EW Attack on USS Donald Cook

gazzzwp

Member
Is this nothing more than Russian propaganda or could there be an element of truth to it?

For those not familiar with the 'theory' read here:

https://futuristrendcast.wordpress.com/2014/11/19/what-frightened-the-uss-donald-cook-so-much-in-the-black-sea/

When the Cook was last in the Black Sea in April 2014 it was buzzed many times by an SU-24. The theory goes that after the incident the vessel left the area quickly and has not returned after being hit with an electronic jamming warfare device that completely shut down AEGIS and left the Cook helpless. The SU-24 apparantly carried out a missile lock in a simulated attack. Has any US vessel returned to the area since the alleged incident?
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/russia-claims-its-bomber-jammed-u-s-destroyer-8b58c9b56515

Couple of good points, but the one that sticks out is that why would Russia demonstrate to the US on a single destroyer they have an EW system capable of completely jamming the sensors on a USN destroyer?

There's a difference between sending a message and demonstrating a strategically critical change in ELINT/SIGINT capability. The former doesn't (by a long shot) make the latter worthwhile.
 

gazzzwp

Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/russia-claims-its-bomber-jammed-u-s-destroyer-8b58c9b56515

Couple of good points, but the one that sticks out is that why would Russia demonstrate to the US on a single destroyer they have an EW system capable of completely jamming the sensors on a USN destroyer?

There's a difference between sending a message and demonstrating a strategically critical change in ELINT/SIGINT capability. The former doesn't (by a long shot) make the latter worthwhile.
It's a good point. Why would Russia play a trump card too early in the game risking development of effective counter measures I believe is what you are saying?

The Russian's tend to hot headed in times of perceived conflict and don't forget that tensions have been high (even more so back in April).

'Look what we can do - better get your vessels out of our back yard' would be the simplest answer to me.
 

gazzzwp

Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
It's a good point. Why would Russia play a trump card too early in the game risking development of effective counter measures I believe is what you are saying?

The Russian's tend to hot headed in times of perceived conflict and don't forget that tensions have been high (even more so back in April).

'Look what we can do - better get your vessels out of our back yard' would be the simplest answer to me.
More to the story:

After the incident, the foreign media reported that “Donald Cook” was rushed into a port in Romania. There all the 27 members of the crew filed a letter of resignation. It seems that all 27 people have written that they are not going to risk their lives. This is indirectly confirmed by the Pentagon statement according to which the action demoralized the crew of the American ship.

What are the possible consequences of the incident provoked by the U.S. in the Black Sea? Pavel Zolotarev forecasts:

I think that Americans are somehow going to reflect on improving the system “Aegis”. This is a purely military aspect. In political terms, there is hardly any likelihood of demonstrative steps by either side. That is enough. Meanwhile, for Americans it is a very unpleasant moment. In general, the missile defence system which they deploy involves huge expenditures. They have to prove each time that it is necessary to allocate funds from the budget. At the same time, the ground component of the ABM was tested in ideal conditions and showed a low efficiency. This fact is concealed by the Pentagon. The most modern component, the sea-based system “Aegis” also showed its shortcomings in the present case.


Read more.........

AEGIS Fail in Black SEA, Ruskies Burn Down USS Donald “Duck” | Veterans Today

Edit to add:

A lot of people seem to think that this incident has some validity. Check out the blog at the bottom of the above page.

This is potentially devastating for the US Battle Groups surely? Also if true a massive propaganda victory for the Russians; as soon as there is any close quarter confrontations they score a massive victory without even firing a shot.

Worrying.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
The article I linked discusses the 27 people issue, there also seems to be a loss in translation as it says "all 27". All what, exactly?

There's a difference between being hot headed and exposing a significant* capability to the opponent you'd most likely be using it against?

*i cannot overemphasise how significant that capability would be, to completely overcome the sensors of an AB destroyer? Using a mount on a single Su-24? Imagine what a squadron of those could do in terms of jamming a US CVBG.

Yet they go 'hey look what we have!' for chest thumping to keep the US out of their territory, that's not being hot-headed, that's being moronic. Russia isn't stupid.

Propaganda, nothing more IMO.
 

gazzzwp

Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
The article I linked discusses the 27 people issue, there also seems to be a loss in translation as it says "all 27". All what, exactly?

There's a difference between being hot headed and exposing a significant* capability to the opponent you'd most likely be using it against?

*i cannot overemphasise how significant that capability would be, to completely overcome the sensors of an AB destroyer? Using a mount on a single Su-24? Imagine what a squadron of those could do in terms of jamming a US CVBG.

