JinanHow many targets can a sea sparrow launcher target at the same time ?
Are they effective against mass air attacks ?
E.g an average 80s destroyer has 2 sea sparrow launcher, can they take out an entire squadron of attacking aircraft armed with PGM ( assume the aircraft is a 80s VVS or AVMF su24 or mig27)
a LAUNCHER doesn’t target anything, you need to look at the fire control system: how many illuminators and are these necessarily continuously illuminating targets? In the Dutch navy, there typically were 3-4 channels (2 big Stir 2.4, sometimes plus 1 smaller STIR 1.8, and CAS/WM-25 dome).
Sea Sparrow has been fired from at least three different launchers: a modified ASROC launcher, the Mk29 GWLS and vertical launch (Mk48).
See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_92_Guided_Missile_Fire_Control_System
This is on the Perry class (SM1) but the principle is the same as SM1 is semi active radar homing too.
JinanDidn’t Falkland war show limitations of 1-2 carriers against a small but dedicated force. Argentinian fighter were operating at the limit of their range without any MPS or AWACs.
Just imagine what could have been the outcome if Argentinians had those assets along with precision weaponry/ and loads of Anti ship missiles.
I was talking more along the lines of CV(N)s, like Charles the Gaulle, rather than ski-jump/stovl ships. In which case you would have Hawkeyes for AEW instead of SeaKings* (which wasn’t there at the time of Falklands war), Tomcat’s and Hornets instead of Harriers. The two aircraft carriers sent were Invincible and Hermes. Hermes carried 12 Sea Harrier FRS1 attack aircraft of the Royal Navy’s Fleet Air Arm, and 18 Sea King helicopters to the Falklands, but her airgroup grew to a total of 16 Sea Harriers, 10 Hawker Siddeley Harrier GR3s of the Royal Air Force, and 10 Sea Kings (after some of the helicopters were dispersed to other ships). Invincible brought 8 Sea Harriers and 12 Sea King helicopters. So that is a total of 24 SHARs and 10 GR3s. As compared to 85–90 fixed wing and helicopters for a Nimitz class carries. The contemporary French carrier of the Clemenceau class carried a total of 40 (10 F-8FN, 15-16 Super Étendard and 3-4 Étendard IVP, 7 Alizé, 2 Super Frelon and 2 Alouette III). The carrier Charles the Gaulle typically carries a mix of 20-24 Super Etendard and Rafale (increasingly the latter) plus 2 Hawkeye AEWC and some helicopters (aircraft complement: 28–40 aircraft).
The Argentinians had no AWACS and their MPAs limited to S-2 Trackers and P-2 Neptunes, neither of which carried antiship missiles (just unguided rockets and/or dumb bombs). However, the Brazilian Air Force leased two EMB111 Bandeirantes maritime patrol aircraft to the Argentine Navy.
Argentinia had no Mavericks or Paveway like precision munitions as we know them today. In 1979, the Argentine Naval Aviation had decided to buy 14 Super Étendards. Between August and November 1981, five Super Étendards and five anti-ship sea skimming Exocet missiles were shipped to Argentina, at which point an arms embargo prevented the delivery of further shipments. A total of four Super Étendards were operational during the conflict. On June 4, ten Peruvian Mirage 5 with precision guidance AS-30 missiles arrived to Tandil but the war ended before they could be used.
* Two Sea King HAS2s were modified in 1982 with the addition of the Thorn-EMI ARI 5980/3 Searchwater LAST radar attached to the fuselage on a swivel arm and protected by an inflatable dome. These prototypes, designated HAS2(AEW), were both flying within 11 weeks and deployed with 824 “D” Flight on HMS Illustrious, serving in the Falklands after the cessation of hostilities.
JinanRussia has 2 Oscar IIs active in the Northern Fleet and 3 in the Pacific fleet. If both the Northern fleet Oscar IIs are in the Eastern Med, that say something about Russian interests. It also means they cannot be elsewhere at the same time (e.g. Baltic, North Atlantic, Black Sea)
JinanThe Romanian Government has ordered four Sigma class light frigates for the Romanian Navy at a cost of $1.1 billion.
Damen shipyards has businesses in Romania. For example, the hull of Doorman JSS was constructed in Romania and finished in the Netherlands.
JinanHow would a navy with strength in numbers face off against an adversary with a smaller navy but ample Patrol aircraft/AWACS and fast jets armed with AShMs?
Would it place massive limitations on the bigger navy as their ships could be detected from 3-400kms and fast jets sent to fire off a salvo of AShMs?Could these limitations be overcome and can they enforce a blockade ?
Depends on what is in those numbers… if that is a carrier heavy force, then good luck with MPAs and fast jets.
JinanNATO hunting at least one Russian Navy Oscar II Class submarine that is chasing aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean Sea
“Hunting”is a big word, with a negative connotation. “Keeping track of” would be more appropriate.
JinanThe Barak VLS hatches seems almost identical to the Brahmos VLS hatches. Is it possible?
Not sure if the Barak and Brahmos VLS hatches of the Kolkata Guided Missile Destroyer class (Project 15A) can be used as a baseline…. 🙂
Don’t confuse the launcher for Barak-8 (as e.g. on INS Kolkata) with that of Barak-1 (as e.g. on INS Ranvir D54): they are different VLSs (Barak-8 is significantly larger).
Barak-1
Weight 98 kg
Length 2.1 m
Diameter 170 mm
Wingspan 685 mm
Barak-8
Weight 275 kg
Length 4.5 m (Booster adds 123 cm)
Diameter 225mm (missile body)/540 mm (Booster body)
Wingspan 940 m
See this, for VLSs on INS Kolkata
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/dd91cab7c966d9afac8d2c3217d66bedd36b3dc9/r=x1683&c=3200×1680/http/cdn.tegna-tv.com/-mm-/e0d196cc1ccdcf4492f3f2c87a7fbde839e1bbef/c=0-337-3819-2495/local/-/media/2015/11/27/DefenseNews/DefenseNews/635842106952923455-Barak-8.jpg
http://drop.ndtv.com/albums/NEWS/galleypictures1/g6.jpg
http://drop.ndtv.com/albums/NEWS/ins_kolkata_gallery/imagesnew_ndtv_24x7_c_290066_6.jpg
http://i.ndtvimg.com/i/2015-09/ins-kochi-special-page_1300x670_81443495447.jpg
As opposed to the BArak-1 launcher e.g. on Vikramaditya, Viraat, Kamorta, Shivalik, Delhi, Godavari, Rajput classes.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/2/21/VLS_Barak_Indian_Carrier_Viraat.jpg
http://gallery.military.ir/albums/userpics/25m5buse51im36jkt0pt.jpg
Here’s a couple of nice ones of INS Ranvijay
http://s004.radikal.ru/i208/1205/9d/8c0d24741526.jpg
http://s57.radikal.ru/i156/1205/89/a2b146e4b87d.jpg
Jinan29 K was mandatory with carrier… Gorshkov Lifts are too small for Rafale M anw
This won’t be a problem with new INS VIkrant, as this has deck-edge lifts that in addition are wider. Like Kuznetsov and Liaoning.
The Mig-29K with wings folded has a wingspan of 25.7 ft (7.8m).
The Rafale M, whose wings do not fold, has a wingspan of 35.4 ft (10.8m). This is 9.7 ft (3m). wider.
Question is: is there 1.5m left and right to spare? I think MAYBE with 1 elevator.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]250112[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]250110[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]250111[/ATTACH]
JinanLiaoning was massively updated since.
Relative to the Kuznetsov, the weapons fit hasn’t really improved that much: 3 heavy gun CIWS (versus 6 AK630 + 8 CADS-N-1 Kashtan gun-missile system), fewer (3x 18 HQ-10) SAMs (versus 8×32 Kortik SAM and 24×8 Khinzal SAM), no AShM (versus , 12 P 700 GRanit) equally limited ASW (RBU type ASW rocket launchers)
Sensors esp ASuW and AAW: likely improved.
The deck size and layout unchanged, MAYBE a bit more hangar space.
Nor really substantially greater number of fixed wing aircraft
No smaller aircraft e.g. Mig29K or Su-25 equivalents), smaller number of AEW/ASW helicopters.
Liaoning
24 Shenyang J-15
6 Changhe Z-18
4 Changhe Z-18J
2 Harbin Z-9
Total of 36 fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft.
Kuznetsov
Approx. 36-44 aircraft
Fixed Wing;
12 × Su-33 fighters (current) or
20 × MiG-29K/KUB fighters (future)
4 × Sukhoi Su-25UTG/UBP trainers
Rotary Wing;
4 × Kamov Ka-27LD32 helicopters
18 × Kamov Ka-27PL helicopters
2 × Kamov Ka-27PS helicopters
JinanThat’s gotta cost…. What do you think? Economically written off? Or still worthwhile to salvage?
Jinan[ATTACH=CONFIG]250084[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]250085[/ATTACH]
JinanIndia’s first homemade aircraft carrier falls short of US expectations: Report
Parhaps it wouldn’t be operational for up to a decade be not for lack of small missile system to defend itself, a limited ability to launch sorties and no defined strategy for how to use the ship in combat. Those issue are either easily rectified (note the installation of Barak 1 and AK630 on Vikramaditya, which are systems dismounted from the Godavari frigate upon retirement) or choice (Vikramaditya also has a limited ability to launch sorties, given similar layout, likewise Liaoning and Kuznetsov). As for strategy, India has has a long time objective of 3 carriers (so 1 available on each coast, with 1 extra under maintenance) > blablabla
JinanA new set of sensors … these have been spotted on INS Kolkata and INS Chennai in images released to the public. Does anyone know what these are ? The black arrays beneath the MF-STAR
Since only oriented towards the bow, and not to sides or rear, I’m not directly inclined to call these sensors.
See http://images.newindianexpress.com/uploads/user/imagelibrary/2016/11/21/original/PTI11_21_2016_000144B.jpg
Earlier pics do not show any sign of mounting points fir these ‘arrays’,
see http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Dy_HjlhZYO8/Vj7l3t8AMqI/AAAAAAAAGgM/p8lQcz1MTGw/s1600/h-754602.jpg
Slabs of radar absorbing material?
JinanThat’s not a refit. They removed stuff, but didn’t fit anything. A refit is what it says: a re–fit. She’s been reduced to a hulk, for which the proper term is hulked.
Someone on Wikipedia doesn’t know what the word means.
Even if certain items removed, it could also have involved installation of other things (e.g. if planned for use as floating accommodations, instruction)?
Anyway, now there is insight into what was done while in dock last time around.
JinanSome times if they are adamant in that case you simply drop more if these underwater grenades close to target or even high power non explosive depth charges and go for active pinging of targets. In worst case they might be forced to surface but thats about it.
Once you are caught you know your game is up , you loose discretion and that is what sub warfare is all about. It pretty routine and its a cat mouse game that goes on. Just that media makes it sound more dramatic.
I understand how a noisemaker lets the other guy know he’s been detected. But, ultimately, it is the boat’s captain that decides whether or not to leave, yes? I mean, in peace time in international waters at a safe distance from a target ship. There is no way to physically force the submarine to leave the area, right? Besides his Walrus ‘incident’ (which doesn’t make clear if the Russians actually detected the sub on their own with their sensors, or that the sub made its presence known, intentionally or unintentionally by surfacing or being unusually loud: this is a sub that ran circles around USN ships – CVN, DDG, SSN in NATO excersizes in the 1990), there is a similar hubhub about an Indian navy 209 detected by Pakistan navy.
I mean, there is a difference between a fire alarm that informs you that you should leave the building, and a fire alarm that is actually so loud and sharp to your ears that you cannot physically remain in the building without your ears starting to bleed so to speak 😉
Sign In
