Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Forbin - Horizon
nominoe    3/19/2008 11:37:21 AM
here is a very interesting article about the new french frigate, unfortunately it's in french : http://www.meretmarine.com/article.cfm?id=107154 Currently, the new frigate is tested at sea. it's radar is following planes of Roissy airport from Lorient harbour (450 km). You will find some details about weapons, sensors, etc..
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
Yimmy       3/20/2008 4:17:46 PM



True class Herald, the way you answer my post without countering any of my claims.

But I'm more interested in your having a professional interest - please do tell what line of work you were in?  Without knowing, I have more confidence in what I read as a kid.



1. The Kresta II's and the Karas were built as escorts for the strikers like the Kirovs.and to defend the ASW aviation cruisers the Russians deployed to hunt our boomers.
2. Ships like the Moskva and the Kiev were designed to hunt for Ethan Allen class submarines. In reponse we bult the Ohios so the Russians were screwed anyway..
3. I used to plan on how to defeat those turkeys.
4. You do bother to read what I write?

Herald

In answer to 4, mostly not, but this thread has some shits-and-giggles factor.

1.  They evolved from Soviet cruiser design.  They were replacements for the earlier ships, knowing the earlier ships would be withdrawn without replacement.
2.  Nothing to do with the conversation.
3.  I saved the best until last - please elaborate.  As it stands my knowledge base is in the open (my readings as a 12 y/o), and if your going to throw around your "professional" hobby, I want to know the groundings!

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       3/20/2008 7:25:02 PM







True class Herald, the way you answer my post without countering any of my claims.

But I'm more interested in your having a professional interest - please do tell what line of work you were in?  Without knowing, I have more confidence in what I read as a kid.




1. The Kresta II's and the Karas were built as escorts for the strikers like the Kirovs.and to defend the ASW aviation cruisers the Russians deployed to hunt our boomers.
2. Ships like the Moskva and the Kiev were designed to hunt for Ethan Allen class submarines. In reeponse we bult the Ohios so the Russians were screwed anyway..
3. I used to plan on how to defeat those turkeys.
4. You do bother to read what I write?

Herald


In answer to 4, mostly not, but this thread has some shits-and-giggles factor.

1.  They evolved from Soviet cruiser design.  They were replacements for the earlier ships, knowing the earlier ships would be withdrawn without replacement.
Actually evoilved from existing designs to fit the changed Russian Navy mission.
2.  Nothing to do with the conversation.
Everything to do with the discussion as the changed Russian Navy mission drove the Russian ship design changes. I thought you claimed to know WHY the Russians built those ships. My mistake. I should never assume that the other guy knows what he discusses until he proves it.
3.  I saved the best until last - please elaborate.  As it stands my knowledge base is in the open (my readings as a 12 y/o), and if your going to throw around your "professional" hobby, I want to know the groundings!
DAC for the DoD.


Herald

 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       3/20/2008 8:27:43 PM
Actually evoilved from existing designs to fit the changed Russian Navy mission.

I fully agree.

Everything to do with the discussion as the changed Russian Navy mission drove the Russian ship design changes. I thought you claimed to know WHY the Russians built those ships. My mistake. I should never assume that the other guy knows what he discusses until he proves it.

I never claimed anything of the sort!  I stated what the mission of the Russian cruisers evolved into - I never delved into their reasoning.  Their reasoning has nothing to do with the conversation.

DAC for the DoD.

And what's that then?


 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       3/20/2008 8:31:55 PM
Just to make my point clearer herald, you stated that the Soviets had more potently armed surface-action cruisers than America (at least from the congress perspective), and used the Kresta's as your example.  I argued this as incorrect, as the class was predominantly tasked for ASW warfare - there being 10 ships such tasked, while only 4 were tasked for surface action.

That's it - and it is indisputable.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       3/21/2008 12:46:19 AM

Just to make my point clearer herald, you stated that the Soviets had more potently armed surface-action cruisers than America (at least from the congress perspective), and used the Kresta's as your example.  I argued this as incorrect, as the class was predominantly tasked for ASW warfare - there being 10 ships such tasked, while only 4 were tasked for surface action.

