Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Share

    Vann7

    Posts : 3436
    Points : 3552
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Aug 29, 2013 6:30 pm

    GarryB wrote:Actually that is not true... AEGIS is a naval based battle management system that takes data from sonar, radar and other sensors and combines them into a subsurface, surface, and air picture to help defend carrier battle groups at sea.

    Only recently has it acquired any ABM capability.

    The Russian Navy equivalent of AEGIS is called Sigma and pretty much does the same thing of combining data from subsurface, sea, land, air and space assets to provide a complete picture of the battlespace and can be used to direct the defence of assets.

    Even the smallest new Russian Corvette is being fitted with Sigma and the standard cruise missile VLS and SAM VLS systems. A tiny Corvette could use data from a carrier 500km away to launch a 400km range SAM at a target 300km away from the Corvette and 200km from the carrier using data from the carriers AWACS aircraft... not many other corvettes have that capacity.

    im wondering about your opinions about the claims of an user in another forum about Russia navy defense capabilities.. He told..


    Both AEGIS and the UK/French PAAMS are designed to counter "saturated attacks" of high performance, supersonic anti-ship missiles and aircraft. No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.

    I would put PAAMS slightly above AEGIS in terms of air-defense capabilities - however AEGIS will regain parity or even exceed PAAMs in the near future (upgrades etc).

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that even comes close.

    The Chinese type 052C and future 052D destroyers are equipped with advanced AESA multi-function radars and long-range SAMs to provide similar capabilities of Western AEGIS/PAAMS systems. But we can safely assume that the Chinese "AEGIS" is still inferior to the Western systems. The Indian Navy is also developing its own "AEGIS" system in the new P-15A (Kolkata-class) and P-15B destroyers. But again, like the Chinese system it is still inferior to Western AEGIS and PAAMS. Germany and the Netherlands have also developed their own "AEGIS" like systems.

    The Russians as of yet have not developed any capable naval air defense systems and their fleet will still be vulnerable to anti-ship missiles like the Harpoon or Exocet.

    He seems a fanboy but not sure of any of his claims.. whats your take about his comments?
    it was in defense pk forums . can post the link of the conversation if you want.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16191
    Points : 16822
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 30, 2013 1:04 pm

    No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.
    An Iranian Airbus almost got through an AEGIS destroyers defences... the first shot they tried to fire failed and it was the second missile they fired within Iranian waters that murdered the 290 odd people on board.

    Moskit was in service in the early 1980s and it underflew AEGIS easily... the only defence the US Navy had on their AEGIS class cruisers that would get a shot at a Moskit was Phalanx and it is being replaced by SEA RAM because it can't hit low flying targets.

    No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.
    A very strong statement. Does he know that on paper those Exocets used by Argentina against British warships should also have failed miserably as Britain had Exocets and knew all about them and the Sea Wolf was on paper able to shoot them down with ease... yet so many ships sunk.

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that even comes close.
    You are paying too much attention to what he is actually saying and ignoring what he is not saying.

    He clearly has an interest and has researched AEGIS and PAAMS, though to what level is not clear, the problem is clearly that he obviously knows nothing about Russian Naval air defence systems or development in that direction... what he really should be saying is:

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that I know of that even comes close in performance to the performance that I believe AEGIS and PAAMS has.

    Which I think you will agree can fail on two counts... over estimation of the performance of the systems compounded by his ignorance of any other system including new Russia weapons and their deployment.

    For years the USN has been quite worried about Moskit and its replacement Onyx, and also the Klub missile with a long range subsonic carrier missile with a mach 2.8 high speed rocket propelled terminal component... not to mention the service entry in the next decade of the hypersonic Brahmos II and Zirconium missiles... currently every new vessel made for the Russian navy is being fitted with UKSK launch bins from Corvette right up to carrier and all the subs as well to carry supersonic anti ship missiles and Tomahawk equivalents.

    The Russians as of yet have not developed any capable naval air defense systems and their fleet will still be vulnerable to anti-ship missiles like the Harpoon or Exocet.
    A single KASHTAN-M turret can engage up to 4 Harpoons or 4 Exocets at once and apart from light patrol boats I don't know of any Russian or Soviet vessel that just has one CIWS.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 798
    Points : 882
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Aug 31, 2013 3:15 pm

    Vann7 wrote:
    im wondering about your opinions about the claims of an user in another forum about Russia navy defense capabilities.. He told..

    Both AEGIS and the UK/French PAAMS are designed to counter "saturated attacks" of high performance, supersonic anti-ship missiles and aircraft. No Soviet missile would penetrate the defense systems of ANY AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.

