• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

	Director, Operational Test & Evaluation
FY97 Annual Report

VERTICAL LAUNCH ASROC (VLA) SYSTEM

	Navy ACAT III Program 438 missiles Total program cost (TY$) $630.2M Average unit cost (TY$) $0.84M Full-rate production FY93 Prime Contractor Loral Cleveland, OH

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION & CONTRIBUTION TO JOINT VISION 2010

Vertical Launch ASROC (VLA) is a ballistic missile designed to deliver the Mk 46 Mod 5 torpedo to a water entry point. VLA is intended to provide vertical launch-capable surface combatants (without AntiSubmarine Rocket (ASROC) rail launchers) with an all-weather, quick reaction, standoff antisubmarine weapon capability. It is installed in Aegis ships (cruisers and destroyers) with the Mk 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS) and DD 963-class destroyers with Mk 41 VLS. VLA includes a solid propellant booster with thrust vector control (TVC) to guide the missile from a vertical orientation through a pitchover maneuver into a trajectory intended to deliver the torpedo to an aim point on the ocean surface.

Pre-launch commands for the VLA are provided by the ASW Combat System (ASWCS) which includes the Mk 116 Mod 6 (or 7) Underwater Fire Control System (UFCS), the Naval Tactical Data System (NTDS) data link receive capability, hull-mounted sonar AN/SQS-53B (the primary acoustic sensor for VLA targeting), towed tactical array sonar AN/SQR-19, data processor AN/SQQ-28 for sonobuoy data transmitted from a Light Airborne Multi-Purpose System (LAMPS) Mk III helicopter, and the operators. The AN/SQS-53B and AN/SQR-19 are shipboard sensors which provide detection, classification, and localization (position and movement of target) information for processing by the UFCS. NTDS allows another platform (ship or aircraft) to share information that it has on enemy submarine position and movement with a VLA ship by transmitting the information for use by the UFCS. LAMPS Mk III can relay similar submarine information from its deployed sonobuoys to its assigned VLA ship. Localization information, in conjunction with environmental data at the launch ship (surface winds, relative humidity, for example), is used by the UFCS to compute an aim point (intended water entry point) for the VLA.

VLA missile inspection, as well as component replacement, missile assembly, and checkout (test) are conducted at an Intermediate Maintenance Activity (IMA) where the VLA missile is placed into a canister for storage or transportation to the ship. The canister is loaded into the VLS aboard ship and the VLA is fired from the canister. No corrective maintenance of VLA will be performed aboard ship. Component repair will be conducted at the depot level.

Under certain conditions, the VLA system could contribute to the JV 2010 concept of full dimensional protection by enhancing ship self protection against threat submarines that have "leaked" past outer ASW defenses. Given that some of the ships capable of firing VLAs are also platforms from which strike operations can be executed, the VLA system could indirectly contribute to the concept of precision engagement, again, under certain conditions.

The VLA program was initiated in the early 1980s to fulfill the need for a mid-range attack capability for surface ships with vertical launch systems. The VLA program was canceled in April 1988, in anticipation that another acquisition program, Sea Lance, would result in a longer-range ASW standoff weapon. In late 1988 Congress provided funding for a one-time buy of 300 VLAs until the surface ship-launched Sea Lance was fielded. This quantity was subsequently defined as 100 missiles for LRIP, with an additional 200 missiles for full production. VLA development continued, with OPEVAL occurring in August 1990. COMOPTEVFOR concluded that VLA was not operationally suitable and that low reliability precluded evaluation of operational effectiveness. FOT&E was conducted during June through August 1992 (missile assembly and encanisterization at the intermediate maintenance activity at the Naval Weapon Station, Yorktown, VA during June-July, and at-sea operational testing at an underwater test range of the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, HI during late August).

Based on FOT&E results, the Navy's operational test agency concluded that the VLA missile is operationally effective and operationally suitable, and that the VLA IMA is operationally suitable. DOT&E concluded that while the VLA missile is operationally effective, the overall VLA system is not operationally effective.

There was no T&E activity during FY97.

Inclusion of this report is to provide the status of the program, following DOT&E's BLRIP report. Notwithstanding DOT&E's BLRIP report conclusion that the overall VLA system is not operationally effective, the Navy proceeded with production beyond LRIP, without correcting the major deficiency which rendered the overall VLA system not operationally effective. That deficiency remains uncorrected, although an additional 128 VLAs (beyond the one-time buy of 300) will have been acquired through FY98.