Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: the folly of the naval missile age???
thruster    1/14/2009 1:03:16 AM
hi, i thought i'd throw some ideas at you all and see where it lands? on my throne as an armchair admiral im concerned at the apparent reliance on the naval anti-surface missile, abit like the AA missile focus with the F4 Phantom, only to see it struggle without a gun in vietnam. Q:if a target is gifted with a good countermeasures suite, whats the realistic assumption that a missile will actually hit its target? it seems to me the utimate effectiveness of your missile is handed to the enemy. i think if youve been hit by an antiship missile youve either A)been asleep at the wheel. B)gone the basic option with your defensive suite and its not up to speed. C)youve picked a fight with someone who has the very latest toy and the countermeasures cycle hasnt caught up with it yet; or D)youve been subjected to an overwhelming barrage of missiles descending upon you all at once (numbers difficult to realistically achieve i guess). so therefore the enemy really decides how much he spends, and whether your trendy missile actually works. Am i correct? so, whats to stop us getting HMAS Vampire outa darling harbour, loading it with heaps of countermeasures as an umbrella, then closing to gunnery range and blowing the bad guys out of the water? a modern day dreadnought! something to ponder, im interested in your replies. cheers.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
HERALD1357    Its called a TORPEDO.   1/14/2009 1:09:51 AM
Antiship missiles can be spoofed, splashed, or dodged right up to 0 tau. A torpedo in its NEZ is you guaranteed DEAD. 
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

thruster       1/14/2009 10:51:05 PM
herald, i totally agree. tho lets work on this abit more:
 
as a community of interested persons, if i have a ships magazine of [i dunno] 5 anti-ship missiles, how many should i expect to actually work? i think as a battle commander i have no say in that, cos it depends on what my adversary decides to put on his ship to defeat them and lets me get away with. lets say, none! over the horizon theyve all been defeated, then what, do we go home very quickly? or is it a given that cos i sent it, it will hit? i hope they still practice ship v ship gunnery [excluding FFGs]!
 
if we can assume that of the 5 rounds i have some do indeed hit the bad guy, then does that mean that i can assume that i will take 1 or 2 myself regardless of the contermeasures gear im carrying?
 
i thought i'd generate more discussion with this?
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Depends........   1/14/2009 11:30:56 PM
What type of anti-ship missile?
 
Lets take STANDARD II.
 
But STANDARD II is an an anti-aircraft missile...........
 
Is it? Its a rocket. Its a Mach 4 rocket with a semi-active radar homing updating architecture.l That means it chases a strobing coded  radar beam reflected off a target
 
The target could be a cruise missile, an aircraft, a SHIP or a building. The STANDARD doesn't care what it hits. ut just looks for specific reflected radiation and homes in on it.
 
Now I am Mister Sovremeny and I detect a flock of eight rockets climbing into the sky.oh say about one hundred miles distant by the returns my radars register.I don't see any aircraft and I didn't launch any anti-ship rockets or cruise missiles because I didn't have a target. What gives?
 
Then an unknown radar beam illuminates me. And I watch the eight missiles arc over in apogee and head down straight at me.
 
By the time I establish tracks and IU figure it out, I have eight Mach four killbodies plunging straight down on me.at a steep slant too fast for me to intercept. If only three hit, I'm sunk because each STANDARD II killbody at those speeds  has the SMASH of TWO Iowa  sixteen naval gun shells.
 
That is why the USN landed Harpoon.
 
Herald
 
   
.
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    GAH! typos!   1/14/2009 11:51:04 PM

What type of anti-ship missile?
 
Let's take STANDARD II.

But STANDARD II is an an anti-aircraft missile...........

Is it? Its a rocket. Its a Mach 4 rocket with a semi-active radar homing updating architecture. That means it chases a strobing coded  radar beam reflected off a target  The target could be a cruise missile, an aircraft, a SHIP, or a building. The STANDARD doesn't care what it hits. It just looks for specific reflected radiation and homes in on it.

Now I am Mister Sovremeny and I detect a flock of eight rockets climbing into the sky,.oh say, about one hundred miles distant by the returns my radars register. I don't see any aircraft and I didn't launch any anti-ship rockets or cruise missiles because I didn't have a target. What gives?
 
Then an unknown radar beam illuminates me. And I watch the eight missiles arc over in apogee and head down straight at me.

By the time I establish tracks and I figure it out, I have eight Mach four killbodies plunging straight down on me.at a steep slant, too fast for me to intercept. If only three hit, I'm sunk; because each STANDARD II killbody at those speeds  has the SMASH of TWO Iowa  sixteen inch naval gun shells.

That is why the USN landed Harpoon.

Herald


A post edit function would be nice.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

THEPUSSMK2       1/15/2009 2:29:41 AM

Now I am Mister Sovremeny and I detect a flock of eight rockets climbing into the sky.oh say about one hundred miles distant by the returns my radars register.I don't see any aircraft and I didn't launch any anti-ship rockets or cruise missiles because I didn't have a target. What gives?

 

Then an unknown radar beam illuminates me. And I watch the eight missiles arc over in apogee and head down straight at me.


 


By the time I establish tracks and IU figure it out, I have eight Mach four killbodies plunging straight down on me.at a steep slant too fast for me to intercept. If only three hit, I'm sunk because each STANDARD II killbody at those speeds  has the SMASH of TWO Iowa  sixteen naval gun shells.


