAW. Their load out is going to need to focus on the fact they are a giant AAW battery. Tomahawk's can be fired off of anything now with Mk 70.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousNovember 28, 2024 at 4:04 PM

      Perhaps this is also good choice but unmanned submarine, I think, is better:

      https://www.twz.com/news-features/our-best-look-yet-chinas-new-stealthy-trimaran-drone-ship

      Delete
    4. AndyMNovember 28, 2024 at 6:16 PM

      Better is going to cost much more. Plus, once you start shooting, you are now a slow target.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousNovember 28, 2024 at 7:23 PM

      Better than Marines in an island.

      Delete
    6. ComNavOpsNovember 29, 2024 at 8:03 AM

      "Why not shoot directly from ships like Burke?"

      The issue is not the shooter. We have plenty of launch platform options. We can shoot from thousands of miles away. The issue, as always, is targeting. A Burke's sensors are limited to the horizon. That thousand mile missile is limited to the horizon if that's the limit of the sensor. In order to use a thousand mile missile, the shooter needs a thousand mile sensor and we don't have that.

      The Marine's missile sniping flaw (well, one of many) is that they will be limited to a six mile or so targeting range which is the horizon, depending on elevation.

      I'm going to keep pounding on this. It's not the shooter, it's the sensor that's critical.

      Delete
    7. AnonymousNovember 30, 2024 at 6:38 AM

      No talk of adding a drone capable of improving targeting?!

      Delete
    8. ComNavOpsNovember 30, 2024 at 7:43 AM

      "No talk of adding a drone capable of improving targeting?!"

      Well, perhaps you'd care to talk to us about the use of drones for targeting?

      Delete
    9. AnonymousNovember 30, 2024 at 10:21 PM

      "Why not shoot directly from ships like Burke?"
      How about converting C-130 to seaplanes, attaching required sensors on it and launch them when plane is flying

      1) this removes sensor's limitation to horizon
      2) gives missile a longer range (because its launch at altitude)
      3) we can mass produce C-130
      4) this will free our Capital ships for doing more important task
      5) we can use these Seaplanes (not multi-purpose, specialized ones with commonality of spare parts) for Search and Rescue, Recon missiles, Maritime Patrol
      in Pacific Theater

      Delete
    10. ComNavOpsDecember 1, 2024 at 7:53 AM

      "attaching required sensors"

      What sensor are you thinking that will provide hundreds to thousands mile targeting range and not give the large, slow, non-maneuverable aircraft's position away?

      "removes sensor's limitation to horizon"

      No. If you stand on a mountain, you can 'see' for hundreds of miles but you can't distinguish anything beyond a few hundred feet because your eyes don't have the resolution required. Similarly, a small sensor on an aircraft can't resolve much.

      The horizon is a limit but a distant horizon is no guarantee of detection.

      Delete
  3. AndyMNovember 27, 2024 at 7:45 PM

    Last I saw each NMESIS section has 3 launchers and uses the manning usually assigned to one 155mm gun. Plus there is the rhetoric and what actually happened. The Tomahawk Rogue Fires battery has already been stood up. NMESIS is the NSM version of Rogue Fires which is the unmanned JLTV.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousNovember 30, 2024 at 12:19 AM

      1/11 is already a Tomahawk Battalion.
      What ROGUE system loadout are MEUs going to deploy with since cannons are going away and HIMARS are considered tethered to their C130 as a prime mover.

      Delete
  4. AnonymousNovember 27, 2024 at 10:44 PM

    These anti-shipping batteries will to be protected by an air defense unit as well as a ground security component.

    All so they can be stuck in one location to launch missiles that could be launched from the air.

    You are asking for a naval version of Black Hawk Down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousNovember 30, 2024 at 6:39 AM

      That's a great comment.

      Delete
    2. ComNavOpsNovember 30, 2024 at 7:46 AM

      "All so they can be stuck in one location to launch missiles that could be launched from the air."

