Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Share

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2675
    Points : 2806
    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 : 7301
    Points : 7611
    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
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 236
    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
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 236
    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 : 15872
    Points : 16577
    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 : 423
    Points : 489
    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?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15872
    Points : 16577
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:55 am

    This being a naval weapons thread I assume you mean the naval model of OSA, in which case the vast majority of targets you will lock will be anti ship missiles that wont know they are being targeted.

    A helo or close by aircraft will detect your search radar scanning for them and once detected it will detect the tracking radar (which operates at a different frequency) tracking them.

    That will tell they they are likely under attack.

    The tracking radar continually updates the precise location of the target while also tracking the outgoing missile and sending course corrections to that missile.

    New models would allow optical tracking of the target and missile but that is not all weather day night and its accuracy and range performance is not as good as radar but it is at least passive.


    _________________
    “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 : 184
    Points : 236
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:50 pm

    Are anti ship missiles like Harpoon able to hit targets when they are hidden by land or islands e.g in the earlier version of harpoon if launched from the sea on one side of a peninsula can it travEl overland and hit a naval target at sea on the other side of the peninsula? Provided this target is within its max range e.g of 60nm

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15872
    Points : 16577
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:25 am

    Very few have the radar range to detect their target at launch and so the general location is given to the missile and it flys to the target location and turns on its own radar to scan for the target.

    Some can be fed the targets general location, while others have to climb and scan for the target and then drop down to very low altitude for the flight to the target area.

    As long as the island is not between the missile and the target when it turns on its radar to scan for the target it should be able to fly past islands and other items to get to a position to scan for the target.

    Some longer range missiles can have way points so they actually approach their target from an unexpected direction.


    _________________
    “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

    Isos
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 431
    Points : 435
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Thu Aug 25, 2016 8:53 pm

    GarryB wrote:Very few have the radar range to detect their target at launch and so the general location is given to the missile and it flys to the target location and turns on its own radar to scan for the target.

    Some can be fed the targets general location, while others have to climb and scan for the target and then drop down to very low altitude for the flight to the target area.

    As long as the island is not between the missile and the target when it turns on its radar to scan for the target it should be able to fly past islands and other items to get to a position to scan for the target.

    Some longer range missiles can have way points so they actually approach their target from an unexpected direction.


    Some new missiles have GPS guidance to hit the target in its base. Because their are lot of buildings and ships there, they can't use radar.

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 236
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Thu Aug 25, 2016 10:21 pm

    Isos wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Very few have the radar range to detect their target at launch and so the general location is given to the missile and it flys to the target location and turns on its own radar to scan for the target.

    Some can be fed the targets general location, while others have to climb and scan for the target and then drop down to very low altitude for the flight to the target area.

    As long as the island is not between the missile and the target when it turns on its radar to scan for the target it should be able to fly past islands and other items to get to a position to scan for the target.

    Some longer range missiles can have way points so they actually approach their target from an unexpected direction.


    Some new missiles have GPS guidance to hit the target in its base. Because their are lot of buildings and ships there, they can't use radar.
    did the 80's version of harpoon have that feature ?

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 236
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Thu Aug 25, 2016 10:24 pm

    GarryB wrote:Very few have the radar range to detect their target at launch and so the general location is given to the missile and it flys to the target location and turns on its own radar to scan for the target.

    Some can be fed the targets general location, while others have to climb and scan for the target and then drop down to very low altitude for the flight to the target area.

    As long as the island is not between the missile and the target when it turns on its radar to scan for the target it should be able to fly past islands and other items to get to a position to scan for the target.

    Some longer range missiles can have way points so they actually approach their target from an unexpected direction.
    Thanks for the explanation, was 80s version of harpoon capable of distinguishing targets in the littorals if there is a lot of rocks coves and cliffs ?

    Isos
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 431
    Points : 435
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:17 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Very few have the radar range to detect their target at launch and so the general location is given to the missile and it flys to the target location and turns on its own radar to scan for the target.

    Some can be fed the targets general location, while others have to climb and scan for the target and then drop down to very low altitude for the flight to the target area.

