Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

BoraTas

BoraTas

Major
Registered Member
SEAD said:
If a Soviet SSN found something in the patrol area, how can they know it’s not their own SSBN?

won’t the pre-positioned SSNs leak whereabouts of SSBNs?
Click to expand...
Typical methods involving sound libraries are used. An SSN wouldn't expose the SSBN if it is not being tracked itself.
MarKoz81 said:
Soviets used missiles because technology gap and higher noise levels prevented them from getting close enough to use torpedoes. They also used multiple submarines and waves of bombers to exhaust the defenses of carriers approaching Soviet-controlled waters and airspace. It was always defense in depth at sea. If PLAN contests USN carrier groups it will be close to enemy waters or in international waters at open sea. They will be as exposed as USN and at a weaker position.

For every group of 3-4 submarines that is necessary to credibly threaten an USN carrier group with saturation strike there's one large sub with heavy long-range torpedoes that is both a much bigger problem for USN and much lower cost for PLAN. No matter how effective active sonar becomes in the future the problem is still orders of magnitude more complex than countering missiles with currently available technology. To paraphrase the most amazing woman of all time: when enemy goes high, we go low.

Russians lag behind USN in all possible metrics so they utilized the advantage that physics provides and developed the Status-6 supertorpedo and Khabarovsk-class submarine.

View attachment 88439

View attachment 88440
Russians predictably went overboard but PLAN only needs to match it half-way to become a credible threat. And if we think AShBMs with a glider warhead then submarines are superfluous.
Click to expand...

According to what I read, the current active sonar is really good. Towed low frequency active sonars are detecting subs from long enough distances to make torpedo evasion possible. If this is true, trying to torpedo an escorted vessel became very dangerous. This is why I argued for missiles.
I think the Status-6 was developed just in case the US BMD system becomes reliable. It makes no other sense.
 
S

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
Typical methods involving sound libraries are used. An SSN wouldn't expose the SSBN if it is not being tracked itself.
Click to expand...
But it must be more difficult to track a single SSBN than a group of SSNs.
BoraTas said:
According to what I read, the current active sonar is really good. Towed low frequency active sonars are detecting subs from long enough distances to make torpedo evasion possible. If this is true, trying to torpedo an escorted vessel became very dangerous. This is why I argued for missiles.
I think the Status-6 was developed just in case the US BMD system becomes reliable. It makes no other sense.
Click to expand...
I read some related papers by chance, and it looks like the performance of active sonars highly depends on environment. For continental shelf water it’s pretty hard.
 
tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
Typical methods involving sound libraries are used. An SSN wouldn't expose the SSBN if it is not being tracked itself.


According to what I read, the current active sonar is really good. Towed low frequency active sonars are detecting subs from long enough distances to make torpedo evasion possible. If this is true, trying to torpedo an escorted vessel became very dangerous. This is why I argued for missiles.
I think the Status-6 was developed just in case the US BMD system becomes reliable. It makes no other sense.
Click to expand...
You mean SM-6? I think USN is in a different place than PLAN at the moment. Their nuclear fleet is so much larger and more advanced than everyone else's.

We are finally seeing active TAS on the newer Chinese submarines. That is long overdue. Unfortunately, I don't think that's necessarily going to allow them to detect Virginia class at a long enough distance. Until that happens, Chinese carrier movements are pretty restricted in any combat scenario.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
tphuang said:
You mean SM-6? I think USN is in a different place than PLAN at the moment. Their nuclear fleet is so much larger and more advanced than everyone else's.

We are finally seeing active TAS on the newer Chinese submarines. That is long overdue. Unfortunately, I don't think that's necessarily going to allow them to detect Virginia class at a long enough distance. Until that happens, Chinese carrier movements are pretty restricted in any combat scenario.
Click to expand...

He means Status 6 (Kanyon), which is a Russian, ultra large long range nuclear powered, nuclear warhead equipped torpedo/AUV, designed supposedly for strategic deterrence.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


This thread is getting way too cluttered so I'm going to move some posts around.
 
S

Soldier30

Senior Member
Registered Member
The corvette "Gremyashchy" of the Pacific Fleet launched a rocket of the newest Russian anti-submarine complex "Answer". The 91RE2 anti-submarine missile is launched from universal ship launchers. In the area where the target is located, the rocket drops a torpedo by parachute into the water. Next, the torpedo independently searches for a submarine using its sonar equipment. Missile guidance can be carried out not only by ships, but also by anti-submarine helicopters and airplanes. The firing range of the missile is about 50 km, the flight speed is Mach 2.5. The MPT anti-submarine torpedo is installed on the 91RE2 rocket as a warhead, which can reach speeds of up to 45 knots with a range of 8 km and a depth of up to 450 m. That's all for today. Friends, thanks for watching, we will cover everything.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top