Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Share
    avatar
    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5366
    Points : 5411
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Militarov on Tue Dec 13, 2016 2:41 am

    nastle77 wrote:The RBU 6000 can it be used for shore bombardment and also against surface ships (I'm assuming can only be effective against merchant ships patrol boats etc) ?
    Thanks

    Its not very practical to be used aganist other surface ships, no point in it.

    However yes, it can be used for shore bombardment.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16107
    Points : 16798
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 13, 2016 7:10 am


    What if those 20mm shells destroy the engine or slice off the P-700's wing?

    The P-700 is moving at almost a kilometre a second... how many rounds do you actually think will even get a hit.

    Even if it took both wings completely off at 1km or less range it is an object weighing several tons... it will keep going the way it was going... it will likely hit something the size of a large ship anyway.

    The projectiles from Phalanx are 12.7mm calibre slugs of DU designed to penetrate armour... not remove limbs or appendages... if they hit anything they will punch little holes in things... if the hit the core body of the incoming missile they will likely be deflected by the Titanium armour protecting the warhead.

    The RBU 6000 can it be used for shore bombardment and also against surface ships (I'm assuming can only be effective against merchant ships patrol boats etc) ?
    Thanks

    They have multiple uses but shore bombardment is not one of them AFAIK except in an extreme emergency.

    There are three types of rockets for use against subs and incoming enemy torpedoes.

    Obviously the depth charge for subs and torpedoes, but also floating mines for torpedoes and diverting decoy sound emitter for torpedoes as well.

    For shore bombardment they have the A-22 OGON system.

    The features that allow it to be used against incoming enemy torpedoes also make it effective against enemy divers too... but it would be a total waste against shore targets... a 30mm gatling burst of shells or larger calibre gun would be used against shore targets.


    _________________
    “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
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Dec 13, 2016 4:59 pm

    Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?
    avatar
    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5366
    Points : 5411
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Militarov on Tue Dec 13, 2016 6:54 pm

    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?
    avatar
    Isos
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 537
    Points : 541
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Tue Dec 13, 2016 7:15 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?

    Why not ! if it's close to you you fire with everything you have to take advantage.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 305
    Points : 307
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Singular_Transform on Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:01 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:

    What if those 20mm shells destroy the engine or slice off the P-700's wing?


    The Phalanax muzzle velocity is 1km/sec. The bullets of it won't capable even theoretical to hit granit/onyx from behind.
    Means if it start to fire at 2km distance then if the targeting was OK the bullets will meet the granit/onyx one second later , midway.

    Of course if the missile is so nasty to use up this one second do say move only 2 meter off from the calculated position, then the bullets will kill the air.

    If the granit/onyx has 20g manoeuvring capability then the phalanx will miss it by 600 something meter at 2 km, and at the collision with target it will miss it by 60 meters.

    Only chance to kill it if it is so kind to not to manoeuvre.

    Only thing that has chance to kill is the mid range RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missile.

    The long range missiles with active seeker won't have chance to kill it, all of them has same speed like the missile, and the active head prompt the missile to do evasion manoeuvres ( unless the russians left out this 10 000 $ option from the 3 000 000 000 $ missile)

    But the granit/onyx will do evasion here as well as soon as it feel the X band illuminators, so the high kill chance will be around 14 km distance from the ship at the end of the ESSM boost phase, out of that range it will decrease dramatically.


    Last edited by Singular_Transform on Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:26 pm; edited 3 times in total

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:15 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?
    I was thinking of very low tech warfare
    This system is carried by parchim poti petya class ships which also are the major surface combatants of smaller navies in 80s so maybe this RBU can be used as a weapon against offshore patrol vessels minseweepers coastal merchant shopping etc too esp against opponents who might not have much of a submarine fleet

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:17 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?

    Why not !  if it's close to you you fire with everything you have  to take advantage.
    Exactly was thinking of low tech littoral warfare involving small ships that routinely carried this system but didn't have submarine opponents and might end up fighting other smaller surface combatents

    miroslav
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 33
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2016-11-16

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  miroslav on Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:36 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?

