This is a discussion on ASW Questions, within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Volkodav
Stand off ASW weapons probably make more sense when talking about stand off ASW sensors. Likely ...
Stand off ASW weapons probably make more sense when talking about stand off ASW sensors. Likely we will see a resurgence in interest once ships start deploying ROVs with the appropriate sensors at tens of NM from the parent ship.
There is a natural symmetry
At the moment. the helo is the best ASW asset fof both sensing and engagement , as ROVs come in or sensing, you can bet that using them to engage won't be far behind.
At the moment. the helo is the best ASW asset fof both sensing and engagement , as ROVs come in or sensing, you can bet that using them to engage won't be far behind.
Good point, the US Navy's unmanned helicopter looked pretty capable. If they could increase its range and payload capacity in the future then it would no doubt become top of the class for almost everything.
All ASROC systems only deliver lightweight or ultra-lightweight ASW torpedoes, not heavyweight ASuW torpedoes.
SS-N-14 is the only one with decent performance against surface ships since it can be used as a regular anti-ship missile, and carries a 185-kg HEAT warhead for this purpose in addition to the lightweight torpedo (with a 60-kg warhead) that it carries for ASW. With some 50 km range it's also the longest-ranged such system.
SS-N-14 Silex is the Metel Complex. There are different anti-submarine variants ('Metel') for cruisers and frigates, and a later version with a shaped charge ('Rastrub') that can be used against shipping as well as submarines. The missile has been in operational service since 1968, but is no longer in production; it was superseded by the RPK-2 Viyuga (SS-N-15 'Starfish').
The Metel missile is based on the P-120 Malakhit (NATO: SS-N-9 'Siren') anti-shipping missile. The missile itself is radio command guided and is powered by a solid fuel rocket motor. The later 'Rastrub' models of the weapon were "universal" carrying a smaller torpedo, but with a 185 kg shaped charge warhead for use against ships. Rastrub missiles were deployed alongside the anti-submarine versions of the missile.
The URPK-3 Metel entered service in 1969 on the Kresta II and Kara classes of cruisers. The URPK-4 was introduced in 1973, and the anti-ship version URPK-5 Rastrub in 1976. The URPK-4 has been used on the Burevestnik (NATO: KRIVAK) class frigate and the first batch of the Udaloy class destroyer; the Udaloy II carries the SS-N-15 'Starfish' = RPK-6 VODOPAD
Modern versions are members of the Klub family of missiles
91RE1 - Submarine launched anti-submarine variant, with an anti-submarine torpedo. Basic length 8.0 m, with a range of 50 km. Supersonic speed. The torpedo has a warhead weight of 76 kg. This, along with the 91RE2, are similar to the American ASROC/SUBROC missile/torpedo system. Follows a ballistic path into the surface, speed is 2.5 mach.
91RE2 - Ballistically launched anti-submarine variant, with an anti-submarine torpedo. Basic length 6.5 m, with a range of 40 km Supersonic speed. The torpedo has a warhead weight of 76 kg. For surface ship use only. The lightest of all variants, with a launch weight of 1300 kg. Speed is 2 mach
The Italians had the Milas system, a version of Otomat carrying a lightweight torpedo 55 km range and compatibility with Otomat standard systems. It can put a torpedo in the water at 35 km of its launch platform within three minutes and, if required, change its impact point while flying. Only a few Milas missiles are in service, deployed on the two Durand de La Penne class destroyershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otomat#Submodels
________________
Trans corpus mortuum (and I mean that!)
You'll find "35+ km" in all declassified official data sources, including MBDA's own datasheet advertising it. The 55 km given in some sources are an unofficial estimation, and a rather low one at that.
You'll find "35+ km" in all declassified official data sources, including MBDA's own datasheet advertising it. The 55 km given in some sources are an unofficial estimation, and a rather low one at that.
So, that beats SS-n-14, I suppose....
________________
Trans corpus mortuum (and I mean that!)
And just what it sounds like - i.e. an unguided rocket that only brings its payload into the rough desired target area. Range isn't that phenomenal either.
The Soviet Union developed a number of guided missiles carrying torpedoes, e.g. URPK-4/-5 (Metel/SS-N-14 Silex, for ships) and RPK-2 (Viyuga/SS-N-15 Starfish, for submarines). - kato
Range isn’t that phenomenal?
Well if you think in cruise missiles’ terms, then it’s not.
Otherwise these systems have HUGE ranges.
The system you mentioned, the SS-N-15, has a range of some 28nm. That’s about 45 kms.
There are however two other systems developed by Russians:
- The RPK-7 Vetev (Vodopod-MK the surface variant) – NATO designation SS-N-16 Stallion. Uses the 65cm TT, and an E-45-75A (Type40) 53cm torpedo. Range: 644nm (120km!)
