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: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Yeah lasers would be better and cheaper. The USN is experimenting with lasers to try and burn holes or cut incoming missiles.




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 08:38 PM
link   

All ASM's are deadly if they are able to get through the defenses. The Harpoon however is slow allowing any half decent CIWS to knock it down. It also has a smaller warhead.


There's some stuff I was going to post about the Harpoon in that reply, but after reading about 30 different web sites about Harpoon I didn't see any of them mentioned a single time, so I'm not going to go into details. That's my rule, if I can't find it in a Google search, I keep my mouth shut.

You just have to take my word that there is virtually no defense against a proper Harpoon attack, even with it's short range and subsonic speed.

Edited to fix quote tag.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by PeanutButterJellyTime]



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Forgive me for anything that I've missed because I did a little skimming.

There was some speculation about the Rolling Action Missile (I've also heard it called Rolling Airframe Missile) being for DD(X). It's a drop in replacement for the SM-2 in Phalanx actually according to the link WestPoint23 gave us.

There was some talk about our possession of Ramjet missiles. We didn't have to reverse engineer the Coyote. Clinton got it (an AS-17/Kh-31 spinoff) in an ill advised cooperation with the Russians. It has a slight disadvantage in speed and a major disadvantage in range compared to Sunburn, Onyx, Yakhonts, etc.
We do have the technology though. We had our own answer to AS-17 back in Vietnam, called Talos. It was upgraded to a test drone called Vandal. Our acquisition of Coyote prevented the development of Sea Snake, a next generation Talos which probably would have been a better missile than Coyote. I'm pretty sure that cost sharing and cooperation with Russia was Clinton's motivation for this. Fact of the matter is though, if we had the budget we could start building our Ramjet anti-ship missiles in fairly short order- I would speculate the buying is simply preferable because it costs more to make your own from scratch.

The good news on Sunburn is that last I checked, the Russians were still developing an airborne version. At present it is only deployed on surface combatants- FACs and DDGs (Sovremenny specifically). The superiority of American submarine forces goes a long way to protectings us from this threat except in specific geographical areas where we must approach land. (areas controlled by straights of 120km width or less mostly)- Persian Gulf comes to mind.

FACs would probably be the main threat for us when dealing with defenses based on Sunburn, and the development of airborne Sunburns will cause additional problems. We will have to reorganize our carrier groups and their tactics to protect our carriers, and we may have to deploy modifications or new classes of small ships (corvettes or FACs) to help create a good screen for our forces, but all in all I think it would take a severe miscalculation on America's part to actually put in a position where Sunburn could be used decisively against us.

Disclaimer: naval warfare isn't my thing, and I've done a little bit of speculating, so don't take this for gospel.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   
The RAM is a replacement for the Phallanx Close In Weapon System (CIWS). It's on the newer DDG's. SeaRAM is a next generation RAM for DD(x).

SM2 is the Navy's general purpose missile.

In more than a thousand firings over the past two decades, SM-2 consistently has demonstrated effective performance against targets from surface ships to helicopters, manned aircraft, and cruise missiles, from very low to very high altitudes and from stationary to supersonic speeds, under a variety of weather conditions, and across a spectrum of stressing electronic countermeasures environments. ...the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense program (formerly Navy Theater Wide) currently under test uses the same extended range propulsion stack as the basis for the SM-3. The SM-3 has successfully intercepted a ballistic missile targets twice.

Source


I've seen a few SM-2's have mechanical problems and have to be destroyed in flight, but I've never seen one miss a target. I'd guess all in all I've seen around 100 SM-2 launches in person.

I've been on both ends of Vandals. I've had them shot at me and I've watched the site I work at launch them at other ships.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
lasers will be the next in line for anti missile weapon. cheaper to fire per shot probably 10,000 buks per shot instead of a million dollars per missile to fire against another missile.

I've always wondered, what if the missile had a reflective body? You can't burn mirrors with lasers can you?



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by PeanutButterJellyTime

All ASM's are deadly if they are able to get through the defenses. The Harpoon however is slow allowing any half decent CIWS to knock it down. It also has a smaller warhead.


There's some stuff I was going to post about the Harpoon in that reply, but after reading about 30 different web sites about Harpoon I didn't see any of them mentioned a single time, so I'm not going to go into details. That's my rule, if I can't find it in a Google search, I keep my mouth shut.



Aww come on please
I would be very intersted in what you hvae to say.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 01:14 AM
link   

I've always wondered, what if the missile had a reflective body? You can't burn mirrors with lasers can you?


That wont work, solid state laser will burn through just abut anything mirror or not. I’m not a laser physicists so I don't know exactly why a solid state laser burns through mirrors but I know that they can.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Also, if the missile is inbound the seeker head of the missile will be facing the ship and will be the most visible part of the missile body. You can't cover that up.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   
the sunburn is very quick

When slower missiles, like the French Exocet are used, the maximum theoretical response time for the defending ship is 150-120 seconds. This provides time to launch countermeasures and employ jamming before deploying "hard" defense tactics such as launching missiles and using quick-firing artillery. But the 3M82 "Mosquito" missiles are extremely fast and give the defending side a maximum theoretical response time of merely 25-30 seconds, rendering it extremely difficult employ jamming and countermeasures, let alone fire missiles and quick-firing artillery.

www.globalsecurity.org...



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 11:10 PM
link   
I suggest you check out SeaRAM, which employs a rolling missile launch to intercept and destroy supersonic anti-ship missiles such as the Sunburn. Here are quotes from a website explaining SeaRAM.


The standard US Navy anti-missle defense system is too slow to engage the Sunburn. This system, called the Phalanx, has only about 2.5 seconds to react to the Sunburn. In multiple tests, the Phalanx failed to engage high speed missiles in time to protect a ship.
Speed aside, the other threat the Sunburn poses is it's destructive force. The Sunburn skims the sea and pops up at the last seconds to slam down on the decks of ships.

"In 10 scenarios, real Anti-Ship Missiles and supersonic Vandal target missiles (Mach 2.5) were intercepted and destroyed under realistic conditions. RAM Block 1 achieved first-shot kills on every target in its presented scenarios, including sea-skimming, diving and highly maneuvering profiles in both single and stream attacks."
"With these test firings RAM demonstrated its unparalleled success against today's most challenging threats. Cumulatively to date more than 180 missiles have been fired against anti-ship missiles and other targets, achieving a success rate over 95%"
The SeaRAM is a drop in replacement for the Phalanx system. The RAM missle itself is a mach 2, second generation derivative of the Sidewinder and Stinger missles. It features BOTH infrared and radar based target tracking, allowing for use against future low radar cross section (stealthy) anti-ship missles.
The effective range of the RAM missile is 11 miles. The CIWS part of the SeaRAM can track multiple targets and fire multiple missles at a single target. Each SeaRAM platform holds 11 RAM missiles.


Now according to this website the Phalanx system is not capable of engaging the Sunburn. However PeanutButterJellyTime can explain to you better than I can about what the Phalanx system is really capable of.

[edit on 23-4-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 04:35 AM
link   
im saying sunburn is alot faster than other missiles



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 07:12 AM
link   
The thing with missles flying at mach 1.5 is that you only have about 30 seconds to react, say you take 15 seconds to launch a missle, the missle takes around 5 seconds to get to the same altitude as the ASM, you have about 10 seconds to shoot down the missle, but a missle going head on against another missle means they are moving to each other at around mach 3.5, and a turn from a ASM will mean the intercepting missle will miss.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Most anti-missile defense systems cant react quick enough eve some U.S. systems cant, but its not impossible to shoot down an incoming Sunburn as I have posted above.

they are moving to each other at around mach 3.5, and a turn from a ASM will mean the intercepting missle will miss.

The Sunburn flies very low to the water then it rises very quickly to strike the ship, there is not turn because a turn at those speed and that close would mess up the Sunburns trajectory.


[edit on 24-4-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:00 AM
link   
Ok then, those tests mean something, but in battle things are a lot different, we are talking 3 Su-30s firing 6 Sunburns, which is a big difference from just 1.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:00 AM
link   
Warlord,

You make some good points. But as I was saying above, the Aegis autospecial mode can fire almost instantaneously when a target like this is detected.

If a sneak attack in peacetime is made than I would say the sunburn would be about 95-100% effective at scoring a hit. But if the target ship is a prepared Aegis ship, especially one of the latest DDG's, I'd drop that percentage to about 25%. The ship would have the technology to defend against it, it would come down to the crew's training, knowledge, and readiness.

A turn of the sunburn probably wouldn't be effective. Sharp turns are extremely difficult at those speeds. Sunburn, RAM, and SM-2 are all highly manueverable. The SM-2 would use an airburst with an expanding rod type warhead, it wouldn't have to contact the sunburn to hit it. You also have to realize the sunburn is not capable of remote guidance, it it cannot detect when a missile is fired at it, so it woldn't attempt to manuever out of the way. Incoming cruise missiles are like a horse with blinders on, they see their target and nothing else. Plus, if the sunburn made a turn that close to it's target it would miss the target.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Ah, ok then. That clears up a few things, I don't really know so much about naval warfare, but think about it, even if it was instant, 6 Sunburns will probably still be a challenge to intercept.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:06 AM
link   
I'm sure the british were failr confident in the state of the art air-defence system used on board the type-42 destroyer during the falklands war... incidentely the same system also used by US destroyers of the period.

Didn't stop the british losing 2 of them.

I'm saying you can't predict what's going to happen and saying something will "definately" work smells like elitism.

Anyone remember the titanic?



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Who says that they fired the missiles one by one? It say that SeaRAM engaged multiple targets. And I don't think the Su-30 can carry Sunburns its for the Su-27. And yes it would be a challenage but multiple ships in the area can all try and shoot them down not just one ship.


[edit on 24-4-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   

I'm saying you can't predict what's going to happen and saying something will "definately" work smells like elitism.


Uhh.... that works both ways you cant “definitely” predict what going to happen with the Sunburn or how something will work because that smells like elitism

Again nothing is 100% but live fire tests under realistic conditions mean nothing I guess.



posted on Apr, 24 2005 @ 08:16 AM
link   
well i'm sure they thought when they testing the sea dart before fitting that it would do the job perfectly well... and that the new lightweight ship superstructure made from aluminium was fine.

Actually the americans still use aluminium in millitary ship design... quite scary really.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join