Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Alternatives to Anti-Ship Missiles; If the PN cannot afford AShM
Topic Started: Apr 19 2005, 02:43 PM (4,618 Views)
Aerocobra
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Titan Corp is no more, acquired by L3 Communications, same defense contractor that developed the SeaFighter catamaran.

The AWS is still in development stage by L3's Advanced Systems Division, serial production said to be nlt 2012.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spraret
Member Avatar
PDFF Admin Support
PDFF Admin Group
Looks like a Russian company beat the US to the draw with their own version of a shipping container missile:

Club K Container Missile System
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KFIR
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
I made an online research about weapons that are effective for anti-ship use other than the regular expensive anti-ship guided missiles like the Tomahawk and Harpoon... I found out that torpedoes are still effective in sinking ships as what was used in WW2 as well as relatively-cheaper (when compared to real anti-ship missiles) anti-tank guided missiles like the Israeli Spike-ER and the American Hellfire.

I concluded that anti-tank guided missiles can be launched from warships with minimal fire control systems and the Philippine Navy can look into this as an alternative in arming their warships with anti-ship missiles in their modernization effort.

Reference: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/navy-mar...missiles-10323/

The Chinese developed a modern torpedo that can be launched from a boat not a warship...

Quote:
 
The Yu-1 is China’s first indigenously made torpedo. A Chinese copy of the Soviet 53-51 non-homing torpedo, the Yu-1 is designed to be launched from Type 033 (Romeo class) submarine and Type 25 (Huchuan class) torpedo fast attack craft (FAC). The torpedo is obsolete and has been replaced by the more capable indigenous and imported designs. The improved Yu-1A uses passive acoustic-homing and is still in service.


The BRP Rajah Humabon was an ex-USN Cannon-class destroyer escort that used to be armed with 21 in. torpedo tubes (1×3) but I am not sure if this was for anti-ship use or for anti-submarine warfare.

The Cheonan incident is a strong evidence of how powerful torpedoes can still be used against warships. My question is what is a modern warship's defense against torpedoes?

Quote:
 
Spike-ER is the extended range or extra long range version of the weapon. It was formerly also known as the NT-Dandy or NT-D. It has a maximum range of 8,000 meters. It has a larger diameter and is heavier than the other systems, and is usually vehicle mounted. It is used by infantry, LCVs, and helicopters. The Finnish Coastal Jaegers also operates the version in the anti-ship role. The weight of the missile is 34 kg, the launchers are 30 kg and 55 kg respectively for the vehicle and air-launched versions. Penetration is around 1000mm of RHA.


Finland uses the Israeli Spike-ER for coastal defense against intruding warships.

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
I know Norway has played around with TOWs mounted on small landingcrafts.

Not only TOWs but they also eyperimented with Hellfires on CB90s IIRC.

Our SEAL equivalent also uses MILAN against sea targets if the needs/opportunity arises.


The TOW anti-tank guided missile is a wire-guided missile platform but such guidance for me looks odd for naval use. A "fire-and-forget" missile would be much better for the Navy so the gunner won't have to electronically guide the missile with thin wires to its destination. What if a flying fish gets in the way and broke the wire guiding the missile? Hehehe

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
In 2004, the Royal Norwegian Navy conducted tests (including a live fire exercise) to evaluate the effectiveness of the SB90N as an aiming and launching platform for the Hellfire missile. One SB90N was equipped with stabilized Hellfire launcher based on the PROTECTOR M151, and its machine gun was replaced with a gimbal-mounted sensor package containing visible-light and infrared cameras and a laser designator. Although the tests were successful, there is currently no indication that the Royal Norwegian Navy will actually deploy SB90Ns armed with Hellfire missiles in regular service. The Hellfire can still be carried on the boats without launching platforms and be fired from shore with the Portable Ground Launch System.
Here is a video of the Norwegian ship launched testing...

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/a...way_Edited.mpg


Now this is a documented proof with a video that a "fire-and-forget" anti-tank guided missile can be launched from a naval vessel for anti-ship use. When you buy an anti-tank guided missile the system already includes all the electronics needed to find its target and fire the weapon so that means the navy vessel does not need to install extra.

Quote:
 
Quote:
 
The Israeli Super Dvora-class FAC can/do mount Hellfires as SSMs. Such missiles are potentially quite effective against other FAC, and/or for close in-shore fire support. In terms of mounting such weapons aboard a vessel, they are really only suitable for being mounted on smallcraft, for use against other smallcraft. They have limited range (~8 km +/-) and have comparatively small warheads relative to what else is available in terms of AShM. This means that for a FAC armed with Hellfires or something similar, it would need to close to well within visual range to be able to target/fire them. Additionally, given that such weapons have small warheads (~15 kg usually), unless there was a lucky/fortunate shot which damages sensors, comms or similar to achieve a mission kill, such weaponry would likely only achive minor results, unless employed en masse.

