Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Share

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Werewolf on Fri May 13, 2016 6:09 pm

    I already have suggested an ATGM with one-shot corner reflectored projectile in the probe of the ATGM that is fired from some range to set off the APS system and use the time between reload/reaction to penetrate it. Or use a projectile that explodes with the set off the APS and forms a dust/cload that will block the radars of acquiring the follow up ATGM.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4825
    Points : 4872
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Militarov on Fri May 13, 2016 7:11 pm

    Isos wrote:Do you think it's possible to put radar reflectors in a antiship missile and release them while attaking ? Naval radars can detect like 2000 targets, so puting 500 2mm radar cone reflectors could sature radars. I'm not talking about a cloud of chaffs.


    Would need to be bigger than that, radar reflectors are great idea but they still need to be alot bigger than that.

    Isos
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 306
    Points : 310
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Fri May 13, 2016 7:39 pm

    Werewolf wrote:I already have suggested an ATGM with one-shot corner reflectored projectile in the probe of the ATGM that is fired from some range to set off the APS system and use the time between reload/reaction to penetrate it. Or use a projectile that explodes with the set off the APS and forms a dust/cload that will block the radars of acquiring the follow up ATGM.

    RPG-32 !!

    Militarov wrote:

    Would need to be bigger than that, radar reflectors are great idea but they still need to be alot bigger than that.

    I read somewhere that with a good design it could be small. They use the same as in the picture on boat to be seen by radars. So a much smaller could simulate a 0.1m² RCS of a ONIKS.

    Bonus:



    At 55s, It seems to be a Moskit !

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9443
    Points : 9935
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  George1 on Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:33 pm

    Russian Navy to receive advanced Futlyar torpedoes

    The new torpedoes will equip the Project 955A Borey-A (NATO reporting name: Dolgorukiy-class), Project 885 Yasen-class (Severodvinsk-class) and Project 885M Yasen-M in the first place

    MOSCOW, June 22. /TASS/. The Russian Navy is expected to adopt for service the advanced Futlyar deep-water torpedo that is undergoing its state trials now, a source in the defense industry told TASS on Wednesday.

    According to the source, the Futlyar is an upgraded variant of the Fizik homing torpedo that has entered service recently.

    "The new variant of the torpedo is undergoing state trials at Lake Issyk-Kul in Kyrgyzstan, which are due for completion later in the year. If the torpedo passes the tests, it will enter service and its full-scale production should begin in 2017," the source said.

    According to the source, the sophisticated torpedo will be of heat-seeking design like the baseline model but it will have the ability to be controlled from the submarine.

    "The Futlyar will also be supplied with an improved homing system with an extended underwater target lock-on range. It will retain the baseline model’s range, speed and maximum launch depth - 50 km, over 50 knots and 400 m respectively," the source said.

    The source said that the Futlyar would equip the Project 955A Borey-A (NATO reporting name: Dolgorukiy-class), Project 885 Yasen-class (Severodvinsk-class) and Project 885M Yasen-M in the first place. With the beginning of the Futlyar’s serial production, the output of the Fizik torpedo will be discontinued.

    The Futlyar has been developed by the St. Petersburg Research Institute of Marine Engineering and the Dagdizel Enterprise will handle its production.

    An official confirmation of the above information is unavailable to TASS at the moment.

    In April last year, another source in the defense industry told TASS about the service entry and the launch of the production of the Fizik torpedo designed to replace the obsolete USET-80 developed in the 1980s.


    More:
    http://tass.ru/en/defense/883900


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:48 pm

    The speed of a 14.5mm is too high, something that go away from the missile at low speed is better optimized against the alghorithms used for anti chaffs.

    Chaff released by a missile in flight will rapidly decellerate and clearly not have a trajectory that will hit the target... it will drop to the ground a few metres past where it is released and would be ignored by the ARENA radar system from the 1990s let alone a modern system.

    If your missiles is flying 2000km/h then there are two targets on radar and one is flying 1000m/s but 45° on the left. With good alghorithms you can know which one is the missile.