    Why not !  if it's close to you you fire with everything you have  to take advantage.
    Exactly was thinking of low tech littoral warfare involving small ships that routinely carried this system but didn't have submarine opponents and might end up fighting other smaller surface combatents  

    Theoretically this is all possible, but the system is not designed for it at all. This is essentially an area target weapon not a point target one. If you want to engage surface targets (sea or land) there are far, far more effective weapons like the main gun, as some one mentioned before, most ships equipped with RBU-600 will have at least a 57mm universal gun. Using an RBU-6000 up an close against an enemy ship is well, 19 century style.

    As far ass the fuse goes, its a dual one, it can be activates by contact and set to detonate at a certain depth, the minimal difference in depth that the grenades are set to is 5m. So a volley of 12 grenades will cover the dept from, for instance, 50 to 105 with detonations at every 5m, roughly. The fuse can be set manually or automatically, meaning, as an example: first three at 50, 70 and 80, second three at 100 120 140 and so on.

    The new versions of the grenades, like the ones on Adm. Girgorovic and I supose on the Udaloy class, have an active seeker head, basically a small sonar, the warhead is smaller (shaped charge for point contact) but that is a small drawback compare to the gains of having an active seeker head.

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:55 pm

    miroslav wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?

    Why not !  if it's close to you you fire with everything you have  to take advantage.
    Exactly was thinking of low tech littoral warfare involving small ships that routinely carried this system but didn't have submarine opponents and might end up fighting other smaller surface combatents  

    Theoretically this is all possible, but the system is not designed for it at all. This is essentially an area target weapon not a point target one. If you want to engage surface targets (sea or land) there are far, far more effective weapons like the main gun, as some one mentioned before, most ships equipped with RBU-600 will have at least a 57mm universal gun. Using an RBU-6000 up an close against an enemy ship is well, 19 century style.

    As far ass the fuse goes, its a dual one, it can be activates by contact and set to detonate at a certain depth, the minimal difference in depth that the grenades are set to is 5m. So a volley of 12 grenades will cover the dept from, for instance,  50 to 105 with detonations at every 5m, roughly. The fuse can be set manually or automatically, meaning, as an example: first three at 50, 70 and 80, second three at 100 120 140 and so on.

    The new versions of the grenades, like the ones on Adm. Girgorovic and I supose on the Udaloy class, have an active seeker head, basically a small sonar, the warhead is smaller (shaped charge for point contact) but that is a small drawback compare to the gains of having an active seeker head.

    Thanks for the explanation but if you look at some of the low-intensity conflict in third world countries until 80s they are kind of like 19 century.... most of the opponents are small combatants with few having capabilities of sophisticated antiship missiles and even then they only carry 2 to 4 missiles which when expended makes these small craft very vulnerable even to basic weapon systems esp since  most of their battles are in the littorals

    I get your point that it's an area defense weapon not a point defense weapon I assume you mean it cannot be aimed very well against surface ships and that's why maybe it is useful against static targets during shore bombardment

    miroslav
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 33
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2016-11-16

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  miroslav on Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:10 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    miroslav wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?

    Why not !  if it's close to you you fire with everything you have  to take advantage.
    Exactly was thinking of low tech littoral warfare involving small ships that routinely carried this system but didn't have submarine opponents and might end up fighting other smaller surface combatents  

    Theoretically this is all possible, but the system is not designed for it at all. This is essentially an area target weapon not a point target one. If you want to engage surface targets (sea or land) there are far, far more effective weapons like the main gun, as some one mentioned before, most ships equipped with RBU-600 will have at least a 57mm universal gun. Using an RBU-6000 up an close against an enemy ship is well, 19 century style.

    As far ass the fuse goes, its a dual one, it can be activates by contact and set to detonate at a certain depth, the minimal difference in depth that the grenades are set to is 5m. So a volley of 12 grenades will cover the dept from, for instance,  50 to 105 with detonations at every 5m, roughly. The fuse can be set manually or automatically, meaning, as an example: first three at 50, 70 and 80, second three at 100 120 140 and so on.

    The new versions of the grenades, like the ones on Adm. Girgorovic and I supose on the Udaloy class, have an active seeker head, basically a small sonar, the warhead is smaller (shaped charge for point contact) but that is a small drawback compare to the gains of having an active seeker head.

    Thanks for the explanation but if you look at some of the low-intensity conflict in third world countries until 80s they are kind of like 19 century.... most of the opponents are small combatants with few having capabilities of sophisticated antiship missiles and even then they only carry 2 to 4 missiles which when expended makes these small craft very vulnerable even to basic weapon systems esp since  most of their battles are in the littorals


    Dont get mo wrong I like the idea of a close up an dirty fight with ships, guns, speed and maneuvering.

    Here is the RBU-6000 one the Talwar's, same set up on the Adm. Grigorovic I presume, probably a better sonar and overall fire control, start at 3:56, it has 90R grenades as part of a standard load, active seeking ones, and 48 of them as a total combat load, including the standard RGB60 ones, they mainly use the RGB60 for mines and torpedoes and keep the 90R for submarines. Wikipedia says that the Indian ones (RGB60) have a range of only 1500m, very down graded.

    This sort of indicates that a ship like the Adm. Grigorovic has solid ASW capabilities, all included.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkpjbdP6CHo

    miroslav
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 33
    Points : 35
    Join date : 2016-11-16

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  miroslav on Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:20 pm

    miroslav wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    miroslav wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    They will explode its very simple arming fuse, however why would you target surface ship with it? I dont see the situations for it myself. For shore bombardment sure, it would act like mortar but why against surface ships?

    Why not !  if it's close to you you fire with everything you have  to take advantage.
    Exactly was thinking of low tech littoral warfare involving small ships that routinely carried this system but didn't have submarine opponents and might end up fighting other smaller surface combatents  

    Theoretically this is all possible, but the system is not designed for it at all. This is essentially an area target weapon not a point target one. If you want to engage surface targets (sea or land) there are far, far more effective weapons like the main gun, as some one mentioned before, most ships equipped with RBU-600 will have at least a 57mm universal gun. Using an RBU-6000 up an close against an enemy ship is well, 19 century style.

    As far ass the fuse goes, its a dual one, it can be activates by contact and set to detonate at a certain depth, the minimal difference in depth that the grenades are set to is 5m. So a volley of 12 grenades will cover the dept from, for instance,  50 to 105 with detonations at every 5m, roughly. The fuse can be set manually or automatically, meaning, as an example: first three at 50, 70 and 80, second three at 100 120 140 and so on.

    The new versions of the grenades, like the ones on Adm. Girgorovic and I supose on the Udaloy class, have an active seeker head, basically a small sonar, the warhead is smaller (shaped charge for point contact) but that is a small drawback compare to the gains of having an active seeker head.

    Thanks for the explanation but if you look at some of the low-intensity conflict in third world countries until 80s they are kind of like 19 century.... most of the opponents are small combatants with few having capabilities of sophisticated antiship missiles and even then they only carry 2 to 4 missiles which when expended makes these small craft very vulnerable even to basic weapon systems esp since  most of their battles are in the littorals


    Dont get mo wrong I like the idea of a close up an dirty fight with ships, guns, speed and maneuvering.

    Here is the RBU-6000 one the Talwar's, same set up on the Adm. Grigorovic I presume, probably a better sonar and overall fire control, start at 3:56, it has 90R grenades as part of a standard load, active seeking ones, and 48 of them as a total combat load, including the standard RGB60 ones, they mainly use the RGB60 for mines and torpedoes and keep the 90R for submarines. Wikipedia says that the Indian ones (RGB60) have a range of only 1500m, very down graded.

    This sort of indicates that a ship like the Adm. Grigorovic has solid ASW capabilities, all included.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkpjbdP6CHo

    This is better, and I am suppose to be working as a programmer.


    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:04 pm

    Thanks
    I wonder why western navies did not retain similar weapons ?
    avatar
    Singular_Transform
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 305
    Points : 307
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    aegis vs onyx / granit

    Post  Singular_Transform on Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:34 pm

    I spent same time to research the chances to kill a supersonic missile with a SAM.

