Chinese submarines thread

[IDonT]

Re: Chinese sub thread

first of all the soviets dont have supersonic missile during the period when the ageis is developed

the moskit and the shipwrek is designed to destoryed the ageis not the other way around

Umm...

SS-N-12 Sandbox

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The P-350 Bazalt [industrial code 4K-77] was the successor to the P-35 Bazalt, which was started in 1963 and subsequently cancelled. It evolved into the P-500 Bazalt [industrial code 4K-80] which was the production version of the original P-350 Bazalt. Development work for the SS-N-12 Sandbox began in the mid-1960s probably as part of the Eighth Five Year Plan (1966-1970), was apparently completed in 1973. Production was probably authorized as part of the ninth Five Year Plan (1971-1976). Some 500 missiles were produced but production has now ceased.

SS-N-3 Shaddock

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As-5 Kelt

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As-4-Kitchen

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As-6 Kingfish

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

MOskit and SHipwreck was just an evolution of the Shaddock/Sandbox, high speed antiship missile. Saying that it was designed to beat the Aegis is just fallacy. It was just an evolutionary advancement in the standard Soviet tactic of bring massive amounts of firepower in a short amount of time. A tactic Aegis was designed to beat.

US carrier defence meanwhile changed. Back in the same time period, carrier defence relied on the F-14/Phoenix combo in the outer-air defence, and Sam for inner air defence. TOday, the Aegis system handles both outer-air and inner air defence, for coordination and prosecution (includes directing aircraft to hostiles). You can see this in the type of aircraft in a carrier wing. Before, roughly half of it was used to defend the group, now roughly all of it are for power projection. Defence largely being supplied by AEGIS, for both air, surface and subsurface threats.

Oh yeah, we are now on the 7th incarnation of Aegis. Aegis of 1982, is 7 generations behind the current Aegis in US ships. MAy I add that China, is no where near the capabilities of BAseline 1 Aegis.

 

[IDonT]

Re: Chinese sub thread

slackpiv, the moskit was released one year after the commision of the first ticonderoga. that shows the soviets built the family of missles to kill aegis, not vice versa. the speed and high g manuvers of the moskit and its developments could have been directed at mo other system. i must say, if the tartget ship of a moskit did not have aegis, it has a very high chance of getting mission killed.

Mig, that's how it work.

The way things in procurement works is in this order.
1.) Develop a posture (sea - denial)
2.) Develop a tactic (saturation attacks by air and naval assets)
3.) Develop a system (Long range bombers and ships capable of carrying large missiles)

Having said that, Moskit is an evolutionary advancement of the Soviet saturation strategy of the coldwar, designed to replace the Siren and Styx short range family of ASM. It's not even their top of the line anti-ship missile (its the Shipwreck, in case you're wondering). Making a missile very fast is not the best way to counter on Aegis anyway because Aegis is a BATTLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, not just a sam. The effectiveway to counter it is with Electronic warfare. IF the SPY radar can't see the missile, AEGIS can't tell the standard sams to hit it.

 

[coolieno99]

Re: Chinese sub thread

explain to me how RAM would be able to reduce the RCS by 50 percent. Thats quite a figure considering China has limited or no experiance in stealth. Supersonic missiles always have sharp heads, huge boosters, and are sleek. ... etc ...

It was from Aviation Week(American publication) mentioned about Chinese plan to applied RAM on cruise missiles to reduce RCS by 50%. Technically, the RAM must have a certain dielectric value. The Indians claimed their RAM can reduce RCS by 70%. Maybe China should buy RAM from their Indian buddies. Or better yet China should applied her "tennis racket" technology and just build the missile with graphite composite to make it almost "invisible".

PL-8 or Sidewinder missiles have blunt nose and small booster and able to fly at Mach 2.5 . :coffee:

 

[MIGleader]

Re: Chinese sub thread

Mig, that's how it work.

The way things in procurement works is in this order.
1.) Develop a posture (sea - denial)
2.) Develop a tactic (saturation attacks by air and naval assets)
3.) Develop a system (Long range bombers and ships capable of carrying large missiles)

Having said that, Moskit is an evolutionary advancement of the Soviet saturation strategy of the coldwar, designed to replace the Siren and Styx short range family of ASM. It's not even their top of the line anti-ship missile (its the Shipwreck, in case you're wondering). Making a missile very fast is not the best way to counter on Aegis anyway because Aegis is a BATTLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, not just a sam. The effectiveway to counter it is with Electronic warfare. IF the SPY radar can't see the missile, AEGIS can't tell the standard sams to hit it.

good idea. china should send in half a dozen moskits, coompanied by a dozen dummy moskits that are designed to emulate the ehat and emissions of a normal missle. better yet, it can send in wave after wave of dummy missles(j-6 drone?) and let the burke waste its standards.

 

[slackpiv]

Re: Chinese sub thread

good idea. china should send in half a dozen moskits, coompanied by a dozen dummy moskits that are designed to emulate the ehat and emissions of a normal missle. better yet, it can send in wave after wave of dummy missles(j-6 drone?) and let the burke waste its standards.

Do you realize how many missiles a burke can carry depending on its mission? Dummy Moskits????????? First all of china woudln't be in position to launch their REAL moskits without dealing with USN SSNs and USAAF and USN fighters. Wave of wave of dummy missiles? China doesn't have enough paltforms to launch dummy missiles. China won't have to deal with one burke. It will have the whole force. (The USN will have 4+ carriers in the theatre of war assuming they treat china the same way they treated Iraq). The invent of modern processing power significantly reduced the threat of supersonic cruise missiles.

the pic on sino defence first started from janes a highly unrelible source for info on the chinese military

Janes is a realiable source. Much more realiable than global security.

 

[IDonT]

Re: Chinese sub thread

Do you realize how many missiles a burke can carry depending on its mission? Dummy Moskits????????? First all of china woudln't be in position to launch their REAL moskits without dealing with USN SSNs and USAAF and USN fighters. Wave of wave of dummy missiles? China doesn't have enough paltforms to launch dummy missiles. China won't have to deal with one burke. It will have the whole force. (The USN will have 4+ carriers in the theatre of war assuming they treat china the same way they treated Iraq). The invent of modern processing power significantly reduced the threat of supersonic cruise missiles.

You are absolutely correct, all those missiles CHina has do not posed a threat until the PLAN and PLAAF develops a credible over the horizon. Any air recon assets who tries to make contact will have a very low probability of survival. Without credible contact, you do not have a target for your missiles.

A/B destroyer can carry 96 missiles on its VLS cells, more if you count the ESSM quadpack.

 

[Sea Dog]

Re: Chinese sub thread

You are absolutely correct, all those missiles CHina has do not posed a threat until the PLAN and PLAAF develops a credible over the horizon. Any air recon assets who tries to make contact will have a very low probability of survival. Without credible contact, you do not have a target for your missiles.

A/B destroyer can carry 96 missiles on its VLS cells, more if you count the ESSM quadpack.

I do agree with you guys here. Plus the Standards are not the only means of defense for a CSG. If you launched the entire airwing in a typical massed naval war scenario, the first thing that would defend the group would be the fighters with their AMRAAMS. AMRAAMS can target missiles, and would do pretty well against Moskits farther from the carrier.

On a side note, when SM-6 ERAM is out in the force, it's really going to be a jump in overall capability. At that point, aircraft skimming the surface at ultra long ranges will not be able to hide themselves.

 

[MIGleader]

Re: Chinese sub thread

Do you realize how many missiles a burke can carry depending on its mission? Dummy Moskits????????? First all of china woudln't be in position to launch their REAL moskits without dealing with USN SSNs and USAAF and USN fighters. Wave of wave of dummy missiles? China doesn't have enough paltforms to launch dummy missiles. China won't have to deal with one burke. It will have the whole force. (The USN will have 4+ carriers in the theatre of war assuming they treat china the same way they treated Iraq). The invent of modern processing power significantly reduced the threat of supersonic cruise missiles.


Janes is a realiable source. Much more realiable than global security.

yes, i realize the burke carries 96 standards and two phalanx. it can also fire the missles all at once. but that does not mean all of them can immediately be directed agains a few dozen supersonic missles, some of which are dummies. it takes real people to operate the system. china also has areal and under sea sssets just like the u.s.

if the us navies submarine assets are to protect the carrier ,they must be out of the carriers range of protection, due to the long range of chinese ash missles.

 

[slackpiv]

Re: Chinese sub thread

if the us navies submarine assets are to protect the carrier ,they must be out of the carriers range of protection, due to the long range of chinese ash missles.

the carriers range of protection? The carriers range of protection is the combat range of the F-18s and E-2. A carrier groups ships are not spread far apart to make a difference. Long range of Chinese ASH is useless if China can't get reconaissance over the horizon. A ship's radar can't see ships over the horizon, a fact i've noticed that many people on this forum choose to ignore. China's assets are outgunned and outnumbered. The chance that a Chinese sov can get into range to even launch there missiles is already very low.

but that does not mean all of them can immediately be directed agains a few dozen supersonic missles

yes they can. they can be directed against hundreds of cruise missiles. The support vessels and AWACS of a CVBG work in unison forming one huge huge picture.

 

[Sea Dog]

Re: Chinese sub thread

the carriers range of protection? The carriers range of protection is the combat range of the F-18s and E-2. A carrier groups ships are not spread far apart to make a difference. Long range of Chinese ASH is useless if China can't get reconaissance over the horizon. A ship's radar can't see ships over the horizon, a fact i've noticed that many people on this forum choose to ignore. China's assets are outgunned and outnumbered. The chance that a Chinese sov can get into range to even launch there missiles is already very low.


yes they can. they can be directed against hundreds of cruise missiles. The support vessels and AWACS of a CVBG work in unison forming one huge huge picture.

Basically, if you have a 2 Ticonderoga's and 1 Arleigh Burke......if you are totally saturated, you can launch and direct over 70 missiles at one time. 3 Tico's, close to 90. And then launch another similar salvo, and still have missiles in reserve. Nobody in this day and age can amass a force to deal with this, especially with the amount, types, and levels of surveillance out there. Try pre-positioning with these eyes on you. This also doesn't account for carrier aircraft. And just wait until SM-6 ERAM is out there.

BTW, some folks in this forum also choose to ignore the ECM environment and other electronic warfare means that are used to repel these types of attacks. And I guess if the carrier moved in a straight line at 10 knots, that would make it easier too. But in the real world, it doesn't.