Ideal of DDG 167 improvement

Did the Chinese know that the missile would not have antimissile capability?

From Richard Fisher's article:

"RIF-Ms to China Downgraded

Russian sources at Euronaval claimed that Altair’s RIF-M naval SAMs employed on China’s two new Type 051C destroyers are not capable of anti-missile missions. They would require both software and hardware upgrades in order to perform that mission. However, these sources did indicate that discussions are underway with China regarding the sale of more capable versions of the RIF-M. These sources also noted that China has not been sold the latest modifications of the RIF-M with employ the latest 45km range 9M96E and the 150km range 9M96E1 SAMs. Both of these, in addition to a version that would incorporate the naval version of the S-300PMU-2 FAVORIT, are anti-missile capable These two missiles can be carried four to a launch tube that would carry but one 150km range 48 SAM. The Type 051C carries 48 launch tubes for its RIF-M system."



The latest versions of RIF-M do have the capability to engage missiles. So RIF can't be simply brushed off as having no anti-missile capability.

Is it more logical for 115 and 116 to be assigned to the East Sea fleet, where they can act as the outer defense envelop while the Sovremennys provide medium range defense?

FugitiveVisions said:

Did the Chinese know that the missile would not have antimissile capability?

From Richard Fisher's article:

"RIF-Ms to China Downgraded

Russian sources at Euronaval claimed that Altair’s RIF-M naval SAMs employed on China’s two new Type 051C destroyers are not capable of anti-missile missions. They would require both software and hardware upgrades in order to perform that mission. However, these sources did indicate that discussions are underway with China regarding the sale of more capable versions of the RIF-M. These sources also noted that China has not been sold the latest modifications of the RIF-M with employ the latest 45km range 9M96E and the 150km range 9M96E1 SAMs. Both of these, in addition to a version that would incorporate the naval version of the S-300PMU-2 FAVORIT, are anti-missile capable These two missiles can be carried four to a launch tube that would carry but one 150km range 48 SAM. The Type 051C carries 48 launch tubes for its RIF-M system."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The latest versions of RIF-M do have the capability to engage missiles. So RIF can't be simply brushed off as having no anti-missile capability.

Is it more logical for 115 and 116 to be assigned to the East Sea fleet, where they can act as the outer defense envelop while the Sovremennys provide medium range defense?

Click to expand...

I think they did know. The issue here is what kind of mission does PLAN want 051Cs to play? Even if they get the anti-missile upgrade (which I think they should), it still would not have the capability to intercept sea-skimmers.

(note to Chris, can your game simulation try this out?)
Now, let's imagine a scenario where 12 F-15Ks come in to attack the Northern sea fleet. NSF basically has the 2 051Cs + 2 052 + some ludas. So outside of 051Cs, the only air defense it has are the HH-7s on 052s. Assume that they get in a formation where there are some 051s and 052s in front and 051C is in the middle (since PLAN doesn't want it to be exposed). The two 051Cs are facing opposite directions to achieve 360 degree coverage with Tombstone. If F-15Ks are coming over at low altitude, the Sea Eagle radar on 051C is not going to be able to them up before F-15Ks pick up NSF. They fire a wave of Harpoons and Harms at 051C and the other ships. AGM-88s are aimed at the tombstone radar. Harpoons are aimed at different ship. As the missiles come, maybe a few get intercepted by HH-7 of 052s. Since Ludas have no AAW to speak off, most of them will get sunk. Type 730 CIWS and ECM will destroy some missiles coming at tombstone and 051C, but tombstone will eventually get knocked out, other parts of 051C will get hit. Without long range air defense, remaining 052s and ludas will be at the mercy of remaining F-15s.

So what am I saying? The AAW of NSF is really pitiful. If they go without air cover, the entire fleet is going to get neutered by a squadron of advanced strike planes.

Does that mean 051Cs should get moved to ESF? No, why weaken the already weak NSF? What they need are 054As. That way, it gives 051C some time to be able to track the striking planes and fire at them.

There are two Lvdas in NSF have HHQ7 too, 109 and 110. They also has a good chance to get 054A since there're only a few frigate in NSF. But from what you said, rif has no change to get the planes, it can't knock out missiles either, so they are still useless?

szbd said:

There are two Lvdas in NSF have HHQ7 too, 109 and 110. They also has a good chance to get 054A since there're only a few frigate in NSF. But from what you said, rif has no change to get the planes, it can't knock out missiles either, so they are still useless?

Click to expand...

I'm not saying they are useless. I'm saying you need more assets to provide AAW for NSF, so that 051C can have a chance of tracking/shooting down strike aircrafts. When you have just 2 051Cs against many super eagles/super hornets, you are asking for trouble. And of course, in real life, I don't think we will ever have a scenario where NSF would not have supporting air assets.

Well, when you have more good AAW ships, they can have more planes. I still don't get how can rif shoot down planes. Say some F15 approach at high altitude, can they get the location of the ships from 150 or 200 km away? Even if they could, they can't fire harpoon at this time. They will take down their altitude to very low, approcah to about 70km, raise up again and get the target location, then down to like 20m above sea level and fire harpoon. So during this process, how can rif fire the missiles to the planes?

My game can only simulate some broad principles. It does not have anything like the Strike Eagle. Are you sure F-15K can use Harpoons and AGM-88s? Strike Eagle wasn't cleared for both of this.

Yes, aircraft can detect ships easily at 150km. And the ships will detect them back once line of sight is establsihed between the two. The attackers are likely to stay low, then once in AshM range, pop up to gain LOS on the ships, fire their AshMs, then drop down again below the radar horizon. There is a window of opportunity where the planes will be acquired, locked and fire upon, but it ain't much. To use the AGM-88s, the aircraft will have to acquire the ship radar long enough for the missile to lock upon. To actually use AshM + ARM on the same plane, the plane will be subjected to a window of vulnerability longer---because it has to switch from one weapons system to another---than it can with one missile system.

The ship AD will have to lock on fast enough, and the missiles will have to fly fast enough. What's scary about the 48N6E2, is that it can fly up to Mach 6 (or an enormous 2000m/s). To be low enough to escape it, you need to be able to get below 25m if you are within the radar horizon.

To say that the missile has a blanket no missile capability at all is not true. It has been tested against SCUD like missiles and Tomahawk sized cruise missiles. The RIF-M is basically a navalized S-300PMU2 and uses the same radar and equipment. What it may have a problem is that the missile may have a minimum height of operation (10-30m), and that modern AshMs can slip under this. Land striking cruise missiles fly at a height higher than AshMs in order to clear ground obstacles.

Hence the need for the latest 9M96E1 and 9M96E2 missiles, which were actually introduced for the S-400. However, no RIF-M installation yet has been equipped with these, so this is still a planning stage. Do note that since the missiles now have an "E" designation, they have been approved for export.

[Do note that Fisher got the designations wrong. It is E1 for the 45km version and E2 for the 120km version. Don't think 150km is correct range.]

Do note that the 9M96E1 is a smaller missile, and four of them can fit inside the same launcher. A ship with 48 silos can in theory, carry as much as nearly 200 of these missiles.

While the 9M96E2 may have better antimissile flexibility, it lacks the speed of the 48N6E2, and is only pegged at 1000m/sec.

So what is the solution for NSF? Upgrade then. A ship with 48 silos can keep 24 of the silos for 48N6E2, and the other 24 silos can store as many as 96 9M96E1 for medium range antimissle defense. Overall that still makes a potent ship.

so 9M96E1's size is about the same as HHQ7 (may be longer) but has a range of HQ16? That sounds too good to be true.

well I would think it as a miracle, HHQ7 is a 60's generation of missiles where as 9M96E is 2000 era generation. Thecnology goes foward you know...

But Of what I have heard, 9M96E migth be more of Buk M1 size...

But the mechanism part haven't advanced that much. If you go longer range with higher speed, you need a lot more fuel. With about the same diameter, the missle must be much longer, hence can not stand high G turn and harder to control.

9M96 is 333kg and 9M96M is 450kg, both are smaller thab Buk, but larger than HQ-7.