crobatoI kind of noticed that there isn’t much event news on this thread.
Like earlier this month, South Korea was having some kind of national celebration, and a lot of ships from different navies were there for show. The SKN certainly showed their newest stuff there including their LHD.
Russia sent the Slava class Varyag from the Pacific Fleet for a visit, then held an open house for people to visit the ship. It certainly enjoyed having a long line of tourists waiting in line to see the ship. hina sent two ships, DDG 112, a Luhu, and 527, a Jiangwei II.
China sent a small fleet of warships, comprising of DDG 138 (Sovremanny EM), 525 (054 Jiangkai), 529 (054A Jiangkai II) and the 886 replenishment ship for a port visit to Vladivostok, home of the Russian Pacific Fleet. Some pics show at least three Udaloys in port over there. On the way, the Chinese fleet was tracked by Japanese P-3s, causing a minor ruckus in the Japanese media why a Chinese fleet is so up far north doing “general training”.
A Chinese port visit would mean the Russians would reply the favor soon. Who are they going to send? I am thinking the Slava plus one of the Pacific Fleet’s Sovs.
crobatoDid you mean MiG? They toyed around with a single engined design using the RD-33, named aptly, Project 33. It started and died all still in a conceptual stage. Its sort of JF-17 like, but the wings are much more MiG-29 than F-16.
crobatoIn the Talwar class, the Garpun B radar is placed on the rear and is enclosed with a radome similar to the Mineral’s in shape. I’m likely to think its the Garpun-B or -Bal since that is the radar used to direct Urans on such ships like the Delhi. Or it may be the Cross Dome/Pozitiv radar like in the Neustrashimy and Gepard class, also used to direct Urans, which can placed in the front or rear location and uses the same radome structure.
Anyway, a lot of radars can use a dome like that, and such a dome can house any sort of radar.
If you look at this pic of the Sovremenny 956EM, you will note the Mineral ME to the front and a similarly shaped but not exactly the same sized radar on the rear. This second radar only appears from the 956EM and not with the earlier ships, and I suspect might either be a Garpun-B or Pozitiv-E.
crobatoIt reminds me of a Kh-31 Krypton type with half the intakes missing. The size and shape is just about right. Dual class with both ASM and ARM versions?
crobatonow, 3M54E (if its reliable yet) shows the same intent.
3M54E is reportedly fixed as of 2007 with both Chinese and Indian deployments,
A force of single Brahmos is equal to 9 subsonic cruise missiles.
Weird.
A single airlaunched Brahmos is almost equal to force of 10 to 15 tomhawks.
Flipflops more often than US presidential candidate.
crobatoOther examples of note- SAS in Aden/Oman, etc… where skill and tactics won the day.
Some of the examples you mentioned can be better explained by sheer incompetence on the losing side.
crobatoYes and yes.
crobatoI did not think of the fact that Sweden probably was the 1st country in the world (don´t know about Soviet) with a anti-ship missile.
Nope. Not by a long shot.
The first country was Germany, World War II. Two in fact, the Henschel 293 missile and the Fritz-X. Although the latter can be more described as a smart bomb. Both missiles have quite a number of hits and kills. Conversely, the first aircraft to use antiship missiles were the He-177, Fw-200 Kondor and the Dornier 217.
For a cause there was an effect, and it also resulted in the Allies developing the first electronic counter measures ever devised and used against missiles.
Germany also developed the first glide bomb, the Bv 246 (Blohm und Voss).
Japan in World War II would be the second country that ever actually used an antiship missile, if you consider the rocket propelled Ohka kamikaze a missile. Call it “human guidance”.
The third country would be the US who developed the BAT in World War II, though BAT is more like a TV guided bomb. It made its first attack against Japanese shipping in 1945.
crobatoHow about the use of high-power AESA arrays, like radar and com antennas, directed exactly at the approaching missile’s RF sensor? Easier to integrate that IR/EO/UV blinding lasers.
Ejectable counter-measures are still important. The next step will probably be to make them more intelligent, instead of using just a lot of them. Think minature missile, maybe even collision-course smart “air mine”. If not that, think miniature missiles staying longer in the air instead of just droping, giving the approaching missile a more likely behaviour, once they are smart enough to figure out flares by altitude decrease rate.
Blinding lasers are a problem to integrate volume-wise. Option here would be external carriage in a fairing like e.g. some section of a conformal fuel tank.
If the power of emitters continue to rise, lets say from the 10 watts today to something like 40 to 50 watts and beyond, you probably don’t have to bother with using missiles or even stealth, which is not going to overcome all that sheer power. The arrays become direct energy weapons, and adversarial aircraft would be oven microwaving each other and human pilots getting flambéed as part of the dinner course.
crobatoI have read that the cannon in the Gripen is radar guided.
Can a radar guided cannon be trained against a front aspect missile ?
Gunsights since the Korean War have been radar sighted. The last plane to have a manual gunsight was the MiG-15.
The answer to the second question is no.
crobatoWould be nice if someone would post an F-CK-1 flying video on Youtube. Something really flying, not a slide show of still pictures.
crobatoWhat advantage is there to using ARMs then as opposed to normal radar or IR guided missiles?
Yes indeed, why use ARMs, when the same limited quantity of aircraft can also be fully equipped with AshMs. The answer to that question, is that you can involve aircraft that is not capable of launching AshMs but are ARMs capable.
This brings you to a third kind of missile that can be used against a ship, which are electro-optically guided ones, e.g. Kh-59, SLAM. You can involve aircraft capable of using this, but not necessarily capable of using an AshM or ARM.
