MTB maintain their role in an era of guided antiship missile

This idea of mine is reaching...BUT... fun. So...what if you steal the idea of a narcosub for a MTB? Build a cheap 80 foot boat with ballast-tanks so it can operate with main-deck awash and only a fiberglass/radar-stealthed conning tower visible. Hang four torpedoes in clamps on the sides like an old WWII PT boat. Shove the guts of a dipping sonar system off an ASW helicopter into the bow. The MTB transits to the combat zone as a regular boat. Then, it ballasts-down and closes with diesels running through the mast-snorkle following the screw noise of its targets until within torpedo-range.
 
This idea of mine is reaching...BUT... fun. So...what if you steal the idea of a narcosub for a MTB? Build a cheap 80 foot boat with ballast-tanks so it can operate with main-deck awash and only a fiberglass/radar-stealthed conning tower visible. Hang four torpedoes in clamps on the sides like an old WWII PT boat. Shove the guts of a dipping sonar system off an ASW helicopter into the bow. The MTB transits to the combat zone as a regular boat. Then, it ballasts-down and closes with diesels running through the mast-snorkle following the screw noise of its targets until within torpedo-range.
Running Diesels through a snorkel makes a lot of noise and is not viable in higher sea states. Anything with any kind of sonar will hear you, anything without is probably too fast for your vessel to catch or not worth a torpedo
 

MatthewB

Banned
This idea of mine is reaching...BUT... fun. So...what if you steal the idea of a narcosub for a MTB? Build a cheap 80 foot boat with ballast-tanks so it can operate with main-deck awash and only a fiberglass/radar-stealthed conning tower visible. Hang four torpedoes in clamps on the sides like an old WWII PT boat. Shove the guts of a dipping sonar system off an ASW helicopter into the bow. The MTB transits to the combat zone as a regular boat. Then, it ballasts-down and closes with diesels running through the mast-snorkle following the screw noise of its targets until within torpedo-range.
A submersible mine layer or even frogmen with limpet mines seems more effective. Strike the target and get away before the detonation.
 
A submersible mine layer or even frogmen with limpet mines seems more effective. Strike the target and get away before the detonation.
Or get the right crew that shouts something like 'Aloha Snackbar' before detonation, and not bother with the getting away part.
 

Khanzeer

Banned
In any situation short of an all-out shooting war against a top-tier opponent, they can be very useful
in any all out shooting war with an opponent that can sustain airstrikes and has decent combat aircrafts does not need to a "top-tier" one, the FAC are in deep trouble
 

MatthewB

Banned
Or get the right crew that shouts something like 'Aloha Snackbar' before detonation, and not bother with the getting away part.
I love that, and admire your cultural insensitivity. You melted my inner snowflake.

10933825_831109293614991_1224698634710974166_n.jpg
 
In the 1960s and 1970s, the Finnish Navy tried to design a new model of a domestic torpedo, a guided electric one, to arm its MGBs/MTBs (the 60s-vintage Nuoli class, particularly). At the same time, the Soviet P-15 Termit anti-ship missile was introduced in the Finnish Navy, domestic coastal launchers were designed for it, and Osa II class missile boats bought from the Soviets to be used as platforms.

By the late 70s, the torpedo project was abandoned, as it was found technically too difficult to design a reliable guidance system with the Finnish resources. The Finns' limited funding for new naval weapons (that are not guns or mines) was directed into developing/fine-tuning the P-15 for particular Finnish needs.The navy's entire torpedo arm was practically abandoned and the anti-ship missile became the navy's major weapon system alongside naval guns and sea mines. In the 80s, the Finns moved from the P-15 to the Swedish RBS-15, and at that point the hands-on experience the Finns had had with the Soviet missiles was very important for being able to introduce the Swedish missiles and customise their systems for Finnish needs. Now, after three decades with the RBS-15, the Finnish Navy will be changing over to the Israeli Gabriels in the 2020s.

The morale of the story, IMO, is that even for a small nation that theoretically could benefit from using MTBs past the 60s (due to resource constraints), it will be smarter to pour your limited resources into adopting an anti-ship missile armament than keep using torpedoes alone, or, the worst of follies, divide your limited funding to try to introduce both a modern torpedo system and an anti-ship missile system. That might lead to you having two sub-par systems neither of which would be up to snuff if you would really need to use them.
 
Last edited:
While they’re cheap shooters, their sonar capability is going to be extremely limited. I’d bet the Soviets looked at the idea and concluded light frigates were an overall better investment.

Depends on how big the ship you’re calling a MTB is...
 

Khanzeer

Banned
While they’re cheap shooters, their sonar capability is going to be extremely limited. I’d bet the Soviets looked at the idea and concluded light frigates were an overall better investment.
Their riga mirka petya classes had significant gun armament too (although they were only for ASW missions) not sure why ?
 
in any all out shooting war with an opponent that can sustain airstrikes and has decent combat aircrafts does not need to a "top-tier" one, the FAC are in deep trouble

The thing is, there aren't very many states which:
a) are not 'top-tier'
b) can sustain a series of airstrikes on multiple, hard-to-hit, targets
c) have decent combat aircraft

When I was wrote that, I was thinking of first-line NATO or WARPAC states like the UK, France, or Germany, or the USSR or East Germany on the other side. You could throw in other states like Sweden, Japan, or Israel; the category is a fairly loose one. The point remains, though, that most states will fall short in one or more of those requirements. Even in an all-out shooting war, states without the ISR resources of a 'top-tier' opponent will either struggle to find the FACs or struggle to sustain efforts against them. Good pilots, serviceable aircraft, and quick response times will all be at a premium under those circumstances, especially given all the other tasks an air force must do, and most states just can't maintain a high level of performance in all areas.

And of course, in any situation that ISN'T an all-out shooting war, the FACs still provide excellent value in a wide variety of roles.
 

Khanzeer

Banned
Top