    It doesn't matter what speed your target is approaching at a HEAT warhead will work at any speed so any object no matter how fast it is moving will need to be intercepted by the defense system... except if its trajectory wont hit the tank like with chaff.


    The speed of 14.5mm ammo at the gun muzzle is 1km/s which is rather less than most APFSDS rounds... if it is going to hit the target then the APS would need to intercept.

    The point is that you would not be firing the 14.5mm HMG at the target from within 500m... from 3,000m or more the projectile will be travelling at nothing like 1km/s... it will be more like subsonic, but its mass will allow it to travel great distances... 6km or so.

    The point is that the corner reflector in its nose will make it appear to be a much larger object and as long as its trajectory will impact the tank the APS system would have to intercept... a 20 round burst means it will have to intercept 20 targets within the space of 2 seconds due to the cyclic rate of fire of the KPV HMG launching these projectiles.

    It would not be hard to launch a Kornet and then fire a burst of 14.5mm rounds from the same vehicle at the same target so the 20 rounds of 14.5mm ammo arrive on target a fraction of a second before the Kornet arrives... the APS will see 20 large objects arriving and then detect a smaller slower threat arriving next... it will try an engage the first targets first and will not be able to cope.

    An EM pulse projectile could be fired from a BMPT from its 120mm main gun via a 120mm mortar shell that detonates 10m from the tank and disables all the tanks electronics just before the ATGMs arrive...

    There are lots of options.

    Then if you have a propulsed reflector that goes in parallel with the missiles at 100m from it (even if it's for 10s, but it would be a very little propuslor), it's more complicated to know which one is the good target. So with 100 or 1000 of them it's 100/1000 times harder.
    You just need to eject it 100m away. A bullet would go 4km from it and wouldn't be detected by the missile's radar (out of range).

    Decoys release just short of impact would all have to be on a trajectory to hit the target to trigger a system like ARENA which will ignore threats that are not actually going to hit the tank or fly directly over it... an ARENA munition would likely shatter the missile and all the decoys in one interception.

    14.5mm rounds will come one at a time in a string of rounds rather than all together in a cluster like released decoys.


    _________________
    “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

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  max steel on Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:14 pm

    Bubble-Enclosed Submarines Could Go Really, Really Fast

    Supercavitation promises airplane speeds--under the sea.

    Researchers at Penn State are working to enclose the submarines of the future in a bubble of gas, allowing them to achieve top speeds faster than what is possible while moving through regular water. If successful, it could mean submarines capable of speeds of up to hundreds of miles per hour.

    As submarines and torpedoes travel through seawater they are naturally at the mercy of physics, and objects traveling through sea travel encounter much more drag than objects traveling through air. The end result is that the practical speed limit of submarines is somewhere around 30 to 40 knots. Even with nuclear propulsion, that's about the best many military submarines can do.

    But what if it were possible to enclose a submarine in a gas as it travels through liquid? That's the principle behind supercavitation.

    There is a precedent: the Russian VA-111 Shkval torpedo. Developed in the 1970s, Shkval is equipped with a bubble generator in the nose that envelops the torpedo in a gas membrane while a solid rocket fuel engine provides thrust. The Shkval is capable of speeds in excess of 200 knots—up to five times faster than conventional torpedoes.

    Scientists at Penn State are currently trying to understand so-called "pulsation"—the continuous cycle of shrinkage and expansion of a gas bubble around an object that occurs during supercavitation. Pulsation creates an inconsistent bubble unsuitable for travel, but before they can tame pulsation, the scientists need to understand how it works. Pulsation is difficult to create under laboratory conditions, but researchers at Penn State have managed to pull it off.

    Supercavitating submarines wouldn't be perfect. Ultimately submarines are stealthy killers, relying on their ability to remain undetected. Maintaining a giant gas bubble would be very noisy, making the submarine easy to locate. A compromise might be a submarine that can sprint from its base at, say San Diego by supercavitation, and then switch to slow-and-stealthy mode once it gets to a patrol zone in the western Pacific.