- The 91RE1 – NATO: SS-N-27. Uses 53cm TT and a smaller torpedo (48-49cm). Range 18nm (35km). This one (including the torpedo it carried) was at one point under development. I don’t know whether entered production or the project was abandoned.
So, we all due respect. At sea and in sea-warfare, ranges of 35 and up to 100 kms, are phenomenal.
Quote:
SS-N-14 is the only one with decent performance against surface ships since it can be used as a regular anti-ship missile, and carries a 185-kg HEAT warhead for this purpose in addition to the lightweight torpedo (with a 60-kg warhead) that it carries for ASW. With some 50 km range it's also the longest-ranged such system. – kato
SS-N-14 Silex is an ASW missile with a range of some 50 km constituting the main armament of the Udaloy class destroyers among others.
There are torpedoes with that kind of range you know. I.e. the Russian Type65 with a range of 50,000m at 49kts or 100,000m at 40kts.
Well if you think in cruise missiles’ terms, then it’s not.
Gotta think torpedo terms - mostly in a defensive sense. A ship launching at under 50 nm distance is within the weapons envelope of the attacked submarine. The opposite of that is what stand-off weapon implies.
i don't see the advantage that a long range ASW missile can offer to a surface ship. All ASW ships today carry at least one ASW helicopter, and during ASW picket duty will have a ASW aircraft in attendance. ASW torpedo is only useful if the sub are detected too close and there's little time to launch a helo,so the extra fuel
is a waste. For long range engagement, a helo is better.
i don't see the advantage that a long range ASW missile can offer to a surface ship. All ASW ships today carry at least one ASW helicopter, and during ASW picket duty will have a ASW aircraft in attendance. ASW torpedo is only useful if the sub are detected too close and there's little time to launch a helo,so the extra fuel
is a waste. For long range engagement, a helo is better.
The idea was to have a more effective long range anti ship weapon then using multiple missiles to engage a ship. As anti missile defences are so advanced on ships and torpedo's are so effective against ships, I was thinking of incorporating best of the two weapon systems.
The idea was to have a more effective long range anti ship weapon then using multiple missiles to engage a ship. As anti missile defences are so advanced on ships and torpedo's are so effective against ships, I was thinking of incorporating best of the two weapon systems.
The main problem with a long range ASW weapon is having a good enough target position for you to engage at that range. The Helo is a good platfrom because it can localise as well as drop the weapon. The weapon may have a homing capability, but it still has limits
Unless of course you intend to use a nuclear warhead.
The main problem with a long range ASW weapon is having a good enough target position for you to engage at that range. The Helo is a good platfrom because it can localise as well as drop the weapon. The weapon may have a homing capability, but it still has limits
Unless of course you intend to use a nuclear warhead.
A cruise missile style UAV could be launched to carry the torpedo to its target range and then provide the weapon with accurate guidance? Or perhaps the weapon could be controlled wirelessly, using radar from the surface vessel or from any other survalance source in the military's arsenal to guide it or the weapons operator. Anyway I'm sure with the rate of advancing technology we're either going to progress past the need for anything other than missiles or continue finding new weapons, followed by finding new countermeasures etc.
The idea was to have a more effective long range anti ship weapon then using multiple missiles to engage a ship. As anti missile defences are so advanced on ships and torpedo's are so effective against ships, I was thinking of incorporating best of the two weapon systems.
SM-2 block III missile can engage an incoming missile from more then 100km away. To overcome this, the missile must release the torpedo outside the effective range of the enemy air defence system. All ASW missile today carry a payload of a lightweight ASW torpedo which barely sufficient to penetrate a hull of it's primary target, a submarine, let alone to cause considerable damage to the large surface ship. Plus, the torpedo short range mean's the missile must enter the enemy air defence coverage to reach a release point. there's a chance that the missile will be shot down before it can release. For a long range heavy torpedo, there's no practical way for a normal size missile to carry one. let's look it this way. a Mk-48 heavy torpedo weight 3400 pound. A tomahawk missile weight 2900 pound. I can't imagine how big the missile that can haul a heavy torpedo. It may not even be able to fit into a hull of most warships today.
A cruise missile style UAV could be launched to carry the torpedo to its target range and then provide the weapon with accurate guidance? Or perhaps the weapon could be controlled wirelessly, using radar from the surface vessel or from any other survalance source in the military's arsenal to guide it or the weapons operator. Anyway I'm sure with the rate of advancing technology we're either going to progress past the need for anything other than missiles or continue finding new weapons, followed by finding new countermeasures etc.
Where does the cruise missile get the target information?
How does the cruise missile hang around in the air to communicate with the torpedo once launched?
How does wireless communication work through water?
How does radar track the ASW target or torpedo launched
Technology advances, the laws of physics stay the same
