Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Share
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2967
    Points : 2998
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  max steel on Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:14 am

    Chicken your picture doesn't mention Zirconium anyhwere.

    chicken

    Posts : 102
    Points : 107
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  chicken on Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:45 am

    Forgot about that.

    Here's source
    http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-718.html
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 967
    Points : 965
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  Isos on Sun Nov 15, 2015 6:57 pm

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIwr8W1dr8E

    Look at the first hit !! It hits under water.

    Why don't they upgrade Moskit with a better range and absorbing radar paint?

    It was able to counter AEGIS when it was designed and today it's the same AEGIS on the US destroyers so an upgraded Moskit will be a good weapon against US and Japanese destroyers.

    And it has the best design of all the antiship missiles, it is pretty dissuasive.

    I have also some questions:

    1) Can you tell aproximative prices of each russian anti ship missiles and some western to make comparison ?
    2) If the Kh-35 is programmed to hit the target from behind, will it be harder for the target's radar to detect it ? For exemple on the steregushchy presentation video I've seen on YouTube, there was a part of the structure behind the radar. Can this make the detection harder ? Moreover most of ships have very bad defences at the rear , no missiles, no canons, no gatling guns.

    3) And why western navys use subsonic, not really stealth missiles?

    4) Can you employ Iskander-M against aircraft carrier ? I know taht they can be re-programmed durring flight against manoeuvring targets so with GPS/GLONASS guidance and optic guidence at the end it would be a very usefull weapon. 500 Km range is enough because in a war the carrier must be close to the battlfield as the F-18 doesn't have a long range. What the you think ?
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2967
    Points : 2998
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  max steel on Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:27 pm

    Any difference between Vulkan and US LRASM apart from speed ? They both are long range antiship missile.
    avatar
    artjomh

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

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  artjomh on Fri Jan 15, 2016 1:08 am

    Vulkan = turbojet engine, inertial+satellite+radar navigation, ship-launched

    LRASM = turbofan engine, GPS-assisted inertial+radar+electro-optical navigation, ship- and aircraft-launched

    Completely different missiles.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16871
    Points : 17479
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jan 16, 2016 5:11 am

    And one is deployed operational system and the other is not.


    _________________
    “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
    Book.

    Posts : 699
    Points : 760
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  Book. on Fri Feb 12, 2016 7:36 pm

    Russian bomber shown carrying anti-shipping missile in Syria
    Piotr Butowski, Warsaw - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly | 12 February 2016

    The Russian Ministry of Defence has released a video of a Sukhoi Su-34 'Fullback' bomber carrying the new Kh-35U (NATO designation AS-20 'Kayak') anti-shipping missile on operations over Syria.

    The on-board video, released on 11 February by the Arabic section of Russian state-broadcaster RT, shows the aircraft departing on a mission with at least one missile mounted on a port-side underwing hardpoint (while footage shot from the other side also shows a missile on the starboard hardpoint, it can't be verified that it is of the same aircraft).

    Development of the subsonic Kh-35 was begun by the Soviet Union in March 1983, following an assessment of the operational effectiveness of the Argentine-launched AIM-39 Exocet anti-shipping missile against the UK Royal Navy off the Falkland Islands the year before. The latest Kh-35U-variant is a The Kh-35U is a 550-kg (1,213lb) subsonic anti-ship missile that has been adapted for ship-, shore-, helicopter-, and aircraft-launched applications. While the outer-mould line remains the same as the earlier models, the newer version is powered by a smaller and lighter Saturn Izdeliye 64M turbofan (allowing for more fuel, and a doubling of range to 260 km).

    The missile was first trialled on the Su-34 in November 2010. Initial tests of the missile were completed in November 2012, with state acceptance tests following in 2013. It is now in series production at the Tactical Missiles Corporation's facility in Korolev near Moscow.

    http://www.janes.com/article/57975/russian-bomber-shown-carrying-anti-shipping-missile-in-syria



    Photo: Janes
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2967
    Points : 2998
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  max steel on Sat Mar 12, 2016 7:39 am

    Impact of Sunburn Missile ( in real time )

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10768
    Points : 11247
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  George1 on Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:51 am

    Russia Test-Firing New Hypersonic Zircon Cruise Missiles for 5th-Gen Subs. russia russia

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160317/1036437650/zircon-hypersonic-cruise-missiles.html#ixzz4391DCjBz


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

    avatar
    AK-Rex

    Posts : 45
    Points : 45
    Join date : 2015-12-22

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  AK-Rex on Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:18 am

    George1 wrote:Russia Test-Firing New Hypersonic Zircon Cruise Missiles for 5th-Gen Subs.  russia  russia

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160317/1036437650/zircon-hypersonic-cruise-missiles.html#ixzz4391DCjBz

    Rus to arm its 5-gen submarine "Khaski" with hypersonic missile "Zircon"
    avatar
    zg18

    Posts : 881
    Points : 957
    Join date : 2013-09-26
    Location : Zagreb , Croatia

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  zg18 on Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:58 am

    George1 wrote:Russia Test-Firing New Hypersonic Zircon Cruise Missiles for 5th-Gen Subs.  russia  russia

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20160317/1036437650/zircon-hypersonic-cruise-missiles.html#ixzz4391DCjBz

    Nice! thumbsup
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16871
    Points : 17479
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  GarryB on Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:30 am

    The zircon should be standardised in shape and size and weight with existing weapons in the UKSK launchers put on new and upgraded ships of the Russian Navy.

    That means ships like the corvettes in the Caspian Sea able to carry Kalibr long range land attack missiles and Klub supersonic anti ship and anti sub weapons will also be able to carry hypersonic anti ship missiles soon... a huge step up in performance.

    The new technology could also be applied to a new version of Klub with a scramjet operating in low thrust settings for a long subsonic cruise at medium altitude to the target area followed by an acceleration and climb to hypersonic speed for the last portion of the attack...


    _________________
    “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

    Posts : 1747
    Points : 1787
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Mar 18, 2016 12:36 pm

    GarryB wrote:The zircon should be standardised in shape and size and weight with existing weapons in the UKSK launchers put on new and upgraded ships of the Russian Navy.

    That means ships like the corvettes in the Caspian Sea able to carry Kalibr long range land attack missiles and Klub supersonic anti ship and anti sub weapons will also be able to carry hypersonic anti ship missiles soon... a huge step up in performance.

    The new technology could also be applied to a new version of Klub with a scramjet operating in low thrust settings for a long subsonic cruise at medium altitude to the target area followed by an acceleration and climb to hypersonic speed for the last portion of the attack...

    imgine that ASH with 32 Zircons is an a$$ CSG whooping experience Twisted Evil
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10768
    Points : 11247
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1732
    Points : 1889
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 16871
    Points : 17479
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 539
    Points : 535
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 210
    Points : 276
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 16871
    Points : 17479
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 210
    Points : 276
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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 ?
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5236
    Points : 5299
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 539
    Points : 535
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 16871
    Points : 17479
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 967
    Points : 965
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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

    Posts : 539
    Points : 535
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    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.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Anti-Ship Missiles Thread

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:04 am