    Another thing about supercavitating submarines: if they, like Shkval, used rocket motors for thrust the subs would generate tremendous amounts of pollution, dumping rocket exhaust directly into the oceans. Not the most eco-friendly propulsion system, but seriously impressive if it can be made to work.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9443
    Points : 9935
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  George1 on Thu Jun 30, 2016 11:40 am

    All new Russian Navy ships and submarines will be equipped with the Fizik-1 universal deep water homing torpedo which has a target range 2.5 times greater than the USET-80, currently in service, a military source told RIA Novosti on Wednesday.

    http://sputniknews.com/military/20160629/1042168265/torpedo-ships-submarines.html

    so this is the new standard torpedo of Russian Navy?


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    chicken
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 83
    Points : 88
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  chicken on Thu Jun 30, 2016 11:50 am

    George1 wrote:
    All new Russian Navy ships and submarines will be equipped with the Fizik-1 universal deep water homing torpedo which has a target range 2.5 times greater than the USET-80, currently in service, a military source told RIA Novosti on Wednesday.

    http://sputniknews.com/military/20160629/1042168265/torpedo-ships-submarines.html

    so this is the new standard torpedo of Russian Navy?

    I believe they already upgraded that.

    Isos
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 306
    Points : 310
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Thu Jun 30, 2016 3:00 pm

    http://concern-agat.ru/en/production/missile-systems-land-and-sea-based-missile-systems/3r-14uksk-kh-ship-general-purpose-firing-system



    Just found that their are 2 types of uksk lunchers. One with 8 missiles and one with just 4 missiles wich is smaller.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jul 01, 2016 1:56 pm

    I have seen models where if you look under the deck a UKSK launcher is two huge tubes with 4 inner tubes, so one bin launcher has two big huge tubes that contain two lots of 4 tubes equalling 8 small tubes in total for the missiles for naval vessels.

    I suspect the single large tube model with just 4 small tubes is for the shipping container version and might have a land based model like Iskander eventually when the INF treaty is torn up... Smile

    For use on ships its great depth because of the length of the missiles the system carries means the launcher needs to be centrally placed... so I doubt they would fit only 4 tubes on ships or subs... might as well have all 8 tubes...

    Thanks for the link to that site though... Smile


    _________________
    “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

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:05 pm

    Actually looking at that site...

    this page:

    http://concern-agat.ru/en/production/missile-systems-land-and-sea-based-missile-systems/club-u-modular-missile-system

    Shows Club... which is the family of missiles in the UKSK launcher so this page shows it refitted onto an existing type... in this case a Udaloy class with mockups of inclined launchers and new under deck systems and systems mounted at the mid section... this suggests such inclined mounts could be used on the Slava and Sovremmeny class as well as Udaloy.

    the inclined launcher seems to have 6 missiles ready to launch so fitting that to a Slava class means instead of 16 heavy missiles in 8 sets of twin launchers it should be able to carry 8 sets of 6 missiles, so 48 missiles...

    So that is the Club land attack (ie Kalibr) plus the Club subsonic anti ship missile and the Club subsonic anti ship missile with the rocket propelled mach 3 terminal stage anti ship 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

    chinggis
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 35
    Points : 40
    Join date : 2015-06-11
    Age : 49
    Location : karlovac, croatia

    650mm torpedo

    Post  chinggis on Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:08 pm

    What is status of 650mm torpedo's in Russian Navy? After Kursk disaster there is a rumor that they will be put out of service and after that I am not hear nothing about that.

    Isos
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 306
    Points : 310
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:24 pm

    GarryB wrote:Actually looking at that site...

    this page:

    http://concern-agat.ru/en/production/missile-systems-land-and-sea-based-missile-systems/club-u-modular-missile-system

    Shows Club... which is the family of missiles in the UKSK launcher so this page shows it refitted onto an existing type... in this case a Udaloy class with mockups of inclined launchers and new under deck systems and systems mounted at the mid section... this suggests such inclined mounts could be used on the Slava and Sovremmeny class as well as Udaloy.

    the inclined launcher seems to have 6 missiles ready to launch so fitting that to a Slava class means instead of 16 heavy missiles in 8 sets of twin launchers it should be able to carry 8 sets of 6 missiles, so 48 missiles...