 

That is why the USN landed Harpoon.


 

Herald


 

Yes you can use AA missiles such as standard II as a antiship missile but range is limited as CWI or "Then an unknown radar beam illuminates me. And I watch the eight missiles arc over in apogee and head down straight at me." as you put it is strictly line of sight only. If you as shoot a ship it could only be 14nm away before it was un engageable because it was over the horizon.
So for this reason the USN has not landed harpoon as every time I sail pas a Yank DDG they always have at least two canisters on each of there two MK 141 launchers.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Thruster   1/15/2009 3:25:23 AM

hi, i thought i'd throw some ideas at you all and see where it lands? on my throne as an armchair admiral im concerned at the apparent reliance on the naval anti-surface missile, abit like the AA missile focus with the F4 Phantom, only to see it struggle without a gun in vietnam.

Q:if a target is gifted with a good countermeasures suite, whats the realistic assumption that a missile will actually hit its target?

it seems to me the utimate effectiveness of your missile is handed to the enemy. i think if youve been hit by an antiship missile youve either A)been asleep at the wheel. B)gone the basic option with your defensive suite and its not up to speed. C)youve picked a fight with someone who has the very latest toy and the countermeasures cycle hasnt caught up with it yet; or D)youve been subjected to an overwhelming barrage of missiles descending upon you all at once (numbers difficult to realistically achieve i guess). so therefore the enemy really decides how much he spends, and whether your trendy missile actually works. Am i correct?

so, whats to stop us getting HMAS Vampire outa darling harbour, loading it with heaps of countermeasures as an umbrella, then closing to gunnery range and blowing the bad guys out of the water? a modern day dreadnought! something to ponder, im interested in your replies. cheers.

If you look at it that way your ultimate effectiveness is always handed to the enemy, i.e. there is no guarentee that he won't have a bigger gun than you either.
 
Quote    Reply

thruster       1/15/2009 4:21:31 AM
thats true aussiegunneragain, but at least in older days if you did get under their guns your shells would hit the target. is it not true that by virtue of you having systems to avoid missile hits, your own weaponry are subject to similar constraints. therefore is it wise to rely on antiship missiles as your primary surface weapon?
 
if you spent your budget on max countermeasures, how impermiable would your ships be? could you reasonable disarm a modern navy? clearly missile magazines are tiny compared to main gun magazines, once you weather the storm -> close and kill.
 
is it really as ridiculous as it sounds? 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    Kook again at those canisters.    1/15/2009 6:34:31 AM



Now I am Mister and I detect a flock of eight rockets climbing into the sky.oh say about one hundred miles distant by the returns my radars register.I don't see any aircraft and I didn't launch any anti-ship rockets or cruise missiles because I didn't have a target. What gives?



 



Then an unknown radar beam illuminates me. And I watch the eight missiles arc over in apogee and head down straight at me.






 






By the time I establish tracks and I figure it out, I have eight Mach four killbodies plunging straight down on me.at a steep slant too fast for me to intercept. If only three hit, I'm sunk because each STANDARD II killbody at those speeds  has the SMASH of TWO Iowa  sixteen naval gun shells.






 



That is why the USN landed Harpoon.






 



Herald






 




Yes you can use AA missiles such as standard II as a antiship missile but range is limited as CWI or "Then an unknown radar beam illuminates me. And I watch the eight missiles arc over in apogee and head down straight at me." as you put it is strictly line of sight only. If you as shoot a ship it could only be 14nm away before it was un engageable because it was over the horizon.


So for this reason the USN has not landed harpoon as every time I sail pas a Yank DDG they always have at least two canisters on each of there two MK 141 launchers.


 
To be BLUNT, STANDARD's ballistic trajectory MER outranges HARPOON,effective cruise MER.is far FASTER in travel time over interval, has FAR more SMASH, and is much more countermeasures resistant. Its also one of those weapons that ASTER or most Soviet naval air defense system whether SAM or countermeasures is helpless against.
 
The USN is not including Harpoon in new builds as it needs that deck space for other things. It lands Harpoon in backfits.
 
As for how that radar suddenly  mysteriously paints a ship from more than 100 miles away, that should be OBVIOUS.. It isn't a joust of ship versus ship.
 
Herald
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Thurster   1/17/2009 8:47:12 PM

thats true aussiegunneragain, but at least in older days if you did get under their guns your shells would hit the target. is it not true that by virtue of you having systems to avoid missile hits, your own weaponry are subject to similar constraints. therefore is it wise to rely on antiship missiles as your primary surface weapon?

 if you spent your budget on max countermeasures, how impermiable would your ships be? could you reasonable disarm a modern navy? clearly missile magazines are tiny compared to main gun magazines, once you weather the storm -> close and kill.

is it really as ridiculous as it sounds? 

 

My guess is that when it comparing EW to Counter EW it all comes down to who has the most money and who has the latest intelligence. For Australia the way to go appears to be to stay close to the US as they have the money to spend on research so their gear is usually ahead of the curve, co-operate on elint and to try to outspend the neighbours on key capabilities. You can apply the principle to just about any acquisition. For example with your big guns idea, how do you know that the enemy won't outspend you on DE weapons to destroy the incoming shells? I personally favor a combination of ship and helibourne missiles and long range guns such the mk 4 inch, to complicate the solution for the enemy.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Thruster   1/17/2009 8:47:57 PM
I meant to say the Mk 4 five inch in my last post.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics