Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Share

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 750
    Points : 933
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Nov 20, 2012 11:40 pm

    Sujoy wrote:By far the greatest challenge that the Russian navy will face is in the EW domain because the following US EW systems do NOT have any shortcomings that can be exploited .

    AN/WLR-1H(V)
    AN/SLQ-32
    AN/SSX-1
    AN/SLQ-49 Chaff Buoy Decoy System


    If any, EW department is by far the most strickened area of US Navy's surface ships defensive structure ; the strong point of this structure is absolutely not in the EW capabilities, neither in the quality of the interceptors, but almsot exclusively in the very high quality of the integrated fleet level detection and tracking architecture (AEGIS) allowing a very efficient threat's detection, discrimination and assignation to each defensive system present on the networked ships ,obtaining so an holistic increase of perfomances.


    AN/WLR-1H(V) is ridiculously outdated ,AN/SSX-1 is a stand alone system of AN/SLQ-32 Block 1B's spiral enhancement program (SEWIP program) adding Specific Emitter Identification -SEI- to the system ; image that Soviet planners don't even wasted a minute trying to compute theirs impact on possibility to hit of theirs most advanced ASCM against CBG ,so crushing was the advantages enjoyed by the data-sharing, swarm attacking salvos of P-500, P-700 or P-1000 on this defensive layer, you can figure by yourself what is the situation with today domestic "Kalibr" or "Oniks".


    AN-SLQ-49 has been almost completely replaced by Nulka and both of them are ,obviously, almost completely useless against any high supersonic ASCM with in-built processor target discrimination algorithms, for not say swarm-attacking missiles exchanging target's data resultant from radar irradiation from very different angle of incidence Wink


    Also US Navy is perfectly aware that cannot count on those weak EW defensive solutions against any except the less sophisticated enemies and instead invest enormous resources to mantain high the level of its ship based integrated survellaince and tracking systems and of the related interceptors elements.





    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 912
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:34 am

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Also US Navy is perfectly aware that cannot count on those weak EW defensive solutions against any except the less sophisticated enemies and instead invest enormous resources to mantain high the level of its ship based integrated survellaince and tracking systems and of the related interceptors elements.

    All valid points . However, fact remains that only a saturation strike by employing ‘swarm’ tactics will possibly be able to overwhelm these air-defences . For example the Soviet naval doctrine envisaged that at least 24 supersonic ASCMs need to be fired to overwhelm these US EW systems.

    As on this date Russia can and to a lesser extent China can overwhelm these EW systems. That said, this is a very cost prohibitive tactic. A better approach is to find out the technical shortcomings of these systems and exploit them . As on this date NO such technical countermeasures to these EW systems exist .

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 750
    Points : 933
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Nov 21, 2012 2:43 pm



    Soviet naval doctrine envisaged that at least 24 supersonic ASCMs need to be fired to overwhelm these US EW systems.



    I don't know where you get this information ,but it is totally false (i have even read comical figures of 100-120 missiles on some media Razz Razz Razz ).

    The entire salvo of a single Pr. 1144 (20 3M45, for three missiles groups) ,by end of '80 years, was computed capable to destoy all by itself an entire CBG with a probability superior to 85% ,with one probable surviving dameged ship among the escort piquet.

    EW systems on those ships was ,at the times and are even more today, almost totally powerless against those kind of highly sophisticated menaces .
    Already the previous infinetely less sophisticated P-120 Malakhit had a dual mode terminal seeker (active radar and passive IR) capable of crossing data reference , and P-500 ,P-700 and P-1000 all had not only a dual mode active/passive terminal guidance, heavily armoured components, inbuilt ECM systems, satellites -Legenda- target position reference but was also capable of "swarm" data sharing and correlation to obtain a multisensor and multi incidence picture of target position rendering so (in the same way of several of theris coeval elements of ground based IADS ) totally worthless any kind of decoys and deceptive jamming.

    The last element of the high lethality and ECCM reliability of those missiles was represented by the sheer high supersonic speed ; in facts this factor don't only was capable to render, without taking into account the features previously mentioned, theirs intecepton several dozen of times more difficult in respect to a subsonic missile , but render also false ship's positions for the effect of terminal countermeasures employment incompatible with any target vector data previously collected.


