I searched alittle for info about decreasing CEP of ballistic missiles to hit acarrier or alarge -medium ships... ,
i got some different answers, optical guidance is fine but not for targets like aship in sea (for short range ballistic missile ),
First of all look at what other anti carrier missiles use for guidance... options include anti radiation. When defending itself during an actual attack most vessels will turn on their radars once they know they have been spotted because the advantage of having radars turned on and being able to spot targets and threats from long range is much more useful than having them off and making the opponent wonder if that is really you or not.
If the attack has already started then hiding is not the best option because they have likely found you.
Other options include radar, IIR and optical. Very few would rely on GPS or coordinates only simply because one of the main features of ships is that they can move.
All of these options would be relevant to an incoming ballistic missile so using one or a combination of several might be useful.
Radar guidance is very good but i have no info that if it enough to hit ashiip or not (for SRBM)
Radar guidance is all weather, but it is also active and warns the target it is under attack.
combining GPS will be excellent ,but GPS will be bolcked by USA on war time
Actually GPS would not be that much use because most ships move... a target 300km away moving at 25knts is not going to be in the same place when your missile arrives.
im interested in this idea after watching the iranian anti ship short ballistic missile,i wondered how can they hit aship with that accuracy,,
An undefended stationary ship... optical or radar guidance would both work well.
I guess CEP here must be around 10 meters !!
the lowest CEP of ascud as i remember was 50m ,
Lowest CEP of original Scud was more like 1km... which was fine for its purpose... delivering chem or bio agents or nukes to large NATO structures like airfields or troop concentrations. For Iraqi modified Scuds it was 2-5 times bigger CEP.
Scud had no terminal guidance so CEP gets much worse with distance travelled.
i also guess that 10 m CEP require using GPS, iranian didn't use GPS...
US military GPS guidance would be fine for this test, but real targets will be moving so GPS would not be much use unless you had a platform tracking the target and continuously updating the weapon... what sort of platform could survive that close to a carrier?
after looking to the rounded warhead,i think they used radar guidance or optical guidance or combined them together ??
For a supersonic weapon you want a pointed nose if you can help it... aerodynamically it is better. This suggests this weapon has optical guidance.
Iskander is a 300km range ballistic missile with options that include optical and radar guidance.
Am surprised they didn't fit a pointed fairing over the nose that fell off in flight to allow terminal optical homing but with better launch and cruise aerodynamics.
but how they achieved this acuuracy without GPS ?
or they just lie
GPS "guidance" guides things to fixed positions in space. It works in 3 dimensions... LAT LONG, and ALT. An anti ship guided missile needs to work in 4 dimensions... LAT, LONG, and ALT and Time to get a hit with GPS.
The calculation is quite difficult and prone to error... when you spot a carrier you need to get its exact position and heading and speed and based on the time it will take for your missile to arrive you can estimate the ships future position when the missile arrives... assuming the target will not change course or speed.
CEP would be 100m plus even without thinking about the effect of cross winds etc.
Much easier to locate the target and fire the missile into the area where it is going to be and then as the missile is falling activate an optical sensor or radar scanner to look for targets and then use the control surfaces to manoeuvre to fall onto the target.
if they didn't lie,iranians would become the first country to hit aship with short ballistic missile ( for my memory )
It will needs some very sophisticated bits to make it effective. Sinking a ship is about being sneaky... you are far more likely to sink a ship because it didn't know it was under attack in the first place. A ballistic missile flys so high it will probably be detected at very long range, so even though it is moving rather fast it becomes a maths problem to shoot it down. Modern computers are very good at maths.
If the target is an oil tanker then you will likely get a kill if you get a hit. An AEGIS class cruiser on the other hand has SAMs that can hit high speed objects flying high...
They could fake by having a radio emitter on the ship.
Quite true. Or they could be lasing the target with a laser target designator LTD.
The question is... what is this weapon for? If it is a political thing to say to the Iranian people and their neighbours that Iran is not defenceless against the mighty US Navy, then such tricks and cheats make sense... a hit is worth more than anything else that might have happened if they had not cheated... though I dare say if they had missed we would not see the footage...