    So that is the Club land attack (ie Kalibr) plus the Club subsonic anti ship missile and the Club subsonic anti ship missile with the rocket propelled mach 3 terminal stage anti ship missile...

    Well if they decide to do that, it would give them a realy big power up, I mean just puting the inclined lunchers. Their Moskit have a small range for a destroyer. They could assist Slava's and Kirovs with the same missiles.

    Hope they will do that, They just need to change the external lunchers, wires and computers. Its not a big job to do that, they could do it easily.

    GarryB wrote:I have seen models where if you look under the deck a UKSK launcher is two huge tubes with 4 inner tubes, so one bin launcher has two big huge tubes that contain two lots of 4 tubes equalling 8 small tubes in total for the missiles for naval vessels.

    I suspect the single large tube model with just 4 small tubes is for the shipping container version and might have a land based model like Iskander eventually when the INF treaty is torn up... Smile

    For use on ships its great depth because of the length of the missiles the system carries means the launcher needs to be centrally placed... so I doubt they would fit only 4 tubes on ships or subs... might as well have all 8 tubes...

    Thanks for the link to that site though... Smile

    Or put some missiles on Navy's tankers Twisted Evil

    Big_Gazza
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 510
    Points : 534
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Big_Gazza on Mon Jul 04, 2016 1:31 pm

    chinggis wrote:What is status of 650mm torpedo's in Russian Navy? After Kursk disaster there is a rumor that they will be put out of service and after that I am not hear nothing about  that.

    The Yasen class SSN is reckoned to carry 650mm tubes, so I'd suggest that those reports are inaccurate.

    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Sunburns on Tarantul

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Jul 12, 2016 2:26 pm

    when was the Sunburn started being used on the Tarantul class missile ships ?
    I mean 12 Tarantul III class ships were in commision by 1990 but did they have the Sunburns at that time ?
    Reason I ask as the Database for soviet missiles in 1989 lists only 80 Sunburns in their inventory and at that time there were 9-10 Sovremennys in the fleet as well

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 13, 2016 12:06 pm

    The first 10-11 Tarantula class boats had an older rocket powered version of Moskit... it wasn't until the next vessels entered service they had the combined rocket ramjet powered Sunburn....


    _________________
    “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

    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Jul 20, 2016 5:49 am

    GarryB wrote:The first 10-11 Tarantula class boats had an older rocket powered version of Moskit... it wasn't until the next vessels entered service they had the combined rocket ramjet powered Sunburn....
    Ok thanks but they were never armed with SSN-7 ?

    The SSN-16 Stallion RPK-6 and RPK-7 was a dual ASUW and ASW weapon ? Was this the principal ASUW weapon of Victor III/Alfa/Akula/Sierra class ?

    It was explained here on this forum that RPK6/7 was only assigned a ASW role in SSN so what was their principal anti-surface ship weapon

    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1516
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:34 pm


    Russia will create a system of protection of the Arctic

    Enterprises of the military-industrial complex are developing a sonar system for the protection of the Arctic territorial waters of Russia, have informed "news" a source in the defense Ministry.
    - Now there is a study project of the new system. Work should be completed next year and after approval of the Ministry of defense will begin deploying it, - said the interlocutor of the edition.

    SEE ALSO
    In the Arctic will build ten military airfields
    "Security alarm" of the Arctic is composed of three components: marine, space and terrestrial. First, sonar buoys and underwater sensors, catch the noise of surface ships and submarines. The information gathered through satellites is transmitted to ground control station. The expanded system will cover the area of hundreds of kilometers.

    Head developer of the complex security is Corporation space systems of a special purpose "Comet" that appeared recently in the concern PVO "Almaz-Antey". The project involves dozens of Russian defense industry enterprises. The main issue when creating system experts, sustainment of sensors. Placed under water sonars must be sufficiently compact and unobtrusive, capturing the noise at a great distance. And diet have to provide energy not only them but also the equipment space communications.

    - American and British nuclear submarines were active in the Arctic during the cold war - in particular, went into the sea, washing the Russian coast. In recent years their activity is associated with the advent of the Northern fleet of the newest submarines of project "Borei" and "Yasen". Also we must not forget that American submarines armed with cruise missiles "Tomahawk" with a range of 1.5 thousand kilometers, noted historian of the Navy Dmitry Boltenkov.

    In August 2014, the Northern fleet found in the Barents sea, submarine, US Navy class "Virginia". After a 27-minute pursuit surface ships and anti-submarine aircraft left the area.

    Half a century ago, the United States has deployed in North Atlantic for several lines of anti-submarine sonar system SOSUS. Placed on the line Greenland - Iceland - UK underwater sensor was used to track Soviet submarines. However, the system was imperfect and could only find subs for the first and second generations. Moreover, the Soviet submariners quickly learned how to cheat the enemy "ears": for example, they overcome the barrier under the bottom of a merchant ship. In the 90-ies during the test, the coordinates of modern low-noise submarines built the ellipse size 216х90 km. Now part of the sonar SOSUS mothballed.

    The shortcomings of the American system will be taken into account in creation of Russian one.


    https://rg.ru/2016/07/20/rossiia-sozdast-sistemu-ohrany-arktiki.html


    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Osa boats vs Israeli navy

    Post  nastle77 on Sat Aug 06, 2016 4:55 pm

    What was the reason the Osa boats of Egypt perform so poorly against the Israeli navy ?
    And during the cold war if the performance of Osa boats was so appalling against MGB of westers navies what were the primary means of countering enemy MGB in the Soviet navy

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2525
    Points : 2658
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  kvs on Mon Aug 08, 2016 12:19 am

    nastle77 wrote:What was the reason the Osa boats of Egypt perform so poorly against the Israeli navy ?
    And during the cold war if the performance of Osa boats was so appalling against MGB of westers navies what were the primary means of countering enemy MGB in the Soviet navy

    Perhaps the competence of the people operating those boats may have something to do with how they "perform".

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Aug 08, 2016 4:40 am

    take into account that Israel was probably more or less prepared cause they were hit before hand by the missiles. At the same time too, they were deploying more CIWS for their ships. Of course that doesn't cause 100% protection but as you said, depending on competence, they could have saturated the attack.

    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:32 pm

    sepheronx wrote:take into account that Israel was probably more or less prepared cause they were hit before hand by the missiles.  At the same time too, they were deploying more CIWS for their ships.  Of course that doesn't cause 100% protection but as you said, depending on competence, they could have saturated the attack.
    could it also be that the Termits export version had no IR versions and had down graded seekers ?
    Also it seemed like most OSA were lost when they expended their missiles and were caught by israeli boats and were dispatched by 76 mm gunfire

    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    naval SAM

    Post  nastle77 on Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:35 pm

    Could the following naval SAM systems target/engage multiple missiles/planes at the same time ?
    4k33 OSA M
    Uragan
    S-300F Fort
    3K95 kinzal naval version of Tor

    the sea sparrow installed on NATO destroyers and cruisers can it engagae multiple targets
    thanks

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:07 am

    Depends on the mounts.

    A single OSA mount can guide two missiles to one target.

    Klintok (Naval TOR) can guide 8 missiles to four targets.

    Regarding naval models of S-300 I suspect the same or better... ie 12 missiles to 6 targets for Fort, Uragan would be dependant on the number of antenna arrays but could be up to 4 targets with 8 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

    jhelb
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 419
    Points : 483
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  jhelb on Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:58 am

    GarryB wrote:Depends on the mounts.

    A single OSA mount can guide two missiles to one target.

    Klintok (Naval TOR) can guide 8 missiles to four targets.

    Regarding naval models of S-300 I suspect the same or better... ie 12 missiles to 6 targets for Fort, Uragan would be dependant on the number of antenna arrays but could be up to 4 targets with 8 missiles.

    Assuming I am an OSA operator (or for that matter a S-400, BUK, Tor operator) and I establish a radar lock on an adversary aircraft.

    Will the pilot of the adversary aircraft get to know that I have established a radar lock before I have fired the missile or will he get to know that only when I have fired the missile?

    Sponsored content

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 3:21 pm


      Current date/time is Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:21 pm