    Interesting result.

    The Antley -2500 gladiator SAM has 0.6 chance to kill a non manoeuvring Lance ballistic missile.
    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Giant-Gladiator.html#mozTocId912634

    Say if it has 0.4 chance to kill a manoeuvring target then it needs 5 rocket for 90% kill chance.

    The gladiator is a monster, 10 meters long, 6 tons heavy.

    The advanced sea sparrow 3.6 meters long and 280 kg.


    The gladiator is designed against fast moving supersonic targets.


    What can be the kill chance of a sea sparrow against a granit or onyx? 0.2 ?

    Realistic it means the aegis has to launch 160 rocket against a 16 onyx salvo to kill 14 of them.

    However the kill chance smaller if the target is out of the optimal engagement range ( if the acceleration of the sea sparrow is 7 g then it will be around 14 km) , so 160 SAM will let through 4-8 onyx by quite high chance.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16107
    Points : 16798
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:35 am

    Re RBU 6000
    Will it's rockets not explode if they hit surface ships or land targets ? Are they designed to explode only under water ?

    You talk about the system like it has only one type of rocket.

    The anti sub rockets are guided and will use sonar to actively home in on a submarine.

    The mine rockets will float in the water and if anything comes close or touches them they will explode.

    the anti diver models will detonate at a preset depth and can also be used against subs.

    And the decoy rockets make sounds and move away from the area to distract subs or torpedoes.

    I would say most of the exploding models have an impact fuse as well as a depth fuse or proximity fuse.

    Why not ! if it's close to you you fire with everything you have to take advantage.

    Because the RPK-8 anti submarine weapon is not cheap and only has a range of about 4.3km... at that range a burst of 30mm cannon shells would probably be more effective.

    Any medium gun would be vastly more accurate and more effective too.

    I was thinking of very low tech warfare
    This system is carried by parchim poti petya class ships which also are the major surface combatants of smaller navies in 80s so maybe this RBU can be used as a weapon against offshore patrol vessels minseweepers coastal merchant shopping etc too esp against opponents who might not have much of a submarine fleet

    The mine rockets would be useful to lay in the path of an incoming small boat or torpedo and would also be useful against enemy divers.

    A medium gun like a 57mm or 76mm gun would be vastly more useful most of the time.

    RPGs and even ATGMs on board could easily also be more useful too.

    Thanks
    I wonder why western navies did not retain similar weapons ?

    No profit in cheap and simple...

    Torpedoes are used against enemy subs now... mostly mini torpedoes of small calibre.

    Of course in the US Navy they had ASROC and SUBROC and there was a replacement but it got cancelled because the chance of detecting a Russian sub at 50km was becoming almost impossible... so it was quietly dropped... I believe it was called Sea Lance or something...


    _________________
    “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
    Isos
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 537
    Points : 541
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:55 pm

    Sweeden has something like that. I don't remember the name but you can found it easily.

    Because the RPK-8 anti submarine weapon is not cheap and only has a range of about 4.3km... at that range a burst of 30mm cannon shells would probably be more effective.

    Any medium gun would be vastly more accurate and more effective too.

    Well it's cheaper than replacing a radar because the enemy fired an guided rocket on it. However I agree with what you say, it's better to use canon.

    Their main role was to intercept torpedos and the Pk was like 0.8 against one torpedo with a 1 salvo. Their range is very small to attack subs.
    avatar
    Isos
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 537
    Points : 541
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Thu Dec 15, 2016 8:09 pm

    http://rusnavy.com/science/weapons/underseaweapon/index.php?print=Y

    Any improvment in torpedos since this article ?
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16107
    Points : 16798
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:24 am

    Well it's cheaper than replacing a radar because the enemy fired an guided rocket on it. However I agree with what you say, it's better to use canon.

    Not really because to hit a point target like even a medium sized ship you would need to launch volleys of rockets only a few of which will actually land on the target.

    The whole point of the system is to scatter rounds around a point of aim to increase a chance of a hit.

    For the anti sub round with the sonar seeker precision is not important as while it dives it homes in on the target so it can miss by hundreds of metres and then swim towards it target is it descends in the water to get a hit.

    In terms of killing divers a volley of rockets each detonating at different depths in a scattered pattern makes a kill almost certain even against a group of divers... humans are horribly vulnerable to underwater explosions... the shockwaves move rapidly through water but air pockets collapse... think about what that means for a diver in the water when an explosive goes off nearby... a humans lungs are two large air pockets inside the body...

    In terms of an incoming enemy torpedo the system needs to drop a spread cluster of mines so that the torpedo will pass by a few to ensure their proximity explosion defeats the torpedo in question.

    The RBU and other similar Rocket depth charge launchers evolved in Soviet and Russian service over time to make them more flexible and useful and effective.

    In most western countries they remained cheap and very simple and to be honest not hugely useful most of the time.

    The Soviets developed them to the point where they were useful for a range of uses other than just attacking submerged vessels (ie anti frogman etc) but also rather capable at the job.

    Old story of the west replacing simple systems with more sophisticated systems (ie small calibre torpedoes) while the Russians/Soviets expanding the capabilities of systems to make them multipurpose.

    Any improvment in torpedos since this article ?

    I believe if you read through the earlier posts in this thread there were reports about brand new Torpedoes entering service this year and next that are state of the art...


    _________________
    “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
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Dec 21, 2016 5:56 pm

    Thanks for the explanation GarryB first time I really understood RBU

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    RPK-2( SS-n-15) and RPK-6 and RPK-7(ssn-16)

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Dec 27, 2016 10:10 pm

    were these torpedoes missiles operational on the Yankee and Delta class submarines ?

    Assuming they were for self-protection as both SSN-15 and SSN-16 were ASW missiles , to protect the SSBN from SSN

    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16107
    Points : 16798
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:59 am

    The SS-N-15 and SS-N-16 were for ASW use both in defence and in attack.

    In many ways they were super fast torpedoes that delivered torpedoes into the vicinity of enemy Subs at supersonic speed (mach 2.5) but without the noise of underwater travel to warn the target.

    The first the target knows of the attack is the torpedo dropping into the water nearby and starting actively seeking the sub...


    _________________
    “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
    Isos
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 537
    Points : 541
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:33 am



    In many ways they were super fast torpedoes that delivered torpedoes into the vicinity of enemy Subs at supersonic speed (mach 2.5) but without the noise of underwater travel to warn the target.

    Do you know how much noise the lunch makes ? The booster is pretty noisy so a enemy sub could detect it a very long distances. It woun't be able to track it but it will know it has been lunch and it will know the position of the sub.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16107
    Points : 16798
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Dec 29, 2016 8:41 am

    Do you know how much noise the lunch makes ? The booster is pretty noisy so a enemy sub could detect it a very long distances. It woun't be able to track it but it will know it has been lunch and it will know the position of the sub.

    The launch of any weapon makes noise... not sure you will care about a launch 40km away... they can be launched by ships as well too...

    Most of them move through the water like a torpedo and it surfaces and then the booster rocket motor fires to drag them out of the water... the launch noise would not be that much different from a sub launched Harpoon or Calibr.

    BTW I remember seeing a missile being fired from a surface ship... the torpedo tubes are turned to the side and the missile leaves the torpedo tube on the ship and splashes into the water... then a few metres further away from the ship the rocket motor fires and the missile leaves the water on a ballistic path to the target.

    they could have adapted it for the ship... there is also the Medvedka, but by using the torpedo based system they can launch torpedos at long range targets rapidly and without modification needed.


    _________________
    “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
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 185
    Points : 237
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Sat Dec 31, 2016 3:11 am

    Was the SSN 16 a dual role weapon ? ASW and ASUW
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16107
    Points : 16798
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 31, 2016 7:19 am

    I guess it is possible, but the ballistic path on the way to the target area would make it rather vulnerable to interception by SAM... SS-N-16 is a 65cm weapon... I would say a 100km shot with a 50 Knot torpedo would be more likely than a 30-40km shot with a much smaller torpedo with a much smaller HE payload...


    _________________
    “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 Sun Apr 30, 2017 6:42 pm