U.S. Supersonic Anti-ship Guide Missile?

The US Navy made the desision in the 1960s that they were not going to develop supersonic antiships missiles. Before that they had many supersonic ramjet powered missiles including ramjet SAM missiles. The US Navy uses the supersonic weapon the fighter aircraft to kill ships. Also, a Harpoon is very hard to kill. They made say they can stop one but they cant stop two fired at the same time. US Destroyers have more defence against antiship missiles than any Russian ship.

Your analysis was good but your forgetting 1 thing Russia;s EMC's on ATMC is a secret so US has no idea what it can do, btw way SS-25 goes ,Mach 2.9 not 2.5. Part 1. www.vialls.com... Part 2. www.joevialls.co.uk...

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
Your analysis was good but your forgetting 1 thing Russia;s EMC's on ATMC is a secret so US has no idea what it can do, btw way SS-25 goes ,Mach 2.9 not 2.5. Part 1. www.vialls.com... Part 2. www.joevialls.co.uk...

*cough* if its so secret how come old Joe can find it? SO you are basing all your information on old Joes site right?

You lose the arguement once AGAIN HAHAHAHA I said the "ECCM" of Russian SS-25 is a secret. thats what I waz talking about so u loose.!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
You lose the arguement once AGAIN HAHAHAHA I said the "ECCM" of Russian SS-25 is a secret. thats what I waz talking about so u loose.!!!!!!!!

Lose what exactly? I was refering to your constant use of a source who's real credability is ZERO, Zip, nada etc etc etc. And if it is such a secret then how come you feel it is the end all be all for the SS-25?

How old are you for real now???

I know your tactic your a zionist agent or an unwilling acomplace your alwayz telling everone here that what the gov says about 9/11 and Iraq- Al-Qeuida is correct what conspirosy theorists are wrong" you have NO CREDIBILITY with ME!!!!! You can say all that "well you Siberiantiger have no cred with me eigther" THE FACT iz your a DIS-info AGENT and ALL other MODZ on thiz site, I've been watching all your posts.

Tiger, let's make this perfectly clear, right here in the open, just where you insulted my Mod. One more gross act of stupidity and you will be having your insultive outbursts on some other board. Any questions?

Are you also saying that 9/11 was NOT an inside job and the Gov had nothing to do with it?

[edit on 28-7-2005 by SiberianTiger]

Screeeeech!

(that was the sound of a thread veering off course, into a crowded sidewalk...)

BTW, the SS-N-25 Switchblade, named by Zvezda the Kh-35 Uran, is a sub-sonic ASCM designed to be fitted to small coastal vessels and anti-submarine frigates and destroyers, where anti-shipping missiles are a secondary weapon system.

Often referred to as the "Harpoonski" in the west, it is generally regarded as a low-tech knock-off of the Harpoon ASCM, of which examples were probably obtained by the Soviets from a third party nation. Not coincidentally, the Kh-35 appeared in Russian service about 15 years after the deployment of the Harpoon, and it has been one of Russia's best international sellers.....

It is fairly cheap, accurate, lightweight, and easy to use, and....fairly slow at mach 0.85.....unlike the exotic multi-mach ASCMs that the Russians seem to delight in designing. Which only serves to reinforce my previous point.............

I still remembered that the SM-1 or 2 which was made in U.S. ever destroyed Iran's frigate one or two in last century 80's. Would anyone here give me some introductions about it maybe some link.
On other hand, if my memory wasn't wrong, almost every surface-to-air ship loaded missiles of US navy all have capability to anti-ship. Is it right?
If so, are there any instances which show US missiles made anti-ship could be proved?

emile,

THe SM-1/2 LASM is a recent creation so in the 80's it would have been a Harpoon or a TASM. In this time frame it was strictly a SAM

The USN after the demise of the Soviet Union really does not have a blue water threat to face nor is it likely to encounter one in the near term so ASM missiles have taken a back seat to ABM and the like. It is unlikely that they would have to face off against a foe without air cover. And subs can get pretty close and loft a few harpoons and then disapaear if needed

[edit on 7/29/05 by FredT]

My question wasn't answered yet!

TEHEWUIHGFIGFSJFDNBUIW

Something else to consider:

Air Force Releases Two Boeing Small Diameter Bombs in Flight Test
Boeing Co
Jul 28, 2005, 11:46

ST. LOUIS: Two Boeing Small Diameter Bombs (SDB) were dropped recently from the same aircraft, scoring direct hits on two separate targets.

The test on July 26 at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. was from an altitude of 15,000 feet. Released from a U.S. Air Force F-15E at Mach 0.95, each weapon performed a planned one hundred degree heading change, traveled approximately 18 miles across the range from the release point and attacked independent targets spaced 30 feet apart.

"These were our 25 th and 26 th successful weapon flights and two of the more significant tests we've accomplished to date," said SDB Program Manager, Dan Jaspering. "They go to the core of the weapon's capabilities, which is getting to more targets with fewer flights, with incredible accuracy."

The first SDB hit within four feet of its target, while the second hit within 10 inches of its target. The two weapons were released from the same carriage, but each bomb had its own set of target coordinates.

The all-weather SDB weapon system can hold four SDBs and is compatible with every U.S. fighter and bomber aircraft. It has a standoff range of 60 nautical miles. At 71 inches long, this 250-pound weapon quadruples the weapons load on each aircraft. The SDB will first be deployed on the Boeing F-15E Strike Eagle in 2006.

If a JDAM can hit a mobile target then the SDB can. With a range of 60nm this will be a threat to naval vessels.

jetsetter, did you notice this mention?

The all-weather SDB weapon system can hold four SDBs and is compatible with every U.S. fighter and bomber aircraft. It has a standoff range of 60 nautical miles.

Air Force Releases Two Boeing Small Diameter Bombs in Flight Test

Or this mention from Defense Update:

New 250 pound class bombs are designed to provide high precision and effective stand-off range when launched from fighter bombers or unmanned platforms. This type of weapon offers increased weapon's loads on current bombers and strike fighters, as well as flexible loading options for Joint Unmanned Combat Systems (JUCAS). SDB is designed to destroy a variety of targets, penetrate over 1.20 meters of steel reinforced concrete while inflicting minimum collateral damage, from ranges of 70km (40nm). The US Air Force plans to use these weapons with its fleet of F-15E, F/A-22, F-35 and unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAV).

Small Diameter Bomb (SDB)

It has already been shown and stated in a number of past ATS topic threads that the S-400 anti-air missile system would not be able to detect the F-22 Raptor till the aircraft entered within 12-18 mile radius/envelope of the S-400 site(s), despite the claims that this new system is intended to detect and destroy airborne targets at a distance of up to 400 km. If the F-22 is equipped with these SDBs, with a range of 40-60 miles stand-off range, bye-bye vaunted S-400 anti-air missile site(s).





seekerof

[edit on 29-7-2005 by Seekerof]

seems like since the russians and chinese have pulled out some of thier toys the US is starting to dust off thier toys as well.

Nope. No supersonic cruise missiles from the US. SM-2 only fulfils the supersonic part

TASM is gone, and that makes the Russian Kirov class with their 550 km supersonic Sunburns king of the seas.

That is, of course, as far as warship-warship warfare goes. Carrier combat is another story and of course the US with their dozen carriers has the upper hand in that

Originally posted by Taishyou
Nope. No supersonic cruise missiles from the US.

Here you go, Taishyou: Joint SuperSonic Cruise Missile (JSSCM)

Also of note, there are and have been implemented hardware to combat the Russian Sunburn. The degree of effectiveness is of question being they have not been combat tested against such an adversary, then again, the degree of effectiveness of the Sunburn is also in question being it has not been combat tested.
The Sunburn is only king of the sea on paper....




seekerof

[edit on 29-7-2005 by Seekerof]

Wrong again Sunburn iz king of the sea always you yanks are always using media trickery to make it seem as if Rus weaponry is second rate, but it ain't and US iz find out if the attack iran. www.vialls.com... www.joevialls.co.uk... www.vialls.com...

Joe Vialls in a military discussion?
Joe Vialls the master of disinformation?
The same Joe Vialls that was said to be dead?
Joe Vialls is symbolically a Sunburn Missile 'mini-me'....just the dud version.





seekerof

[edit on 29-7-2005 by Seekerof]