Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Share

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

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

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Jul 20, 2016 6:07 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    In the late cold war era the SSN-3 shaddocks Did they go through any kind of upgrades to keep them more modern and resistant to jamming than their 1970s versions?

    They they also have the problem of poor resolution and not able to pick up smaller ships like corvettes /MGB ?

    The P-500 Bazalt (SS-N-12 Sandbox) was the modernised follow-on to the P-5 Shaddock.  The USSR didn't bother to modernise the old shaddock carriers like the Kynda or Kresta I classes, and only fitted the new missiles to new combatants like the Kiev and Slava cruisers.  P-500 was itself modernised as the Vulcan P-1000 and fitted to 3x Echo II boats and some of the Slavas.

    Not sure about P-5/SS-N-3 as its an old design, but P-500 & 1000 had very powerful active radars and would have had no problem picking up a corvette-sized vessel, but given that they were programmed to attack in swarms and to prioritise the large fleet targets, its unlikely they would select a puny corvette over other juicier victims Twisted Evil

    The Kynda and Kresta class can they ripple fire their missiles against a single target ? given the importance of the "first strike salvo" in the soviet naval doctrine and esp since the SSN-3 was likely equipped with tactical nukes

    I think the SSN-12 can be ripple fired and one missile can control the flight of the others in the salvo like the SSN-19 shipwreck, is that accurate for all P-500 bazalt carriers including Echo II class submarines ?
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16090
    Points : 16781
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:17 am

    Live missiles don't last forever, so after being made and spending a set period of time in operational service they will end their operational lives and need to be replaced. This means even old missiles are kept in production to keep stocks current while expired missiles are fired off in tests including tests to ensure they can still perform their mission and also as targets for air defence systems too.

    The new build models will generally use improved components and systems... often incorporating modules and components from replacement systems where possible to reduce production costs.

    AFAIK the Soviet Antiship missiles are all designed for mass attack to overwhelm the defences of very strongly defended targets.

    The huge step forward with Kalibr and Klub is the unified launcher allowing all Russian vessels to be adapted to carry the same large missiles.

    It means more missiles can be carried and more importantly the variety of different types can be reduced. The cost of making so many different anti ship missiles that are not compatible in design or launcher makes things more expensive and harder.

    With Granit a Kirov class ship needs stocks of the missile in the ports it will operate from, while a Sovremmeny class operating from the same port needs stocks of Moskit. With an upgrade with UKSK launchers both vessels could carry Klub and Kalibr and later be upgraded to Zircon.


    _________________
    “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
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1513
    Points : 1553
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:32 am

    GarryB wrote: It means more missiles can be carried and more importantly the variety of different types can be reduced. The cost of making so many different anti ship missiles that are not compatible in design or launcher makes things more expensive and harder.

    With Granit a Kirov class ship needs stocks of the missile in the ports it will operate from, while a Sovremmeny class operating from the same port needs stocks of Moskit. With an upgrade with UKSK launchers both vessels could carry Klub and Kalibr and later be upgraded to Zircon.


    Interesting is if RN plans to re-equip also remaining Project 1164 Atlant class. From size of launch cells it could use up 48 Calibrs...
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10144
    Points : 10638
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  George1 on Fri Jul 22, 2016 2:24 pm

    "Bastion" and "Bal" to be deployed in the Kuril Islands

    Подробнее на ТАСС:
    https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/3477483&usg=ALkJrhhcQSgEeIowhsduNmV3sJBkmopVGw


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

    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10144
    Points : 10638
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  George1 on Sat Jul 23, 2016 12:55 pm

    In Primorye, the Pacific Fleet missile troops first performed live firing of the complex "Bastion"



















    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2031272.html


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

    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16090
    Points : 16781
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 24, 2016 12:28 pm

    Nice... basically a land based Yakhont/Onyx.

    The next gen will likely be a land based Zircon...


    _________________
    “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
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10144
    Points : 10638
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  George1 on Sat Oct 22, 2016 11:54 am

    MOSCOW, October 21. /TASS/. The Russian Navy in the third quarter of 2016 received more than one hundred Kalibr and Oniks missiles as well as ships and coastal defense missile systems, Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov has said.

    More:
    http://tass.com/defense/907916


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

    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10144
    Points : 10638
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  George1 on Sat Nov 19, 2016 1:41 pm

    MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The combat readiness of two Utes coastal silo-based missile systems in Crimea was restored and confirmed by successful launches of the P-35 cruise missiles, a source the Crimean in law enforcement agencies told RIA Novosti.

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/russia/201611191047609773-russia-utes-crimea-missiles-ready/


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

    avatar
    franco
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2137
    Points : 2177
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  franco on Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:56 pm

    "Previously, the newspaper of the Pacific Fleet "Battle Watch" reported the location and setting on combat duty divisions antiship DBK "Bastion" on the island of Iturup and DBK "Bal" on the island of Kunashir Kuril chain, as well as the preparation of these units to the training of missile launches."


    Apparently another "Bastion" division was placed on Kunashir last year, so this would equal a brigade of Coastal Artillery Rocket assets. A division generally is 3-4 firing units with commanding support units.
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10144
    Points : 10638
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  George1 on Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:22 am

    Bal and Bastion: Meet Two Coastal Defense Systems Russia Deployed to Kurils

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201611221047718343-bal-bastion-defense-systems/


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

    avatar
    franco
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2137
    Points : 2177
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  franco on Sun Nov 27, 2016 1:58 pm

    An article on the operations of the Crimea anti-ship missile system just put back into service;

    https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://topwar.ru/103960-rossiya-vosstanovit-obekt-100-v-krymu.html&usg=ALkJrhhBb_bdur6gwA7VvhDAkXcQLu8uUw
    avatar
    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1628
    Points : 1791
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  TheArmenian on Fri Dec 02, 2016 7:12 pm

    GRANIT missile operation explained:

    The Vice director of NPO Mash. mentions that all the rockets from one salvo act as "all for one and one for all"

    The range is mentioned as : 700 km

    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16090
    Points : 16781
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 03, 2016 8:40 am

    Interesting.

    The all for one and one for all comment refers to the fact that these missiles operate as a pack using a datalink network.. since the late 70s.


    _________________
    “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
    Singular_Transform
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 300
    Points : 302
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  Singular_Transform on Mon Dec 05, 2016 11:38 pm

    What I started to wander is what can be the aproach trakjestory of a anti ship weapon?

    It has to be random and the SAM fire control computer has to have hard time to predict it.


    So, I think the P-700/800 should use something like this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptic_curve

    It is not possible to calculate the trajestory based on the observed part of it without knowing the coeficients.

    The rockets radnomly choose paths that satisfy a few condition (like endpoint has to be the ship, fuel consumption, scattering around the ship and so on) and after that just following it , and as a bonus randomly change the trust of the engine as well.

    nastle77
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

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

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Sat Dec 17, 2016 4:10 am

    GarryB wrote:Interesting.

    The all for one and one for all comment refers to the fact that these missiles operate as a pack using a datalink network.. since the late 70s.

    Did that system also exist for the Sepel coastal anti ship missile system?
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16090
    Points : 16781
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:30 am

    No.

    AFAIK the Sepal used active radar homing with a datalink back to the launch vessel.

    The radar picture was sent back to the launch platform via a video channel and the operator selected the target and changed the mode of the radar to tracking... so the missile would drop to low altitude and close in and hit the target selected.

    The wolf pack hunters started with the P-500 Bazalt AFAIK and also includes the P-700 Granit and P-1000 Vulcan, and later missiles like Onyx.


    _________________
    “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: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Dec 27, 2016 10:01 pm

    GarryB wrote:No.

    AFAIK the Sepal used active radar homing with a datalink back to the launch vessel.

    The radar picture was sent back to the launch platform via a video channel and the operator selected the target and changed the mode of the radar to tracking... so the missile would drop to low altitude and close in and hit the target selected.

    The wolf pack hunters started with the P-500 Bazalt AFAIK and also includes the P-700 Granit and P-1000 Vulcan, and later missiles like Onyx.

    Did the Sepal also dropped to a low altitude when engaging its target ? but not a sea skimmer ? but I'm assuming was a lot more vulnerable given it could not be ripple fired like bazalt and it was also a lot slower ?

    JohninMK
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3834
    Points : 3889
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  JohninMK on Tue Dec 27, 2016 10:56 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Interesting.

    The all for one and one for all comment refers to the fact that these missiles operate as a pack using a datalink network.. since the late 70s.

    Did that system also exist for the Sepel coastal anti ship missile system?
    Would it be correct to assume that wolf pack operation is unlikely to be very important for shore based systems as the single prime target, the carrier, is unlikely to be within range of Russian shore batteries?
    avatar
    Singular_Transform
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 300
    Points : 302
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  Singular_Transform on Tue Dec 27, 2016 11:57 pm

    JohninMK wrote:
    Would it be correct to assume that wolf pack operation is unlikely to be very important for shore based systems as the single prime target, the carrier, is unlikely to be within range of Russian shore batteries?

    It is very important for any missile system.

    Say you attack with two missile.
    Chance of the defense is 50% to kill an incoming missile with a sam.

    If the two incomming missile close to each other then the sam has higher chance of kill,and the sams in the second wave has targets even if one of the missiles destroyed.

    If the two missile using wolf pack method then both of them comming on a path that stressing the sam system,and the killingof one missile leaves the subsequent waves without target.

    So two uncooperative missile needs less sam to kill than the wolf pack ones ( I don't want to calculate the chances , but easy it to do )

    game theroy Smile
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16090
    Points : 16781
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:55 am

    Did the Sepal also dropped to a low altitude when engaging its target ? but not a sea skimmer ? but I'm assuming was a lot more vulnerable given it could not be ripple fired like bazalt and it was also a lot slower ?

    They would not be fired one at a time at targets... they would be coordinated. They were not sea skimmers in the tradition sense but an enemy ship approaching the Russian coastline wont be broadcasting its position with radars operating all the time so the threat of an incoming missile would be significant... turning on SAMs to defend the vessel would broadcast the vessels position to all in the region...

    Would it be correct to assume that wolf pack operation is unlikely to be very important for shore based systems as the single prime target, the carrier, is unlikely to be within range of Russian shore batteries?

    The Russian missiles will likely have a much greater range than export models and as such when US carrier groups move in to launch land strikes against the Soviet Union/Russia they will have to come within range so their aircraft can reach their targets.

    Russian anti ship land batteries are not for hunting US carriers in the Atlantic... they are to blunt and push back any attempts at amphibious assault.... against WASP class LHD and helicopter carriers they would be devastating...

    If the two missile using wolf pack method then both of them comming on a path that stressing the sam system,and the killingof one missile leaves the subsequent waves without target.

    You clearly don't understand how the wolf pack attack works.

    Take an Oscar II class SSGN... it gets a communication via satellite to warn of a carrier group that is say 550km away. The SSGN immediately launched 12 Granit missiles which climb to medium altitude for the initial flight phase at supersonic speed. After travelling 450km 11 missiles drop down to 20m above the wavetops, while one missile stays up high and scans the projected target area... that will be the first emission from the missiles so the first the targets know is one radar scan from 100km away from an altitude of maybe 500m. The missile that made that scan then examines what it detects and then knowing there are 11 other missiles divides up the targets. Lets say there is a single carrier and four support destroyers... the lead missile might allocate two missiles to each destroyer with the remaining four missiles targeting the carrier.

    Note the lead missile scanned from 500m but dropped down to low altitude to fly with the other 11 missiles so the carrier group sees nothing on its radar while the 12 missiles are each given target data and the information is linked back via satellite link to the Oscar which may now decide to launch another 12 missiles or it might wait to see what happens.
    If the lead missile is intercepted and destroyed the remaining 11 missiles will then vote a leader and that missile will reassign missiles to targets... so for instance if one missile is shot down, then one destroyer might be targetted by one missile instead of two.

    The Granit missiles have heavy titanium armour plate protecting their warhead from frontal attack and would be very hard targets to knock down. The fact that they will be flying very low and very fast and will not reveal their attack until the last seconds would make them deadly...

    Most of the time their attack would be coordinated with other platforms attacking too like AS-6 missiles falling from 40km altitude at mach 3, and 100km range torpedoes from SSNs times to arrive to destroy the steering of the ships at a time when the missiles are approaching....

    Note only the lead missile reveals its existence to the target with a radar scan... the target has no idea whether there is one missile or 32. There are 12 or 24 missiles to a wolf pack but who knows how many wolf packs have been launched...


    _________________
    “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 : 532
    Points : 536
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  Isos on Wed Dec 28, 2016 11:54 am

    And now with the Yassen class and futur VLS equiped Kalina class, they will be able to do this with their nuclear attack and diesel subs with newer missiles, no need to have the big Oscar.

    I gave the same idea but for diesel subs equiped with a hundred of small mach 3 missile with a range of 70-100 km but small warehead. GarryB suggested the 100 km Hermes missile. Lunch first some IR guided then some active radar finally some passive radar to dammage the ships . Combined with 12 Oniks lunched after the small missiles, the result would be devastating.

    Oscar need long range missile because it's a SSN operating in the ocean. A diesel subs is harder to detect and can come closer to the battlegroup.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 300
    Points : 302
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  Singular_Transform on Wed Dec 28, 2016 1:08 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Did the Sepal also dropped to a low altitude when engaging its target ? but not a sea skimmer ? but I'm assuming was a lot more vulnerable given it could not be ripple fired like bazalt and it was also a lot slower ?

    They would not be fired one at a time at targets... they would be coordinated. They were not sea skimmers in the tradition sense but an enemy ship approaching the Russian coastline wont be broadcasting its position with radars operating all the time so the threat of an incoming missile would be significant... turning on SAMs to defend the vessel would broadcast the vessels position to all in the region....


    It is the publicly communicated information, and I think it is way off from reality.

    Ther is not so much information (I mean real) about the 700/800, but there is a lot of informaiton about the SR-71, and based on that there are a few interesting discrepency.
    The ramjet on the 700/800 has an optimal speed of 4 mathc, maximum speed of 6 match,and optimal altitude of 24000 meter .
    on sea level the speed of the rocket can't be more than 1.6 match, and the range dramaticaly reduce.

    Due to the high speed a dopler radar can spot it even with high clutering.

    The main target carrier has airborne radar, means the rocket can be spotted 250 km away.At least.


    So, thereal protection is the small RC, high speed, manouver capability , close to the capability of the SAM rockets, long range and deltaV, and high flight ceiling.

    I don't think that the 700/800 using sea skimming .
    And I think the description of the strateg ( flying high and low and so on) doesn't ad up due to the fuel requirement and speed diferences.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16090
    Points : 16781
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Thu Dec 29, 2016 8:51 am

    They knew the US forces could detect their missiles from long distances... the purpose of high speed is to reduce the time they have to do something about it.

    The early models of missile were not sea skimming... they flew at 50m altitude or so.
    The new missiles however are fully sea skimming and can hit land targets now too.

    They are working on scramjet motors for the new missiles, but currently the fastest missile they have has a rocket propelled speed of mach 2.9 for the terminal phase of the attack.

    Moskit is reportedly able to fly at mach 2.2 at low altitude. Granit at mach 1.6 at the start of its flight and mach 2 near the end when it is much lighter having burned off several tons of fuel.

    Granit has titanium armour to protect the warhead and would be rather difficult to shoot down.



    _________________
    “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
    Singular_Transform
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 300
    Points : 302
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  Singular_Transform on Thu Dec 29, 2016 7:12 pm

    GarryB wrote:They knew the US forces could detect their missiles from long distances... the purpose of high speed is to reduce the time they have to do something about it.

    The early models of missile were not sea skimming... they flew at 50m altitude or so.
    The new missiles however are fully sea skimming and can hit land targets now too.

    They are working on scramjet motors for the new missiles, but currently the fastest missile they have has a rocket propelled speed of mach 2.9 for the terminal phase of the attack.

    Moskit is reportedly able to fly at mach 2.2 at low altitude. Granit at mach 1.6 at the start of its flight and mach 2 near the end when it is much lighter having burned off several tons of fuel.

    Granit has titanium armour to protect the warhead and would be rather difficult to shoot down.


    If you check the three missile ( moskit/700/800) engine inlet the range and purpose of them become quite obvious.


    The 700/800 has a conical inlet, adjustable ( I expect) the moskit has a fixed inlet.

    Means that the moskit was designed for one altitude, the 700/800 felxible about the altitudes .

    If the 700 engine data true then the maximum speed of it could be around 1.7 match sea level, but it means that the maximum speed of it should be 4-6 match 24000 meter altitude.

    I don't think that the granit has titanium in the warhead.They have to had the inlet cone moving motor,and the radar in the front of the rocket.
    The CIW has very small chance to hit it, so why they should bother with any armour?


    If they updated the electronics of the rockets that means they have 100-300 kg extra weight allowance for the rockets.

    I think the attack profile of th 700/800 flexible, and they can decide the best based on the distance and attacker profile.

    And the true range of the 700/800 should be around 1500-2500 km.

    Based on this if the attacker launch them from 600km distance then they have enough allowance to make a full circle around the target , around 200 km, to synchronise all wolf.

    avatar
    Tsavo Lion
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 51
    Points : 55
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Dec 30, 2016 10:13 pm

    Перед самым выходом российских кораблей к берегам Сирии Северный флот показательно провел учения, в ходе которых атомная подводная лодка проекта 949 «Антей» поразила «Гранитами» еще и несколько наземных целей. Transl.: Just before sailing to the coast of Syria, the Northern Fleet conducted exercises during which nuclear submarine Project 949 "Antey" [Oskar SSGN] struck with "Granite" a few ground targets. http://izvestia.ru/news/654331#ixzz4UMFphf7A
    So, will they keep & expend them in that role even after they r replaced in anti-ship role with newer missiles?

    Sponsored content

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles: Discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Apr 29, 2017 1:15 pm