Now FAC armed with LWT's is another story. For one thing, LWT's are typically larger, and have warheads approaching the weight of an entire ATGM like Hellfire. They also can have longer ranges approaching 12 km, which can help the launching ship survive the attack. Perhaps more importantly (apart from the increase in warhead size) is how a torpedoe is used against a ship, compared to how missiles impact ships. A torpedoe would normally be used against the hull exploding either on impact or when nearby but underneath to create a pressure bubble, Such a bubble effect can disrupt the buoyancy of the vessel and/or cause the hull to break apart. Such an effect appears to have been what caused the South Korean naval vessel Cheonan to split in half and sink.

In the end though, it becomes a question of what and where the vessels are operating, and who/what they need to be able to deal with.

-Cheers

Back in the 1960s, France sold quite a few FACs with SS.12 missiles, heavy anti-tank missiles with similar range to Hellfire.


See http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/...ProductCard.pdf - the picture on the left side below the helicopter gunship is a Hellfire anti-tank guided missile launched from what appears to be a warship.

Quote:
 

AGM-114 Hellfire = US$25000-$65000.
Boeing AGM-84 Harpoon = US$720000.


Can the Simbad launcher (commonly used to launch Mistral SAMs aboard warships like the Endurance-class of the Singapore Navy) be used to launch Hellfire and Spike-ER ATGMs for Anti-Ship use? Any information about this missile launcher system?

---

I hope this thread can help our Philippine Navy modernization program and credits goes to my online sources in defencetalk.com/forums!
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KFIR
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
You may want to read my thread too which can address to the Philippine Navy's needs for an affordable but proven solution to have missiles - Alternatives to Anti-Ship Missiles
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ctrlaltdel
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
The BRP Rajah Humabon was an ex-USN Cannon-class destroyer escort that used to be armed with 21 in. torpedo tubes (1×3) but I am not sure if this was for anti-ship use or for anti-submarine warfare.


you mean to say that there is a specific torpedo for targeting surface vessels and another type for submarines?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Marschall
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Actually sounds like a good idea: arm the current vessels with such missiles.

better yet: one could locally build high-speed - perhaps stealthy - boats armed with this anti-tank missiles to patrol our waters: would anyone risk losing a big warship to a small boat with a relatively cheap missile?
"THE BEST PARENT AND GUARDIAN OF LIBERTY AMONGST MEN IS TRUTH" ~ Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei

“When learned men begin to use their reason, then I generally discover that they haven’t got any.” - G. K. Chesterton

MSantor is not a man of sound reason. Savages have always preferred the club for they know that they are powerless against the pen. But who is the greater fool - the savage or the one that gives him power? May Truth rebuke you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rapidfire
Member Avatar
Professional Toy Gun Technician
[ *  *  * ]
Possible but the Spike ER has a maximum range of 8000m or 8kms only - our boat has to be within that range for the missile to reach its intended target, now here's the problem: As theoretical captain of our Spike-armed boat, how will you maneuver your boat within 8km of the target ship without being detected?

Easy if your target is an unarmed merchant ship, but what if its a corvette equipped with OTH sensors and armed with AShM with a range of 80km and a 100mm gun with a range of 30km?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
zundino
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Rapidfire
Jun 9 2010, 06:32 PM
Possible but the Spike ER has a maximum range of 8000m or 8kms only - our boat has to be within that range for the missile to reach its intended target, now here's the problem: As theoretical captain of our Spike-armed boat, how will you maneuver your boat within 8km of the target ship without being detected?

Easy if your target is an unarmed merchant ship, but what if its a corvette equipped with OTH sensors and armed with AShM with a range of 80km and a 100mm gun with a range of 30km?

Easy... turn on invisibility cloak :armyLol:

Seriously, against our potential external enemy's warships, the Spike-equipped boats are toast - detected, targeted, hit & sunk well outside the 8-km launch point.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
maverick
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Rapidfire
Jun 9 2010, 06:32 PM
Possible but the Spike ER has a maximum range of 8000m or 8kms only - our boat has to be within that range for the missile to reach its intended target, now here's the problem: As theoretical captain of our Spike-armed boat, how will you maneuver your boat within 8km of the target ship without being detected?

Easy if your target is an unarmed merchant ship, but what if its a corvette equipped with OTH sensors and armed with AShM with a range of 80km and a 100mm gun with a range of 30km?

ouch,ugly truth. To make it short there is NO ALTERNATIVE for AShM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mazingu
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Well it can still be used, against vessels of terrorists, smugglers & poachers. :armysmile:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Philippine Navy · Next Topic »
Add Reply