Anti-Ship missile

As for the EU Embargo for military sales to China its long time overdue to be removed. EU do not see the same threat in China as the US administration does anymore as Chinas new military is only a threat to the US influence in Asia, and that is an old relic from the WWII.

coolieno99 said:

The worst diesel-electric sub is quieter than the best nuclear sub. Nuclear propulsion systems are inherently noisy(and they cannot be turn off). In a sub to sub confrontation, a diesel-eletric sub will detect the nuclear sub first, well before the nuclear sub can detect the diesel sub ... some time ago , the British Navy and the Norwegiean Navy engaged in a naval wargame. The British were using ASW surface ships and the Norwegian use a diesel-electric sub. The Norwegian kept on "sinking" the British ships because the Brits cannot locate the sub ... The noise level of the Amur class sub is so low such that the ocean background noise can mask it out ...

As far as the "32 harpoons" are concerned , the tactics of coordinated mass attack is not new. Back in World War 2, the Germans and Japanese employed coordinated mass attacks. Probably the most famous being the Dec. 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. ... The German U-boats mass attacked in a coordinated fashion called the "wolf pack". The Chinese can use a similiar tactic by sending 10 or more submarines to attack an aircraft carrier...:coffee:

Click to expand...

hmm, I read that the latest American nuclear subs had noise level in the range of 90 to 100 db. Amur should be in that range too.

This discussion is somewhat interesting.

In reguards to what sub is quiet I asked my son who is an active duty sonar tech in the USN why a diesel boat is so hard to track. Presently he is an instructor of advanced sonar technology at the USN ASW school in San Diego. This was his answer. I've previously post his response.

Hi dad.
I can answer your questions. diesel boats are hard to track because when submerged they're running on batteries. no moving parts in batteries so they don't make any noise. nucs have turbines, so there are a lot of moving parts associated with that. all those parts need systems in place to reduce the noise. those systems don't always work and when they fail we can see them. all of the nuc subs that are out there have their problems except for the U.S of course. so in comparison to a submerged diesel there are no nucs that I know of that would be harder to track.

Click to expand...

He also says a LA class is very quiet bit not as quiet as a submerged diesel boat.

those systems don't always work and when they fail we can see them. all of the nuc subs that are out there have their problems except for the U.S of course.

Click to expand...

Well, that not objective...

Still interesting to hear from an profesional.

a nuclear carrier was designed for long range attack mission, seeing it can stay underwater for months at a time(only limiting factor is food.) now, with the intro of aip, much of that advantage has been lost.

perhaps china ought to go for the cvbg supply ships, so the fleet will have no food.

MIGleader said:

a nuclear carrier was designed for long range attack mission, seeing it can stay underwater for months at a time(only limiting factor is food.) now, with the intro of aip, much of that advantage has been lost.

perhaps china ought to go for the cvbg supply ships, so the fleet will have no food.

Click to expand...

SSK's even with AIP still cannot match the endurance of a SSN.
AIP systems bring their own oxygen with them. They are usually liquid oxygen carried in tanks. They are still limited on how much fuel they can carry and cannot even hope to match the underwater speeds of the SSNs.

Sea Dog said:

That's true. You're correct that a faster missile is harder to intercept. That's the only area that Moskit outclasses Harpoon. But Harpoon can easily overcome that by attacking by various modes and various attack axis's. Plus when in low flight profile, the defending ship really doesn't have alot of time to react. And even for higher flight profiles, Harpoon attacks can be supplemented with various electronic warfare means to help them get through defense screens. But that topic obviously goes beyond the scope of this thread.

Click to expand...

I must say that the speed is THE single most important factor in the missile, as it directly affects the respond time or intercept allowance time and the difficulty of intercept. And yes, moskit fly quite low prior to impact

e-x-e said:

I must say that the speed is THE single most important factor in the missile, as it directly affects the respond time or intercept allowance time and the difficulty of intercept. And yes, moskit fly quite low prior to impact

Click to expand...

