Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Share

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Sat Sep 26, 2015 3:35 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Ok thanks I wasn't sure if it could pick targets smaller than 10,000 tonnes

    I read that the AS-4 Kitchen was designed to target only large ships as mentioned earlier in this thread too

    Keep in mind that technology improves over time and I would suggest all modern Russian anti ship missiles would be able to target surf boards by now... the AS-4 likely would not have been wasted on a corvette in the 1980s, but these days even corvettes are potent vessels that can't be ignored.

    Besides once the fighting starts most ships will scan for threats making them vulnerable to anti radiation models of AShMs too.

    True but I was most interested in capabilities of Soviet ASM in the 80s, do you think saturation might work against destroyer sized targets ?
    e.g if 5 Tu-22M launch 2 x AS-4 each against a destroyer there are good chances atleast one would find home and given large warhead most likely sink the ship

    Again I do understand AS-4 were to be saved for CVBG but even a harpoon armed destroyed can be bad news at the wrong place and need to be eliminated , and other ships armed with ASM or SSM may not be around e.g Krivaks, Udaloy, Kara , Kresta II carried no anti-ship missiles
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 27, 2015 9:47 am

    True but I was most interested in capabilities of Soviet ASM in the 80s, do you think saturation might work against destroyer sized targets ?
    e.g if 5 Tu-22M launch 2 x AS-4 each against a destroyer there are good chances atleast one would find home and given large warhead most likely sink the ship

    I would think a destroyer would be big enough to target, the thing is that I rather doubt they would send up 5 Backfires just to fly around looking for targets to attack and when they find a target to make a snap decision as to whether to attack it or not.

    I would expect a Bear (Tu-142) flying on MPA might detect a signal from a radar or communication from the target... give it a quick scan on long range radar and send coordinates to HQ who might decide to mount an all out attack or it might send a few aircraft.

    The AS-4 came in a range of types including anti radar and active radar homing... if the target is not emitting then a single active radar homing model followed by a few anti radar missiles would be a useful attack where the incoming first missile will result in the defensive use of radars to scan for more incoming missiles, which in turn allows the following missiles something to detect and home in on

    Most destroyers of the 1980s were like land based air defences of the time and had one or maybe two guidance channels per major SAM system so 2-3 fast missiles could overwhelm quite impressive systems.

    and other ships armed with ASM or SSM may not be around e.g Krivaks, Udaloy, Kara , Kresta II carried no anti-ship missiles

    Actually they were more well rounded systems than the west actually thought... the SS-N-14 Silex was a fully dual role weapon system in its 1980s models.

    The original was like the Australian Ikara in that it was a torpedo with a rocket attached to its top... the rocket carried the torpedo ballistically to the general location of the sub and then released the torpedo into the water for the torpedo to hunt down and hopefully sink the sub.

    The SS-N-14 was different and actually had a secondary HE warhead and optical seeker, so when launched it used its wings to maintain flight and flew to the target at subsonic speeds and dropped its torpedo into the water near where the sub was expected to be. At the flick of a switch however the torpedo payload was not dropped and the optical guidance was activated to find surface ships... the combination of the warhead on the rocket section and the torpedo warhead and fuel combined to make quite a significant anti ship payload and with fully passive guidance it would give less warning than Harpoon and Exocet.

    Obviously designed for anti sub use where the optical guidance and rocket payload was not used.


    _________________
    “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

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 4:04 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    True but I was most interested in capabilities of Soviet ASM in the 80s, do you think saturation might work against destroyer sized targets ?
    e.g if 5 Tu-22M launch 2 x AS-4 each against a destroyer there are good chances atleast one would find home and given large warhead most likely sink the ship

    I would think a destroyer would be big enough to target, the thing is that I rather doubt they would send up 5 Backfires just to fly around looking for targets to attack and when they find a target to make a snap decision as to whether to attack it or not.

    I would expect a Bear (Tu-142) flying on MPA might detect a signal from a radar or communication from the target... give it a quick scan on long range radar and send coordinates to HQ who might decide to mount an all out attack or it might send a few aircraft.

