It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

sunburn

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 08:50 AM
link   
what is so special about the Russian sunburn missle?? would it be hard to reverse engineer it?




posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by straylight
what is so special about the Russian sunburn missle?? would it be hard to reverse engineer it?

Try google....all I can say or use this... www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   
It uses ramjet which gives it great speed but also has relatively large weight and short range.
And it is not difficult to reverse engeneer (of course if you mean US,EU or other countries with advanced technology). in fact US Navy already did it - laste year they tested GQM-163 Coyote it's Mach 2.3-2.5 misille with low RCS.









link



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Yup the Coyote was developed because the Navy wanted to have an advanced supersonic anti ship missile to match the capabilities of other counties. Also notice the similarities between the Coyote and the Sunburn. I don't think its that hard for modern counties to reverse engineer it.


Approximately 18 feet long and 14 inches in diameter, Coyote is compact. Launched from Navy test and training ranges, this high-performance missile uses the latest technologies in propulsion to achieve speeds of Mach 2.5 while flying approximately 15 feet above the ocean's surface. Its mission is to simulate the launch of the most advanced threat anti-ship cruise missiles.





The Sunburn is 3x as fast as our Harpoon missile and its level speed is about Mach 2.2.

The 3M82 "Mosquito" missiles have the fastest flying speed among all antiship missiles in today's world. It reaches Mach 3 at a high altitude and its maximum low-altitude speed is M2.2, triple the speed of the American Harpoon. The missile takes only 2 minutes to cover its full range and manufacturers state that 1-2 missiles could incapacitate a destroyer while 1-5 missiles could sink a 20000 ton merchantman. An extended range missile, 9M80E is now available.

Sunburn




posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   
does anyone know how much one costs?



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Don't know how much the Sunburn costs exactly, but I read somewhere that it is really expensive.



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Yup the Coyote was developed because the Navy wanted to have an advanced supersonic anti ship missile to match the capabilities of other counties. Also notice the similarities between the Coyote and the Sunburn. I don't think its that hard for modern counties to reverse engineer it.


lol, the Coyaote is in actual fact a Russian AS-17 ' Krypton ' missile, it wasn't reverse engineered at all.

The Clinton administration was well known for its refusal to spend money on new weapons. President Clinton reduced the number of aircraft carriers, cut Army divisions, retired whole Air Force squadrons and did not field one major weapon system during the entire 1990s.

However, there is one missile success story that can be directly attributed to the tireless efforts of Bill Clinton and Al Gore. This fantastic missile would not be in active service today if it were not for the personal efforts of Bill and Al.

Unfortunately, the missile is made in Russia.

The Russian air force has announced that it will soon field the improved Kh-31 rocket-ramjet missile. The Kh-31PM, known to NATO as the AS-17A Krypton, is designed to attack U.S.-made radars used by Patriot air defense sites and Aegis warships.

The titanium Kh-31 was built in 1988 by the Russian Zvezda-Strela State Science and Production Center for the former Soviet Union. The PM version of the Krypton missile offers extended range and features improved passive seeker electronics, enabling it to pick up a wide range of radar targets.

The PM also incorporates into its design virtually all of the improvements suggested by a team of U.S. military engineers who worked on the Krypton during the Clinton years.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 12 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23




That looks right out of the thunderbirds cartoon/puppet show!!

Thunderbirds are GO!!



[edit on 12-4-2005 by Daedalus3]



posted on Apr, 12 2005 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Sadly, yes Clinton was the worst thing to ever happen to the U.S. military. But that report you posted seems more opinion oriented then factual to me. Also for the Russian supersonic anti ship missiles there is this by the USN to counter them. Read all about it.

SeaRAM



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 09:32 PM
link   
There's more to defend the Navy than the RAM.

I was a weapons system tech on an Aegis destroyer. We had two mottos:

In God we trust, all others we track

and

If it flies it dies

If an Aegis destroyer were in a situation where it anticipated being fired upon by those cruise missiles it would surely activate Auto Special doctrine.

In Auto Special mode the computer systems on the ship will automatically detect, evaluate, and engage hostile targets. You activate AS, put your feet up, and watch the show!



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 10:55 PM
link   

In God we trust, all others we track


Oh man, I love that motto!


And the Auto Special mode could even track low flying super-sonic cruise missiles?



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime

If an Aegis destroyer were in a situation where it anticipated being fired upon by those cruise missiles it would surely activate Auto Special doctrine.