That's it - and it is indisputable.
 

No I said that was the impression that the idiot main stream media had. O actually said when the misinformed Congress cretins asked where are "cruisers" were, the US Navy pointed at the Spruances and Ticos and tried to explain why the  USN warships all looked different from their "soviet" counterparts. The Krestas at which Congress looked and as a mattrer of fact the MAJORITY of soviet warships [Sovremeneys for example] were equipped with anti-ship missiles as their offensive weapons.

You nitpick on a minor detail, but my central points about the history and the actual Soviet navy stand.

That is indisputable.

Herald   
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/21/2008 10:26:34 AM
One more time , I have to correct Herald as he made (again) mistakes .
He said :
""Aster 30 has a MER of 30 ,000 meters. it is named ASTER 30 for a REASON.""

The truth :
"
The Aster missile carries an inertial computer with datalink, an active J-band Doppler radar seeker and 15kg warhead. The speed of Aster 30 is Mach 4, and the range is over 80km. The missile has manoeuvrability of up to 62g, achieved through the use of the EADS Aerospatiale PIF/PAF guidance system. Aster 15 has a speed of Mach 3, range over 30km and manoeuvrability of up to 50g."

He also said :
""ASTER still cannot stop supersonics nor can the Forbin engage more than four missiles a quadrant.""

The truth :
"
The system is designed to defend against supersonic, stealthy, highly manoeuvrable missiles that could use sea-skimming or steep-diving flight profiles approaching in salvoes, simultaneously from several directions."

He also said :
""You also exaggerate the LO of the Forbin : it isn't, at least not to US radars. ""

No I did not , again the truth :
« Elle est toujours analogue à celle d'un bateau de pêche et comme les Horizon sont dotées de radars de navigation civils, les bâtiments pourront vraiment se faire passer pour des chalutiers »
Translation :
"The LO gives similar RCS than a small fishboat and since the Horizons are doted of civilian navigation radars , it can be mistaken for a trawler"
Of course , the US radio waves from the US radars travel faster than light and are much better at drawing a electronic picture than European radio waves ...

Herald also said :
""Why don't you visit a Daring and see what a REAL warship looks like?""

I did and I cannot see any big differences beside the better SAMSON radar compare to the EMPAR . Both ships use the same
PAAMS (Principal Anti Air Missile System) and both ships use the S1850M air surveillance radar .
Air surveillance capabilities are roughly the same with an advantage to the Horizon with the SAGEM Vampire MB Infrared Search and Track system (IRST), which operates in both 3-5 and 8-12 micron wavebands .

Contermesures are also roughly the same but again with an advantage to the Horizon because of her ESM radar :

""The radar ESM component will feature very high sensitivity, very high accuracy direction finding and broadband digital receivers. The radar ECM component is based on Phased Array Solid State Technology and will feature high specific transmitted power, fast reaction, multi-threats engagement capability and complete programmability of coherent and not coherent jamming techniques, due to the implementation of multiple broadband Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM).""

Regarding the anti-ship capability , the Daring doesn 't have any besides torpedoes while the Horizon has the Exocet MM40 Blk3 and torpedoes.
On a land-attack role , the Daring will probably not carry the Tomahawk while the Horizon will probably carry the Navy version of the SCALP-EG (250km+ range) .

More later ...

Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       3/21/2008 1:25:50 PM

 The Krestas at which Congress looked and as a mattrer of fact the MAJORITY of soviet warships [Sovremeneys for example] were equipped with anti-ship missiles as their offensive weapons.


Jesus Christ herald.  I know what you said - and you were wrong.  The Sovremeney's are destroyers - we are not talking about destroyers - we are talking about cruisers.  The Krestas were not fitted with anti-ship missiles as their offensive weapons.  There were 14 in the class, and only four were armed with the old SS-N-3, the other 10, and majority of the class, were optimised for ASW and AA defence.