    I would put PAAMS slightly above AEGIS in terms of air-defense capabilities - however AEGIS will regain parity or even exceed PAAMs in the near future (upgrades etc).

    Apart from AEGIS and PAAMS there is no other naval air-defense system that even comes close.

    The Chinese type 052C and future 052D destroyers are equipped with advanced AESA multi-function radars and long-range SAMs to provide similar capabilities of Western AEGIS/PAAMS systems. But we can safely assume that the Chinese "AEGIS" is still inferior to the Western systems. The Indian Navy is also developing its own "AEGIS" system in the new P-15A (Kolkata-class) and P-15B destroyers. But again, like the Chinese system it is still inferior to Western AEGIS and PAAMS. Germany and the Netherlands have also developed their own "AEGIS" like systems.

    The Russians as of yet have not developed any capable naval air defense systems and their fleet will still be vulnerable to anti-ship missiles like the Harpoon or Exocet.

    He seems a fanboy but not sure of any of his claims.. whats your take about his comments?
    it was in defense pk forums . can post the link of the conversation if you want.

    Typical old arguments..no need to get really worked up on it.

    AEGIS air defense are still limited by how many fire control director it can carry... even with 100++ standards.. Arleigh burke can only at best engage three of them at long range because it only carries three directors. SM-6 may improve their case though.. but with advent of naval based 9M96's..they're equal.

    I Don't really buy of "Over The Horizon Engagement" capability of the SM-6's as it still relies on other platform who were happen to spot the target to contact the missile carrier before launch.

    Russian naval air defense are more comprehensive than their western counterpart.. just take Kashtans.. combination between missile and guns.. can engage more targets than any EU or US Close in systems except RAM...along with Klinok and naval version of OSA's .. All of them have their own Radar's Thus won't disturb each other.. meaning more targets can be engaged independently.

    And even nicer that Russian CIWS often come in pair... instead typical western arrangement which favor single fighter arrangement.. meaning that Russian CIWS can put more lead on the air.. increasing probability of destruction of AsHM's

    And odds are that if Soviet doctrine implemented.. There would be jammers directed at the radar's...though this can be dealt with ECCM's ... and not to mention Soviet ASHM's are armored.. won't be easily brought down by typical SAM fragmentation warhead.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16191
    Points : 16822
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:28 am

    It is similar to the situation on land... the Soviets spend a lot of money on their air defences on land and sea because the west spent a lot on air power.

    The Soviets have systems like Kashtan and soon Pantsir-S1 with two 6 barrel gatling guns and 8 ready to fire missiles and 24 reload missiles on an automatic ammo handling system... do you think that is because they have rather more experience with supersonic anti ship missiles?

    As StealthFlanker mentions the total number of on board SAMs is not as important as the number of missile director channels you have... SA-2 SAM sites with the capability of engaging one target at a time means two cruise missiles at once are a serious threat... Vityaz with 16 missile directors each able to control 2 missiles against 1 target means 16 targets can be engaged at once with the high speed of the missile meaning more targets can be engaged per minute than with older slower missiles.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Austin

    Posts : 6203
    Points : 6609
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Tue Oct 22, 2013 5:29 pm

    CB "Amethyst" has begun to develop a lightweight naval gun system "Kartaun-Puma"
    rusnavy.com

    Design Bureau "Amethyst" has begun to develop a lightweight naval gun system "Kartaun-Puma", which is easier to existing options to four times. It will equip light vehicles, so they will get heavy combat capabilities.

    According to "News" Deputy Director General Yury design office smoothly, managed to ease the weight of the unit due to composite materials.

    - It creates complex, including a gun and ammunition management system. Previous two-barrel gun was and weighed 97 tons, the - single-barrel and weighs 24 tons - through the application of new technical solutions and the introduction of new hardware components, including composite materials, - said Yuri smoothly.

    The principal difference between the perspective of the complex from the previous 130-millimeter plants - a unified fire control system that is compatible not only with any naval artillery systems, but also with complex land 'Beach'.

    - In contrast to the previous, the system creates a universal control for all kinds and for all artillery weapons of the Navy. It used to be - that neither the caliber, it has its own control system. Due to unification, we have reduced the number of management systems, reducing the number of devices. As a result, reduced cost, and at the same time we can control and 30 - and 130-mm gun, - said Yuri smoothly.

    The new complex will be able to get any ship whose design provides artillery. But above all, it will be installed on frigates of Project 22350 - "Admiral Kasatonov", "Admiral Golovko," etc.

    - All of our efforts have focused on weight reduction for this complex could be placed on a ship smaller displacement. Before, we could put the complex on the ships with a displacement of 6.7 tonnes, and now we can put it on ships with a displacement 2 tons This will enhance the combat capabilities of coastal and sea targets to the level of larger displacement ships, - said Yuri smoothly.

    "Kartaun-Puma" is created on the backlog of past development activities - in the complex will fire control system "Puma", the height of the gun will be about 12 m, the length of the barrel - 7-8 pm Just like the last gun "Armat" artillery can hit targets on the water, on the shore and in the air.

    - Compared to what it was before, in the short term, the firing range will be increased by about a factor of 1.5-2. Efficiency is also significantly increase, up to two times, this rate will exceed 30 cannon rounds per minute. Expected to increase reliability 1.5 times increase in the reaction rate of up to two seconds. To manage the new gun will require only three people instead of six, - said Yuri smoothly.

    Installation will be able to fire until it is completely use up ammunition - ammunition "Kartaun-Puma" will be equal to the capacity of the ship's cellar for shells, it is impossible for any foreign counterparts. Shoot 'Kartaun-Puma "will high-explosive, anti-aircraft and any other projectiles caliber 130 mm, including managed.

    - Earlier in the gun shells were submitted as a Kalashnikov rifle cartridges. Now this is a serious intelligent automation mechanisms guns, including ammunition feed system SAP 192-M. Without interrupting the shooting, you can fire up to exhaustion of all ammunition with automatic selection of the type of projectile - Back to the high-explosive anti-aircraft can be instantly. In addition, in this caliber we have a unitary shell, which is also an advantage over other countries - said smoothly.
    The installation will be ready for the start of 2015. To conduct R & D to create a new complex in the 2013-2014 year, KB "Amethyst" will receive 776 million rubles. Produce 130-millimeter artillery complex "Kartaun-Puma" will be of "MZ" arsenal. "
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16191
    Points : 16822
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    CB "Amethyst" has begun to develop a lightweight naval gun system "Kartaun-Puma"

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:26 pm

    Excellent news about the new gun... A-192M... reduced weight, increased range, ability to fire off its entire ammo load in one go (ie fully cooled to prevent overheating so it is able to provide continuous fire support) and small and light enough to be carried by Frigates... excellent news.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:16 pm

    Read an interesting tidbit on Balancers....Uragan is known as having an good record of shooting down AShMs during live training exercises...only Kinzhal out did it regularly.

    Makes me feel better about the prospect of the Shtil being the only missile system the 11356s have for self defense.

    xeno

    Posts : 140
    Points : 145
    Join date : 2013-02-04

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  xeno on Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:43 am

    TR1 wrote:Read an interesting tidbit on Balancers....Uragan is known as having an good record of shooting down AShMs during live training exercises...only Kinzhal out did it regularly.

    Makes me feel better about the prospect of the Shtil being the only missile system the 11356s have for self defense.
    Interesting... Do you still have link to that discussion?
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Uragan is known as having an good record of shooting down AShMs

    Post  TR1 on Sat Dec 07, 2013 9:55 am

    xeno wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Read an interesting tidbit on Balancers....Uragan is known as having an good record of shooting down AShMs during live training exercises...only Kinzhal out did it regularly.

    Makes me feel better about the prospect of the Shtil being the only missile system the 11356s have for self defense.
    Interesting... Do you still have link to that discussion?
    Yep here it is:

    http://forums.airbase.ru/2013/12/t87190,45--razvitie-morskogo-oruzhiya-3.1075.html

    Towards middle and bottom of the thread.

    Austin

    Posts : 6203
    Points : 6609
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Tue Feb 04, 2014 5:27 am

    Will this be the new Standard CIWS for Russian Navy replacing Kashtan ?

    Plama

    http://kbtochmash.com/articles-eng/articles-eng_82.html
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  TR1 on Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:06 am

    There's no standard CIWS as we are seeing brand new ships enter service armed with anything from Ak-630, Duet, or Palma....and we could very well see navalized Pantsir in service this decade.

    Austin

    Posts : 6203
    Points : 6609
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Tue Feb 04, 2014 9:20 am

    Thanks , That would be stupidity if they dont standardise on a single class of CIWS.

    Just keep AK-630M/Duet for low end ships and Plama for high end.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16191
    Points : 16822
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Naval systems

    Post  GarryB on Tue Feb 04, 2014 10:27 am

    Palma is the low cost low impact CIWS for light vessels and for export.

    There is no deck penetration... Kashtan on the other hand has below deck missile handling equipment and 24 reserve missiles which together with the 8 on the mount meant 32 missiles per turret available, plus two 30mm gatling guns.

    The Palma is cheaper because it doesn't have CM or MMW radar, and it has only 8 missiles ready to fire.

    Those missiles are laser beam riding Sosna missiles.

    The replacement for Kashtan-M is a Pantsir-S1 based system with 20km engagement range and a an engagement envelope from 2m above the wave tops to 15km altitude, with 8 missiles on the gun mount with a further 24 missiles below decks for a total of 32 missiles.

    It will be used on larger vessels with plenty of room.

    less room, or less money or both = Palma or Duet or combinations of the two.

    Thanks , That would be stupidity if they dont standardise on a single class of CIWS.

    They are different enough to be useful. The Palma is a cheaper simpler option for export or for vessels that are not designed for serious combat.

    For Pantsir equipped vessels they should be able to defend themselves from a range of threats.

    Part of the Kirov upgrades and Slava upgrades will likely include Pantsir because of their performance.

    For smaller vessels where stealth is a concern then Duet and Palma offer cheaper more radar silent options.

    The ultimate solution would be Duet and Morfei in vertical launch bins... as it would be stealthy and relatively very capable.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10092
    Points : 10580
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  George1 on Mon Aug 04, 2014 11:12 pm

    Russia Develops Robots for Maritime Defense

    MOSCOW, August 4 (RIA Novosti) - Russian scientists have developed and presented to the Defense Ministry a maritime defense system comprising surface, underwater and flying robots, a defense industry official told RIA Novosti on Monday.

    “The global [maritime defense] command-and-control system, which we are developing, is ready for a large-scale testing phase,” General Director and Chief Designer of the Morinformsystem-Agat corporation, Georgy Antsev, said during the Innovation Day exhibition organized by the Defense Ministry.

    "A patrol ship or a submarine are not always capable of monitoring large regions, while an integrated information control robotic system may solve tasks related to the defense of whole regions, as well as providing navigation in difficult conditions," Antsev said.

    According to the official, the system includes remotely-controlled patrol boats, unmanned aerial vehicles, various types of floating beacons and sensors, as well as other means of monitoring, communications and data-management.

    Antsev said his company could create robotic systems providing maritime defenses of any scope - from protection of ports to the defense of entire stretches of border. The robots could be equipped with traditional internal combustion engines or with engines powered by solar or water energy, he added.

    Morinformsystem-Agat Concern is an umbrella organization in the Russian shipbuilding industry specializing in the domains of informational systems and technologies, system engineering in the sphere of marine data computing equipment, electromagnetic compatibility of radio-electronic facilities, degaussing systems, fire control systems of sea-based cruise and ballistic missiles, combat information and control systems and integrated management systems for surface ships and submarines, according to the company’s official website.

    MotherlandCalls

    Posts : 8
    Points : 8
    Join date : 2014-08-03

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  MotherlandCalls on Tue Aug 05, 2014 4:16 am

    George1 wrote:Russia Develops Robots for Maritime Defense

    "A patrol ship or a submarine are not always capable of monitoring large regions, while an integrated information control robotic system may solve tasks related to the defense of whole regions, as well as providing navigation in difficult conditions," Antsev said.

    According to the official, the system includes remotely-controlled patrol boats, unmanned aerial vehicles, various types of floating beacons and sensors, as well as other means of monitoring, communications and data-management.

    I don't see how a remotely controlled patrol boat would be any better than a patrol ship with men on board. The UAVs and other beacons and sensors make a lot more sense and it will be interesting to see the results of those tests.  russia 
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2763
    Points : 2813
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mike E on Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:47 am

    MotherlandCalls wrote:
    George1 wrote:Russia Develops Robots for Maritime Defense

    "A patrol ship or a submarine are not always capable of monitoring large regions, while an integrated information control robotic system may solve tasks related to the defense of whole regions, as well as providing navigation in difficult conditions," Antsev said.

    According to the official, the system includes remotely-controlled patrol boats, unmanned aerial vehicles, various types of floating beacons and sensors, as well as other means of monitoring, communications and data-management.

    I don't see how a remotely controlled patrol boat would be any better than a patrol ship with men on board. The UAVs and other beacons and sensors make a lot more sense and it will be interesting to see the results of those tests.  russia 

    It means that the men that would have been on the ship can be placed elsewhere. Patrol boats don't really need to have a crew.