      Really? Assuming an operating area of the first island chain, where would these launching aircraft come from. Check a map for distances before you answer.

      How would these aircraft find their targets?

      How would these aircraft survive in largely Chinese controlled airspace?

      Delete
    3. ComNavOpsNovember 30, 2024 at 7:47 AM

      "That's a great comment."

      See my comment above and feel free to try to answer the questions and demonstrate that it was a "great comment".

      Delete
    4. AnonymousNovember 30, 2024 at 2:14 PM

      The Littoral Marine force would be in serious trouble if we are talking about largely Chinese controlled airspace.

      Resupply would be difficult if not impossible and could create as I have said a naval Black Hawk Down where resources are devoted to rescuing units well beyond any value the position offered.

      If the Chinese control the airspace they are going to have recon and sensors to direct their attacks. How would an island based missile site manage to target naval vessels beyond the horizon under such circumstances?

      Delete
    5. ComNavOpsNovember 30, 2024 at 2:21 PM

      "serious trouble if we are talking about largely Chinese controlled airspace."

      Can you imagine any other situation in the first island chain operations? Given the proximity of bases for both sides, the Chinese can maintain fairly constant aerial presence whereas the US would only be able to sporadically operate. Guam is a loooong way off!

      Delete
    6. AnonymousNovember 30, 2024 at 3:04 PM

      A fair point, but like the Channel Islands in WW2, if the place cannot reasonably be held then throwing men and equipment away on doing so isn't helping anyone but the enemy.

      I don't even disagree about ground based missiles when the infrastructure exists to target and launch them. Remote company or Battalion sized strongholds rarely hold out on their own.

      Delete
  5. NickNovember 30, 2024 at 4:16 AM

    The Naval Strike Missile, NSM, was developed by the Norwegian company Kongsberg, a follow on to the AGM-119 Penguin. Kongsberg have been very successful with the NSM and recently had to open a second factory to meet the demand, Raytheon have the US license for up to 50% by value. There is also Joint Stike Missile, JSM, an air launched version fitted to the F-35A and replacing Harpoon on the P-8A.

    Re your point on sensors, not straightforward as you say, the U.S. Army conducted its first anti-ship ballistic missile strike using the new PrSM Inc 2 with its new multimode seeker, known as the Land-Based Anti-Ship Missile (LBASM) seeker, to enable the missile to strike maritime moving targets and tested at Valiant Shield 24, if understand correctly support provided from HAB, high-altitude balloons, which ascended above 50,000 feet and operating around the Marianas Islands, equipped with electromagnetic sensing and mesh communications equipment, and the 'Vanilla' UAS providing communications relay over 27 hours even through severe weather with coordinated teams operating out of Japan, Guam, and Palau.

    Always thought USN should qualify the PrSM to fire from the Mk41 VLS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsNovember 30, 2024 at 8:02 AM

      "support provided from HAB, high-altitude balloons"

      As best I can glean, the HAB operated as a comms relay, not a targeting sensor.

      Delete
    2. NickDecember 1, 2024 at 3:54 AM

      The US Army Pacific press release June 6, 2024 said "The HAB systems include electromagnetic spectrum sensors and radio networking equipment, which will enable maritime domain awareness".

      Speculating the electromagnetic spectrum sensors to mean passive targeting sensors, though if the Chinese ships operate in EMCON mode it would negate the HAB targeting system sensors, another a question remains re the trial and how realistic was it with the old target ship USS Cleveland (LPD-7) Austin-clas, was it stationary or steaming and if so expect at a low speed when hit by the PrSM and how the Army set up the Cleveland to emit in electromagnetic emissions so as to registrar with the HAB. As you say remote targeting not easy.

      https://www.usarpac.army.mil/Our-Story/Our-News/Article-Display/Article/3798814/us-army-to-launch-high-altitude-balloons/

      Delete

Comments will be moderated for posts older than 7 days in order to reduce spam.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)