    As long as the island is not between the missile and the target when it turns on its radar to scan for the target it should be able to fly past islands and other items to get to a position to scan for the target.

    Some longer range missiles can have way points so they actually approach their target from an unexpected direction.


    Some new missiles have GPS guidance to hit the target in its base. Because their are lot of buildings and ships there, they can't use radar.
    did the 80's version of harpoon have that feature ?

    I don't think so. However they made new stocks of harpoons today. You will not found a harpoon from the 80s in US stock. Even if they don't really use them. Few ships of the US navy are armed with anti ship missile. They use their f18 with air lunched harpoons for anti ship missions.

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 236
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:10 am

    Isos wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Very few have the radar range to detect their target at launch and so the general location is given to the missile and it flys to the target location and turns on its own radar to scan for the target.

    Some can be fed the targets general location, while others have to climb and scan for the target and then drop down to very low altitude for the flight to the target area.

    As long as the island is not between the missile and the target when it turns on its radar to scan for the target it should be able to fly past islands and other items to get to a position to scan for the target.

    Some longer range missiles can have way points so they actually approach their target from an unexpected direction.


    Some new missiles have GPS guidance to hit the target in its base. Because their are lot of buildings and ships there, they can't use radar.
    did the 80's version of harpoon have that feature ?

    I don't think so. However they made new stocks of harpoons today. You will not found a harpoon from the 80s in US stock. Even if they don't really use them. Few ships of the US navy are armed with anti ship missile. They use their f18 with air lunched harpoons for anti ship missions.
    reason I asked was because I was interested in the capabilities of harpoon in service with Japanese navy in the 80s

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15872
    Points : 16577
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:16 am

    Some new missiles have GPS guidance to hit the target in its base. Because their are lot of buildings and ships there, they can't use radar.

    Actually launching a Harpoon or other AShM at a target in port surrounded by other things like fishing boats or Piers etc would be a very rare thing that most AShMs will never have to deal with.

    If you can find a target in a cluttered environment... identify it, and calculate its coordinates to use GPS guidance then good on you... with the flight time of missiles and the fact that targets can move I don't think GPS would be the sole method of guidance.

    did the 80's version of harpoon have that feature ?

    I rather doubt it. Harpoon finds its targets with its radar... which isn't perfect but should be good enough to distinguish a target ship compared with an island or sand bar.

    Thanks for the explanation, was 80s version of harpoon capable of distinguishing targets in the littorals if there is a lot of rocks coves and cliffs ?

    Lots of radar reflectors would make locating the target difficult but not totally impossible. The missiles brain would be not particularly sophisticated, but as shown in the Falklands war one problem not often discussed is that in war time you often put into service non military vessels... ie civilian vessels are put to use as troop transports or supply vessels and when the enemy start firing missiles at your ships like exocets then when you military vessels fire off chaff and decoys and jammers and the incoming missiles lose lock it is all together possible they might acquire those undefended civilian vessels and blow up your supply of heavy helicopters or ammo or your troop ships...

    reason I asked was because I was interested in the capabilities of harpoon in service with Japanese navy in the 80s

    Being subsonic it would have trouble against the Soviet navy, but against the Chinese navy of the period or pretty much any other navy in the region they should be capable.

    Again... with the Falklands... the UK had Exocets in their own inventory so they should have been familiar with its capabilities yet they suffered.


    _________________
    “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

    Isos
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 431
    Points : 435
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:34 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Some new missiles have GPS guidance to hit the target in its base. Because their are lot of buildings and ships there, they can't use radar.

    Actually launching a Harpoon or other AShM at a target in port surrounded by other things like fishing boats or Piers etc would be a very rare thing that most AShMs will never have to deal with.

    If you can find a target in a cluttered environment... identify it, and calculate its coordinates to use GPS guidance then good on you... with the flight time of missiles and the fact that targets can move I don't think GPS would be the sole method of guidance.

    You are wrong. With observation sattelites you can easily identify and find coordinates of a ship in a port. Military ships are not parked with fishing boats in ports so it's not a problem. Even with Google earth you can do that.

