What can we learn from the Houthis' successful ASBM attack?

[Sanyr1310]

Update situation:

[Sanyr1310]

A successful preventive strike against the TELs

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f ... hed-by-u-s

[maverick3320]

My point is this is a typical uninformed narrative about some new and transformational change in combat dynamics. And it turns out to be mostly hype from a broader perspective.

Hold up: you're saying CENTCOM is uninformed as to what types of weapons are being fired at the ships?

[DeepTyphoon]

If they're shooting down $30,000 dollar drones with multi-million dollar missiles — that's a loss.

[thewood1]

My point is this is a typical uninformed narrative about some new and transformational change in combat dynamics. And it turns out to be mostly hype from a broader perspective.

Hold up: you're saying CENTCOM is uninformed as to what types of weapons are being fired at the ships?

I'm saying they might not want to disclose how they are doing it.

[Sanyr1310]

I don't know how to say this, but, uh, the ASBM interception performance in the summary chart is definitely different from the performance in the CMO.

Should I question the actual performance of the Aegis system and the Standard series missiles? I believe that the US and its allies have not exhausted their Standard or other long range air defense missiles.

3c792c95cf11f70287ba94b4f361fffe.jpg (423.52 KiB) Viewed 1020 times

If I remember correctly, now IKE CSG is in the vicinity, and this ASBM appears to have "successfully penetrated the fleet's defenses."

e4f64534ecd3978185878cb4bb8d0abb.jpg (300.57 KiB) Viewed 1017 times

[thewood1]

Can you be a little more expansive? What exactly shows a marked difference in CMO vs RL performance.

[Sanyr1310]

Can you be a little more expansive? What exactly shows a marked difference in CMO vs RL performance.

In CMO, any SM-2/6/Aster-30 shot against a target above Mach 4 has an actual hit rate of more than 60%/70%/80% per shot. This performance is definately quite different from what the chart shows.

I have observed and tested countless scenarios.

[thewood1]

How can you determine anything from the chart. We don't know what type of target they fired at, what counter they used, or if they don't even fire at non-threats. We don't even know how many SAMs were fired.

[ExNusquam]

You are making the assumption that every ASBM is fired into the defended area coved by a CRUDES. You can't make assumptions about weapon Pk without understanding the engagement geometry. Certainly possible for weapon detection and track outside of the range where engagement is possible.

[thewood1]

I like how we have two threads right next to each other with the underlying theme that BM defense is too generous in one and the other that CMO is flawed because they don't hit enough.

[Sanyr1310]

So let's break it down a little bit.

Since the 11th and 12th ASBM intercepted by the USN, the Houthis have fired at least another 20 ASBMs. In my previous post, 7 out of 18 ASBMs launched were intercepted, and this interception probability gap seems a little too wide.

And let's look at the February 6 attack. According to public information, the Houthis launched a total of six ASBMs on the same day, and according to the statement, it can be regarded as a threat to the two commercial vessels attacked. Both vessels were located in the southern Red Sea, near the location of the IKE CSG, and only one of the last six ASBMs was successfully intercepted (the USS Laboon successfully intercepted one of the three ASBMs against MV star nasia).

Unless the expensive SM-2/6 is used to intercept cheap, poor penetration UAV/ASCM regardless of the cost and deplete the reserve instead of ESSM, I don't think the advanced, anti-ballistic missile capable SM-2 upgrade /SM-6 should perform so poorly. Therefore, I am highly skeptical about the gap between the CMO's ballistic missile interception simulation and reality.

https://twitter.com/CENTCOM/status/1755048262497607923
https://www.vesseltracker.com/en/Ships/ ... 20506.html

1159598f992310cf0e6542293a00e24d.jpg (457.51 KiB) Viewed 942 times

e7d86aa37dadc78d3c8ed3bb2fcdcda8.jpg (224.02 KiB) Viewed 942 times

[/attachment]

GFpIEAQXkAAo-Xv.jpg (120.27 KiB) Viewed 942 times

919D2BD42AE7DB3600C7285ECE74FEBA.png (20.91 KiB) Viewed 941 times

[thewood1]

Does this really answer any of the questions we have?

