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.

 

Russia has SKAVAL, any answer from USN?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 06:26 AM
link   
Russian navy has the most powerful rocket-torpedo called SKAVAL.
it is unmatched in its speed and quality and destructive power ; so called weapon of revenge . china got it frm russia .
INDIA is also rummoured to have it.

i dont know whethere any western navy or USN have it. Anyone have info on it?

[edit on 23-11-2004 by John bull 1]




posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Yeah, it's called a real navy with the ability to actually launch our torpedoes. Just because a navy has these impressive torpedoes and anti-ship missiles it's a far far different thing to be able to effectively deploy them and use them.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by swastika
sorry , posted in awrong thread. moderators please remove it to relevant section.


You are in the right spot actually.

Can you post some link for the torpedo. Its not really the rocket per say but more about its ability to "supercavitate". My question is this: Russia has alot of stuff that are prototypes like Su-47 etc. But is it in service?



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 06:42 AM
link   
test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>productin>>>>>>>>>acquition>>>>oprational
.......a long procedure , but mater of time.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 07:01 AM
link   
I got a link here . it may be operational.

check it....... www.periscope.ucg.com...



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 07:54 AM
link   
US is developing a supercavitating torpedo right now.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
US is developing a supercavitating torpedo right now.


No we are not. There are too many problems and dangers that are associated with a supercavitating propulsion system.

We are going in other directions, that is all that can be said.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Russian supercavitating torpedos are an interesting system, however, in reality, the current state of the art in this technology makes them practically useless in an ASW role.

These weapons are unguided. Meaning, your target had better be pretty close and pretty large. The idea is that these weapons could be used on less capable Russian subs and export models in an effort to offset any lack of stealth or advanced sonar employed by these vessels.

They are also more dangerous than conventional torpedos, as they use multiple forms of liquid and solid fuels to power the propulsion and cavitation system on the warshot. Most western experts now agree that the loss of the Soviet era Mike-class (along with a large part of the crew and a Chinese Navy observer) was due to a misfire or problem with a Shkval-class weapon test.

It is an interesting weapon system, however, it would never get past the test lab in most western navies in it's current incarnation. But then again, the Russians are infamous for fielding test systems on operational naval units.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pyros
Russian supercavitating torpedos are an interesting system, however, in reality, the current state of the art in this technology makes them practically useless in an ASW role.


I agree that they are useless in an ASW role, as you have to get close to a sub to track it. At the ranges we are talking I do not see how having a supercavitating torpedo will help you out. As soon as you launch it you loose the passive picture.

However, as an anti-shipping weapon I think it is an ideal choice. They will not have enough time to get out of the way or to perform any kind of avoidance manuever.



These weapons are unguided.


Read the link posted above. The latest versions have a targeting and tracking system.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND

We are going in other directions, that is all that can be said.



And what direction may that be? Care to elaborate??...



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pyros
It is an interesting weapon system, however, it would never get past the test lab in most western navies in it's current incarnation. But then again, the Russians are infamous for fielding test systems on operational naval units.


Yes, that's what sank the Kursk -- most likely a detonation of the Granite antiship missile, (look for the links) which is a lot heavier weapon with a tremendous range.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HANDWe are going in other directions, that is all that can be said.


Spearfish clone?



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by swastika
test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>productin>>>>>>>>>acquition>>>>oprational
.......a long procedure , but mater of time.



Actually I was referring to

operational >>> having the ships to deploy them >>> good training to use them effectivly >>> Obtaining C&C plus intelligence to know where to shoot them >>> surviving more than one launch when the enemy comes looking for you >>> ability to keep them maintained for long periods of time....

etc..etc..etc...

Meanwhile the Russian navy sits rusting in thier harbors.

Ever seen the fire control measures (or lack thereof) a modern Russian capital ship has? They are death traps. Our sailors won't have anything to do with em.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
And what direction may that be? Care to elaborate??...


Maybe a 55 knots stealth torpedo with active sound cancellation? Just my opinion.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
Maybe a 55 knots stealth torpedo with active sound cancellation? Just my opinion.


Only 55 knots?



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cjwinnit


Only 55 knots?


If you cannot hear it it doesn't matter how fast it's going. That's exactly I would consider as "move to the another direction."



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
If you cannot hear it it doesn't matter how fast it's going.


Slight problem though, it's hard to disguise a torpedo launch, and slower torpedoes have to be a lot closer to a target or it can simply outrun it until the torpedo runs out of fuel.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cjwinnit


Slight problem though, it's hard to disguise a torpedo launch, and slower torpedoes have to be a lot closer to a target or it can simply outrun it until the torpedo runs out of fuel.


Maybe they found solution also for this. I don't know much about the current torpedoes, are they still ejected by air pressure?
Also the submarine will probably not go faster than is it's tactical operating speed (20knots by Seawolf, Virginia)

However the active sound cancellation has always fascinated me. It looks quite simple(at least in teory) - just send an wave with oposite phase and enemy hears nothing. There are already devices able to "mask" 2 people talking so why not use it on subs/torpedoes. Maybe the newest nuclear subs already have it to mask their pumps/propeller.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   
about producing supercavition by charging the skin of the torpedo to free trapped gasses in the water.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
Yes, that's what sank the Kursk -- most likely a detonation of the Granite antiship missile, (look for the links) which is a lot heavier weapon with a tremendous range.


No, the kursk was sank by an explosion in the torpedo room. This was most likely caused by a leaking torpedo.

All of the granit missiles were recovered and were intact. Some suffered water damage and were subsequently removed from service. The ones that were not damaged were sent back out to the fleet.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join