    This is a video ,with english subtitles, with some informations on those missiles, give to it a look (for you could be interesting the notion that two-three BrahMos are sufficient to sink a modern aircraft carrier ,practically would be sufficient the BrahMos payload of a single Super Su-30MKI penetrating CBG's defence to add ,two-three hours after, a new coral barrier the size of a Nimitz class to the bottom of sea Wink )



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-cm-f2JpiI



    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 912
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:17 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:

    Soviet naval doctrine envisaged that at least 24 supersonic ASCMs need to be fired to overwhelm these US EW systems.


    I don't know where you get this information ,but it is totally false (i have even read comical figures of 100-120 missiles on some media Razz Razz Razz ).

    I am referring to a US fleet not a single destroyer or frigate .

    Your remaining points are valid , but then as I said this a cost prohibitive exercise . Why ? Because apart part from the EW systems the destroyers , frigates , aircraft carriers will also use their anti cruise missile systems like Sea Sparrow, Phalanx and Sea Ram. Therefore , it makes far more sense to take out the EW systems technically . But then as I have already said "technical countermeasures" against these EW systems do NOT exist.

    One possible way could be to use something like "Suter" which uses a data stream filled with algorithms to invade an EW system through its antennas.

    Thanks for the video.

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 912
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:28 pm

    TR1 wrote:Why are you so convinced they have zero shortcomings?
    I am not convinced and am always delighted to Learn. I do not say there are no shortcomings . There are NO technical shortcomings . You see the difference ? Now if you point out to docile problems of EMI shielding , elimination of dissimilar metals , communication bandwith etc that's a different thing . But overall NO technical shortcomings that can be taken advantage of .

    TR1 wrote:No system is perfect.
    As I said these systems can be overwhelmed by a barrage of missiles , which is a costly affair.

    TR1 wrote:Russian ships have always traditionally been heavy on the EW as well.

    But do NOT have TECHNICAL countermeasures against the EW systems I have listed . And the converse is also true that the US does NOT have TECHNICAL countermeasures against the EW systems on board Russian ships.



    NickM
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 131
    Join date : 2012-11-09
    Location : NYC,USA / Essex,UK

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  NickM on Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:00 pm

    Sujoy wrote:By far the greatest challenge that the Russian navy will face is in the EW domain because the following US EW systems do NOT have any shortcomings that can be exploited .

    AN/WLR-1H(V)
    AN/SLQ-32
    AN/SSX-1
    AN/SLQ-49 Chaff Buoy Decoy System

    Yes, these EW systems do NOT have any technology related shortcomings. Only way to destroy them is to overwhelm the system by dozens of stand off missiles.

    War&Peace
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 27
    Points : 6
    Join date : 2012-11-15
    Location : Nashville,TN (USA)

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  War&Peace on Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:07 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Also US Navy is perfectly aware that cannot count on those weak EW defensive solutions against any except the less sophisticated enemies and instead invest enormous resources to mantain high the level of its ship based integrated survellaince and tracking systems and of the related interceptors elements.

    AN SLQ 32 in sufficient numbers ( which we have ) can jam any incoming hostile missile . The EW systems that are on board US ships are more than capable of taking out hostile missiles. The only option is a saturation strike , but that can be said about any aspect of warfare. Even a saturation strikes with ICBMS can make ABMs look obsolete.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 750
    Points : 933
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:17 pm


    I am referring to a US fleet not a single destroyer or frigate .


    Single destroyer or frigate ? Shocked Shocked

    I talk of an entire Carrier Battle Group -CVBG - not of a single ship .
    Something say to me that you lack a clear picture of what chances have CVBG's defenses against advanced anti ship supersonic missiles.

    Maybe some words from the someone of the US Navy's insiders involved will disperse a bit of mist:


    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a5LkaU0wj714


    But then as I have already said "technical countermeasures" against these EW systems do NOT exist.


    Sorry Sujoy, but i are uncapable to understand what you mean here.

    None of the EW systems you mentioned employ any revolutionary measure or solution, rather some are even badly outdated Very Happy
    Those systems are in no way different or better than those mounted on surface ships of the most advanced nations worldwide; literally even the most conventional of ASCM at world (leaving out high supersonic monsters capable of "swarm cooperative attacks" such as P-500,P-700 and p-1000) is designed to resist to similar "classic" kind of countermeasures : decoys, jamming and chaff/flares.

    I truly don't understand, Sujoy.