In Auto Special mode the computer systems on the ship will automatically detect, evaluate, and engage hostile targets. You activate AS, put your feet up, and watch the show!



So you're saying that the AEGIS system can down Sunburns with SM-2 missiles ? Have they upgraded AEGIS to cope with the new Sunburn type threats, if so software or hardware upgrades ?



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Auto Special is made specifically to counter sea skimming missiles. The missiles are so low that they can only be detected 9-10 miles out. At that range and at the speed that they fly, humans can't react fast enough to ID them and engage them. When an Auto Special candidate track is detected, it receives the highest priority of all CPU usage in the computer systems. The ship will launch missiles even before the target is displayed on the radar displays.

I saw one Auto Special engagement occur. We were doing missile exercises as part of my ships CSSQT (Combat Systems Sytem Qualification Trials). All ships do a CSSQT right after commissioning. It's a huge certification test for the ship and the crew before the ship can carry weapons and is deemed ready to fight. We had a Vandal launched at us from a shore facility. We heard the woosh from the SM-2 and about a second later the radar displays showed the symbology for an outbound mssile, an incoming missile, and the 'x' where the intercept point was. Needless to say we hit it.

Low, fast targets (we call them pop ups) have always been the number one priority of the Aegis Weapon system. They are by far the deadliest of all targets.

Aegis uses a Defense-In-Depth layered defense concept. Our first layer of defense, with the furthest range, is CAP aircraft that we are controlling. All Aegis ships are assigned aircraft from the carriers that they control. After that is the SM-2, which can hit both air and surface targets. Next comes the 5" gun, then CIWS, whether it be the 20mm Phallanx or RAM on the newer ships. Finally there is chaff and evasive manuevering.

A lot of people may lauge about using the ship's 5" gun as an air defense. It's primary purpose is shore bombardment and anti-surface warfare. I was very skeptical of it at first. We did an exercise during our CSSQT where a Lear jet towed a large sensor on a few miles of cable behind it. We were to fire BL&P rounds at it. BL&P (blind loaded and plugged) are like hardball ammunition, just a big hunk of metal. The sensors the lear towed would be able to detect how far off our rounds were. If we got close enough, it would be assumed that using the proper air-bursting rounds would have destroyed the target. Well, the lear did his first pass and the sensors didn't detect our rounds fired. It made two more passes and never detected our shots. The pilot hauled in the sensor and returned to base. We were informed a short time later that the first round fired actually struck the sensor and destroyed it!

I'd imagine the rail gun will be used for air defense as well.



Have they upgraded AEGIS to cope with the new Sunburn type threats, if so software or hardware upgrades ?


Aegis is constantly upgraded, both hardware and software. CG47-51, the Baseline 1 ships, are being decommissioned because they do not have a Vertical Launch System and cannot be upgraded anymore. The others see upgrades all the time.

There are currently 8 different versions, or Baselines, of Aegis ships in the fleet. I work as a defense contractor at a site that provides engineering, R&D, and testing for the Baselines in development, plus life-cycle support and training for the Baselines in the fleet. We're about to install the equipment for the next generation Aegis Baseline and the generation after that is already well into it's design phase at a different facility.

The ships will continue to be upgraded their entire lifetime. As new threats from other countries emerge, and as we develop new technologies, they are incorporated into the Aegis Weapon System. It's the job of people like me to ensure our sailors have the best possible weaponry and defenses.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   
So the US actually reverse engineered the 3M80? (And they blame China for reverse engineering stuff?)



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 06:02 PM
link   
The F-15 was reverse engineered from the Mig-25.

The B-2 is partially reverse engineered from WWII German Luftwaffe designs.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 06:13 AM
link   

Auto Special is made specifically to counter sea skimming missiles. The missiles are so low that they can only be detected 9-10 miles out. At that range and at the speed that they fly, humans can't react fast enough to ID them and engage them. When an Auto Special candidate track is detected, it receives the highest priority of all CPU usage in the computer systems. The ship will launch missiles even before the target is displayed on the radar displays.

The only problem is that this may still be too slow to get the sunburn before it hits, do you know how long it look from detection to destruction for the auto-special to work there? Because if you hit it half way between where it was detected and your ships then I think that's probably too slow. This is were a kinetic weapon would be ideal because as you demontrated you can get very high accuraccy with modern targeting and with high speed shells(magnetically accellerated) you could create a deadly and cheap air defense system. Only tricky part is insuring you have sufficient coverage on all sides.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime
The F-15 was reverse engineered from the Mig-25.


What are you talking about
, F-15 is completely differnet both in purpose (interceptor VS fighter) and capabilities to Mig-25. There was no reverse engeneering at all. It was designed to counter new gen russian fighers - Mig 23 and Mig-25 but it was not reverse engeneered from them or from anything else.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime
The F-15 was reverse engineered from the Mig-25.

The B-2 is partially reverse engineered from WWII German Luftwaffe designs.


lol, just because the shape looks the same does not mean it was reverse engineered. The F15 was in development far before the first Mig-25 was seen.

The parallel you draw with the B-2 and german aircraft design ( assuming you mean the Horton flying wing ) is laughable at best.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 10:35 AM
link   

A true understanding of the attributes and failings of the MiG-25 came in 1976. On 6 September 1976 in aviation a PVO pilot, Lt. Viktor Belenko, defected to the West, landing his MiG-25P 'Foxbat-A' at Hakodate airport in Japan.

Source

I thought this was the event that led to the reverse engineering of the Mig25 into the F-15, but I see now the first F15 prototype flew in 1976, so it couldn't have been so.

As far as the B-2 I was refering to the Horton flying wing. Northrop engineers thoroughly studied that aircraft and modeled the size and shape of the B2 based off that plane. The B-2 isn't an exact copy of the Horton, but it is a direct decendent of it.


As far as auto special mode, ANY hit is better than the missile hitting the ship! The Phallanx CIWS engages targets at less than 2 miles. I won't give times for auto special engagements because it's classified, but it is VERY fast. Auto special is a doctrine mode. It's a series of if/then statements that the computer programs use to make it easier for operators to use Aegis. Doctrine can automatically drop anomolies aquired from atmospheric conditions, increase the priority assigned to targets that display certain characteristics (speed, flight path, etc), and do other things to clean up the radar pucture or help fight the ship.

Here's a watered-down version of the auto special doctrine:

1. Is this a 'real' target and not an anomoly?
2. Is the target inbound?
3. Is the target's speed above a certain rate?
4. Is the target squawking Mode 4 IFF?

If the answers to these questions are right, the target is assigned auto special status and is fired on.

The time it takes to receive the radar returns, process them, submit the data to the auto special doctrine, and make a decision is almost instantaneous. How long does it take your computer to cycle through a few if/then statements? Not very long.

The main problem with using SM-2's against sea skimmers is that the SM-2 is fired vertically from a VLS cell. It must launch straight up and then roll over and dive to the target. That takes some time and allows the skimmer to get very close to the ship before intercept. However, the ships are designed to take several hits and keep fighting. Assuming the sunburn wasn't nuclear, a near miss would have little effect on the ship. Even if it was nuclear, the destruction of the missile wouldn't detonate the warhead, it would just be like a dirty bomb. The DDG's are built to survive a CBR (chemical/biological/radiological) attack, so there would be no effect felt from the release of radioactive material close to the ship. The CG's don't have as much CBR defense, so some of the crew might get cancer from the radioactive material released, but they'd still be alive.

www.churchill.navy.mil...
Here's a website with a great picture of the shock trials of the USS Winston S. Churchill DDG-81. The ship had three 10,000 pound explosive charges detonated one at a time, progressively closer to it. After each explosion the ship went through drills, firing live ordinance at target drones. Normally the third ship of each class is designated as the shock trial ship and goes through this. The Churchill did it because DDG-81 through 85 have a new generation of computer equipment known as Baseline 6 phase 1. Whenever new equipment is added to a ship it must be shock-trialed first. This normally happens on land, but the Baseline 6 ships had such extensive modifications the entire ship had to go through the trials.

The sunburn is an awesome missile and the reduced radar cross section is what makes it most scary. The limiting factor of the sunburn is that it has to be launched first. The short range means the aircraft or ships firing the sunburn will be well within our range before we are in sunburn range. They might get to launch some in a peacetime surprise attack, but in a time of war when the ship's CO's are given authorization to fire at all hostile targets, most sunburns will end up at the bottom of the sea, still attached to their mounting rails.

[edit on 17-4-2005 by PeanutButterJellyTime]



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I've seen a short video clip of Phalanx tests on Discovery Channel. It shows them shooting down ASM or missing them - these were early days though. I'll try and find the footage.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join