    If they are in port it means their radars are off. 1 missile per ship is enough. And in a surprised and coordinated attack you can make lot of dammage to a navy as your sattelite will give you real time situation and your ships can go like 20km (international waters) from a country.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3098
    Points : 3196
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  medo on Fri Aug 26, 2016 6:20 pm

    If the ship is in port, that it is better to use TV guided missile like Kh-59MK2, where the operator will recognize correct ship on his TV screen.

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 236
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  nastle77 on Fri Aug 26, 2016 7:43 pm

    Isos wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    Some new missiles have GPS guidance to hit the target in its base. Because their are lot of buildings and ships there, they can't use radar.

    Actually launching a Harpoon or other AShM at a target in port surrounded by other things like fishing boats or Piers etc would be a very rare thing that most AShMs will never have to deal with.

    If you can find a target in a cluttered environment... identify it, and calculate its coordinates to use GPS guidance then good on you... with the flight time of missiles and the fact that targets can move I don't think GPS would be the sole method of guidance.

    You are wrong. With observation sattelites you can easily identify and find coordinates of a ship in a port. Military ships are not parked with fishing boats in ports so it's not a problem. Even with Google earth you can do that.

    If they are in port it means their radars are off. 1 missile per ship is enough. And in a surprised and coordinated attack you can make lot of dammage to a navy as your sattelite will give you real time situation and your ships can go like 20km (international waters) from a country.
    did Japan have GPS and satelite guidance for its ashm in the 80's ?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15872
    Points : 16577
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:49 am

    You are wrong. With observation sattelites you can easily identify and find coordinates of a ship in a port. Military ships are not parked with fishing boats in ports so it's not a problem. Even with Google earth you can do that.

    If your anti ship missile is using GPS coordinates for targeting then it is not an anti ship missile it is a cruise missile.

    the flight time of most anti ship missiles can mean quite a few minutes pass between detection and launch and impact... if the ship moves even 20m before missile impact then the missile will miss.

    You obviously have a very low opinion of radar... the Kh-35 reportedly uses a high resolution MMW radar that can not only detect ships but also identify them based on their shape/radar signature.

    As such even a large group of ships would not defeat its guidance and it could single out its target and home in on it even in a fairly cluttered environment.

    If they are in port it means their radars are off. 1 missile per ship is enough. And in a surprised and coordinated attack you can make lot of dammage to a navy as your sattelite will give you real time situation and your ships can go like 20km (international waters) from a country.

    If they are in port the ports air defence system and local air force offer rather better protection than their own air defence systems could offer.

    could it also be that the Termits export version had no IR versions and had down graded seekers ?

    Export versions of Termit were either radar or IR guided but not both. I believe India used the IR versions to good effect hitting Pakistani oil storage tanks. The sun had heated the tanks to the point where they were rather warm... when the sun went down the ground cooled faster than all that oil in those tanks so after dark the oil was still a warm target in a sea of cold land...

    did Japan have GPS and satelite guidance for its ashm in the 80's ?

    AFAIK only the Soviets had satellite guided AShMs in the late 1970s and 1980s.


    _________________
    “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

    Isos
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 431
    Points : 435
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Sat Aug 27, 2016 3:56 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    You are wrong. With observation sattelites you can easily identify and find coordinates of a ship in a port. Military ships are not parked with fishing boats in ports so it's not a problem. Even with Google earth you can do that.

    If your anti ship missile is using GPS coordinates for targeting then it is not an anti ship missile it is a cruise missile.

    the flight time of most anti ship missiles can mean quite a few minutes pass between detection and launch and impact... if the ship moves even 20m before missile impact then the missile will miss.

    You obviously have a very low opinion of radar... the Kh-35 reportedly uses a high resolution MMW radar that can not only detect ships but also identify them based on their shape/radar signature.

    As such even a large group of ships would not defeat its guidance and it could single out its target and home in on it even in a fairly cluttered environment.

    If they are in port it means their radars are off. 1 missile per ship is enough. And in a surprised and coordinated attack you can make lot of dammage to a navy as your sattelite will give you real time situation and your ships can go like 20km (international waters) from a country.

    If they are in port the ports air defence system and local air force offer rather better protection than their own air defence systems could offer.


    1) Antiship missiles are cruise missile with radar. The name you gave to the missile won't change it's capacities.

    2) The flight time : I said its usefull for a surprise Attack from 20-30 km of the target not for max range. So for a speed of 800km/h it's nothing, the target won't move. Even if, you can send the new coordinates to the missiles or activate the radar mode.

    3) I never spoke about radar. I just said some have gps guidance. Of course I know that Kh-35 use radar and has a very good one. But harpoons and others are not upgraded with gps for nothing. I don't think it's the case for the kh-35 however.

    4) Depend what country you are atacking. If it's armed by NATO country, its ships will have better air defence systems than land forces. West countries have really poor air defence systemes. They are mostly protected by their navy and air force. And I don't think they will have time to anything against a big surprise attack of 50 missiles just with 2 or 3 fighter meant to protect all the country.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15872
    Points : 16577
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 28, 2016 3:37 am

    1) Antiship missiles are cruise missile with radar. The name you gave to the missile won't change it's capacities.

    Not really.

    An anti ship missile is optimised to kill ships and has a radar for that purpose fitted in its nose.

    They generally have a relatively short range... 70-200km or so in the 1980s... except of course the big heavy long range anti carrier missiles the Soviets had.

    A cruise missile generally flies a series of way points to a fixed coordinate.

    They are generally much longer ranged weapons with flight ranges of 1,500km to 3,000km or so in the 1980s.

    Mixing the two is of no value because the radar in the AShM is expensive and if you are just firing at a point in space next to a pier then you are much better off using a real cruise missile with no radar in its nose and much much better range performance.

    2) The flight time : I said its usefull for a surprise Attack from 20-30 km of the target not for max range. So for a speed of 800km/h it's nothing, the target won't move. Even if, you can send the new coordinates to the missiles or activate the radar mode.

    Who is getting within 30km of an enemy port... and what makes you think the missile will get past the ports defences?

    3) I never spoke about radar. I just said some have gps guidance. Of course I know that Kh-35 use radar and has a very good one. But harpoons and others are not upgraded with gps for nothing. I don't think it's the case for the kh-35 however.

    GPS is not used to turn Harpoons into Tomahawks... it is used for flight navigation to the target area.

    Once it gets to attack position it will use its onboard radar to find the target and fly into it.

    4) Depend what country you are atacking. If it's armed by NATO country, its ships will have better air defence systems than land forces. West countries have really poor air defence systemes. They are mostly protected by their navy and air force. And I don't think they will have time to anything against a big surprise attack of 50 missiles just with 2 or 3 fighter meant to protect all the country.

    So when has this ever been done?

    Where are these 50 missiles coming from?

    The US attack on Libya used about 200 cruise missiles in total and afterwards they had problems replacing them in stores... do you really think they will fire 50 missiles at targets in a port?

    If the enemy has only 2-3 aircraft to defend it... do they have any ships worth taking out this way?

    In the Falklands the British didn't start by destroying the entire Argentine fleet in port.

    Has that ever actually been done with anti ship 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

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9785
    Points : 10277
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  George1 on Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:52 pm

    Russian naval air defense in trouble

    There have long been reports that the ongoing delays with the commissioning of the Admiral Gorshkov frigate have to do with defects in its air defense systems. These were thought to be primarily related to problems with integration of the Poliment Redut air defense missile system. The Poliment system was designed to be Russia’s answer to AEGIS, with four phased array antennas that are able to track 16 targets at the same time. The Redut system consists of four or eight vertical launch systems that launch three types of missiles. The 9M100 is the short-range missile, with a range of up to 15km. The 9M96M is the medium-range missile, with a range of 40-50km. Finally, the 9M96 long-range missile is supposed to have a range of up to 150km.

    It now appears that the Redut’s problems are much more serious than just integration. A recent report notes that the Ministry of Defense has stopped trials of the system because of continuing problems with the 9M96 long-range missile. Specifically, the missiles appear to fail after three seconds of flight. Some reports indicate that the Redut system works well hitting targets up to 40km away, but fails in the long range. The implication is that the short and medium range missiles work well, but the long range missile does not. Nevertheless, this may be an improvement over previous results, as trials of the Redut system on the Steregushchiy class corvettes in 2014 showed that they were only able to hit targets at distances of up to 15km because the medium-range Furke-2 radar system was not functioning properly.

