Article Archive: Current 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Surface Forces: Arming Container Ships With Anti-Ship Missiles
   Next Article → LEADERSHIP: The Gorshkov Scam
April 14, 2010: A Russian firm is marketing a version of the Klub cruise missile that can be carried in a 40 foot shipping container. The launcher and the missile have to slide out of the container before firing, thus limiting where it can be placed on a ship, particularly your typical container ship. But you could get two or three of these shipping container Klubs on most cargo ships, turning the vessel into warship.

The Klub missile is a key weapon for the Kilo submarine. Weighing two tons, and fired from a 533mm (21 inch) torpedo tube, the 3M54 has a 440 pound warhead. The anti-ship version has a range of 300 kilometers, and speeds up to 3,000 kilometers an hour during its last minute or so of flight. There is also an air launched and ship launched version. A land attack version does away with the high speed final approach feature, and has an 880 pound warhead.

What makes the anti-ship version of the 3M54 particularly dangerous is its final approach, which begins when the missile is about 15 kilometers from its target. Up to that point, the missile travels at an altitude of about a hundred feet. This makes the missile more difficult to detect. The "high speed approach" (via the use of additional rockets) means that it covers that last fifteen kilometers in less than twenty seconds. This makes it difficult for current anti-missile weapons to take it down.

The 3M54 is similar to earlier, Cold War era Russian anti-ship missiles, like the 3M80 ("Sunburn"), which has a larger warhead (660 pounds) and shorter range (120 kilometers.) The 3M80 was still in development at the end of the Cold War, and was finally put into service about a decade ago. Even older (it entered service in the 1980s) is the P700 ("Shipwreck"), with a 550 kilometers range and 1,650 pound warhead.

All these missiles are considered "carrier killers," but it's not known how many of them would have to hit a carrier to knock it out of action, much less sink it. Moreover, Russian missiles have little combat experience, and a reputation for erratic performance. Quality control was never a Soviet strength, but the Russians are getting better, at least in the civilian sector. The military manufacturers appear to have been slower to adapt.

Still, it is unusual for a firm to offer such a weapon for concealed transport on a merchant ship. So far, there have not been any buyers. Or, rather, the manufacturer will not admit to any sales. While these missiles are of questionable effectiveness in wartime, they would likely be much more potent if used for a surprise attack on a military or civilian target.

 

Next Article → LEADERSHIP: The Gorshkov Scam
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
Hamilcar    Bandits   4/14/2010 8:37:26 AM
A Russian firm is marketing a version of the Klub cruise missile that can be carried in a 40 foot shipping container. The launcher and the missile have to slide out of the container before firing, thus limiting where it can be placed on a ship, particularly your typical container ship. But you could get two or three of these shipping container Klubs on most cargo ships, turning the vessel into warship. 
 
That has got to violate several treaties, that I am aware of.
 
H.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo       4/14/2010 9:37:20 AM
Stuid Russians!  Darth already told you this was a bad idea! http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emsmiled.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo       4/14/2010 9:37:25 AM
Stupid Russians!  Darth already told you this was a bad idea! http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emsmiled.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    but still,...   4/14/2010 9:40:43 AM
...Regardless of any treaty violations,
wouldn't the missile still need proper targetting information?
Not many cargo vessels are equipped with the types of radars and fire control electronics needed to designate/program the target info to the missile.
 
Would this be a "dumb" weapon of terror that's just fired somewhat blindly to a GPS coordinate (located in a port area or near-coastal city?), and the missile just randomly picks out its own target once it's in that area?
Even the tech behind Tomahawks still requires some military-level electronics systems in the launch vessel to handle the missile before launch. Not like an average tuna trawler could just lob one off with a pre-programmed TerCom/digital image in its target memory to seek out (unless you're attacking a fixed structure, how can you get your timing down, as far as programming the data into the missile before it's containerized and even put on the ship?)...
 
Hitgh-tech missiles ain't like just slapping deck guns on ships and calling yourself a pirate.
 
The real treaty violators would moreso be in the clients that buy these, wouldn't it?
(I might more be fearful of such systems being carried overland by tractor-trailer and randomly fired into a given land-locked city, severely damaging powerplants or whatever other critical infrastructure or economic assets: could you imagine the damage inflicted if a cluster-bomb-dispensing cruise missile were launched inside the US (far from any USAF base that would be equipped to scramble against it, if it were even detected in time) and GPS-targetted at strategic oil reserve tank farms?... That would be a serious terror threat.)
 
 
Quote    Reply

mabie       4/14/2010 9:57:56 AM
Who's the target market for something like this? Al Qaeda?
 
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       4/14/2010 11:10:52 AM
This reminds me of German auxiliary cruisers of WWII, like Kormoran, which sunk light cruiser HMAS Sydney.in surprise attack. 'Kormoran' was a passenger ship with six 150 mm guns concealed on the deck. The guns were uncovered just before the action.
 
I think that North Korea might love to have one of those, because they own large merchant fleet. They could sneak up to target, as described in article. There is an inertial guidance version of Klub missile for stationary targets, so I leave it to readers imagination which target and type of warhead they might choose.
 
From the context I understood that the manufacturer is a private owned company. So, they might be willing to sell the system to highest bidder. Maybe, someone like Viktor Bout is the owner. Maybe Bout himself.
 
DG
 
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       4/14/2010 11:47:07 AM

...Regardless of any treaty violations,

wouldn't the missile still need proper targetting information?
 
(1) The missile contains its own targeting telemetry link and ATG seeker.. All it needs is a a bearing and a clock timed command to begin its search function.

Not many cargo vessels are equipped with the types of radars and fire control electronics needed to designate/program the target info to the missile.

(2) That is what the satellite uplink/downlinks to the terrorist targeting and forward observer party was for.  That should also be sold as a command and control telemetry cargo container companion to the firing unit.
 
Would this be a "dumb" weapon of terror that's just fired somewhat blindly to a GPS coordinate (located in a port area or near-coastal city?), and the missile just randomly picks out its own target once it's in that area?

(3) or it could be fired blind toward the sea,  as a coastal battery weapon.  (Iran would like that option.)
 
Even the tech behind Tomahawks still requires some military-level electronics systems in the launch vessel to handle the missile before launch. Not like an average tuna trawler could just lob one off with a pre-programmed TerCom/digital image in its target memory to seek out (unless you're attacking a fixed structure, how can you get your timing down, as far as programming the data into the missile before it's containerized and even put on the ship?)...
 
(4) Land attack doesn't require that much, and as I said, anti-ship is as simple as bearing launch with a clock., a search logic, and  with an active terminal guidance seeker in the missile that makes it a self contained auto-search weapon.    

Hitgh-tech missiles ain't like just slapping deck guns on ships and calling yourself a pirate.

(5) Sometimes, they are easier to fit, because the shipboard support fire control system can be very simple . Point thataway and shoot. worked  for Osa/Styx. 

The real treaty violators would moreso be in the clients that buy these, wouldn't it?
 
(6) Iran, DPRK, Syria, Saudi Arabia, PRCs, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, Pakistan, and other current intermediate range missile treaty violators, etc. 

(I might more be fearful of such systems being carried overland by tractor-trailer and randomly fired into a given land-locked city, severely damaging powerplants or whatever other critical infrastructure or economic assets: could you imagine the damage inflicted if a cluster-bomb-dispensing cruise missile were launched inside the US (far from any USAF base that would be equipped to scramble against it, if it were even detected in time) and GPS-targetted at strategic oil reserve tank farms?... That would be a serious terror threat.)

(7) Mexico.

H.
 
Quote    Reply

Little Ray       4/14/2010 11:51:52 AM
I think you can launch ASMs using a 'Range and Bearing" mode.  It travels a certain distance, lights up its radar and attacks the first target it finds.  IIRC, a similar thing happened during the recent Lebanon conflict.  Hezbollah launched two ASMs (Silkworms, or copies thereof, I think).  One attacked the Israeli destroyer they were targeted against (but was stopped by CIWS - the destroyer still sustained heavy blast damage) but the other missiled failed to acquire the destroyer, flew out to sea sank an Arab-owned freighter.  Hezbollah was using range and bearing data from a coastal radar station.
 
Quote    Reply

flyingarty    Missle   4/14/2010 4:09:05 PM
Wouldn't a few Barrets be better? Site in on the pirate after warning them a few times, if they dont back down, blow his head off from about a mile away...Flyingarty
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       4/14/2010 4:11:58 PM

Wouldn't a few Barrets be better? Site in on the pirate after warning them a few times, if they dont back down, blow his head off from about a mile away...Flyingarty

Just want to open that can of worms, don't you?http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emsmilep.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />
 
H.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT