i don't have the firing rate and reaction time on HQ-10, but I would imagine it would be better than HHQ-7. Also, the other benefit is that they HQ-10 launchers on 052D carries 24 missiles vs 8 on FM-90N (+ 8 reload)
052/052B Class Destroyers
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
Hope you won't mind me posting the two links:
I know the FM-90 is slightly slower, something like 2.3 Mach vs 2.5 Mach.
The FL-3000N was specifically designed to protect ships against saturation attacks by both subsonic and supersonic threats as well as multiple, highly maneuverable and sea-skimming targets...all simultaneously. They are designed with a Dual Passive Radio Frequency and Imaging Infra-Red seeker guidance systems. Each system is able to launch missiles at 3 second intervals, with an automatic lockon after launch.
Now, the FM-90's design is not optimized to counter precision guided munitions or track and engage multiple incoming targets (ie. it is not optimized for saturation attacks). It just does not have a strong capability to accurately track multiple incoming targets, nor does it have strong altitude determination accuracy which would allow it to intercept missiles using steep dive trajectories. As a result, IMHO, the primary strong suite of the FM-90 is still engaging fast jets and low flying helicopters.
I'd suggest the following site for an EXCELLENT technical description of the entire history of the PLAN use of the original French Crotale missile system and its development of the FM-80 and then the FM-90 systems. Very long, very technical, but also a very good read.
antiterror13
Brigadier
again Jeff, excellent explanation ..... thank you for sharing your knowledges
I'm not sure what you are referring to.
One either side, below the bridge there is a Type 726-4 decoy launcher. Forward of that there are life raft canisters on each side. Are either of those what you mean?
Could you point them out on this pic?
They're speculated to be some kind of electronic warfare or countermeasure device, but I don't believe the Chinese Navy has released any information on this.
The FL-3000N is a newer generation missile, with assumed improved capabilities.
Other than what has already been discussed, I'd point to the Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapon Systems, 2006 edition, page 573, which described the improvements that were made from Crotale to VT-1 missile. You can google this book and read the page yourself. Here's a short excerpt:
"Thales claims that the very high speed of the VT-1 missile enables the system to engage and destroy targets approaching from very different directions. For example, it considers four sea-skimming missiles approaching in pairs (5 sec apart) at Mach 0.9 (300 m/sec) 135 deg apart. The system would designate the first target at 15 km, intercepting it at 9.5 km (12.5 sec after missile firing). The second would be intercepted at 7.1 km (8 sec after firing), the third at 2.5 km (3.5 sec after firing), and the fourth at 1.9 km (3 sec after firing)."
We should not take the manufacture's claim at face value. But it does appear that the Crotale system has been improved by 1989-1991 with such (claimed) capabilities to intercept multiple incoming missiles from different directions. The VT-1 was also tested using Russian (Fakel) cold gas ejection system for VLS launch in the 90's.
We know that China has improved the Crotale system, but we do not know how the improved variants (in use by Chinese Navy and not necessarily export variants) compare to the French VT-1 or CN2 system. I believe that the modernized Crotale SAM is not as obsolete as many would think, though it's still old generation technology.