    Someone could rightly ask what are the measures implemented in an attacking system to overcome defensive systems employing new solutions: at example someone could question what measures should be involved in next generations torpedos - in the past designed only to resist to "soft-kill" defensive systems - to avoid interception by part of an innovative Paket-E/NK hard-kill anti-torpedo systems because it introduce a completely new level of defensive solutions to overcome in order to achieve its intended goal; AN/SLQ-32 or AN/SLQ-49 to the contrary don't represent anything worth of special attention.


    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 750
    Points : 933
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:25 pm

    AN SLQ 32 in sufficient numbers ( which we have ) can jam any incoming hostile missile .


    Smile Smile Oh yes ,SPS-171/L005S/Sorbtsiya-S in suffiecient numbers ( which we have ) can jam any incoming hostile missile. Radar based AAM are doomed Laughing Laughing


    Chances to jam sea skimming missiles (enjoying therefore a very low sidelobe's susceptibility), capable to create a swarm-like integrated picture of the targets composed by the multi-incidence active/passive radar data coming from each missile of the salvo (a capability unique still today among missiles in any category and in any nation worldwide) and with high supersonic speed[/b], therefore offering [b]enormously reduced times not only to overcome ECCM screening of the active half part of the seeker but also to eventually put a similar missile in a vector (compatible with the atacking missile's inertial guidance data) outside ship's projection ....all of that starting from AN SLQ 32's line of sight horizont !!) are ,for those reasons, technically very, very slim.


    We are attempting to conduct a serious ,informed debate on the subject and you are more than agreeably invited to expose your position on the subject, it can be a resource for all of us.

    Naturally this statement :


    AN SLQ 32 in sufficient numbers ( which we have ) can jam any incoming hostile missile.

    or this one

    SPS-171/L005S/Sorbtsiya-S in suffiecient numbers ( which we have ) can jam any incoming hostile missile.

    would never represent serious assertions on the related subjects Wink

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5834
    Points : 5886
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 on Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:57 pm

    Is that video actually accurate?

    For example, the fake signal creation by the Granit? How does it even detected an incoming missile? Is the false signal accurate?

    Maybe I have been a slacker on my reading, but I have never even hear of this before.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15865
    Points : 16570
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:57 pm

    AN SLQ 32 in sufficient numbers ( which we have ) can jam any incoming hostile missile .

    Funny you say that because of the large Kh-22M missiles to be carried by the Tu-22M3 in naval combat they pretty much had three main types... active radar homing, passive radar homing, and tactical nuclear with inertial guidance to a coordinate.

    The thing is that after any initial attack a carrier group will be using radar to detect threats at max range so it can deal with them so the standard strategy was to launch active radar homing missiles to find the elusive carrier group... of course these missiles also have a home on jam capability so using the SLQ 32 would allow the active radar homing missiles to switch from active radar to passive HOJ guidance. Of course active jammers emit a lot of noise so most Soviet platforms nearby will now know exactly where the emitter or emitters are so an enormous range of weapons will start closing in on the emitter/s.

    Unless that vessel or group of vessels want to be totally blind however they will need to turn on a radar or two, to get information to plan their defence... plenty of older Russian antiship missiles were fitted with backup IR guidance systems.

    The point is that after the first wave of missiles have hit there is no advantage to emcon and the second wave will likely include ARM equipped missiles too.

    For example, the fake signal creation by the Granit? How does it even detected an incoming missile? Is the false signal accurate?

    Maybe I have been a slacker on my reading, but I have never even hear of this before.

    Granit is three times the weight of Onyx, and was a very capable missile. Think how far computer technology has moved on... today a palm top computer can perform better than a 1970s mainframe.

    An incoming missile with active radar homing can be detected from the radar signal coming from its nose. A SARH missile can be "detected" by the change from "scanning" to target marking mode.

    The ancient Styx in Soviet service had a back up IR guidance system and it would not be impossible for Granit to have something similar to detect the IR plume of an incoming missile.


    _________________
    “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

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 912
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sujoy on Thu Nov 22, 2012 7:42 am

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Single destroyer or frigate ? Shocked Shocked

    I talk of an entire Carrier Battle Group -CVBG - not of a single ship .
    That's what I am talking about as well . Let's be more precise and say the 7th Fleet ( which was sent against India during the 1971 conflict) Very Happy . Understood Very Happy

    Mindstorm wrote:Maybe some words from the someone of the US Navy's insiders involved will disperse a bit of mist:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a5LkaU0wj714

    Mindstorm , please note that we need to take those observations with more than just a pinch of salt. Most of the time they may these assertions to get bigger defense grants from the Govt. Lobbying groups are working with them . This is not Russia where if you make un warranted comments you loose your job.