    Instead of further trials, the problems will now be sorted out by an inter-agency commission, a sure sign that the problems are serious and are not expected to be fixed any time soon. The problems stem from issues at the design bureau, which is reportedly not up to the task of designing a missile with the requirements provided by the Defense Ministry. The Fakel machine design bureau, which is developing the missiles is supposedly in relatively poor condition, using technologies and equipment left over from the Soviet period.

    Redut systems are supposed to be installed on both the Admiral Gorshkov frigates and the Steregushchiy class corvettes. The corvettes that have been commissioned so far with partial Redut systems that are not able to strike long-distance targets. It looks like the Russian military is now facing a choice regarding how long it is willing to wait to commission the already long-delayed first ship of the Admiral Gorshkov frigate class. So far, the Defense Ministry has not been willing to commission the frigate without a fully functional air defense system, though this may change as the delays grow longer.

    https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2016/07/28/russian-naval-air-defense-in-trouble/


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


    Project Canada
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 578
    Points : 587
    Join date : 2015-07-20
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Project Canada on Wed Aug 31, 2016 5:14 pm

    George1 wrote:Russian naval air defense in trouble

    There have long been reports that the ongoing delays with the commissioning of the Admiral Gorshkov frigate have to do with defects in its air defense systems. These were thought to be primarily related to problems with integration of the Poliment Redut air defense missile system. The Poliment system was designed to be Russia’s answer to AEGIS, with four phased array antennas that are able to track 16 targets at the same time. The Redut system consists of four or eight vertical launch systems that launch three types of missiles. The 9M100 is the short-range missile, with a range of up to 15km. The 9M96M is the medium-range missile, with a range of 40-50km. Finally, the 9M96 long-range missile is supposed to have a range of up to 150km.

    It now appears that the Redut’s problems are much more serious than just integration. A recent report notes that the Ministry of Defense has stopped trials of the system because of continuing problems with the 9M96 long-range missile. Specifically, the missiles appear to fail after three seconds of flight. Some reports indicate that the Redut system works well hitting targets up to 40km away, but fails in the long range. The implication is that the short and medium range missiles work well, but the long range missile does not. Nevertheless, this may be an improvement over previous results, as trials of the Redut system on the Steregushchiy class corvettes in 2014 showed that they were only able to hit targets at distances of up to 15km because the medium-range Furke-2 radar system was not functioning properly.

    Instead of further trials, the problems will now be sorted out by an inter-agency commission, a sure sign that the problems are serious and are not expected to be fixed any time soon. The problems stem from issues at the design bureau, which is reportedly not up to the task of designing a missile with the requirements provided by the Defense Ministry. The Fakel machine design bureau, which is developing the missiles is supposedly in relatively poor condition, using technologies and equipment left over from the Soviet period.

    Redut systems are supposed to be installed on both the Admiral Gorshkov frigates and the Steregushchiy class corvettes. The corvettes that have been commissioned so far with partial Redut systems that are not able to strike long-distance targets. It looks like the Russian military is now facing a choice regarding how long it is willing to wait to commission the already long-delayed first ship of the Admiral Gorshkov frigate class. So far, the Defense Ministry has not been willing to commission the frigate without a fully functional air defense system, though this may change as the delays grow longer.

    https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2016/07/28/russian-naval-air-defense-in-trouble/

    Isnt the malfunction supposed to have been fixed according to an earlier post last week?

    Isos
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 431
    Points : 435
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Isos on Wed Aug 31, 2016 5:32 pm

    With Klub K you can put how easily 50 missiles on one cargo ship.

    They are not meant to be use like tomahawks but they can be. I've red in the description of new exocet that they can be fired against coastal target with the gps (2nd possible role even if its primary role is antiship).

    Any ship can go 30 km from a military port if it's in the international waters. You can check on Google earth and see that in any  big miitary port (in any country) there ar many ships. With electronic warfare instrument you can know what type of radars are there. If there just civillian radars you can attack.
    Like it happened to Israel with the chinese missile. No radars ready, the attack succed.