    Austin

    Posts : 6203
    Points : 6609
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Austin on Tue Aug 26, 2014 2:25 pm

    Naval Variant of Pantsir called Pantsir-M developed

    http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/52284/

    Completed service testing of a marine ZRPK "Armour" delivery set to begin in the Navy in 2016. This was at the "Oboronekspo 2014" the CEO of the holding company " Precision complexes " Alexander Denisov .




    "Armour-M" is a naval variant ZRPK "Armour-S" and to replace the complex " Dirk . " Contract for the supply of a marine ZRPK "Armour" was signed with the Ministry of Defense.
    Previously Managing Director of Instrument Design Bureau, part of the holding "Precision complexes", Dmitry Kanaplyou reported That under the sea "Armour" will modernize a number of destroyers and other large ships. Such works are already underway.


    There is a version that the two versions of the ship's combat module anti-aircraft missile and gun systems "Armour-M" will be included in the arms of the Russian destroyer perspective of the "Leader", the creation of which is under development work. Study of image multi-purpose ship oceanic zone is present in the state defense order for 2014. According to the portal "modern army", armament of destroyers of the "Leader" will be comparable with a complete set of American destroyer Arleigh Burke.


    Anti-aircraft missile and gun system "Armour" - the card Tula KBP. The system is designed to destroy cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, aircraft and ground targets within a radius of 20 km and at an altitude of 15 km.


    "Instrument Design Bureau" - one of the leading design organizations Russian defense complex. Since 2008, the PCU is a member Rosteha, being one of the major holding companies "High-complexes." PCU forces developed and mastered serial production of more than 150 models of weapons and military equipment. Currently, the company is a powerful research and production center, a system of modern precision weapons. Technical solutions embodied in the KBP developments, contain more than 6000 inventions.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2763
    Points : 2813
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mike E on Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:34 am

    Great! I can't wait to see it equipped on some new ships, it will easily be the best CIWS in the world!
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16191
    Points : 16822
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:41 pm

    Not totally clear but it seems from the article that there will be two versions... one for upgrading existing ships and one for new designs.

    I would expect the model for new designs is a more stealthy design perhaps?


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2763
    Points : 2813
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Mike E on Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:59 am

    GarryB wrote:Not totally clear but it seems from the article that there will be two versions... one for upgrading existing ships and one for new designs.

    I would expect the model for new designs is a more stealthy design perhaps?
    Perhaps, as it is with the AK-630.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16191
    Points : 16822
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:35 pm

    As far as I know the "stealthy" AK-630 is Duet...



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4496
    Points : 4675
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Naval Pantsyr

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:02 pm

    Palma testing:

    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1945
    Points : 2066
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:00 am

    I think the following shows the AK-76MA.

    avatar
    RTN

    Posts : 189
    Points : 174
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield , CT

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  RTN on Tue Oct 28, 2014 4:55 pm

    GarryB wrote:With a scramjet engine things are made much easier because the air coming in does not need to be slowed down to subsonic speeds and then accelerated through the engine back up to high supersonic speeds to generate thrust.

    SSK equipped with VLS will make it unstable & it will be a nightmare to control the SSK’s neutral buoyancy levels. This is because ASCMs like BrahMos-1 are best launched from either VLS or inclined launchers encased within much heavier SSGNs. It was for this reason that Russia way back in 2001 wound-up its efforts to market the VLS-equipped Amur 1650.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16191
    Points : 16822
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 29, 2014 10:22 am

    SSK equipped with VLS will make it unstable & it will be a nightmare to control the SSK’s neutral buoyancy levels.

    No disrespect meant, but that sounds silly... most subs are full of a range of ballast tanks that allow shifting of the cg to all over the place on the sub.

    Modern cruise missiles are not that different in weight to torpedos, but more importantly on old Soviet and Russian subs the torpedo room is right at the nose of the vessel so launching 4 torpedoes could take up to 10 tons off the weight of the front of the vessel.

    Vertical launch tubes are added to SSKs and can be placed at the CG so weight loss through launching would have zero effect on stability.

    To be honest the launch tubes themselves could be used to balance the boat as when the missiles are launched the doors can be shut and any level of water could be pumped in... as needed from full to none depending on the requirement at the time.

    To be brutally honest the weight of the missile will actually be close to the missiles volume in water as fuel and even HE payloads, as well as electronic sections are not generally denser than water, so the water that fills the tube after the missile has been launched will balance out the loss of weight of the missile...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Jul 27, 2017 2:37 am