Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Share
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 12858
    Points : 13345
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  George1 on Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:08 am

    Shipborne visual-optical noise stations 5P42 "Filin" enter the fleet

    As reported by the RIA Novosti news agency on February 2, 2019, the Russian Electronics holding, which is part of the Rostec state corporation, has begun supplying the Russian Navy with 5P42 Filin visual-optical interference stations that blind the enemy. This RIA Novosti reported in the press service of the company.



    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3518790.html
    Nibiru
    Nibiru

    Posts : 198
    Points : 200
    Join date : 2018-05-22

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Nibiru on Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:00 pm

    Interesting article about Filin



    Russian Navy gets new weapon to induce ‘hallucinations’ and ‘blind’ the enemy

    A new weapon installed on Russian warships can make enemy soldiers miss targets by blinding them, while also causing hallucinations and making them want to vomit.

    Two Russian frigates were fitted with the new non-lethal dazzler-type weapon, the 5P-42 Filin (eagle-owl), the manufacturer’s representative told RIA Novosti. The weapon is designed to temporarily blind the enemy.

    It creates a strobe-like effect that disrupts eyesight, seriously hampering the soldier’s ability to aim at night, Ruselectronics (which produces the weapon) stated.

    During testing, volunteers used assault rifles, sniper rifles, and machine guns to shoot targets placed up to 2km away and protected by the device. They all had trouble aiming because they “couldn’t see the target.”

    Forty-five percent of the volunteers reported feeling dizzy, nauseous, and disoriented. Twenty percent are said to have experienced hallucinations, described as “a ball of light moving in front of [our] eyes.” The company didn’t specify how many people participated in the tests.

    Filin is also capable of “effectively suppressing” night vision tech, laser distance sensors, and even pointing systems for anti-tank missiles from a range of up to 5km, according to the manufacturer.

    The ships equipped with the new high-tech stations are the state-of-the-art frigates Admiral Gorshkov and Admiral Kasatonov, both of Russia’s Northern Sea Fleet. Each has two stations. Two more frigates, currently under construction, are also expected to be fitted with the device.

    The company first unveiled the blinding weapon in December as a tool for law enforcement. The design team said that it can be used during raids against terrorists and other criminals.

    https://www.rt.com/russia/450489-russian-navy-system-hallucinations/

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:12 pm

    Would add that there would have been no volunteers if this system actually permanently blinded the subject... it causes temporary blindness and discomfort/nausea...

    The west would love it... no body is going to lose an eye like they would with French methods of non lethal crowd control...
    Nibiru
    Nibiru

    Posts : 198
    Points : 200
    Join date : 2018-05-22

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Nibiru on Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:20 pm

    GarryB wrote:Would add that there would have been no volunteers if this system actually permanently blinded the subject... it causes temporary blindness and discomfort/nausea...

    The west would love it... no body is going to lose an eye like they would with French methods of non lethal crowd control...

    If I were the manufacturer I’d introduce a slightly more lethal version of this device that causes permanent blindess and preferably severe brain hemorrhage for use against Islamic Terrorists Twisted Evil
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7681
    Points : 7775
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:55 pm


    Why would they install this on ships? Wouldn't it be more useful for the army?
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 1811
    Points : 1811
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Hole on Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:33 pm

    Patience!
    I´m sure a army version is around the corner. Mounted on an MT-LBu or something similar.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4762
    Points : 4800
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:35 am

    Nibiru wrote: device that causes permanent {} severe brain hemorrhage for use against Islamic Terrorists Twisted Evil

    meh, Hollywood does it better for tens of years now lol1 lol1 lol1
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4762
    Points : 4800
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:56 am

    Peŕrier wrote:RBU-6000 as stated by ISOS, born as an ASW weapon but evolved to an anti-torpedo defense system and it's now coming back to the ASW role.

    The real drawback of the system is that it works through salvos and it's an hardkill system, and in the west it was deemed more effective to lure an incoming torpedo away from its intended target by decoys, but it is universally judged a very effective anti torpedo weapon.