Yet they go 'hey look what we have!' for chest thumping to keep the US out of their territory, that's not being hot-headed, that's being moronic. Russia isn't stupid.

Propaganda, nothing more IMO.
Hope you're right. The other thing that makes the story lack credibility is that the 27 seamen no doubt are bound to contract and simply walking out isn't feasible. Some PR response by the USN would be useful if this was indeed nothing more than part of the propaganda war.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
The Pentagon have reportedly came out and said that at no point was the Donald Cook unable to defend itself.

Simulated missile runs by the Su-24 I could buy, but not the jamming fiasco.

Plus, it gives the US a chance to analyse their jamming system and determine their own countermeasures to it.
 

FormerDirtDart

Active Member
So, let me get this straight.

The Russians have employed a system that effectively renders the entire US Navy defenseless.

An incident that resulted in the resignation of "ALL 27" members of a US Navy destroyer (with a crew of ~280), about nine months ago, has only been reported on Russian media sites, and conspiracy web sites.

In all this time, no one else has come forward with any actual members of the crew. Nor has any family member of the crew come forward over the apparent holding of the entire ships personnel incommunicado for nine months.

I honestly fail to see why this thread would generate any further discussion.
 

AegisFC

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
This didn't happen. For one USN sailors can't just "resign", the rest is too idiotic to comment on.
 

ManteoRed

New Member
The Donald Cook went back and just left the black sea about a week ago, before that USS Ross was there in Sept, and USS Cole was there in October. So if it did happen, they dont seem to be shying away from sending "helpless ships" into harms way.


Sort of makes me doubt the veracity of those claims.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
More to the story:

After the incident, the foreign media reported that “Donald Cook” was rushed into a port in Romania. There all the 27 members of the crew filed a letter of resignation. It seems that all 27 people have written that they are not going to risk their lives. This is indirectly confirmed by the Pentagon statement according to which the action demoralized the crew of the American ship.

What are the possible consequences of the incident provoked by the U.S. in the Black Sea? Pavel Zolotarev forecasts:

I think that Americans are somehow going to reflect on improving the system “Aegis”. This is a purely military aspect. In political terms, there is hardly any likelihood of demonstrative steps by either side. That is enough. Meanwhile, for Americans it is a very unpleasant moment. In general, the missile defence system which they deploy involves huge expenditures. They have to prove each time that it is necessary to allocate funds from the budget. At the same time, the ground component of the ABM was tested in ideal conditions and showed a low efficiency. This fact is concealed by the Pentagon. The most modern component, the sea-based system “Aegis” also showed its shortcomings in the present case.


Read more.........

AEGIS Fail in Black SEA, Ruskies Burn Down USS Donald “Duck” | Veterans Today

Edit to add:

A lot of people seem to think that this incident has some validity. Check out the blog at the bottom of the above page.

This is potentially devastating for the US Battle Groups surely? Also if true a massive propaganda victory for the Russians; as soon as there is any close quarter confrontations they score a massive victory without even firing a shot.

Worrying.

Well, in terms of improving AEGIS, the radars are practically legacy systems now - flight III will have a much more modern AESA system.

Jamming a Burke? Good luck with that, they have a peak output of 4Mw - vs perhaps a few Kw for an airborne system. That plus the TI's can probably microwave popcorn at a couple of dozen klicks..
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
It's a good point. Why would Russia play a trump card too early in the game risking development of effective counter measures I believe is what you are saying?

The Russian's tend to hot headed in times of perceived conflict and don't forget that tensions have been high (even more so back in April).

'Look what we can do - better get your vessels out of our back yard' would be the simplest answer to me.
AEGIS is computer based combat / fire control / battle management system, not a radar system or indeed any sort of sensor. So which radar system aboard USS Donald Cook, did this 'attack' actually target?

The AN/SPY-1D radar?

The AN/SPS-73 radar?

The AN/SPS-67 radar?

Or perhaps none of these systems and it sought to attack the AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare system?

Perhaps they are claiming the entire ship was shut down? Yet somehow it managed to make a port visit and didn't require any of the types of towing, we regularly see Russian naval vessels in need of...

This is just pure 'Russia strong' type bunkum. This 'attack' didn't stop USS Donald Burke going back to the Black Sea after its port visit, nor has it stopped any other USN vessels.

End of story. Next?
 

Volkodav

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
AEGIS is computer based combat / fire control / battle management system, not a radar system or indeed any sort of sensor. So which radar system aboard USS Donald Cook, did this 'attack' actually target?

The AN/SPY-1D radar?

The AN/SPS-73 radar?

The AN/SPS-67 radar?

Or perhaps none of these systems and it sought to attack the AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Warfare system?