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       3/22/2008 1:39:11 AM



 The Krestas at which Congress looked and as a mattrer of fact the MAJORITY of soviet warships [Sovremeneys for example] were equipped with anti-ship missiles as their offensive weapons.



Jesus Christ herald.  I know what you said - and you were wrong.  The Sovremeney's are destroyers - we are not talking about destroyers - we are talking about cruisers.  The Krestas were not fitted with anti-ship missiles as their offensive weapons.  There were 14 in the class, and only four were armed with the old SS-N-3, the other 10, and majority of the class, were optimised for ASW and AA defence.


Sovremeny 7800 tonnes displacement.full load

Kresta I displacement  7200 tonnes displacement.full load.

Kresta II displacement 7500 tonnes displacement full load
 
The Krestas were called CRUISERS. Technically all THREE are large rocket firing ships in the Russian system as I explained Quit while you are way behind.

Herald

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       3/22/2008 2:22:02 AM

One more time , I have to correct Herald as he made (again) mistakes .

He said :

""Aster 30 has a MER of 30 ,000 meters. it is named ASTER 30 for a REASON.""



The truth :

"
The Aster missile carries an inertial computer with datalink, an active
J-band Doppler radar seeker and 15kg warhead. The speed of Aster 30 is
Mach 4, and the range is over 80km. The missile has manoeuvrability of
up to 62g, achieved through the use of the EADS Aerospatiale PIF/PAF
guidance system. Aster 15 has a speed of Mach 3, range over 30km and
manoeuvrability of up to 50g."

Flyout is not mean effective range. You were educated about this, liar.


He also said :

""ASTER still cannot stop supersonics nor can the Forbin engage more than four missiles a quadrant.""



The truth :

"
The system is designed to defend against supersonic, stealthy, highly
manoeuvrable missiles that could use sea-skimming or steep-diving
flight profiles approaching in salvoes, simultaneously from several
directions."

You were warned not to post MBDA propaganda, liar. There is no published success against Mach 1+ missiles or against multiples. Not even the British have published successful test results.

STANDARD exercised against MACH 2.5 target missiles and those results were touted. ESSM has. RAM has. Even Sea Dart tested well. Why nothing about Aster but untested claims, liar?

He also said :

""You also exaggerate the LO of the Forbin : it isn't, at least not to US radars. ""

US radars put out a lot of watts, liar.

No I did not , again the truth :

« Elle est toujours analogue à celle d'un bateau de pêche et comme les
Horizon sont dotées de radars de navigation civils, les bâtiments
pourront vraiment se faire passer pour des chalutiers »

Translation :

"The LO gives similar RCS than a small fishboat and since the Horizons
are doted of civilian navigation radars , it can be mistaken for a
trawler"

A better translation is; The radar return resembles in size that the return of a fishing trawler  and because the Horizon's radars mimic  maritime navigation radars iut will be mistaken for that trawler.

The lie here is that the mimickry is good enough to fool a pattern recognition threat library software either from an active return off the silhouette or that American ESM won't tag it immediately as a MILITARY source emission.

Of course , the US radio waves from the US radars travel faster than
light and are much better at drawing a electronic picture than European
radio waves ...

Our EW is better than you think, liar.

Herald also said :

""Why don't you visit a Daring and see what a REAL warship looks like?""

I did and I cannot see any big differences beside the better SAMSON radar compare to the EMPAR . Both ships use the same
PAAMS (Principal Anti Air Missile System) and both ships use the S1850M air surveillance radar .

I doubt you very much, BW. I really do. Otherwise,  liar, you'd know why SAMPSON can handle more inbounds at a greater distance than the INFERIOR EMPAR.

Air surveillance capabilities are roughly the same with an advantage to
the Horizon with the SAGEM Vampire MB Infrared Search and Track system
(IRST), which operates in both 3-5 and 8-12 micron wavebands .

IRST does not give you anything but warning that your radars failed and you have 45 seconds to pray until you DIE.

Contermesures are also roughly the same but again with an advantage to the Horizon because of her ESM radar :

The British countermeasures active and passive are world standard. Want to tell me what a detection array does to protect a ship if your active countermeasures
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       3/22/2008 8:56:16 AM
Herald , you dare say that I 'm a liar ? And just after trying miserably to answer my post with some more lies ???
That 's true class Herald ...
Listen man , your knowledge on warships is enough to put you on anybody 's List3 . You 'll better check and ask yourself questions before to post your usual garbage .

Regarding ASTER , you really need to be educated , so read :
""Aster 30 has the capability to intercept targets at altitudes from 50m to 20km. Against aircraft targets flying at altitudes above 3km, the maximum range of the Aster 30 is 100km.""
As I said multiple times ASTER 15/30 NEVER failed on any test . In 2001 , a supersonic target flying at 300ft was destroyed . In 1997 (11 years ago) , ASTER destroyed an Exocet missile making it the first "hit-to-kill" interception ever against an anti-ship missile.

France knows how to build good rockets and the UK (and others) are not stupid enough to buy something who doesn 't work as advertized . The ESSM from Raytheon is a good piece of kit and it does its job , I am not disputing this , but the ASSM has a semi-active radar only (it 's not fire and forget on the terminal phase and needs constant updates and illumination from the ship 's radar) while the ASTER has a fully active radar and can act by itself . That 's one of the reason why ASTER is better . I might add that ESSM hasn 't got home on jam either while ASTER has .

Herald , there is no threat library who includes the Horizon Class Ships besides ours and Italy . I defy any SH to get an ID on the Forbin , you were supposed to know that but well ...(List3)
Your EW is good but not as good as you think . You came very close to a catastrophic situation many times and not very long ago ...

High tech IRSTs like the SAGEM Vampire MB Infrared Search and Track system are an invaluable tool for last defense against low profile skimmers , it 's better to have one than none at all . The Australian Navy has the system onboard the ANZAC Class Frigates as part of an Anti-Ship Missile Defence (ASMD) upgrade project .
It is not only a Search&Track system but provides a very effective way to direct fire onto the approaching skimmer with systems like (exemples) SADRAL or even guns . As I said , it is better to have one than none at all because it is one more defense against missile attack , you stupid man .

The British countermesures are indeed world standard so are the French . French ECMs and ECCMs are known to be second to none , our Optics and Optronics also are . There are 2 leaders in the field and France is one of them .
Do you even know how countermesures work Herald ? It seems not .
As you said , it 's better to have the incoming within your threat library because it facilitates things and you react quicker , but if it isn 't in your library , do you know what do to Herald or do you want me to explain it to you ?
Be carefull of what you 're gonna say , I 'm waiting ...

Regarding the Klub 3M-54 four group , it depends on what Klub we 're talking about . If we 're talking about the 3M-54E1 , the missiles will be destroyed at 30-40km when they go medium altitude to activates their seekers . At that time , the Klubs (which are not stealthy skimmers) are making Mach 0.6-0.8 and they will be blast to oblivion . It is also at that time that the ESM radar will blind their ARGS-54 seekers .
If we 're talking about the 3M-54E , the problem is a little more complex as we need to act quicker and really make sure to destroy it or to blind it before the missile jettison everything to keep only the terminal dart who will make Mach 2.9 at an altitude of 3 to 5 meters while zigzaging until impact . The missile does that 20km away from the targeted ship .
It has to be noted that the terminal phase is only started if and when the ARGS-54 seeker has aquired the target , which leaves plenty of time to jam it . Do you think that MBDA didn 't think about it , Herald ?

Don 't compare STANDARD and ESSM to Exocet , it 's apples and oranges . We use ASTER and Exocet . The USN wouldn 't use ESSM to target a ship even if a hit is manageable , the damage wouldn 't be sufficient .
ASTER is superior to ESSM anyway .

The proper name for the SCALP missile is SCALP and not Storm Shadow . It is French tech built in France , furthermore the updates (one way and t
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics