One of the kalibr missile is an anti ship variant with subsonic speed all the time. Its range should be greater than the one with terminal supersonic speed.
The whole purpose of the subsonic flight and then supersonic terminal attack is to combine the long range of subsonic flight via turbofan with the ability to penetrate enemy air defences with a high speed terminal section.
If they could make a supersonic missile with better range than the subsonic/supersonic model then the latter would be completely redundant.
The export Club missile with the supersonic terminal phase has a range limited by missile export agreements, so its range is about 290km or so (has to be less than 300km and with a warhead of 500kg or less). The domestic model however is not limited in range so like the Onyx domestic model has a much greater range than the export version called the Yakhont... the Onyx flys to about 500km or so... which means a subsonic/supersonic missile is redundant if its range is less than that because flying super sonic all the way gets to the target much faster. From what I can find the subsonic Club with the supersonic terminal portion domestic version has a range of about 1,200-1,500km... but all but the last 30km is at subsonic speeds with the last 30km being covered rather quickly at mach 2.9 with solid rocket propulsion...
The upgraded Onyx with new fuel flying at mach 5 to about 800km is very potent, but the subsonic/supersonic club domestic model still makes sense as a first attack weapon because as it flys at low altitude they might not notice it until it is screaming in at almost mach 3 just 2-3m above the wave tops... launching a volley of Onyx to come over the radar horizon just before these low flying sneaky Clubs come over would be an interesting attack method... especially if you used the long range of the Clubs to attack from a different direction entirely... they might be coming from the south while your Onyx missiles are coming from the East... surprise...
But the longer is range the harder us to find a target at such ranges. Even harder to keep tracking the targets because the target will detect you. Redut are getting 400km range missiles so they could destroy any AWACS tracking them. The anti ship missiles would be left with no mid course updates.
You bring up an important point that I hinted at... A Buyan operating in Russia waters wont detect much that is happening 500km away, but ground based over the horizon radars wont detect anything within 150km of their location but they can detect low flying cruise missiles out to 3,000km so a volley of Tomahawks being launched from 2,000km away will be detected rather quickly... so the Buyan will find out that these missiles are on their way... they wont know that they are the target but the fact that they all seem to be heading for the ship would mean it would hold its ground and try to shoot as many as possible with the thought that they are intended for land based targets and you happen to be in the right place to take some down... land based fighters could be armed and scrambled in the hours it would take for those missiles to even get close and any other ships nearby would be moved closer to help deal with the deluge... and of course the ships that launched the attack will be located and MiG-31s will be loaded with Kinzhal and will be awaiting the order to prevent a second strike.
Russia should equip its ships with fake targets (equipped with RCS lenses) that it could release into water and get away. They could attract at least half of the missiles.
Indeed active jammers and decoys and chaff is carried by all small and large ships of the Russian Navy, most of their ships are better armed than western ship equivalents.
Well oops I thought the tomahawk had a similar range to the Kalibr, I guess I underestimated pindostanski inferiority.
The Tomahawk is a naval land attack weapon and not really considered a strategic missile. The Calibre was based on a strategic missile... the SS-N-21 Grannat that was only equipped with a nuclear warhead because it had no terminal guidance and had a CEP of about 250m. The Calibre has terminal guidance and is mainly deployed with a conventional warhead now...
Grannat was withdrawn... just like Kh-15 Kickback... because they had nuclear warheads as standard. Kalibre is now used because it uses a conventional warhead... and Tomahawk is being reintroduced as an anti ship missile because it is cheaper to use Tomahawk than it is to try to quadruple the range of Harpoon which is what they traditionally relied on for anti ship use from an attack aircraft. Improved Russian air defences on ships and on land have made air power much less effective and much more risky so they are not looking at overwhelming defences with lots of cheap missiles... except being American they aren't cheap either.
The irony of course that that all their huge number of missile cells on their ships now need to carry more and more anti ship missiles to be effective having a dramatic effect on their ability to defend themselves from enemy attack as they have fewer and fewer cells for SAMs.
I suppose that an anti ship tomahawk would then likely be outranged by an Oniks.
You do understand that submarines are not threatened by Tomahawks or Onyx missiles so the range is not that important...
Because in the event of such a conflict thoes SLBMs will be needed in western cities.
A single 650mm torpedo with a 20Kt nuke warhead could do the job easily enough too...
That is quite irrelevant as by the time a carrier is engaged the west will be ash and the Russian navy would be tasked with cleaning up the oceans in order to minimise damage they can do to Russia in return.
You don't think Russian captains would hunt the usn for sport do you?
Russia will get plenty of damage too... enough to make the sport not fun.
Russian captains will likely try to keep Russian waters safe for as long as they can... they wont go exploring...
You claimed that Buyan Ms would be deployed to the Russian coasts for defence and not hunting enemy surface vessels,
I didn't claim anything of the sort. Their mission will be based on the nature of their weapon load out... if they have 8x 91ER1 then they are not going to be hunting ships... they will be looking for submerged targets. Conversely if they have Onyx and 91ER1 then they will likely try to engage any hostile ships or subs that enter the area they are tasked with defending.
I pointed out that they cannot provide air defence for the Russian coastline (the task implied by defending the coastline but not hunting enemy ships) unless you meant protection from amphibious landings your statement was silly.
To which I replied why send a man with a Makarov pistol to provide squad fire support... a Buyan is not designed to protect anything from enemy air power except itself... if you want something to provide air defence for an area then you deploy a cruiser or a carrier or you use land based SAMs linked to the Buyans sensors.
A land based S-400 battery located near the beach with a Buyan located 100km out to sea could be quite a potent arrangement with the Buyan sending target data back to the S-400 battery to engage detected threats.
It could also call in aircraft that could fly out and defend an attack for a period of time too.
If they could make a tank that could conquer europe on its own for a reasonable cost and commitment of resources why shouldn't they?
If they could then they should but they can't so they don't.
Russia can make a corvette that can wipe out carrier groups from half way across the planet for a reasonable commitment of money and resources, why should they unnecessarily limit the firepower of their navy?
They can load 8 Zircon missiles in to a Corvette which makes it a very potent threat against even the best defended ships and land based targets, but they can't fit 500 x S-350s on it as well... so it is always going to be an egg shell in terms of vulnerable... but is that really a surprise... there is no such thing as invulnerable... except in Hollywood.
Why would they not want a button the could push to put the us navy on the bottom? All of the components exist they need only be combined and every single surface fleet in service of Russia's enemies would be rendered obsolete, is that what you would call a waste of effort?
Yes... because what ever you do to achieve it... they will eventually be able to do that too and parity will be restored... now everyone will have mach 20 hypersonic manoeuvring anti ship missiles... and MAD is restored.
Another "Frankenstein" being the reported use of the SM-6 in the anti-ship role, in the lack of a true supersonic AShM in the USN.
Yeah, American fanboys have been claiming that one for decades... but the mostly ballistic flight path would make it relatively easy to shoot down and if you made it manouver to make it harder to hit you dramatically reduce its flight range...
This improvised use of weapons outside of their intended purpose is by now an established trend in US armed forces, with many examples in all the services, and by the rushed way in which those are being proposed and brought to operation, indeed forced by adversaries and not by own initiative. Nobody should expect great results when development of military equipment is based on cutting corners...
They might get lucky and accidently stumble on something good, but it is all done in panic and fear... we are behind and we will even copy to catch up... welcome to what Russia and China and the Soviet Union felt... but they have much more class...
The sensor search requirements for Zircon would probably be too high to do such a "blind attack" into the general area where enemy naval assets are expected. It would require a intact over horizon targeting capability.
Zircon will be flying at 40-60km altitude so targeting should not be a problem... remember the idea is speed no stealth so it can scan all it wants because the expectation is that it will be detected early on in its attack... the point is high flight speed reducing reaction time... very high altitude limiting the weapons that can be used to engage it till the terminal dive, and of course the ability to perform very high speed manouvers in the dive to make interception rather difficult...
Mindstorm or Zircon designed to attack ground targets could have a longer range than the anti-ship version? According to your statement, these missiles can vary depending on whether Zircon will attack ground targets or ships?
Probably not... they will likely have Zircons that can be used against sea or ship targets which means combining land attack and anti ship guidance... both of which will likely include terminal guidance sensors to ensure a precise hit and kill.
As Mindstorm mentions, they might get a slight range boost because they can fly a much higher flight profile, but I personally don't think the difference would be dramatic.
Putin said Zircon has a range over 1,000km... which I would guess would mean 1,200km perhaps with a conventional warhead. A smaller lighter nuke warhead might extend the range of 1,500km perhaps...
Certainly an air launched Zircon could have greater range.
We need to wait to find out whether Zircon is a 750mm calibre missile like an Onyx/Yakhont missile or a 533mm calibre missile for use through a torpedo tube... I rather suspect the former, but either way being released from an aircraft in flight and already at altitude means its solid rocket booster can accelerate it further and allow it to climb higher earlier in its flight which will allow it to get to higher speeds and much greater distances even without adding the flight radius of the launch aircraft.
US bets on their carrier avitiation and submarines for antiship missions.
They are looking to Tomahawk because their confidence in Harpoon is not high....
The problem No. 1 for the murican leadership of today is that they believe their own propaganda. The F-35 is invincible and can easily use guided bombs to destroy every russian or chinese ship so there is no need for a decent anti-ship missile.
But that is a good thing... when they realise they are not superior... they will spend America into oblivion... which might lead to them collapsing and dissolving or it might lead to WWIII starting as an act of collective suicide...
LRASM is very good and dangerous. It has a passive targeting mode with IIR or passive radar and incorporates stealth technology. If your ship has its radars turned off for not being detected you will see it too late.
On paper the SS-N-14 was super dangerous too... it used IR guidance when used against ships and it was subsonic and low flying too... though its range was not amazing... it carried a 533mm torpedo plus an extra 300kg warhead on board the missile...
The short range CIWS can destroy the LRASM.
That needs to detect them in 5-6 km, very easy job. They doesn't need the main radar for early detection, the LRASM is a slow target.
Aircraft are getting all sorts of visual systems that provide 360 degree views around the aircraft for pilot and crew and I am sure ships will be getting much the same sort of optronic systems for detecting attacks and threats...
Sailing around with your main radars blazing is an invitation to get attacked from long range but many MMW radar sensors only reach 20-30km so their continuous use would be fine for self defence... it is the sort of thing tanks and armoured vehicles use in their APS self defence systems....