Moderator: MOD_Command
ORIGINAL: KLAB
Cheers, Triode,
First sensible reason for the 9M96 40km range I've read.
I didn't appreciate the key difference.
Also now makes sense why the 20380 only has 9M96.
In view of which :
Ref the next DB update can the Gorshkov VLS please be amended to contain 32 x the 9M96D?
It's an important warship type, it's going to be critical to future scenario builds, and the amendments won't take up any extra DB as all the elements already exist.
Thanks,
K
ORIGINAL: SASR
Range Updates for SM-2 and SM-6 variants
SM-2 Block III/IIIA/IIIB : 50 nm -----> 90 nm
SM-6 Block I/IA: 130nm -----> 200nm
SM-2
From: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_displ ... =1200&ct=2General Characteristics, SM-2 Block III/IIIA/IIIB Medium Range
Primary Function: Surface to air missile.
Contractor: Raytheon Missile Systems.
Date Deployed: 1981 (SM-2 MR).
Propulsion: Dual thrust, solid fuel rocket.
Length: 15 feet, 6 inches (4.72 meters).
Diameter: 13.5 inches (34.3 cm).
Wingspan: 3 feet 6 inches (1.08 meters).
Weight: SM-2: 1,558 pounds (708 kg).
Range: Up to 90 nautical miles (104 statute miles).
Guidance System: Semi-active radar homing (IR in Block IIIB).
Warhead: Radar and contact fuse, blast-fragment warhead.
From: http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/sm-2/Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) is the world’s premier fleet-area air defense weapon, providing superior anti-air warfare and limited anti-surface warfare capability against today’s advanced anti-ship missiles and aircraft out to 90 nautical miles and an altitude of 65,000 feet.
SM-6
From: http://www.popularmechanics.com/militar ... ip-killer/Now, that ability is expanding. The Navy says it will modify the Raytheon-built Standard Missile-6 to act as a supersonic anti-ship missile. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter has confirmed the service was developing the anti-ship SM-6 in an effort to give Navy cruisers and destroyers a weapon capable of reaching such targets more than 200 nautical miles away.
From: http://news.usni.org/2016/02/04/secdef- ... destroyersSecretary of Defense Ash Carter confirmed the Navy was developing a modification to the Raytheon Standard Missile 6 that will give the service a supersonic anti-ship weapon to reach a target more than 200 nautical miles away.
From: http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/revealed ... p-in-test/The Mach 3.5+ SM-6 has an effective range of approximately 200 (some say 250) nautical miles (around 370 kilometers)
From: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... s/sm-6.htmWith the SM-6, an AEGIS ship can target aircraft upwards of 200 miles away, before they can launch their Anti-Shipping Missiles.
ORIGINAL: ExNusquam
According to Jane's, Project 22350 has the following armament:
16 cell (2x8) SS-N-26 Onikx (3M55)
32 Cell 9M96D VLS (4x8 visible on images)
2x CADS-N-2 CWIS
SS-N-29. Jane's doesn't give numbers but based on imagery it looks like 1 8-cell launcher mounted forward on some ships.
In September 2014, DARPA signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Office of Naval Research to jointly fund an extended test phase of an ACTUV prototype. DARPA will collaborate with ONR to fully test the capabilities of the vessel and several innovative payloads during open-water testing scheduled to begin this summer off the California coast after preliminary checkout and movement to San Diego. Pending the results of those tests, the program could transition to the U.S. Navy by 2018.
The vessel was commissioned today in a ceremony at Portland, and in a couple weeks will be sent to San Diego, where DARPA and the Office of Naval Research (ONR) will begin a two-year-long trial period to test the concept and various sensors that can be installed on the 145-ton full load displacement vessel. DARPA will conduct the initial trials and turn the vessel over to ONR later this year. The test phase will run through September 2018.
In 2018, the ACTUV programme is expected to be transitioned to the US Navy for use in anti-submarine warfare.
Pending the results of those tests, the program could transition to the U.S. Navy in 2018 for use in anti-submarine warfare and possibly as a multipurpose unmanned “truck” for dirty, dull or dangerous missions, such as mine countermeasures.
Under a subcontract to Leidos, which is leading a team building the prototype unmanned trimaran for DARPA, Raytheon's Modular Scalable Sonar System (MS 3 ) will be integrated as the ACTUV's primary search-and-detection sonar. Designed to autonomously conduct active and passive searches, detect torpedoes, filter passive threats, localise and track submarines, and avoid small objects, the MS 3 is Raytheon's first fifth-generation medium-frequency hull-mounted sonar system.
With ACTUV arriving at area, the unmanned vessels will deploy the long-range acquisition mid-frequency active-passive sonar carried in the two side pods, to verify the presence of submarines, and assess the ‘area of uncertainty’ (AOU) affected by the threat, limiting surface ships movement in that area. Follow-through with two higher frequency sonars located in the main hull, are used to improve tracking precision and mission reliability. Once in close proximity to the target, total field magnetometer arrays are used to provide additional information about target activity. Once continuous track is established, very high frequency sonar is used to paint an ‘acoustic image’ of the target, thus identify and classify it as a specific submarine. Once the AOU has been determined and the threat positively identified, thus verifying the AOU boundaries, the rest of the area would be safe passage, the ACTUV will shadow the suspected submarine, keeping it at risk, vulnerable to attack if it moves offensively against friendly forces.
Advance unmanned maritime system autonomy to enable independently deploying systems capable of missions spanning thousands of kilometers of range and months of endurance under a sparse remote supervisory control model.
The robotic prototype ship, built for $23 million, has a range of 10,000 nautical miles at 12 knots. “If [Sea Hunter] can demonstrate its range, if we can validate its operating cost per day and prove that it’s safe to operate,” Work told DOD’s Armed with Science blog, “then to me it opens up a whole new vista of things that the Navy can do.”
ACTUV is 132 ft (40 m) in length and weighs 140 US tons (127 tonnes). It was originally designed to trail submarines for weeks or even months at a time.
Sea Hunter will carry about 40 tons of fuel. Top speed on trials was around 27 knots, Littlefield said, although the actual top speed is dependent on the sea state and how much fuel is on board. The vessel is intended to be operational through Sea State 5 – moderate waves up to about 6 and a half feet high and winds up to 21 knots — and be survivable through Sea State 7, considered to be rough weather with seas up to 20 feet high.
ORIGINAL: Triode
In database RVV-BD (aka R-37M) have range 220nm this is wrong
In normal conditions(lauch from 12km against inbound target) max range of RVV-BD is 200km , from "Vympel" site
http://vympelmkb.com/products/rvv-bd-ra ... ozduh/170/ in russian
But on trials Mig-31 with RVV-BD from height ~20km, hit target at 304êì
In 1997 R-37(izd610) change seeker from 9B-1388
to 9B-1103M-350 and became R-37M (izd 610M)
also there is "Izdeliye 810" extreme long range anti-air missile for PAK-FA bays with 400km range,target max altitude 40km ,this missile is "fat" RVV-BD, as "fat" as it can while still can fit into PAK-FA bays
from General Designer of JSC "GMKB" Vympel " Sokolowski G.A. at the Jubilee Scientific and Technical Conference "Aviation system in the XXI century" :
"In the area of long-range weapons of "Vympel" is working on the modernization of R-37 missiles. As part of the pilot project on a competitive basis based on the
izd. 610M(RVV-BD,aka R-37M) developed new izd. 810. This missile should be placed in the inner compartments. Range increased by 1.5 times, altitude targets up to 40 km. power unit work time - 360 seconds."
so, can you please :
-change range of RVV-BD(R-37M) to 200km
-add new weapon ,RVV-BD(R-37M) for Mig-31BM with range 300km ,ARH seeker with range 40km ,and place this instead of RVV-BD(R-37M) in Mig-31BM loadouts
-change seeker range in RVV-BD(R-37M) to 40km
-maybe add izd.810 to PAK-FA?
(Added to this are the too numerous to reference books referencing the ability to carry the R-77.)ORIGINAL: edsw
Su-30SM with AKU-170 to P-77-1
DB 442 currently only has the SA-N-21C (9M96) avilable. The SA-N-21D (9M96D) has a significantly longer range at 65 miles.The database also doesn't have the SS-N-29 launcher, but seeing as I can't confirm it on every ship, it's probably not a big issue.ORIGINAL: emsoyThanks! And this is how the ship is currently armed in the database, yes?ORIGINAL: ExNusquam
According to Jane's, Project 22350 has the following armament:
16 cell (2x8) SS-N-26 Onikx (3M55)
32 Cell 9M96D VLS (4x8 visible on images)
2x CADS-N-2 CWIS
SS-N-29. Jane's doesn't give numbers but based on imagery it looks like 1 8-cell launcher mounted forward on some ships.
So I thought those claims were extraordinary as well...but the appear to be the "standard" unclass figures for range on the SM-2/6 (Janes, FAS, etc. all repeat the same numbers). The similarly-weighted Patriot (PAC-1, at least) has a listed max intercept of 86 NM, where I checked. The only document I could find repeating an intercept range of 50 NM for the SM-2 (what's in the database now) was this document talking about area air defense for the Canadian Navy. However, that document also repeats the 200 NM range on the SM-6. I guess the USN really is OP, at least based on public information.ORIGINAL: emsoy
Fair, but I just don't see how a 1500lb weapon, fired from the surface, can fly 90nm... when a 1000lb weapon like the Phoenix, fired at Mach 1.5 and 30k ft will fly ca 100nm...
Please help me understand [8D]
ORIGINAL: DESRON420
ORIGINAL: emsoy
ORIGINAL: DESRON420
Some F-35-related suggestions:
1. External short-range 24x and long-range 16x SDB and SDB II loadouts
Thanks for your input Desron, do you know if this will be an operational loadout?
I don't know if this will be an operational loadout. I'm extrapolating from:
+ Cobham BRU-61/A Small Diameter Bomb Carriage System brochure
"Currently in service on F-15E with integration ongoing on F/A-22, F-35, and F-16."
+ March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget/ R&D via http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ray ... ion-06510/
“The Joint Miniature Munitions Bomb Rack Unit (JMM BRU) is an Air Force (AF) led ACAT III program. It is required for the Department of the Navy’s (DoN) carriage of the SDB II weapon in the internal bay of the F-35B and F-35C…. The BRU-61/A, currently in production in the AF, does not meet the needs to operate with SDB II within the F-35 internal bay in the DoN environment. The JMM BRU, designated BRU-61A/A, fills the capability gap….”
+ 2x stations for BRU-61/A (9/3) in long-range configuration and 4x stations for BRU-61/A (10/9/3/2) from the diagram on http://theaviationist.com/2015/01/16/f- ... ons-suite/
+ 4x SDB-II per BRU-61/A
Note that at 1460 lb loaded, the BRU-61/A + 4x SDB-II barely fits under the STOVL weight requirement on the outboard A/G pylons (10/2), so it might be possible to see F-35B with 16x external SDB-II prior to the F-35B modifications for internal SDB-II carriage.
Will work on getting more info about AARGM-ER.
ORIGINAL: WARMONGER1944
I miss all those lovely Chinese & DPRK drones/UAVs...
ORIGINAL: DESRON420
I'd like to propose an alternate depiction of S-300PMU/S-400 systems that adds granularity and versatility for scenario designers.
I am not a Russian speaker or a professional analyst, and I would appreciate corrections to the below if I have included inaccuracies. I have relied on the monograph 'Russian Ballistic Missile Defense: Rhetoric and Reality' by Keir Giles at http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.ar ... UB1277.pdf , the SAM battery/battalion configuration descriptions at http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-SAM- ... igs-B.html and http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-S-400-Triumf.html , and the S-400 deployment and semi-official Russian state media sheets linked at http://theaviationist.com/2015/11/13/s- ... fographic/ .
This alternate depiction involves four changes from the existing setup.
#1. Add individual S-400 batteries, each comprising
4x 5P85/5P90 TEL
1x 92N6 GRAVE STONE FC radar
1x 96L6 search radar (optional)
and add an S-400 battalion headquarters unit comprising
1x 55K6 command post
1x 91N6 BIG BIRD search / battle management radar
This will decentralize S-400 systems, add flexibility to scenario designers, come closer to the apparent scale on which individual units are deployed, and make S-400 units harder to take out with single massive saturation attacks.
ORIGINAL: DESRON420
#2. Expand the range of missiles available to the 5P85/5P90 TELs to include
48N6E - 1 / tube slot
48N6E2 - 1 / tube slot
48N6E3 - 1 / tube slot
40N6E - 1 / tube slot?
9M96E - 4 / tube slot
9M96E2 - 4 / tube slot
ORIGINAL: DESRON420
#3. Tweak the SAM ranges somewhat:
48N6E3/DM: 130-140 nm range as opposed to current 80 nm range
9M96E2: Add with 9M96E stats and extended 50-65 nm range against aerodynamic targets
ORIGINAL: DESRON420
#4. Set the default 5P85/5P90 TEL loadout to 4x 48N6E2/3. The 40N6 is still in the realm of speculation and has never been photographed in the wild.
ORIGINAL: Hongjian
ORIGINAL: Triode
ORIGINAL: Dysta
I think I need Triode's help for a recent news from "PLA Daily", about 051C's S-300FM conducted the anti-ship test since 2015
Actually it is nothing special, all russian naval SAM have anti-surface capability (even small, like SA-N-4), land based SAM also have this ability
But the question is whether the S-300FM/48N6 has the ability to engage surface targets beyond horizon as well?
IIRC, the DB3000 they are limited to 25 nmi in anti-surface mode, simulating the limitations of LOS-based fire control radars.
Wikipedia at least states that the S-300FM onboard the Kirov-class (and hence also the Type 051C, as they have the same SAM) is equipped with an infra-red sensor as well to make it capable of engaging beyond horizon surface or low-flying/sea-skimming targets.
Your opinion?
ORIGINAL: Dysta
Making a scenario which is involved with laser dazzling/blinding from non-military side/units, intend to jam their "Mk1 Eyeball"s.
Suggestion:
Generic Laser Dazzler (<10W) -- effective to jam Mk1 Eyeball, but not at other optical equipments
Generic Laser Dazzler (10-50W) -- effective to jam Mk1 Eyeball in longer range, as well as some IR and NV equipments
Generic Laser Dazzler (50-100W) -- same as below 50W class, but potentially damage sensors in close range
ORIGINAL: CrazyIvan101
Would it be possible to add in the GBI's at Fort Greely as new import along with the new AN/FPS-132 UEWR radar at its respective locations? (Beale Air Force Base, California, RAF Fylingdales, United Kingdom, Thule Site J (Thule Air Base), Greenland, Clear Air Force Station, Alaska, and Cape Cod Air Force Station, Massachusetts). These new Radars have range of 3000 miles and "are integrated into the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). The upgrades modernized the hardware and software to improve midcourse BMDS sensor coverage by providing critical early warning, tracking, object classification and cueing data." These new Radars are able to directly cue GBI's to a target. However currently GBI's only have a datalink with a range of 220 miles.
ORIGINAL: AdderStrike
The USN is moving ahead with the purchase of UAV's to be deployed from subs. This would be an incredible addition to the game. Any chance?
THE PENTAGON — U.S. attack and guided missile submarine are set to field miniature unmanned aerial vehicles that will act as the eyes and ears not only for the boats below water but also help special operations forces and strike aircraft target weapons, the Navy’s Director of Undersea Warfare told USNI News last week.
As part of the Fiscal Year 2017 budget submission to Congress, the Navy is asking for small Blackwing UAVs to be launched from attack and guided missile submarines, the Navy’s director for undersea warfare Rear Adm. Charles Richard told USNI News.
“So there’s 150 small unmanned aerial systems coming in on submarines, so we’re now buying them,” Richard said. “It’s not something that you would [just] see on a PowerPoint presentation. These are fully integrated they’ll go in talk back to the ship, talk to the combat control system and additionally we’ll have 12 of a 21-inch torpedo tube launched vehicles with much longer launched duration.”
2013 PEO Subs Slide on AWESUM Program. NAVSEA Image
2013 PEO Subs Slide on AWESUM Program. NAVSEA Image
According to a follow-on statement provided by the Navy, “the three-inch canister launched UAVs are part of Advanced Weapons Enhanced by Submarine UAS against Mobile targets (AWESUM) demonstrates submarine launch, data sharing and control across the Joint Force.”
The current year budget move is set to further operationalize a years-long program to use small UAVs from attack and guided missile boats.
Naval Sea Systems Command Program Executive Officer Subs briefed the AWESUM program publically in late 2013 and outlined the work with U.S. special operations forces (SOF) and the U.S Air Force.
The briefing slides from late 2013 indicated the Blackwings would communicate with a submarines antennas and could provide third party targeting information to aircraft through Link 16 data links. In addition to the targeting function, the UAVs could also possibly be weaponized as a defensive measure for submarines operating in the littorals.
The miniature UAVs are launched through the boats’ existing systems it uses for acoustic countermeasures and have a flight endurance of less than an hour, according to the 2013 presentation.
NRL's XFC Sea Robin demonstration in August 2013. US Navy Photo
NRL’s XFC Sea Robin demonstration in August 2013. US Navy Photo
In 2013, the Navy Research Lab (NRL) also tested larger Sea Robin UAV, powered by fuel-cell technology and launched from a modified Tomahawk Land Attack Missile canister.
I would post the link, but currently I am unable to do so.
ORIGINAL: Supreme 2.0
Update on the Brazilian Gripen weapons fit.
http://www.janes.com/article/59211/fida ... for-brazil