Perhaps they are claiming the entire ship was shut down? Yet somehow it managed to make a port visit and didn't require any of the types of towing, we regularly see Russian naval vessels in need of...

This is just pure 'Russia strong' type bunkum. This 'attack' didn't stop USS Donald Burke going back to the Black Sea after its port visit, nor has it stopped any other USN vessels.

End of story. Next?
Could even be the USN chose not to energize some systems due to concerns the Russians could be conducting an ELINT mission to determine the signatures and capabilities of the USNs DDGs.
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Could even be the USN chose not to energize some systems due to concerns the Russians could be conducting an ELINT mission to determine the signatures and capabilities of the USNs DDGs.
Or they just let ESM soak up all the free radiation the Russians put out there...
 

ololosha

Banned Member
This article is fantasy of bad journalists
Sorry for translation

1)I talked with the current pilot of the Russian Federation and he said that the Su- 24 can not be set this complex.

And another comment

""Hibiny could (and most likely it was) to a local flare on some radars, such as
AN / SPS-49 and / or EW AN / SLQ-32 V2 (1-2,2-8,8 -20 GHz)
AN / SPY-1D (pulse repetition frequency (recorded on tests) and 600Hz 1430Gts with pulse duration of 0.4 ms
40 Hz at 20 and 40 ms) is certainly not "afford", as well as disable the entire Aegis.
Justification:
1.DK -4 x General Electric LM2500, a total of more than 100000l / s
Electrical power generators up to 70% of the shaft power (18.4 MW x 4 x 70% = AVERAGE POWER)
+ The ships of all series are 3 backup gas turbine engine «Allison 2500" (the power of each - 2.5 MW)
2.Power of radio beam is inversely proportional to the square of the distance
3.AN/SPY-1D, 4-6MVt
Complex EW L-175 / L-175B "Khibiny-10B"
EW complex KS-418 "Khibiny"
A complex EW-265 "Khibiny-M"
EW complex "Khibiny-U"

ECM complex provides protection from air defense aircraft and aircraft weapons.


Coverage area in the front and rear hemispheres sector + -45 degrees

Operating frequency range of equipment staging jamming 4 ... 18 GHz
Operating frequency range of containers jamming protection group 1 ... 4 GHz
Power Consumption W 3600

pay attention to RANGE of frequencies, it is IMPOSSIBLE to deafen "other" range
4.RLS and ECM (B) of almost any aircraft to 10kW
Small aircraft , small generators , weight limits and substantial free space "
Ship several orders of magnitude more
 

PCShogun

New Member
How would the Russian pilot even KNOW he had successfully jammed an AEGIS equipped destroyer? Was it the sheer fact that he was still alive and flying within 1,000 yards of the ship?
 

LeGrig

New Member
USS Donal Cook in Constantza

USS Donald Cook is not the only NATO warship temporarily visiting Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey (NATO Black Sea riverans). The schedule of the trip in discussion (April 2014) was announced by media at least one week before and the vessel was not "rushed" into Constantza port but simply cruised as planned. The vessel performed joint exercises with two Romanian warships. At that occasion, the Romanian president visited the ship:
Băsescu a vizitat nava "USS Donald Cook": E un simbol, impresionantă din punct de vedere militar - FOTO - Mediafax
USS Donald Cook came again in Constantza on December 30, 2014:
Distrugătorul USS Donald Cook soseşte în Marea Neagră | Radio Constanța
USS Donald Cook Strengthens Ties with Constanta, Romania | Naval Today
It is true that Russian fighters/recc planes use to fly in international Black Sea waters and challenge neighboring countries defenses. They could not miss such an opportunity as a foreign NATO warship!
By the other hand, I think US Donald Cook did exactly what was proper action for this encounter and nothing more. An "enthusiastic" wellcome could end in a real mess.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Could even be the USN chose not to energize some systems due to concerns the Russians could be conducting an ELINT mission to determine the signatures and capabilities of the USNs DDGs.
well, normal practice is to let them probe as it allows you to harvest whats happening

people often make the mistake of assuming that no reaction means a successful probe.

so I would be assuming that standard conops kicks in, ie let the other bloke poke about as its more of a benefit to you.

passive has benefits all of its own
 

NightKot

New Member
Ololosha was right, this complex can't be used on Su-24 so far, it's still under development for export planes SU-24 MK. However it can used on SU-30/34
 

T1Brit

New Member
Yeah right

What a load of crap. Modern warships are hardened against EMP. They have to be. They are designed to operate on a nuclear battlefield. Besides, if a system is shut down , it can simply be rebooted.
 
Top