    The US attack on Libya used about 200 cruise missiles in total and afterwards they had problems replacing them in stores... do you really think they will fire 50 missiles at targets in a port?

    If the enemy has only 2-3 aircraft to defend it... do they have any ships worth taking out this way?

    In the Falklands the British didn't start by destroying the entire Argentine fleet in port.

    Has that ever actually been done with anti ship missiles?

    The US attack was on Lybia not lybian port. So ...

    IF there are 10 ships (5 billion$) in the port, 50 kh-35 (around 35 million$) are worth it. Can be less if you want.

    In the Falkland they didn't because it would have been suicide as they declared war and Argentinian airforce was ready for war. I said surprise attack If argentinian navy had gps guided missile and did what I said before taking the falklands they would have them now.

    No it didn't happened because their is no more conventional war these days and these missiles are new. But you can be sure Israel would use a strategy like that if it has to face a bigger navy. A succesfull attack like this can end a war before it start if the opponents are separated by sea however.  




    While I'm here, is it possible to make a navalized sub lunched R-77 with a bigger warhead (65kg) and a range of 40-50 km to use in mass attack against battlegroup by a new diesel clas sub ( a little oscar II). Like 40 missiles per subarine. Mach 3-4 sea skeaming. 65*40= 2600kg of explosives. I knwo it can't destroy them (If it's one or two ship it can) but it would dammage them badly and they could be finished by torpedo.


    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4494
    Points : 4685
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Sep 01, 2016 2:16 am

    George1 wrote:Russian naval air defense in trouble

    There have long been reports that the ongoing delays with the commissioning of the Admiral Gorshkov frigate have to do with defects in its air defense systems. These were thought to be primarily related to problems with integration of the Poliment Redut air defense missile system. The Poliment system was designed to be Russia’s answer to AEGIS, with four phased array antennas that are able to track 16 targets at the same time. The Redut system consists of four or eight vertical launch systems that launch three types of missiles. The 9M100 is the short-range missile, with a range of up to 15km. The 9M96M is the medium-range missile, with a range of 40-50km. Finally, the 9M96 long-range missile is supposed to have a range of up to 150km.

    It now appears that the Redut’s problems are much more serious than just integration. A recent report notes that the Ministry of Defense has stopped trials of the system because of continuing problems with the 9M96 long-range missile. Specifically, the missiles appear to fail after three seconds of flight. Some reports indicate that the Redut system works well hitting targets up to 40km away, but fails in the long range. The implication is that the short and medium range missiles work well, but the long range missile does not. Nevertheless, this may be an improvement over previous results, as trials of the Redut system on the Steregushchiy class corvettes in 2014 showed that they were only able to hit targets at distances of up to 15km because the medium-range Furke-2 radar system was not functioning properly.

    Instead of further trials, the problems will now be sorted out by an inter-agency commission, a sure sign that the problems are serious and are not expected to be fixed any time soon. The problems stem from issues at the design bureau, which is reportedly not up to the task of designing a missile with the requirements provided by the Defense Ministry. The Fakel machine design bureau, which is developing the missiles is supposedly in relatively poor condition, using technologies and equipment left over from the Soviet period.

    Redut systems are supposed to be installed on both the Admiral Gorshkov frigates and the Steregushchiy class corvettes. The corvettes that have been commissioned so far with partial Redut systems that are not able to strike long-distance targets. It looks like the Russian military is now facing a choice regarding how long it is willing to wait to commission the already long-delayed first ship of the Admiral Gorshkov frigate class. So far, the Defense Ministry has not been willing to commission the frigate without a fully functional air defense system, though this may change as the delays grow longer.

    https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2016/07/28/russian-naval-air-defense-in-trouble/

    Your a moderator, you should know better than to post garbage from Dmitry Gorenburg. It's not just me saying this, it's sepheronx, it's kvs, it's big_Gazza. Dmitry Gorenburg is as trustworthy as a Jeffery Damer veggie burger!!!

    Sponsored content

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Feb 25, 2017 7:24 pm