    The AS-4 came in a range of types including anti radar and active radar homing... if the target is not emitting then a single active radar homing model followed by a few anti radar missiles would be a useful attack where the incoming first missile will result in the defensive use of radars to scan for more incoming missiles, which in turn allows the following missiles something to detect and home in on

    Most destroyers of the 1980s were like land based air defences of the time and had one or maybe two guidance channels per major SAM system so 2-3 fast missiles could overwhelm quite impressive systems.

    and other ships armed with ASM or SSM may not be around e.g Krivaks, Udaloy, Kara , Kresta II carried no anti-ship missiles

    Actually they were more well rounded systems than the west actually thought... the SS-N-14 Silex was a fully dual role weapon system in its 1980s models.

    The original was like the Australian Ikara in that it was a torpedo with a rocket attached to its top... the rocket carried the torpedo ballistically to the general location of the sub and then released the torpedo into the water for the torpedo to hunt down and hopefully sink the sub.

    The SS-N-14 was different and actually had a secondary HE warhead and optical seeker, so when launched it used its wings to maintain flight and flew to the target at subsonic speeds and dropped its torpedo into the water near where the sub was expected to be. At the flick of a switch however the torpedo payload was not dropped and the optical guidance was activated to find surface ships... the combination of the warhead on the rocket section and the torpedo warhead and fuel combined to make quite a significant anti ship payload and with fully passive guidance it would give less warning than Harpoon and Exocet.

    Obviously designed for anti sub use where the optical guidance and rocket payload was not used.

    Thankyou very much for the detailed explanation

    I think the tendency in the West is to dismiss the soviet weapons as utterly useless, I was reading an article which argued that the Japanese fleet in the 80s in any conventional battle can trounce the Soviet pacific fleet but based on the discussions here I think that view is seriously flawed
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  Rmf on Sat Oct 03, 2015 2:00 am

    GarryB wrote:
    True but I was most interested in capabilities of Soviet ASM in the 80s, do you think saturation might work against destroyer sized targets ?
    e.g if 5 Tu-22M launch 2 x AS-4 each against a destroyer there are good chances atleast one would find home and given large warhead most likely sink the ship

    I would think a destroyer would be big enough to target, the thing is that I rather doubt they would send up 5 Backfires just to fly around looking for targets to attack and when they find a target to make a snap decision as to whether to attack it or not.

    I would expect a Bear (Tu-142) flying on MPA might detect a signal from a radar or communication from the target... give it a quick scan on long range radar and send coordinates to HQ who might decide to mount an all out attack or it might send a few aircraft.

    The AS-4 came in a range of types including anti radar and active radar homing... if the target is not emitting then a single active radar homing model followed by a few anti radar missiles would be a useful attack where the incoming first missile will result in the defensive use of radars to scan for more incoming missiles, which in turn allows the following missiles something to detect and home in on

    Most destroyers of the 1980s were like land based air defences of the time and had one or maybe two guidance channels per major SAM system so 2-3 fast missiles could overwhelm quite impressive systems.

    and other ships armed with ASM or SSM may not be around e.g Krivaks, Udaloy, Kara , Kresta II carried no anti-ship missiles

    Actually they were more well rounded systems than the west actually thought... the SS-N-14 Silex was a fully dual role weapon system in its 1980s models.

    The original was like the Australian Ikara in that it was a torpedo with a rocket attached to its top... the rocket carried the torpedo ballistically to the general location of the sub and then released the torpedo into the water for the torpedo to hunt down and hopefully sink the sub.

    The SS-N-14 was different and actually had a secondary HE warhead and optical seeker, so when launched it used its wings to maintain flight and flew to the target at subsonic speeds and dropped its torpedo into the water near where the sub was expected to be. At the flick of a switch however the torpedo payload was not dropped and the optical guidance was activated to find surface ships... the combination of the warhead on the rocket section and the torpedo warhead and fuel combined to make quite a significant anti ship payload and with fully passive guidance it would give less warning than Harpoon and Exocet.