    Mindstorm wrote:Sorry Sujoy, but i are uncapable to understand what you mean here.

    I begin with the premise that swarming a fleet of sea vessels with super sonic cruise missiles is an option which on today's date Russia has and to a lesser degree China has . Now let's take a adversary who is weaker like say Iran , North Korea , Venezuela or even India . Can these countries overpower the EW systems of US fleet ??? Certainly NOT . As they simply do NOT have as many super sonic cruise missiles . I am assuming they will need at least 3 cruise missiles to take out one ship in the fleet . Now there are 50 - 60 ships in the US 7th Fleet . So at least 180 - 200 cruise missiles will be required . In the recently concluded Zuhai Air Show in China Chinese simulations showed a swarm of WZ-600 'Blue Shark' UCAVs armed with stand off missiles attacking en masse the INS Groshkov (Vikramaditya) . You get the picture ? Swarm of UCAVs for just 1 air craft carrier.


    Mindstorm wrote:None of the EW systems you mentioned employ any revolutionary measure or solution, rather some are even badly outdated Very Happy

    Would appreciate if you can explain this . My point is , if we take quantity out of the equation ( in this case a swarm of cruise missiles ) then how do you de grade the adversary's E system ?? I could't find any except for a few inconsequential ones like improved EMI shielding , elimination of dissimilar metals and improving communication bandwith . The US Navy's new program called Integrated Topside is designed to drastically improve the AN/SLQ-32 but will remain ineffective against a swarm of cruise missiles.

    So how does countries like the ones I have mentioned above who do NOT have a whole lot of cruise missiles in their arsenal deal with such EW threats .

    Remember MAKS 1997 ? Remember Moscow-based AviaKonversia Co? Remember their exhibition of a GPS jammer that cause GPS receivers to malfunction and to display the last coordinates calculated prior to jamming. This Russian invention caused quite a stir all over the world and terrified military users . OK so this is the type of technology I am talking about . Makes sense ?

    I am talking about these type of technologies to deal with EW systems like AN/SLQ 32 . Unfortunately , I do NOT think such systems exist . One plausibility as I had stated earlier is to use a program like "SUTER" to disturb the AN/SLQ-32

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 750
    Points : 933
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Nov 22, 2012 6:49 pm


    Mindstorm , please note that we need to take those observations with more than just a pinch of salt. Most of the time they may these assertions to get bigger defense grants from the Govt. Lobbying groups are working with them . This is not Russia where if you make un warranted comments you loose your job.


    If possibel this is the exact opposite of what happen in reality.

    American military Psy Warfare's principles have, historically, always stressed on self-boosting and over-selling of its military capabilities while ,contextually, "bashing" at maximum and tarnish while possible anything related to any not allied advanced nation (also with the aid of Us funded NGO and media operating in the nation ).


    Those so called "support/counter-will" operations have a duplice function :


    1) Spread an -enormously inflated- image of strenght among internal and allied public opinion basis so to mantain high support ,cohesion and confidence in the ultimate success of any military operation and in the decisions taken at the higher echelon levels.
    Naturally in order to be credible this type of operation must be continous in the time , coordinated and ,above all, must have empirical elements on which stand ; from that come from the habit to engage in war only immensely inferior nations uncapable to inflict any serious material or human loss (and even then ,very often ,only after having insulated them ,attacked in big Coalition with allied nations and after long periods of embargo !! Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes ) employ tactics and means operatively and economically inefficients but capable to reduce at minimum material adn live losses (at example using for months exclusively Air Forces against those inferior enemies,naturally at stellar costs ,when a joint ground operation would have resulted in the victory in few days and at a very little fraction o the costs) and "sell" those easy victories as great military achievements, where US military machine has demonstrated its great strenght Laughing Laughing Laughing

    2) Persuade "enemies" people that it live in a crumbling nation/system ,that is military structure is failed and uncapable to achieve victory and that attempt to beat the "american" structure are doomed to fail Very Happy (in that this process reproduce perfectly the comical representation of facts and reality present in theirs media and movies.)

    Those principles of Psy/Info War are very simple and could appear even childish to an attentive analysis ,but theris secret ingredient is that them operate on very elementary psycological levels which slip under the most complex adn evolute process of critical thinking .


    Returning to the subject in question is important to highlight that technical shortcoming are at the basis of those enormous difficulties by part of US Navy to design efficient defnses against complex high supersonic ASCM , them lack even only the theoretical and engineering basis to design infinitely less performant and complex target drones .
    this document can provide to you a picture of the situation:

    http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ADA441466.pdf


    Zuhai Air Show in China Chinese simulations showed a swarm of WZ-600 'Blue Shark' UCAVs armed with stand off missiles attacking en masse the INS Groshkov (Vikramaditya) . You get the picture ? Swarm of UCAVs for just 1 air craft carrier


    If you employ stand-off ammunitions (capable to be delivered outside the effective range of interception of carriers' aicraft screening group) you don't need UCAV -the unique advantage of which is to avoid to put pilot's lives in danger) you need ,instead, the faster delivering platform you have at disposition, capable not only to reduce the useful interception range of the defending screening air squadrons but ,synergically, increase also drammatically the enagement range of the ASCMs delivered.

    Sujoy have you a link for this video ?
    I am very curious to observe what is the strange CONOPS at the basis of a similar odd system's selection for that task.



    EMI shielding , elimination of dissimilar metals and improving communication bandwith


    What about multi-composite target picture resulting from cooperative exchange of target's poositional and data validation coming from both active (with two different different bands of emissions), inertial (with authomatic exclusion of "incoherent" target positions in respect to : missile's position/speed ,target maximum speed and target maximum degree of bank) space based (Legenda constellation at the time) and passive sensors present on each missile of the "salvo-swarm", shifting from one to the other in a totally random way and illuminating (when active elements operate) any target and decoy from very different angles of incidence....all of that while the in-built 3Б47 "Кварц" create false missile radar returns for enemy's interceptors and radar sensors ?


    I repeat the design of P-700 was ,under a strict technical point of view, a true alien for the time; was IT at represent the technological novelty that need to be countered (and you have seen now what was the situation in reproducing much simpler ASCM menaces in USA at....end of 2005 !!), to the contrary AN/SLQ 32 represent the most typical ship-based EW defensive system not offering any type of particular solution.


    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 912
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sujoy on Thu Nov 22, 2012 7:31 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Sujoy have you a link for this video ?
    I am very curious to observe what is the strange CONOPS at the basis of a similar odd system's selection for that task.

    Right now only a link ( not a video link ) . If I get the video link I will post it here.

    http://www.defensenews.com/article/20121119/DEFREG03/311190001/China-Challenges-West-Arms-Trade

    a video was shown of the futuristic Blue Shark UCAV diving for an attack on the Indian Navy aircraft carrier Vikramaditya.


    Mindstorm wrote:What about multi-composite target picture resulting from cooperative exchange of target's poositional and data validation coming from both active (with two different different bands of emissions), inertial (with authomatic exclusion of "incoherent" target positions in respect to : missile's position/speed ,target maximum speed and target maximum degree of bank) space based (Legenda constellation at the time) and passive sensors present on each missile of the "salvo-swarm", shifting from one to the other in a totally random way and illuminating (when active elements operate) any target and decoy from very different angles of incidence....all of that while the in-built 3Б47 "Кварц" create false missile radar returns for enemy's interceptors and radar sensors ?

    The AN/SLQ-32 ( V5) now uses a jammer called "Sidekick" . The Sidekick system achieves EW objectives by providing full threat band frequency coverage, instant azimuth coverage, high probability of intercept and simultaneous response to multiple threats. Therefore,it can detect aircraft search and target radars well before they detect the ship. Unfocused noise from output traveling wave tubes is coupled into the AN/SLQ-32A(V) receivers affecting both Electronic Attack and Electronic Support functions.When the AN/SLQ-32(V) is performing electronic attack (EA), some of the radiated energy is reflected from the superstructure and detected by the Electronic Support (ES) receivers. The AN/SLQ-32(V) employs a process called Dynamic Threshold Leveling that prevents radiated energy from being perceived as a new emitter.

    R17 software changes AN/SLQ-32A(V) operation in the system operation, and threat engagement areas. Among these changes are Deceptive EA and Decoy Integration algorithms that allow for system control of decoy launches and coordinated engagements.

    Therefore, Mindstorm as I have said the problem will not be for Russia as it has a huge arsenal of sea skimming cruise missiles but other "weaker" nations . The chances of US/NATO going to war against Russia in the near future is Very slim . However, there is a genuine possibility that Iran , Venezuela and maybe even India can be attacked by NATO/US or China .

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 750
    Points : 933
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:43 pm


    The AN/SLQ-32 ( V5) now uses a jammer called "Sidekick" . The Sidekick system achieves EW objectives by providing full threat band frequency coverage, instant azimuth coverage, high probability of intercept and simultaneous response to multiple threats.


    Sujoy AN(SLQ-32(V5) is NOT the most advanced EW system mounted on US Navy's ships , it was simply a rushed improvement on the AN(SLQ-32(V2) intended for medium class surface combatants the jammer of which (Sidekick) has an average jamming energy output and frequecy agility equal to almost HALF of that present on AN(SLQ-32(V3)
    Is AN-SLQ(V3) -after failure in 2002 of the AIEWS "Advanced Integrated Electronic Warfare System" program- at represent the benchmark for EW systems in US Navy's blue water surface ships.

    Among these changes are Deceptive EA and Decoy Integration algorithms that allow for system control of decoy launches and coordinated engagements.

    And...?
    Any relatively modern EW system of any advanced nation worldwide has integrated decoy laucher control , it is a standard amaong any system in the category


    http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Radar-and-Electronic-Warfare-Systems/MP-407-naval-Electronic-CounterMeasures-ECM-system-Russian-Federation.html


    Do you know American PR has been successful in all those years in inject in public imaginary this strange ,subliminal message, leaving the feel that USA enjoy some sort of "magic" lead in anything even by far linked to the "not-kinetic" warfare Laughing Laughing

    Them have literally sold ,in particular through controled media, the lead them enjoy in a particular ,limited, sector of data processing microcircuits and in production of some type of RF transistors ,as a sort all-encopassing lead in anything related to all not-kinetic systems Razz Razz Razz

    Reality is not only very far from that ,but often the exact opposite .
    The greater difference are in the historical principles of "information warfare" of its main opposing Nations, stressing on the exact opposite : downplay itself when possible leaving under total silence any critical military.related technological lead enjoyed on the enemy.

    Some of the institutions operating perfectly within US Psy-warfare principles(such as Jamestown Foundation ,Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and dozen of NED funded organization), for Russian standards in Information Warfare, wouldn't appear simply comical ,but would be considered ,for theirs "self boosting" aptitude and the usual habit to highlight and "oversell" any domestic military-related achievement or advantage enjoyed over competitors, even a true menace to National Security !!

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 912
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sujoy on Sun Nov 25, 2012 3:50 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:Sujoy AN(SLQ-32(V5) is NOT the most advanced EW system mounted on US Navy's ships , it was simply a rushed improvement on the AN(SLQ-32(V2) intended for medium class surface combatants the jammer of which (Sidekick) has an average jamming energy output and frequecy agility equal to almost HALF of that present on AN(SLQ-32(V3)
    Is AN-SLQ(V3) -after failure in 2002 of the AIEWS "Advanced Integrated Electronic Warfare System" program- at represent the benchmark for EW systems in US Navy's blue water surface ships.

    Mindstorm , I am under no illusion that the AN/SLQ 32(V5) is a perfect system . There are several shortcomings :

    (1) limited number of threats that can be engaged with onboard active EA.
    (2) limited elevation coverage
    (3) limited polarization diversity
    (4) high sidelobe levels
    (5) high RCS
    (6) transmitter-to-receiver isolation issues

    Now for a moment just for the sake of this argument imagine that you are not Russian Smile but a Serbian or Iranian or North Korean or Indian or Vietnamese , in short the so called "third world" countries that NATO / China loves to bully . What do you do then to take out an EW system like the AN/SLQ 32(V5) without resorting to overwhelming the EW system with cruise missiles(since you can't afford it) ? For every 6 or 7 cruise missiles that you fire at a NATO/China Warship at least 2 or 3 will be intercepted and the remaining 3 or 4 will hit the warship . You will have to ensure your own protection as well because the enemy will also fire a volley of cruise missiles at you .

    So you realize now how difficult the situation might be for a Iran , India , Vietnam etc . Right ?

    As I said earlier that it is a far better option to exploit the 6 shortcomings that I have listed above. Question is how ?

    One possible solution that I can think of is that Modern air defense at sea doctrines need to consider the emerging technology of software-defined radar. In this manner the surveillance and tracking abilities of imaging radar are implemented in software. Concurrently there exists the need to forge the other side of the same coin. The Software-defined Radar Countermeasure System can prove to be a solution for confusing adversary radar operators .The simulator approach for imaging radar countermeasures is preferred because it provides a bespoke generation of the required signals valid for a diverse set of adversary observers, which are considered to be Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar systems

    I would say that as a defensive measure against hostile cruise missiles there is a need for a more rigorous integration of optical technologies with microwave technologies that enables the deployment of off board microwave decoy systems . For offensive measures the only possible weapon against EW systems like the AN/SLQ 32(V5)is the use of cyber weapons .

    Mindstorm wrote:Do you know American PR has been successful in all those years in inject in public imaginary this strange ,subliminal message, leaving the feel that USA enjoy some sort of "magic" lead in anything even by far linked to the "not-kinetic" warfare Laughing Laughing

    I am happy to announce that for tragic stories with comic ending we Indians do NOT rely on American PR Smile . Our preferred choice is Bollywood Very Happy and we have had great success in exporting it as well Very Happy

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3097
    Points : 3195
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  medo on Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:04 pm

    http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201212051636-7f7x.htm


    New Russian oceanographic ship Yantar for Northern fleet hit the water.

    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1945
    Points : 2116
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Cyberspec on Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:54 am

    A smaller brother to "Losharik" in the works...

    Severodvinsk based shipbuilder "Zvezda" to resume construction of special nuclear powered deep diving submarine, which will be a smaller version of Project 10831 also known as "Losharik." According to the newspaper "Izvestia", citing a source in the defense industry, the name of the submarine being built is secret. She, as well as "Losharik" will be used for special operations at great depth, including a study of the bottom of the Arctic.

    The Russian Defense Ministry refused to comment, citing the confidentiality of information.

    more here (in Russian)
    http://lenta.ru/news/2012/12/04/supersub/

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15865
    Points : 16570
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 07, 2012 9:23 am

    cool Cool


    _________________
    “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

    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1945
    Points : 2116
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri Dec 07, 2012 10:07 am

    Apparently it's not confirmed yet since the original source is the unreliable Izvestia. It could be the Sarov undergoing repairs instead of a new sub.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5834
    Points : 5886
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:28 am

    So apparently the Project 971 modernization will include a new Sonar complex, command/control/info system, among other updates.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5831
    Points : 6243
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:00 pm

    TR1 wrote:So apparently the Project 971 modernization will include a new Sonar complex, command/control/info system, among other updates.

    Source my dear friend ? Smile

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5834
    Points : 5886
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:27 pm

    Austin wrote:
    TR1 wrote:So apparently the Project 971 modernization will include a new Sonar complex, command/control/info system, among other updates.

    Source my dear friend ? Smile

    Mina, a poster (former Navy guy) on Balancer's.

    He is kind of a dick, but knows his stuff Smile.

    http://forums.airbase.ru/2012/12/t60022,41--podvodnye-lodki-proekta-877-i-636.1576.html#p3008468

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5831
    Points : 6243
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:41 am

    TR1 wrote:
    Austin wrote:
    TR1 wrote:So apparently the Project 971 modernization will include a new Sonar complex, command/control/info system, among other updates.

    Source my dear friend ? Smile

    Mina, a poster (former Navy guy) on Balancer's.

    He is kind of a dick, but knows his stuff Smile.

    http://forums.airbase.ru/2012/12/t60022,41--podvodnye-lodki-proekta-877-i-636.1576.html#p3008468

    Sounds good and on expected line , they plan to bring Akula to 4th Gen standards if they suceed then it would be a significant achievement and longer life for the boats.

    Any idea on the official number they plan to upgrade ?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5834
    Points : 5886
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 on Mon Dec 17, 2012 9:25 pm

    http://www.aviaport.ru/news/2012/12/17/245758.html

    First An-140 for VMF delivered.

    This is the 3rd bird from the MOD contract for 11 birds. A follow on contract for 15 birds may be signed in the next 3 months.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Feb 23, 2017 10:22 am