[Sanyr1310]

Does this really answer any of the questions we have?

The SM-6s either kill or deviate the RVs most of the time.

This is your simulation, but it doesn't seem to be reality. This is the result of your simulation, but it does not appear to be a realistic representation, according to CENTCOM's statement as well as this chart

[Sanyr1310]

You are making the assumption that every ASBM is fired into the defended area coved by a CRUDES. You can't make assumptions about weapon Pk without understanding the engagement geometry. Certainly possible for weapon detection and track outside of the range where engagement is possible.

Yes, we are not brave sailors facing the Houthi threat in the Red Sea, and it is impossible to know why they will/will not intercept incoming targets, nor exactly how many targets landed in the interceptor's DLZ. Therefore, I can only speculate based on the available clues. Based on the clues I have found, it is enough to prove that the BMD of CMO is simpler and much easier than reality.

[thewood1]

Does this really answer any of the questions we have?

The SM-6s either kill or deviate the RVs most of the time.

This is your simulation, but it doesn't seem to be reality. This is the result of your simulation, but it does not appear to be a realistic representation, according to CENTCOM's statement as well as this chart

Its not my simulation. I think you are making big assumptions all the way around. You have shown nothing but conjecture around interceptions. Not choosing to intercept is not the same as an missing. Again, you have only presented, at best, a guess. You have not shown how many SAMS or what types were fired. What types of BMs were fired? What was the trajectory? There are tons of questions that you can't or don't want to answer. The best answer is not based on the quantity or size of the graphics in your answer. Bring a little more analysis and less saltiness.

[Sanyr1310]

Its not my simulation. I think you are making big assumptions all the way around. You have shown nothing but conjecture around interceptions. Not choosing to intercept is not the same as an missing. Again, you have only presented, at best, a guess. You have not shown how many SAMS or what types were fired. What types of BMs were fired? What was the trajectory? There are tons of questions that you can't or don't want to answer. The best answer is not based on the quantity or size of the graphics in your answer. Bring a little more analysis and less saltiness.

Do you think the game's simulation needs to change more? Is the game simulating BMD interception (especially endgame phase) performance too ideal/high in efficiency or low on the whole? Can we say the simulation of this game a also "guess"?

[Sanyr1310]

Not choosing to intercept is not the same as an missing

18 ASBM fired, 7 ASBM intercepted, 11 choose "not to intercept", merchant ships get hit. 20 (33 to 52) ASBM fired, 1 ASBM intercepted, 19 choose "not to intercept", more merchant ships get more serious damage (they are close to IKE CSG).

ASCM or UAV, almost never missed. Damage to ships, mostly caused by ASBM.

Doesn't that mean something?

[thewood1]

I have no idea what it means. Until we no more about the engagement profiles, its still a guess.

[DeepTyphoon]

Its not my simulation. I think you are making big assumptions all the way around. You have shown nothing but conjecture around interceptions. Not choosing to intercept is not the same as an missing. Again, you have only presented, at best, a guess. You have not shown how many SAMS or what types were fired. What types of BMs were fired? What was the trajectory? There are tons of questions that you can't or don't want to answer. The best answer is not based on the quantity or size of the graphics in your answer. Bring a little more analysis and less saltiness.

Can we say the simulation of this game a also "guess"?

I think so.

But I would call it a "best" guess based upon open source information. I do think it's "pretty close" to reality. As close as you're going to get without a security clearance and a lot of tests.

You must remember, a lot of this stuff is based upon cutting edge, not 100% proven classified systems in active ever changing conflicts. So you can't expect exact results and a lot of transparency.

I mean, how many Shahed-136 drones would need to be fired simultaneously at a British Type 45 destroyer to overwhelm its defenses and score a hit in a thunderstorm?

I don't know.

Does anyone know?

Maybe not. Probably not!

So it's all a best guess.