Too much speculation and anecdote and not nearly enough evidence. CCTV interview? Let's see a link.
I told you it's on page 6. Several times. Since you do not want to look, here is link from post:
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/054-series-frigate-thread-2-a-6-4149.html#post89146
Here is link:
And here is transcript:
Actual segment where mentioned rocket-boosted torpedo:
" 肖新年:
它是给编队护航,比如说它有反舰的能力,特别是它的反潜能力比较强。
主持人:
反潜能力比较强。
肖新年:
对,反潜的手段比较多,还有直升机可以反潜,反潜武器也是多种,反潜鱼雷、反潜生弹等等,还有火箭助飞的鱼雷也是反潜的,反潜能力比过去提高了。还有一定的防空能力。"
If that means anything to you.
Officer interviewed is "中国海军副参谋长肖新年少将", "navy deputy chief of staff rear-admiral".
Next time do not dismiss as anecdote blithely. Or is that also mere anecdote to you?
What holy trinity? Did you make that up or something? For helicopter ASW, there is no holy trinity. Dipping sonars can be either active or active/passive. Sonobuoys can be either active or passive. Helicopters don't have TAS. MAD's aren't sonars.
I getting impression you misreading my posts on purpose. :nono:
Active, passive, sonobuoys. Three types of sonars. You may or may not know some dipping sonars have only one mode and not other. SH-60 has all three. Ka-27s has not. Holy trinity is turn of phrase, and it is in use. Maybe I was hallucinating in last 10 years when I used and heard it used, but now I know!
I never mentioned TAS, that you conjured from imagination. Nor did I mention MAD. Where did you find that from? Here, I'll put some irrelevant truism here, too. AESA aren't sonars. See? I also can do it.
Anyway nobody would dream of including MAD in list of actual useful sensor for helos. Did you know that?
Duration is not the sole determinant of capability. And again, I'd like to see more than just anecdote. Not sure about the Merlin/EH101, but the SH-3 is yet another ASW helo that cannot simultaneously carry dipping sonars and torpedoes. All the helos we have talked about including the Helix, can carry both sonobuoys and torpedoes simultaneously.
It is fairly important one. If you don't want to accept that there is nothing further to discuss. SH-3 has range has capacity. Too bad it is aging. Thus we have huge Merlin ASW helo and proposals for ASW V-22.
Not really. The Ka-28, besides possibly some minor variations made for purposes of export and maybe some customer-specific requirements, is the export version of the Ka-27. I would not really call this helo an 'upgrade' to the Ka-27.
:roll: So, according to Mr. ZTZ99, capability of firing Kh-35 missile, Osminog-E and Izumrud system is not upgrade? Is minor variation? What's your definition of a major variation? Maybe it has deathrays and nuclear reactors?
I already pointed out to you how Ka-27 family evolves and export versions is part of evolution. For example Indian Ka-28 is significantly upgraded based on Ka-27PL, itself would have led to Ka-27M (cancelled), and led to whole plethora of related and (mostly) unrelated developments (the version spam I mentioned). It is wrong to speak of 'Ka-28' and 'Ka-27' as if is only one system to start with.
ZTZ-99, I will say this once. Your twisting of my words is getting very irritating. Please do not continue to putting words in my mouth. Strawmen are not appreciated.