Speed is only one factor. The USN can effectively deal with multiple supersonic anti-ship missiles using all kinds of ship defenses. Not just missiles. The electronics and guidance are far more important. And these countries that have these supersonic missiles lack in C4I in a big way. I'd much rather have a proven sub-sonic system like the high performance Harpoon with all it offers, in combination with the long-range electronic warfare capabilities of the USN. BTW, did you know the new generation Tomahawk is capable of electronic attacks? I surmise the USN will probably deep fry all PLAN shipboard electronics by sending out a couple hundred of these missiles first ...... right before the Harpoons and other nifty stuff *cough* *cough* come in to obliterate them.

The Moskits will be of no factor. They're nice missiles and very effective against some. But the USN won't let these ships get within range of them. And even if they did, AEGIS combined with RAM and ESSM are more than adequate to deal with them. And a Sovremenny is pretty easy to find. I would be more concerned with PLAN Kilos carrying Klub-S ASM's. And even those could be dealt with.

Sea Dog said:

Speed is only one factor. The USN can effectively deal with multiple supersonic anti-ship missiles using all kinds of ship defenses. Not just missiles. The electronics and guidance are far more important. And these countries that have these supersonic missiles lack in C4I in a big way. I'd much rather have a proven sub-sonic system like the high performance Harpoon with all it offers, in combination with the long-range electronic warfare capabilities of the USN. BTW, did you know the new generation Tomahawk is capable of electronic attacks? I surmise the USN will probably deep fry all PLAN shipboard electronics by sending out a couple hundred of these missiles first ...... right before the Harpoons and other nifty stuff *cough* *cough* come in to obliterate them.

The Moskits will be of no factor. They're nice missiles and very effective against some. But the USN won't let these ships get within range of them. And even if they did, AEGIS combined with RAM and ESSM are more than adequate to deal with them. And a Sovremenny is pretty easy to find. I would be more concerned with PLAN Kilos carrying Klub-S ASM's. And even those could be dealt with.

Click to expand...

hmm. i would assume the plan warships, the latest ones, are emp hardened. the can jam the missle awell as the missle can jam them. and chinese destroyer have aegis too, and the chinese will be fluent in operating it in a few years.

MIGleader said:

hmm. i would assume the plan warships, the latest ones, are emp hardened. the can jam the missle awell as the missle can jam them. and chinese destroyer have aegis too, and the chinese will be fluent in operating it in a few years.

Click to expand...

Ha ha. China does not have the AEGIS system. They may have stolen some aspects of it, but the whole system is impossible to steal. The AEGIS program is widely spread throughout the US defense infrastructure. Some people see China building ships with Phased Array radar and VLS and think...that's an "AEGIS" ship. I got news for you. Theres alot more to AEGIS than that.

The AEGIS is a full spectrum battle-management system capable of prosecuting aircraft, missile, surface, sub-surface, land, and ballistic missile targets simultaneously. It is a fully integrated network that can time-share, and cooperatively engage multiple targets and can use defensive systems passively in a coordinated fashion. The AEGIS sytem can be used in multiple modes including a full-auto mode where the system can maximize its full potential with barely any inputs from operators. The system is totally networked among mutliple surface combatants. And don't even get me started on how many man hours the USN has in experience using these ships. PLAN has zero. And PLAN will not gain any with USN tech AEGIS, because they don't have anything like it. The PLAN "AEGIS" is a cheap off-shoot only. I'm certain they stole some info on it, but to make it work is another question. Then to get crews adequately trained and systems totally field tested is another one. Then comes the experience that the PLAN would take years to get on their copied version. Their system will definitely be less capable than the USN stuff. If all you're doing is copying, it's impossible to reach new capabilities. Meanwhile the USN is moving it's naval engineering beyond AEGIS. But that's a whole other thread.

China has built ships with PAR and VLS and that's about it. But these ships will come nowhere near the capabilities of the USN surface fleet. As I've said before, you can only get so far with pieces of stolen technology. The good news for the US is that China's most capable stuff is absorbed rather than developed indigenously.