    It is judged being highly effective against wire-guided torpedoes, because the wide shock inducted by several detonations should easily break the wire, and it's deemed quite well effective against the torpedoes themselves, even the fire and forget ones.



    both you and Isos made a great explanation. I want only add small detail: salvos in anti-torpedo mode are not all at once. its is like 4-4-4 in 3 tiers with different objectives and ranges form ship. New bombs AFIR have operational depth 600m +
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:06 am

    Why would they install this on ships? Wouldn't it be more useful for the army?

    I believe it was related to experience where ships are operating near the shore and the enemy takes pot shots at the ships using Machine guns, RPGs, sniper rifles, and of course ATGMs.

    Obviously this system is designed to effect optical guidance systems so would also effect laser guided and EO/IIR guided munitions as well... though presumably more by making them blind than making them vomit...

    The amusing this is that I seem to remember that the west was up in arms because one of the Kirovs was supposed to have a laser defence system... I think they said it was the Frunze... all turned out to be bollocks of course...
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4796
    Points : 4955
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Feb 17, 2019 6:44 am

    With talks about complicating defense, and attacking from unexpected directions, so whats the feasibility of a hybrid cruise/Ashm/torpedo system? A weapon with one part of the range is dedicated to aerial flight and one part is dedicated to underwater strike and vise versa? I'm saying like Kh-35 having something like 300 km range, a modified version could have 250 km dedicated to aerial flight, slows down and falls in to the water, and the second stage as a torpedo with 50 km range. Maybe the reverse could be done, where torpedo has a second stage, where flies like a Ashm. Maybe a rocket powered version could have supersonic speed to reduce flight time, then slows down and descends in the water, where the torpedo stage uses the rocket fuel with a cavitating nose, to allow super-cavitation water speed.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3426
    Points : 3510
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  flamming_python on Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:23 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:With talks about complicating defense, and attacking from unexpected directions, so whats the feasibility of a hybrid cruise/Ashm/torpedo system? A weapon with one part of the range is dedicated to aerial flight and one part is dedicated to underwater strike and vise versa? I'm saying like Kh-35 having something like 300 km range, a modified version could have 250 km dedicated to aerial flight, slows down and falls in to the water, and the second stage as a torpedo with 50 km range. Maybe the reverse could be done, where torpedo has a second stage, where flies like a Ashm. Maybe a rocket powered version could have supersonic speed to reduce flight time, then slows down and descends in the water, where the torpedo stage uses the rocket fuel with a cavitating nose, to allow super-cavitation water speed.

    They already have that; the Vodopad/Veter torpedo-missile-torpedo
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4796
    Points : 4955
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:44 am

    flamming_python wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:With talks about complicating defense, and attacking from unexpected directions, so whats the feasibility of a hybrid cruise/Ashm/torpedo system? A weapon with one part of the range is dedicated to aerial flight and one part is dedicated to underwater strike and vise versa? I'm saying like Kh-35 having something like 300 km range, a modified version could have 250 km dedicated to aerial flight, slows down and falls in to the water, and the second stage as a torpedo with 50 km range. Maybe the reverse could be done, where torpedo has a second stage, where flies like a Ashm. Maybe a rocket powered version could have supersonic speed to reduce flight time, then slows down and descends in the water, where the torpedo stage uses the rocket fuel with a cavitating nose, to allow super-cavitation water speed.

    They already have that; the Vodopad/Veter torpedo-missile-torpedo

    I'm aware of those systems. If I recall right, the Vodopad/Veter systems are really for ASW, not exactly what I'm talking about. The system that I'm suggesting is for surface ships, the purpose of surprise and complication of defense. Shot out in to the water like a torpedo some way, and then fly out the rest to the target like a proper Ashm, or an alternate system that flies a significant distance like a Ashm, but engages the target underwater as a torpedo.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4762
    Points : 4800
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:34 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    I'm aware of those systems. If I recall right, the Vodopad/Veter systems are really for ASW, not exactly what I'm talking about. The system that I'm suggesting is for surface ships, the purpose of surprise and complication of defense. Shot out in to the water like a torpedo some way, and then fly out the rest to the target like a proper Ashm, or an alternate system that flies a significant distance like a Ashm, but engages the target underwater as a torpedo.


    like Rastrub-B, with 90km range, dual purpose?

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:02 am

    Shot out in to the water like a torpedo some way, and then fly out the rest to the target like a proper Ashm, or an alternate system that flies a significant distance like a Ashm, but engages the target underwater as a torpedo.

    To what advantage?

    Very simply the advantage of flying through the air is that you can get to very high speeds or very long range depending upon the propulsion options... but not normally both.

    Through water you have the advantage of stealth and the difficulty of defending from such an attack.

    Most sub launched anti ship cruise missiles are launched from underwater and then fly to the target... SS-N-19, SS-N-7, SS-N-9, Kh-35, Club, and Calibr, etc, etc.

    The SS-N-14 flies to the target area and then either drops a torpedo for use against subs or retains the torpedo and hits the target as a missile for ship targets.

    Mixing operating environments just complicates design for little real gain... those Soviet missiles we see launched from a torpedo tube on a ship that go into the water and swim for a bit and the blast out of the water on a rocket powered booster motor to deliver a torpedo close to a target sub or ship were designed that way because they were originally intended to be launched by subs and start off under water, so it is easier to launch them into the water first and have them blast off into the air and then land in the water again...

    The new models to do the same thing... ie deliver torpedos to distances away from the ship by ballistic rocket don't launch from torpedo tubes into the water first... the Medvedevka and the 91ER1 just launch ballistic rockets from ship based launchers (a dedicated system for Medvedka, and the UKSK system for the 91ER1).

    Probably the cleverest use of a mix of propulsions would be the supersonic Club... flight in air can be long range and subsonic, or short range and supersonic, but the Club combines the long range of a subsonic cruise missile with the defence penetration performance of a supersonic rocket powered missile.

    Next gen anti ship missiles will likely just use scramjet propulsion, which offers rocket level speeds with more efficient jet level weights of fuel requirements...
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 1811
    Points : 1811
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Hole on Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:55 am

    His idea is not bad. A 50km+ anti-ship torpedo brought to the target by some low-flying missile would complicate the defence of a ship.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4796
    Points : 4955
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:32 pm

    Hole wrote:His idea is not bad. A 50km+ anti-ship torpedo brought to the target by some low-flying missile would complicate the defence of a ship.

    Yeah, my idea is that if the Ashm gets detected, it'll eventually 'disappear' off the radar (which may sow panic and confusion), and then BOOM, the ship is cut in half! The primary target would be destroy class ships, and the defense complication comes in the fact that you force a ship to be just as good at ASW (both the defense suite as well as the training of the crew) as they are with Ashm's. The first stage is a slow burning cruise missile tubofan, and the last stage is a rocket powered torpedo with a super-cavitating nose. Similarly I would like to see a torpedo (or a UUV drone) that get close enough to a boat (100-50km) and launches a rocket powered Ashm out of the water at Mach 3+ speed.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 1811
    Points : 1811
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Hole on Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:46 pm

    There is the MDS-1 mine which is a torpedo fitted with a bottom-mine or the PMT-1 which is a mine fitted with a torpedo to attack subs. Both could be developed/enlarged to carry a Kh-35.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:10 am

    His idea is not bad. A 50km+ anti-ship torpedo brought to the target by some low-flying missile would complicate the defence of a ship.

    A torpedo is a substantial item and a long range torpedo even more so... which means what we are actually talking about is a small light short range torpedo... which are generally most effective against submarines.

    A torpedo big enough to have a decent range and payload punch to sink a decent sized ship would be very long, very big, and very heavy and would not balance well on the end of a rocket.

    Lets just say that such a long range torpedo would be about 53cm wide and about 8 metres long so to deliver that by air to a target you will need to bolt a fairly enormous solid fuelled rocket engine on the back... a jet powered weapon would need a huge solid rocket booster anyway and a huge wing just to fly.

    Most ships could probably defend themselves from ballistically launched mach 2-2.5 missiles better than they could defend against a torpedo that spends its entire time in the water.

    The point is that the few weapons that consist of ballistically fired small torpedoes are for use against subs with no air defence systems or radar so really they don't hear anything coming... the weapon just splashes into the water a few kms from their position and then the detect the running scanning torpedo when it is in its final attack mode.

    That makes sense because flying at mach 2 for 40kms means it covers the space to the detected sub quickly and for the target sub silently.

    For use against a ship however it is an obvious and fairly straight forward target during its ballistic flight and to get within 3-5km of the ship puts it well within range of most medium range SAM systems.

    The multi stage system only really makes sense in specific cases and it really depends on the targets involved to make it worth while.

    Ie sub means no air defences and small torpedo which means not so huge overall weapon size.

    For the supersonic Club, the subsonic cruise missile portion gives excellent flight range at a low speed but at a low radar evading altitude... but when actually attacking the target the rocket section accelerates the terminal portion of the missile to mach 3 which gives it the benefits of long range and relative low cost, but with the benefits of good defence penetration performance and terminal effect.

    So you end up with a long range weapon with a good chance of penetrating even modern air defences...

    The combination is balanced and uses the best features to achieved desired characteristics...

    The first stage is a slow burning cruise missile tubofan, and the last stage is a rocket powered torpedo with a super-cavitating nose. Similarly I would like to see a torpedo (or a UUV drone) that get close enough to a boat (100-50km) and launches a rocket powered Ashm out of the water at Mach 3+ speed.

    But why bother with the turbofan portion... what about a low noise torpedo that runs at perhaps 20 knots for hours on end that can deliver a nose full of 10-20 rocket propelled torpedo final stage warheads that are independently targeting enemy ships.

    An enemy carrier group is making its way across the Pacific or Atlantic... it wont be sailing straight but a huge torpedo with 10-20 rocket powered super cavitating torpedoes in its nose could be launched in the general direction at perhaps 20-30 knots on a roughly intercept course... as it gets close it can move to near the surface and receive satellite information and course corrections to intercept the surface action group... eventually the weapon will get to within a few kms of the enemy ship grouping and it could launch its rocket powered high speed torpedoes at the ships from very close range... perhaps even closing head on with the enemy ships the main torpedo carrier operating at very low speeds now could turn 180 degrees and wait for the enemy ships to sail past and launch an attack from behind... wake homing torpedos or just passive sonar torpedoes chasing the propellers running right in front of them... the carrying main torpedo could simply sink now that it has done its job without risking a much more expensive manned sub... or it could ram one of those propellers in front of it too with its own modest HE payload.

    Both could be developed/enlarged to carry a Kh-35.

    But would you not agree a torpedo would be more difficult to deal with than a subsonic anti ship missile?
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 1811
    Points : 1811
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Hole on Thu Feb 21, 2019 11:25 am

    Depends on the ship. Very Happy

    Solution to this debate is a large UUV with the capability to fire torpedos, cruise and anti-ship missiles. And lay mines. You could even "park" a UUV somewhere for weeks or even month, just like a mine.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  GarryB on Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:49 am

    Modern land based mine fields are very sophisticated things and can be turned on or off depending upon the situation... you could turn it on to allow friendly forces to retreat over it and perhaps even a weak enemy force to move over it and then turn it on... attack the weak enemy force and their main escape route is over a newly activated minefield...

    At sea it is a little more complicated but also more interesting... you can include sensors with mines and mine torpedos that give data regarding enemy forces and locations...

    Sponsored content

    Re: Naval Weapon Systems & Technology

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:29 pm