Naval launchers, guns and others

Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
I thought of talking about
Iron Man said:
...


Targeting ...
Click to expand...
but just didn't 44 minutes ago

I'm bluffing the warhead would have to be able to glide with an IR or/and EO sensor or sensors on it, as the target ship would increase her speed as much as she could and be zigzagging

EDIT obviously the ship shooting AShBMs wouldn't have enough of them to just fire in salvos and make corrections using a drone observing the splashes LOL!
 
Last edited:
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Iron Man said:
Hmm, mach 3 with a range of only 120km. I think I would rather have a YJ-18 in that tube. The short range makes the high speed and high terminal approach less of a worthwhile tradeoff in today's environment with ubiquitous SM-3 and SM-6. Double that range and maybe there's an argument for it.
Click to expand...
Exist a 185 km range variant
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

For trolling you a bit nah :p:)
 
I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
Iron Man said:
Another graphic:
View attachment 42692

The 32 and 61cm tubes are somewhat arbitrary given we don't know what the exhaust venting requirements are for any of the missiles, but the 45 and 77cm tubes are close to the maximum size that is physically possible.
Click to expand...
Here is another thought on dual-packing: the S-300 up to the 5V55U (range 150km) has a diameter of 45cm, with newer models being 50cm. All the photos I've seen of the HHQ-9 are smaller than the S-300:
6jZOMym.jpg mmbn09.jpg

Take all of that together, and you have the possibility that the HHQ-9 could be dual-packed into a UVLS cell, assuming it could fold its fins (perhaps an HHQ-9C/D iteration). This would be a massive force-multiplier for the 055, and for any warship that is equipped with 9m UVLS modules (like the 052D) that is reloaded with a folding HHQ-9 version. Possibly even 7m length modules could work depending on how much space they need for either the exhaust plenum or the gas eject mechanism. 85cm is right around what you need to dual-pack a 45cm diameter missile, so it may even be possible that this is the exact reason a width of 85cm was chosen over some other number....

UVLS Packing 2.png
 
I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
So for the 055, we could have a hypothetical missile loadout consisting of:

50 cells: 100 HHQ-9s or 50 HQ-26s or a combination
50 cells: 50 YJ-18As + ASBMs + CJ-10s
8 cells: 32 MRSAMs
4 cells: 8 CY-5/Yu-8 ASW missiles

This would be far in excess of what the King Sejong class could load and is fairly close to what the Kirov class loads.
 
Last edited:
A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Iron Man said:
Here is another thought on dual-packing: the S-300 up to the 5V55U (range 150km) has a diameter of 45cm, with newer models being 50cm. All the photos I've seen of the HHQ-9 are smaller than the S-300:
View attachment 43114 View attachment 43115

Take all of that together, and you have the possibility that the HHQ-9 could be dual-packed into a UVLS cell, assuming it could fold its fins (perhaps an HHQ-9C/D iteration). This would be a massive force-multiplier for the 055, and for any warship that is equipped with 9m UVLS modules (like the 052D) that is reloaded with a folding HHQ-9 version. Possibly even 7m length modules could work depending on how much space they need for either the exhaust plenum or the gas eject mechanism. 85cm is right around what you need to dual-pack a 45cm diameter missile, so it may even be possible that this is the exact reason a width of 85cm was chosen over some other number....

View attachment 43116
Click to expand...

Imagine having dual-packed HHQ-9C/D and another dual-packed smaller missile ~20cm diameter in one UVLS ... that would be awesome:):):)
 
I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
antiterror13 said:
Imagine having dual-packed HHQ-9C/D and another dual-packed smaller missile ~20cm diameter in one UVLS ... that would be awesome:):):)
Click to expand...
An ESSM-sized missile (25.4cm) could certainly fit into those gaps/vents, but then all 4 missiles would have to be cold-launched.
UVLS Packing 3.png
And as I was saying before, usually you don't want to cold-launch smaller missiles because they are invariably going to be MRSAMs or SRSAMs which need to be fast-reaction fast-launch types that are designed respond to saturation attacks that have crossed over the radar horizon and are about to hit your ship en masse. Hot-launched missiles can launch within microseconds of other launches from the same bank of modules, while cold-launched missiles are launched one at a time from the entire bank of modules. So for a 055 you could maybe cold-launch 2 HHQ-9s, one from each bank of modules (forward and rear), every few seconds, while (assuming you have 8 cells of MRSAMs) you could hot-launch 8 MRSAMs, one from each cell, regardless of where the cells are located, every few seconds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top