    Obviously designed for anti sub use where the optical guidance and rocket payload was not used.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malafon

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    SSN-3b shaddock

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Mar 08, 2016 2:46 am

    SSN-3b shaddock was the primary weapon of the Kresta I , but they must have been obsolete by the 80s
    what kept them operational till th 90s ? were they primarily antiship or have a land attack nuclear role ?
    what tactics were used by the Kresta I and Kyndas to employ them ?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:18 am

    They are not really obsolete now...

    Modern air defences have a limit or capacity, and having lots of cheap simple missiles could be used to overwhelm any defence... their payload will still ruin your day and being subsonic is no handicap for harpoon or Exocet.


    _________________
    “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

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Mar 08, 2016 5:23 pm

    GarryB wrote:They are not really obsolete now...

    Modern air defences have a limit or capacity, and having lots of cheap simple missiles could be used to overwhelm any defence... their payload will still ruin your day and being subsonic is no handicap for harpoon or Exocet.

    true they were probably easier to shoot down even by 80s standard however if like u said shot in salvoes then may overwhelm the defences of any NON-AEGIS cruiser/destroyer

    alternatively they may have a land attack role esp if tipped with TNW hitting naval bases and installations degrading fleet activities ? esp given their long range which will help the parent ship to stay well outside the range of any anti-ship missiles of enemy ships
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 09, 2016 9:46 am

    true they were probably easier to shoot down even by 80s standard however if like u said shot in salvoes then may overwhelm the defences of any NON-AEGIS cruiser/destroyer

    their main problem was their large size meaning that generally you would only have a relatively small salvo unless you got together a decent number of launch platforms.

    Of course the Falklands conflict showed single missile launches can get a result and the fact that none of the exocets are believed to have exploded properly makes you think of the damage a Styx could manage with almost three times the explosive and working detonators.

    their large size means more flexibility with warhead and guidance types, but their problem remains their launchers are bulky and large.

    For coastal defence you could line up hundreds of them or even thousands, which would be devastating.

    Even if it doesn't get through it will deplete ready to fire SAMs and if you fired them in waves you could keep a battle group on edge 24/7 to wear them out... each attack would be frightening and nerve wracking... and then at 3am in bad weather you get another attack... this time supported by aircraft and subs...


    _________________
    “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

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:09 pm

    In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    Thanks
    avatar
    artjomh

    Posts : 150
    Points : 184
    Join date : 2015-07-17

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  artjomh on Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:57 pm

    nastle77 wrote:In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    Thanks

    No. The guidance system is purely inertial w/ TERCOM. There is no radar or optical system into which you can input vessel shapes.

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:57 am

    artjomh wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    Thanks

    No. The guidance system is purely inertial w/ TERCOM. There is no radar or optical system into which you can input vessel shapes.

    Thanks ! What about the AS-4 kitchens carried by strategic aviation Tu-22M ? Could they be used for anti-shipping strikes ?
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  Militarov on Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:59 am

    nastle77 wrote:
    artjomh wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    Thanks

    No. The guidance system is purely inertial w/ TERCOM. There is no radar or optical system into which you can input vessel shapes.

    Thanks ! What about the AS-4 kitchens carried by strategic aviation Tu-22M ? Could they be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    Yes, they mix inertial and active radar homing.

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Mar 15, 2016 2:13 am

    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    artjomh wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    Thanks

    No. The guidance system is purely inertial w/ TERCOM. There is no radar or optical system into which you can input vessel shapes.

    Thanks ! What about the AS-4 kitchens carried by strategic aviation Tu-22M ? Could they be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    Yes, they mix inertial and active radar homing.

    so not just the naval aviation backfires but the strategic aviation AS-4 armed backfires can potentially be used for anti-shipping strikes ?
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  Militarov on Tue Mar 15, 2016 2:46 am

    nastle77 wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    artjomh wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    Thanks

    No. The guidance system is purely inertial w/ TERCOM. There is no radar or optical system into which you can input vessel shapes.

    Thanks ! What about the AS-4 kitchens carried by strategic aviation Tu-22M ? Could they be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    Yes, they mix inertial and active radar homing.

    so not just the naval aviation backfires but the strategic aviation AS-4 armed backfires can potentially be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    Yeah. they also can carry Kh-15S which is anti-shipping variant.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 15, 2016 10:37 am

    In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    No they could only be flown to fixed coordinates with a nuke warhead.

    The Kh-555 was a conventionally armed model of the same weapon (Kh-55) with terminal guidance and a shorter range, but even it was for fixed targets AFAIK.

    Thanks ! What about the AS-4 kitchens carried by strategic aviation Tu-22M ? Could they be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    Primary role of the Backfires in Strategic Aviation was heavy SEAD with passive radar homing (ie anti radiation) and coordinate finding versions of Kh-22M... the latter having a nuke warhead as standard.

    For naval use there were active radar homing missiles that could be fired at ships and mobile targets, and the anti radiation models could be used in heavy jamming environments.

    Very simply the tactic would be the first enemy ships detected would be fired upon by active radar homing missiles... as they attacked the ships would know they had been located and would turn on their radar to improve their situational awareness... so then the Soviets would launch anti radiation missiles to home in on the radar signals, and likely a few nuclear armed missiles to the general coordinates.

    so not just the naval aviation backfires but the strategic aviation AS-4 armed backfires can potentially be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    The strategic aviation backfires were armed and trained to attack major comms centres and major SAM sites with nuclear armed Kh-22Ms... they are unlikely to have gotten anywhere near any naval vessels and would not carry the correct model Kh-22Ms even if they did.

    Yeah. they also can carry Kh-15S which is anti-shipping variant.

    The Kh-15 Kickback is a nuclear armed anti radiation missile. There were plans for an anti shipping model but AFAIK it never entered service... it was purely used in the anti radar/anti SAM role.

    The Kh-32 has similar speed but rather better range so it would be unlikely they would bother with the Kh-15 now.

    Hypersonic missiles with scramjet motors promise even better performance for the near future.


    _________________
    “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
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  Militarov on Tue Mar 15, 2016 10:45 am

    GarryB wrote:
    In the 1980s approximately 60 Bear H aircraft were equipped with AS-15 Kent ALCM
    were these AS-15 also capable of hitting naval targets like destroyers or frigates /

    No they could only be flown to fixed coordinates with a nuke warhead.

    The Kh-555 was a conventionally armed model of the same weapon (Kh-55) with terminal guidance and a shorter range, but even it was for fixed targets AFAIK.

    Thanks ! What about the AS-4 kitchens carried by strategic aviation Tu-22M ? Could they be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    Primary role of the Backfires in Strategic Aviation was heavy SEAD with passive radar homing (ie anti radiation) and coordinate finding versions of Kh-22M... the latter having a nuke warhead as standard.

    For naval use there were active radar homing missiles that could be fired at ships and mobile targets, and the anti radiation models could be used in heavy jamming environments.

    Very simply the tactic would be the first enemy ships detected would be fired upon by active radar homing missiles... as they attacked the ships would know they had been located and would turn on their radar to improve their situational awareness... so then the Soviets would launch anti radiation missiles to home in on the radar signals, and likely a few nuclear armed missiles to the general coordinates.

    so not just the naval aviation backfires but the strategic aviation AS-4 armed backfires can potentially be used for anti-shipping strikes ?

    The strategic aviation backfires were armed and trained to attack major comms centres and major SAM sites with nuclear armed Kh-22Ms... they are unlikely to have gotten anywhere near any naval vessels and would not carry the correct model Kh-22Ms even if they did.

    Yeah. they also can carry Kh-15S which is anti-shipping variant.

    The Kh-15 Kickback is a nuclear armed anti radiation missile. There were plans for an anti shipping model but AFAIK it never entered service... it was purely used in the anti radar/anti SAM role.

    The Kh-32 has similar speed but rather better range so it would be unlikely they would bother with the Kh-15 now.

    Hypersonic missiles with scramjet motors promise even better performance for the near future.

    Kh-15S passed testing and trials but was never built past that, but doesnt change fact TU22Ms CAN/COULD carry them Smile. I never said they actually did.

    I belive that Kh-SD variant of Kh-55 was offered with terminal active radar seeker for naval surface targets, so if they decide to develop such weapon i assume they would just reactivate that project.

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:42 pm

    or naval use there were active radar homing missiles that could be fired at ships and mobile targets, and the anti radiation models could be used in heavy jamming environments.

    Very simply the tactic would be the first enemy ships detected would be fired upon by active radar homing missiles... as they attacked the ships would know they had been located and would turn on their radar to improve their situational awareness... so then the Soviets would launch anti radiation missiles to home in on the radar signals, and likely a few nuclear armed missiles to the general coordinates.
    That would meant that even startegic aviation Tu-22M can be used in a way against ships , in the strategy as you described above if they carry the kh-22M assuming they do encounter ships
    another question
    I know that the Kh-22 AS-4 was designed primarily to attack carrriers but can they be used against destroyers and frigates as well ? They have powerful radars too and average tonnage of a general purpose destroyer in 80s was 4000  tonnes to 4500 tonnes.Are they big enough to be attacked by Kh-22 in the 80s ?


    Last edited by nastle77 on Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  Militarov on Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:46 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    or naval use there were active radar homing missiles that could be fired at ships and mobile targets, and the anti radiation models could be used in heavy jamming environments.

    Very simply the tactic would be the first enemy ships detected would be fired upon by active radar homing missiles... as they attacked the ships would know they had been located and would turn on their radar to improve their situational awareness... so then the Soviets would launch anti radiation missiles to home in on the radar signals, and likely a few nuclear armed missiles to the general coordinates.

    I know that the Kh-22 AS-4 was designed primarily to attack carrriers but can they be used against destroyers and frigates as well ? They have powerful radars too and average tonnage of a general purpose destroyer in 80s was 4000  tonnes to 4500 tonnes.Are they big enough to be attacked by Kh-22 in the 80s ?

    Size does not matter much, as radar guidance is only terminal phase, it flies in inertial mode till its near enough to "see" the target. I mean, you probably cant attack fishing boat with it, but any ship of major size, sure.

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:50 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    or naval use there were active radar homing missiles that could be fired at ships and mobile targets, and the anti radiation models could be used in heavy jamming environments.

    Very simply the tactic would be the first enemy ships detected would be fired upon by active radar homing missiles... as they attacked the ships would know they had been located and would turn on their radar to improve their situational awareness... so then the Soviets would launch anti radiation missiles to home in on the radar signals, and likely a few nuclear armed missiles to the general coordinates.

    I know that the Kh-22 AS-4 was designed primarily to attack carrriers but can they be used against destroyers and frigates as well ? They have powerful radars too and average tonnage of a general purpose destroyer in 80s was 4000  tonnes to 4500 tonnes.Are they big enough to be attacked by Kh-22 in the 80s ?

    Size does not matter much, as radar guidance is only terminal phase, it flies in inertial mode till its near enough to "see" the target. I mean, you probably cant attack fishing boat with it, but any ship of major size, sure.
    true esp since the destroyers themselves carry several radars themselves and so should present a tempting target even for antiradiation missiles
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 16, 2016 8:48 am

    Kh-15S passed testing and trials but was never built past that, but doesnt change fact TU22Ms CAN/COULD carry them Smile. I never said they actually did.

    Never heard the anti ship model of Kickback got anywhere near service let alone testing.

    The Backfires can carry the standard Kickbacks, which were simply nuclear armed anti radiation missiles... a Blackjack might carry 6 cruise missiles in its rear weapon bay and 12 Kickbacks in its front bay and use the Kickbacks to nuke major SAM installations and major airfields and then fire its cruise missiles and then return to base.

    The Backfire can carry up to ten Kickbacks including 6 on an internal rotary launcher, but like I said they would be used against land based SAMs and comm centres and HQs.

    That would meant that even startegic aviation Tu-22M can be used in a way against ships , in the strategy as you described above if they carry the kh-22M assuming they do encounter ships

    I would suspect there would be plenty of land based major SAMs and comms centres to keep them busy without worrying about ships. The older ARM sensors of the Kh-22M would likely be tuned to land based radars on major SAMs and major airfields etc. And would likely be of little use against ships.

    true esp since the destroyers themselves carry several radars themselves and so should present a tempting target even for antiradiation missiles

    Physical size is not actually the primary factor in RCS... even a small ship with a lot of corner reflectors can look large on a radar screen. I would suspect an Kh-22M would have no trouble finding and hitting a target destroyer size and larger... a carrier detected end on would have a smaller RCS than a side on view of a frigate...


    _________________
    “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
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  Militarov on Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:39 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Kh-15S passed testing and trials but was never built past that, but doesnt change fact TU22Ms CAN/COULD carry them Smile. I never said they actually did.

    Never heard the anti ship model of Kickback got anywhere near service let alone testing.


    It never entered service, but its prototypes were even exibited abroad, in Abu Dabi 1993. and Serbia/Yugoslavia 1997.


    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    ICBM in anti-ship role during cold war

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Jul 12, 2016 2:29 pm

    Were their any plans to use the ICBM ( e.g from the Yankee class subs ) for anti-ship role during the cold war? I mean not in the traditional sense but to use them like a tactical nuclear weapon blotting out a small surface task force ?
    Is that even possible ?

    nastle77

    Posts : 195
    Points : 255
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  nastle77 on Tue Jul 12, 2016 3:15 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    true they were probably easier to shoot down even by 80s standard however if like u said shot in salvoes then may overwhelm the defences of any NON-AEGIS cruiser/destroyer

    their main problem was their large size meaning that generally you would only have a relatively small salvo unless you got together a decent number of launch platforms.

    Of course the Falklands conflict showed single missile launches can get a result and the fact that none of the exocets are believed to have exploded properly makes you think of the damage a Styx could manage with almost three times the explosive and working detonators.

    their large size means more flexibility with warhead and guidance types, but their problem remains their launchers are bulky and large.

    For coastal defence you could line up hundreds of them or even thousands, which would be devastating.

    Even if it doesn't get through it will deplete ready to fire SAMs and if you fired them in waves you could keep a battle group on edge 24/7 to wear them out... each attack would be frightening and nerve wracking... and then at 3am in bad weather you get another attack... this time supported by aircraft and subs...
    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 ?
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1570
    Points : 1608
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Jul 13, 2016 1:08 am

    Kh-35 and land targets...is there any upgrade expected? to have low cost alternative for small ships/export?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16514
    Points : 17122
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jul 13, 2016 12:36 pm

    Were their any plans to use the ICBM ( e.g from the Yankee class subs ) for anti-ship role during the cold war? I mean not in the traditional sense but to use them like a tactical nuclear weapon blotting out a small surface task force ?

    Not as far as I am aware.

    Their guidance was stellar inertial, and their best feature was their short range requiring them operating just off the US coast where time of flight would be less than 10 minutes to target... making them very dangerous to the US.

    If you could pass information to the launch sub they could probably target open ocean, but it seems to be a rather unlikely use of such weapons.

    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?

    As far as I know the domestic model was vastly superior to the exported model, with the local product rather more sophisticated and capable.

    For instance the export model of Termit had either a radar guidance system or an IR system. The Domestic model reportedly had both.

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

    Hardly a problem... like saying an M16 has the fault that it can't accurately hit targets at 800m range.

    These missiles were intended to hit large ships and would be a bit of a waste on a smaller target.

    Kh-35 and land targets...is there any upgrade expected? to have low cost alternative for small ships/export?

    I have seen a few modification models including a reduced size 80km range missile of smaller size more suited to light ship or helo operation, but I have only heard of the original and the extended range improved model being in production.

    Certainly a range of guidance seekers would be interesting... a TV guidance system plus a data link would create a SLAM-ER type weapon, but then with the Kh-38 likely having similar versions the question becomes how many duplicating types do you need... The Kh-59 family is still in production too.


    _________________
    “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

    Sponsored content

    Re: Soviet Anti-ship missiles

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:03 am