• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

USN: Beware the "Carrier-Killer" Sizzler Missile!

I referred to the entire Aegis system and not just the SPY radar because its the entire package that is needed to track and engage incoming missiles.
 
tomahawk6 said:
I referred to the entire Aegis system and not just the SPY radar because its the entire package that is needed to track and engage incoming missiles.

I was just speaking in general terms, for those without a clear understanding of what AEGIS is, i've heard it called a radar many times by people who should know better.

 
I believe that Aegis was developed as a response to the potential Russian tactic of trying to overwhelm the defense of a carrier battle group with multiple cruise missiles. I think the Aegis capable ships the Ticonderoga class CG and the Burke Class DDG would be primary targets of any attack on a carrier battle group. If one of these ships can be put out of action the battle group would be very vulnerable.
 
I suspect the guidance system will be the weakness in these missiles. How do you accuratly guide a missile doing 2.5mach onto a ship zig-zagging at 25kts? It must use some sort of homing system, if the West can get hold of one and build a counter measure to the homing system. Giant Chaff dispensers?
 
Come on guys you don't actually think we would discuss on how we would counter or attempt to counter these or similiar missiles on here do you....?
 
Hmmm, I'm going to try and stay in my lane here, while at the same time addressing some of the concerns in this thread. From a technical standpoint, Carrier-Killer missiles aren't new. The SS-N-19 Shipwreck was designed and built in the 70s and positioned as a Carrier-Group killer thanks to its nuclear warhead. It was large, armored and fast (Mach 2+). The Sunburn came after it and offered a smaller, more precise package while retaining the supersonic speed. All that's changed in the newer version is that the sophistication and export rate has increased.

There is a tradeoff to be made when designing missiles. Just because a missile is supersonic does not make it invincible. Supersonic missiles are far less maneuverable and have a much much larger heat signature that can be very effectively tracked by new IR systems (like the new Sirius system). The current block 1B is capable of engaging such fast moving missiles, but as has been pointed out, the SeaRAM system currently has better Pk against very fast moving targets (how much better? Wouldn't you like to know...). This doesn't mean the Block 1B is crap or that it needs to be replaced, just that the SeaRAM system has some enhanced capability that we may never need. Furthermore simply plonking the SeaRAM system onto a CPF is far more complicated than some of you think, and still doesn't solve the far more pressing concern of how to avoid the CIWS/SeaRAM getting saturated with targets in this "doomsday" missile scenario many of you are putting forward.

Current Naval doctrine doesn't have you firing just one missile at a target, that's for sure.


 
On-topic article from StrategyPage.com....copywrite disclaimer, etc., etc.

Link at bottom of page.

And for NCS_Eng, can you elaborate on the Sea-RAM integration difficulties because the supplier identifies it as a standalone bolt-on unit, identical in needs to Phalanx, with the exception it doesn't need a water line.


Matthew.  :salute:

Antidote for High Speed Anti-Ship Missiles

March 30, 2007: A year ago, the U.S. Navy began production of 39 high-speed anti-ship missile simulators. The GQM-163A Coyote SSST (Supersonic Sea-Skimming Target) is a 31 foot long missile with a combination solid fuel rocket, and ramjet propulsion. It has a range of 110 kilometers and, because of the ramjet, a top speed of over 2,600 kilometers an hour. The Coyote is meant to give U.S. Navy a realistic simulation of an attack by similar Russian anti-ship missiles. (which are also large and fast, and used by other nations as well.) The GQM-163A costs $515,000 each, and about one a month will be built. The navy has not released any information on how anti-missile tests, using the Coyote, have gone.


The GQM-163A will be used as a stand-in for the Russian 3M54 (also known as the SS-N-27, Sizzler or Klub) anti-ship missile. Weighing two tons, and fired from a 533mm (21 inch) torpedo tube on a Kilo class sub, the 3M54 has a 440 pound warhead. The anti-ship version speeds up to 3,000 kilometers an hour during its last minute or so of its flight, and has a range of 300 kilometers. There is also an air launched and ship launched version. A land attack version does away with the high speed final approach feature, and has an 880 pound warhead. What makes this missile particularly dangerous is its final approach, which begins when the missile is about 15 kilometers from its target. Up to that point, the missile travels at an altitude of about a hundred feet. This makes the missile more difficult to detect. The high speed approach means that it covers that last fifteen kilometers in less than twenty seconds. This makes it difficult for current anti-missile weapons to take it down. The U.S. Navy has two anti-missile systems. Phalanx, which uses a 20mm automatic cannon, only has a range of two kilometers, while the Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) has a range of seven kilometers. The radars on both Phalanx and RAM can detect an incoming missile at about twenty kilometers, but that does not really give Phalanx enough time to score a hit. RAM isn't much better. The new navy target missile will enable tests to determine just how effective RAM or Phalanx might be, and if a new system might be needed. There are a number of electronic countermeasures to Russian anti-ship missiles, but these are better tested in simulations or static setups.


The 3M54 is similar to earlier, Cold War era Russian anti-ship missiles, like the 3M80 ("Sunburn"), which has a larger warhead (660 pounds) and shorter range (120 kilometers.) The 3M80 was still in development at the end of the Cold War, and was finally put into service about a decade ago. Even older is the P700 ("Shipwreck"), with a 550 kilometers range and 1,650 pound warhead. This missile entered service in the 1980s.


Iran may have Russian 3M54  missiles, for use in the Kilo class subs it bought from Russia in the 1990s. China has a dozen Kilos on order. China already has some of its Kilos, and has received 3M54 missiles as well. India also has the 3M54. These missiles are considered "carrier killers," but its not known how many of them would have to hit a carrier to knock it out of action, much less sink it.


http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsub/articles/20070330.aspx

 
Back
Top