Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Share
    avatar
    coolieno99

    Posts : 139
    Points : 162
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  coolieno99 on Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:55 pm

    AK-630-M2 dual Gatling guns CIWS

    avatar
    IronsightSniper

    Posts : 454
    Points : 468
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  IronsightSniper on Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:39 am

    Is it me or did you only post text?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am

    I see the vids, so perhaps it is you.

    You aren't tuning in from behind a firewall that blocks content are you?

    (Nice vids BTW coolieno99 )
    avatar
    IronsightSniper

    Posts : 454
    Points : 468
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  IronsightSniper on Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:07 am

    Dunno, but I can see the videos fine now. Nice vids too.

    Austin

    Posts : 6233
    Points : 6639
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Wed Mar 09, 2011 1:48 pm

    Russian Navy Air Defense Missile [ pdf document ]
    avatar
    nightcrawler

    Posts : 535
    Points : 651
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nightcrawler on Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:16 am

    Austin with another BAM...thnx

    Austin

    Posts : 6233
    Points : 6639
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:39 am

    Some scribbling done by me when I was 10 years younger Laughing

    Modern Torpedoes And Countermeasures

    http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE3-4/joseph.html
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:51 am

    Nice, though I would add that in addition to decoys and depth charges the RBU-1000 can also launch proximity mines in the path of incoming threats.

    The system can also be used against divers as well.

    I remember reading based on the systems fitted to new ships that the RBU-1000 has been largely supersceded by the PAKET which is basically a torpedo that homes in and destroys incoming torpedoes... a sort of anti torpedo torpedo... Individually more expensive but more capable... a bit like comparing 23mm cannon shells from a ZU-23 with an Igla SAM... the 23mm cannon shells can be used against a range of targets including ground targets but overall the SAM is more effective over a wider range in its primary role and so works out cheaper and easier to use.

    Austin

    Posts : 6233
    Points : 6639
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:14 am

    Garry we dont know the name of the system but radar is from Phazotron and EO is Sphere-02 gyrostabilized optic-electronic observation device

    http://www.eng.npo-karat.ru/catalog/11-5/
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jul 15, 2011 6:16 am

    Clearly separate products mounted together so they can both benefit from good fields of view up high somewhere.

    Makes sense.

    I would expect that in an air defence setup the EO ball would be used to ID targets detected with a radar as it would not be good for search functions.
    (ie it would take too long to give a 360 degree scan of the airspace around the ship so a threat could close in and hit the ship without the ball ever looking in the right direction in time... It would make rather more sense to use radar to detect targets and then use this optics ball to have a closer look in TV or IR to ID the target... and AESA with 4 antenna covering 360 degrees could scan in every direction around the ship in less than half a second if you want to... anything it detects of interest the EO ball can be directed to have a closer look.)
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3193
    Points : 3283
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  medo on Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:02 pm

    It is clear, that Sphere-02 have enough windows for day TV, thermal imager, laser range finder, IR missile locator and laser missile guidance system. In combination with AESA radars, this FCS complex could actually work with different type of air defense missiles, like radar guided missiles (ARH, SARH), IR guided, radio guided (radar could send radio guiding signals), laser guided missiles and at the end also CIWS guns. It all depends on the programmed parameters in its computers.

    As it use naval Sphere-02 EO ball and is shown in naval exhibition, this could be a ship based system placed on a place of search radar for Kashtan CIWS. But this doesn't mean, this complex could not be used in land based air defense. It could excellently work with SHORADs like Morfei, Pantsir, Tor-M2 or older as well as AA guns like Sosna with Sosna-R missiles or maybe Shilka in closed loop and could make them effective C-RAM system.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:37 am

    Indeed the fact that it is not type specific suggests it has more potential rather than less.

    Following reductions and limitations of systems to reduce the types in service there might be a bit of a fight to narrow down the types of systems used to make it easier to manage and operate.

    The positioning high up in the mast however suggests to me that it might be more intended as an independent surveillance device that is quite widely deployed on relatively small boats and up to larger vessels too.

    The combination of IR and radar would be more expensive than just radar alone but the combination of capabilities makes it far more potent than when used alone or separately.

    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3193
    Points : 3283
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  medo on Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:25 am

    I personally more think this complex will be both in one, air space surveillance and targets engagement as FCS system for air defense unit on ship or on ground. If it is only for surveillance, than EO ball doesn't need so many windows and could use cheaper ball with only TV and TI in it. AESA radar for sure could do both air space surveillance and target tracking with missile guidance. Also EO ball could do visual ID as well as tracking target and missile guidance in passive mode or in heavy jamming. That way could reduce number of radars on the ship and consumption of energy, what could make ships cheaper and same or more effective as they are now.

    This complex on the photo is seen relatively small and could be placed on ship mast or on truck or tracked vehicle in the place of turret for land version. We will see in what direction development will go.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:01 am

    Watching some of the videos of its use on the page Austin posted it seems most likely to be mounted on the mast of a ship and would be used in lieu of a pair of binoculars on the deck of the ship.

    The high magnification plus night and all weather capability would make it much better than binoculars on a ships deck especially if fully stabilised and well above sea spray height, with the added bonus of laser range finding capability.

    Just looking at the number of optics windows I would assume that the two large windows will be the Thermal and Digital optics cameras, while the remaining four optical ports are less obvious.

    The yellow sticker warning of laser radiation and the videos showing range to locked targets clearly suggest a laser range finder. This requires two optical ports, one to send the laser beam and one to detect the returning beam.

    The remaining two optical ports could be II and colour lower magnification ports, or they could include a laser beam for guiding laser beam riding missiles.

    It is perfectly possible that if it has laser ports incorporated into it that it could be used as an independent targeting system, so that for instance on a small patrol craft with a new 57mm automatic cannon that has an integrated optics system for lasing targets, if multiple targets appear the guns ability to fire several hundreds of shells per minute would not be matched by its laser systems ability to lase multiple targets at once so improved performance could be gained by perhaps facing the optics for the gun to one side of the ship to engage a threat and the mast mounted system at targets on the other side of the ship and have the gun fire a burst to each side to enable multiple targets to be engaged at once without needing radar emissions.

    You could probably have 2-4 of these optics turrets around the masts of the ship displaying their information on large screen displays on the bridge to give much better situational awareness for the captain... no more sneaking up on a ship even in harbour in a speed boat loaded with explosives...

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:00 pm

    GarryB i have a question for you.
    In the last weeks we have obtained from IMDS 2011 two good pics of Pr 22350 frigate's VLS number arrangement and size .
    Moreover,from Almaz Antey annual 2010 report,has been confirmed that 9M100 is not only alive but even in production.

    From a quick analysis of the size of the new naval standardized VLS and arrangement of missiles also in land-based launchers,appear almost sure that 4 9M96 will be hosted in each of those 28 VLS in the same way of tubes hosting 48N6 series exchangeable with 4 9M96 tubes.

    Some sources (like warfare.ru )go even further suggesting that the VLS of Redut AD system could allow to host a 4 packed smaller missile like 9M100 for each 9M96 offering an even greater flexibility in missile's customization.

    Do you have any information on this subject ? Thanks.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:53 am

    In the last weeks we have obtained from IMDS 2011 two good pics of Pr 22350 frigate's VLS number arrangement and size .
    Moreover,from Almaz Antey annual 2010 report,has been confirmed that 9M100 is not only alive but even in production.

    From a quick analysis of the size of the new naval standardized VLS and arrangement of missiles also in land-based launchers,appear almost sure that 4 9M96 will be hosted in each of those 28 VLS in the same way of tubes hosting 48N6 series exchangeable with 4 9M96 tubes.

    Some sources (like warfare.ru )go even further suggesting that the VLS of Redut AD system could allow to host a 4 packed smaller missile like 9M100 for each 9M96 offering an even greater flexibility in missile's customization.

    Do you have any information on this subject ? Thanks.

    I was under the impression that the Redut launchers were 16 tube bins, so with two that would make 32 launch tubes for full sized S-400 type missiles. I have heard that the smaller 9M96 type missiles can be loaded 4 to a bin but I rather doubt each of those missiles could be replaced by 4 9M100 missiles.

    For a Frigate I would suspect a normal load of perhaps 64 x 10km range 9M100 missiles for short range defence in conjunction with CIWS, plus probably a balance of perhaps 20 x 120km range larger 9M96 missiles and 44 x 40km range smaller 9M96 missiles.

    Remember this is a Frigate!!!

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Jul 21, 2011 12:29 pm

    I was under the impression that the Redut launchers were 16 tube bins, so with two that would make 32 launch tubes

    The image of Pr. 22350 model from the last IMDS 2011 at which i refer show a bined 14 VL tube formation (for a grand total of 28 ) on the bow and other 8 tubes bined (for a total of 16 more)in a more recessed position, likely UKSK tubes for AShM.  

    http://balancer.ru/forum/punbb/attachment.php?item=231441



    What surely hit the eyes is that the overall appearance of the 28 VLS of Redut AD and the 16 3R-14UKSK is pratically identical letting we to speculate only on a possible difference in deepness (3R-14UKSK is 9.58 meters deep for allow the hosting of Oniks or BrahMos).
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jul 22, 2011 11:16 am

    Excuse my ignorance but in this photo of a model:

    http://balancer.ru/forum/punbb/attachment.php?item=231441

    I see the two sets of launcher bins for Brahmos and Club in the centre with 8 hatches each, but I don't see the 14 tube Redut launcher tubes.
    The two blank areas above and below the Brahmos and Klub launchers in the photo include 3 separate tubs or boxes... unless they each hold a different number of missiles each I would suggest that these are the Redut launchers and that with them grouped in threes that 14 will not likely be their capacity unless each of the three bins that make up each group of launchers holds 4.6666 missiles.
    I suspect that a more sensible load for each bin would be 4, which makes the capacity of three bins 12 missiles and the two forward groups of bins 24 missile capacity.

    Assuming there are no other launchers elsewhere on the vessel that means 16 land attack, anti sub and anti ship missiles and 24 SAM launchers for up to 24 x 4 = 96 SAMs.

    That would likely result in a load of perhaps 64 Morfei short range IIR missiles for close in defence plus perhaps 24 x 40km range 9M96 missiles, which would leave 8 x 120km range 9M96 missiles.

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Fri Jul 22, 2011 1:56 pm

    I see the two sets of launcher bins for Brahmos and Club in the centre with 8 hatches each, but I don't see the 14 tube Redut launcher tubes.


    GarryB go at the bottom of the pic's page and scroll the page to the right and you will see the two series of 14 Redut AD launchers (the pic is very big therefore you see at the beginning only the left part )


    Assuming there are no other launchers elsewhere on the vessel that means 16 land attack, anti sub and anti ship missiles and 24 SAM launchers for up to 24 x 4 = 96 SAMs.

    Because are present 28 Redut launchers the correct count is 28 x 4 = 112 SAM of the 9M96 type.


    That would likely result in a load of perhaps 64 Morfei short range IIR missiles for close in defence plus perhaps 24 x 40km range 9M96 missiles, which would leave 8 x 120km range 9M96 missiles.

    But my previous question remain : we know that 4 9M96,with a diameter of 25 cm ,fit the space of a big 48N6 ,with a diameter of 50 cm .
    We have the 9M100 missile with a diameter just of 12,5 cm (do you note the pattern in the diameter measure ?); do you belive that 9M100 will replace the space of 9M96 on a one to one basis ? ...I highly doubt that ;at the contrary i believe that the same reason behind the design of the short range 9M100 ,is to gain an highly effective mean against large scale saturating attacks.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 23, 2011 3:00 am

    When I open the picture there is no horizontal scroll bar so I can see the blanked launcher bins for Redut.

    Because the picture is side on the Redut launchers are above and below the front UKSK launcher and seem to consist of three bins each with no clearly defined hatches so their capacity is hard to determine directly from the model.

    Because are present 28 Redut launchers the correct count is 28 x 4 = 112 SAM of the 9M96 type.

    If we can establish there are 28 launch tubes then I agree on the count of 112 SAMs.

    But my previous question remain : we know that 4 9M96,with a diameter of 25 cm ,fit the space of a big 48N6 ,with a diameter of 50 cm .
    We have the 9M100 missile with a diameter just of 12,5 cm (do you note the pattern in the diameter measure ?); do you belive that 9M100 will replace the space of 9M96 on a one to one basis ? ...I highly doubt that ;at the contrary i believe that the same reason behind the design of the short range 9M100 ,is to gain an highly effective mean against large scale saturating attacks.

    I can't give you hard answers, but we can use a bit of logic and try to work out what would make sense.

    First of all the purpose of the Redut system is similar to the UKSK system in that it is to be a unified launcher that can be loaded with a variety of weapons.
    It makes sense to build a system that can be applied from small corvettes right up to carriers... especially because unlike other types of launchers it is stealthy in that it mounts flush to the deck and is not limited in terms of firing rate in that all the missiles in the tubes are actually ready to fire... they don't need to be handled or moved to a firing position.

    Having all the launch systems the same makes a lot of sense in terms of standardisation of systems and handling and maintainence, though there is something to be said for having long and short models where the long models are fitted to the bigger ships and allow full sized 400km range S-400 and full sized Rif-M missiles to be loaded, while for smaller ships a shorter launcher that can take the shorter S-400 missiles could be used.

    If it is the case of the latter then fitting the tiny 9M100 missile into the enormous tubes... even if you fit them in quad packs is a little inefficient.

    If you look at this photo you can see even though the two smaller 9M96 missiles are much slimmer, they are not actually that much shorter than the full sized missiles:



    However the 9M100 missiles will likely be much shorter weapons, so even including a cold launch catapult system to throw them up into the air and get them started even if you couldn't pack 4 in the area of one 9M96 missile (which I doubt), you could probably stack two lots on top of each other with the smaller missile so each launch tube could carry one full sized long range missile, or 4 9M96 missiles of 120km or 40km range, or you could put a double pack of 9M100 missiles that has 8 missiles which consist of two stacks of four missiles in each tube.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 23, 2011 3:24 am

    My apologies... I now see the scroll bar on the web page itself, and yes... it appears there are two large bins each with 14 hatches which are presumably the Redut launchers.

    Makes me wonder what the blanked out bins either side of the UKSK launchers are.

    Keep in mind this is a frigate yet it has the potential to have up to 16 Brahmos missiles and 112 SAMs.

    In fact on most pictures I have seen of the vessel it has Kashtan systems at the rear corners, so with the Pantsir-S1 upgrade that means 64 missiles with 20km range able to hit targets at 2m above the water up to 15km altitude and engage 4 targets each at one time... and that is for the export models of Pantsir-S1.

    This is a very well armed frigate... in fact it is better armed than the Sovremmeny Destroyers which were considered well armed vessels.

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Jul 24, 2011 1:15 pm

    Makes me wonder what the blanked out bins either side of the UKSK launchers are.

    My hypothesis,founded on the point that UKSK are placed in that position just to "gain" the 1,5 / 2 meters of deepness necessary to host Oniks, is that those hatches are built but not with capacity to host future integration of long range navalized very long range AD / or cruise missiles.
    Likely the purpose for this will be,thanks to the synergistic resultant of the ship's reduced radar signature and even only the most basic noise/selective jamming,to leave also future airborne attacking menaces well within engagement envelop of the ship (implementable) Long Range Air Defence systems.


    Keep in mind this is a frigate yet it has the potential to have up to 16 Brahmos missiles and 112 SAMs.......so with the Pantsir-S1 upgrade that means 64 missiles with 20km range able to hit targets at 2m above the water up to 15km altitude and engage 4 targets each at one time... and that is for the export models of Pantsir-S1.

    GarryB,all the data at our dispaosal,give to me the distinct feeling that project 20350 will execute -at least until first unities of new generation destroyer will be laid down-several roles assigned,in other Navies around the world, at ships in totally different size categories.
    If the informations on the true range of internal versions of Klub not subject to MTCR (likely the subsonic land attack version with the 400 kg warhead http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=11768 ) can be an hint , we can easily infer that the engagement range of Russian Oniks,not subject to MTRC, lie in the region of 800-900 km .
    That mean that a pair of those "frigates" would be capable ,at second of the missile configuration, attack and destroy several high paying land based targets :C4 sites, radar installations, airfields hangars etc.., from ranges well outside the possibilities of any conventional version -Block III and Block IV TLAM - of BGM-109 http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=1300&ct=2 ; or engage an enemy naval formation with a salvo of high supersonic and manoeuvrable missiles in the class of Oniks/3M54 Klub from well outside the engagement range of any AShM operative in any other Navy worldwide.

    On the missile defence sector we have that each Pr 20350,leaving out any employement of the space now reserved to the technological hatches of which we have talked previously,will mount : 1) Redut AD VL tubes with 112 9M96 missiles with range of 120 / 40 km (or in my opinion,more likely, 90 9M96 missiles and 88 9M100 missile with about 10 km of engagement range for close defence) with the crucial capability to engage incoming missile in a saturating salvo not in the closing order but from the "interior" of theirs formation so to offer to the most internal layers of AD not only targets much easier to designate and neutralize but also enough time between menaces for re-engagement of missiles not destroyed, 2) 64 23Ya6 missile of Pantsyr-M with range superior to 20 km (likely in the 30 km region), 3) A-192 130 mm gun in the 22 km region 4)On board jamming systems in the 13-14 km range 5) 9M100 fire and forget missiles in the 10 km range,likely shooted in salvo of 2-3 to each evenual survivng missile 6)Chaff/Flare delivered by both in borad systems and KA-28 helicopter 7) Two Twinned 30mm gun of Pantsyr-M with range of 4 km.

    On the ASW departement we have (ecluding Klub 91RE1/2 mounted purposely for the task) that the Pr. 20350 is equiped with a new generation sonar ,2 quadruple Medvedka 2 sytems and the only hard kill anti-torpedo active defence system ,at now,operative worldwide the Paket-E/Nk.

    ....Those aren't precisely the capabilities of a typical frigate ship......
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:38 am

    BTW I was reading some more about the the naval Pantsir-S1 and the navy official said they were going to replace the OSA/Klintok class missiles in Navy service.

    So the new system will replace SA-N-4 and SA-N-9 systems.

    Makes sense to me as they offer a very low altitude intercept capability of 2m above the waves out to 20km.

    Interestingly this also suggests improved accuracy because the older missiles have proximity fuses set to about 5m which clearly can't be the case if it can hit targets 2m above the water.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3193
    Points : 3283
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  medo on Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:36 pm

    GarryB wrote:Excellent.

    The fact that they will be showing Morfei also suggests they might show other projects too...

    BTW I was reading some more about the the naval Pantsir-S1 and the navy official said they were going to replace the OSA/Klintok class missiles in Navy service.

    So the new system will replace SA-N-4 and SA-N-9 systems.

    Makes sense to me as they offer a very low altitude intercept capability of 2m above the waves out to 20km.

    Interestingly this also suggests improved accuracy because the older missiles have proximity fuses set to about 5m which clearly can't be the case if it can hit targets 2m above the water.



    I'm sure they will not install any new OSA or Klinok SAM system in any new ship, but newer naval Pantsir and naval version of Morphei ans Vityaz systems. But I doubt they will replace Osa and Klinok on existing ships with Pantsirs. I think new Pantsir could replace old Kasthan, while Osa and Klinok have radar stations and missile launchers on different places and Klinok is also vertical launched missile (naval Tor). Osa is too old system and is now two generations behind and it is a waste of money to work with them, but Klinok could be modernized to Tor-M2 level, which is no worse than Pantsir with similar capabilities.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16302
    Points : 16933
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:52 pm

    The ships they are looking at upgrading... is Kirov and Slava class vessels that have Klintok could have these systems replaced with Pantsir-S1.

    Given an overhaul and upgrade it makes no sense to keep old systems in service as they will become expensive over time both to maintain and upgrade.

    Makes rather more sense to replace them during overhauls with new systems.

    The enormous pedestal radar system for Klinok could be directly replaced with either a Pantsir-S1 turret directly, or a 5P-10 artillery fire control radar system turret which could direct a number of systems.

    It makes little sense to keep Klintok and Pantsir-S1 in service, the extra vertical launch space used by Klintok could be used for UKSK launchers or Redut launchers instead. The Klintok had a rotary launcher that allowed internal access and took up more internal space than needed.

    The 5km range of Morphei is a little disappointing but that article mentions that it uses active and passive guidance... perhaps suggests a combined IIR and ARH seeker?
    They have shown before seekers that combined passive radar homing sensors with active radar homing antennas... from memory the active radar homing range was 20-25km while the passive radar homing range was over 200km.

    Just read in a Russian news site that they are going to show their first UCAV at MAKS2011.

    I would think ATAKA, Kornet-M, and Krisantema-M would be the most likely and most useful armament for such a light platform (150-170kgs weapon payload).

    Sponsored content

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Aug 20, 2017 9:50 am