Which is inaccurate wnough to not hit even a stationary target, least of all a moving one.
Not exactly. An ARM’s accuracy depends on the resolution of the radar it’s homing on. And besides, some ARMs are supersonic, and yet small. So when detected, it may be already too late. Since ARMs are meant to disable radar, they are set for a proximity explosion, so they don’t require a direct hit to disable radar.
A weakness, but how big it is depends on how big a NULL is generated. If combined with a CEC like system, then this is essentially not a problem at all.
I’m not sure if how you intend to do that, if you got AshMs coming on the same vector.
Furthermore, you’re making a guess that the missile is an ARM, and not an optically or thermally guided one. Just too risky.
Chaff operate in different wavelengths, so even if they are thrown in front of the ship they may not necessarily blind it. Who said they have to be thrown to the front and not offset to a side anyway?
Chaff always interferes no matter what. Blinding is not necessary but a degradation of your own radars and datalinks is still a result. Does not change if thrown to the side anyway.
Are you aware of the capabilities of phased array radars?
Indeed I am. Also the different types and their limitations.
Not all phased arrays are SPY-1s types you know, the type that uses individual phase shifters. A common design for a phased array AEW radar consists of a face that is an entire linear phase shifter by itself, or a face with serial linear phase shifters. This form of linear phase array either only scans in elevation or horizon, and is commonly revolved around a pedestal for a 360 degree coverage and scan. Examples range from the Fregat, TRS to SMART. At the same time, many ships still use all forms of mechanical revolving arrays, example, AN/SPS-49.
And decoys meant to replicate these signals as well.
Adds to the ship burden of having to carry multiple kinds of decoys, right? Space used for decoy means less for other things. And besides, decoys can also affect your own signals since they emit a similar waveform. Also the effectiveness of the decoy is subject to the ARM’s software. An ARM is always confronted by different signals simultaneously; differentiation and discrimination is part of its job.
Personally I find anti radiation homing to be overblown in its effectiveness as an anti-ship guidance method. It has advantages and weaknesses just like other seeker methods.
I won’t give a hoot of the seeker if I have enough gun or missile CIWS. Just shoot down everything in sight, regardless and don’t minding whatever seeker they’re using.
crobatoc) steer a radar NULL onto the seeker and deny it guidance without affecting own-ship effectiveness.
d) if part of a CEC system, shut down own ship radars without losing warfighting effectiveness.
Assumes the missile is properly identified as a HARM and not as an AshM. Usually the means if you detect the missile without any emission like AshM waveforms coming from it. The caveat to that if the HARMs are either followed or preceded by a wave of emitting AshMs.
When a HARM loses guidance, it reverts to its INS, and continues on the same direction it received the last valid signal.
If you have a NULL area, it also becomes a blind spot for the ship if there are incoming AshMs behind it.
e) fire chaff and illuminate it with own ship radar to make it look like another emitting ship.
Early warning radars generally revolve around a pedestal and scan for a 360 degrees. That would make it difficult to do the above. If you throw chaff in front of the ship’s radar scan, you will also end up blinding the ship, as well as all your neighbors and the area behind the chaff becomes a blind spot.
If you decide to use you SAM radar beam to illuminate the chaff, then that radar beam isn’t being used to illuminate something else.
HARMs can be drawn to ECM and potentially even to datalinks.
and probably many other things that can be done that isn’t known publicly. ARMs just utilise another form of guidance that looks impressive conceptually, but is just as subject to countermeasures as any other form of guidance.
Generally its better just to shoot the thing down with a gun CIWS. If its drawn to the CIWS radar it will make a beeline to the gun which allows for a head shot.
Nicolas, Planesman, you can troll out a fleet’s SAM defenses to activate by sending out a first wave of AshMs, UCAVs and even target drones (e.g. Coyotes), then follow that up with the HARMs.
crobatoIn the coming future, in the scenario I have called the Resource Wars, oil pipelines, wells, tankers, and refineries have become valid targets for attacks by anything including terrorists, commando raids, tank columns, bombers, CAS aircraft, cruise missiles, missile boats, and even submarines.
Scenario example. Some one in Latin America manages to acquire a real silent cruise missile equipped modern AIP submarine, then uses it to blow up the oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. That’s a far more lethal blow to the US economy compared to the sinking of an aircraft carrier. Similarly, someone with a grudge against China will use a sub to blow up the oil rigs in the South China seas. Heck, every oil rig in the ocean can become fair game.
Anyone with a territorial dispute over land and over water should be aware of the potential for the little guy to hit you in the nuts of your energy supply.
Russia is basically like it is today…
I can see Russia going back to being like the Soviet Union once again. Former Soviet republics will orbit closer to Moscow. The difference between 21st Century Russia and the Soviet Union is that the former is much more affluent, like the Soviet Union with the oil resources and bank account of Saudi Arabia.
China is stronger, more advanced and more aggressive. In every part of the world.
Despite its growing strength, China will have its vulnerabilities, mainly as the result of ecological and pathological (epidermic) disasters. Both are related.
Both China and Russia will step up on the competition to explore and exploit both Artic and Antartic resources against the European Union and the American Union aka NAFTA (US, Canada, and Mexico).
There is also going to be a lot of submarine exploration for underwater resources, especially tied with the Artic front.
crobatoWindows is less american than Indian/Chinese/Russians. All these countries are major software outsourcing centers. US financial/education system donot allow Microsoft to produce indigenous Windows. Now even Individual countries have there own search engines and youtubes.
I’ve heard something about Blizzard that they don’t really do any programming in the US as well (the fresh grads are bad) and that they outsource their code to some place in China.
Sign In
