SSN22 Sunburn missiles: How Pakistan can neutralise the threat of India's aircraft carrier!

[kaku1]

I didn't say it was useless, the other dude did. Barking up the wrong tree here..
Even if Scud is 'old' you can still do nasty stuff with it ans force your opponent to investing in a missile defence. (i.e. a big expense, which is money that cannot also be spent on tanks, troops, training etc)

You are denying the whole process of procurement and Technological adoption lifecycle/curve.

 

[Penguin]

You are denying the whole process of procurement and Technological adoption lifecycle/curve.

I have no idea what you are on about. You pick some remark from a number of pages back and start arguing with me. Meanwhile, it escaped you what my original intent/meaning was. Go pick a fight someplace else please.

 

[Penguin]

I do not think French developed a replacement for the Exocet. Western navies never felt the need for anti-ship weapons. They were confident in their naval aviation prowess.

The Exocet has been manufactured in a number of versions, including

• MM38 surface-launched. Range : 42 km. No longer produced (1970).

• AM38 (helicopter-launched - tested only)

• AM39 air-launched. B2 Mod 2 : deployed on 14 types of aircraft (combat jets, maritime patrol aircraft, helicopters). Range between 50 and 70 km, depending on the altitude and the speed of the launch aircraft.

• SM39 submarine-launched. B2 Mod 2: deployed on submarines, missile housed inside a water-tight launched capsule (VSM or Véhicule Sous marin) that is fired by the submarine’s torpedo launched tubes. On leaving the water, the capsule is ejected, the missile’s motor is ignited and it then behaves like an MM40.

• MM40 surface-launched. Block 1, Block 2 and Block 3 (turbojet): deployed on warships and in coastal batteries. Range : 72 km for the Block 2, in excess of 180 km for the Block 3

France and Germany did some work on the abortive ANS supersonic antiship missile. This was to replace Exocet block 2 by 2005.But with the demise of the ANS program, we got MM40 block 3 instead.

Italy has the TESEO MK2/OTOMAT. Sweden had the RB-04 and has the RBS-15. UK the Sea Eagle. Germany the AS.34 Kormoran. With Exocet, which also made Martel (AS 37) with UK, there are the larger AShM of European countries. The US has Harpoon, SLAM and will have LRASM.Then there are a number of smaller missiles. Norway has Penguin and the much newer NSM. Uk has Sea Skua. Italy has MARTE MK2/A 'Sea Killer'. France has AS/SS-12 and AS15TT

 

[wiseone2]

The Exocet has been manufactured in a number of versions, including

• MM38 surface-launched. Range : 42 km. No longer produced (1970).

• AM38 (helicopter-launched - tested only)

• AM39 air-launched. B2 Mod 2 : deployed on 14 types of aircraft (combat jets, maritime patrol aircraft, helicopters). Range between 50 and 70 km, depending on the altitude and the speed of the launch aircraft.

• SM39 submarine-launched. B2 Mod 2: deployed on submarines, missile housed inside a water-tight launched capsule (VSM or Véhicule Sous marin) that is fired by the submarine’s torpedo launched tubes. On leaving the water, the capsule is ejected, the missile’s motor is ignited and it then behaves like an MM40.

• MM40 surface-launched. Block 1, Block 2 and Block 3 (turbojet): deployed on warships and in coastal batteries. Range : 72 km for the Block 2, in excess of 180 km for the Block 3

France and Germany did some work on the abortive ANS supersonic antiship missile. This was to replace Exocet block 2 by 2005.But with the demise of the ANS program, we got MM40 block 3 instead.

Italy has the TESEO MK2/OTOMAT. Sweden had the RB-04 and has the RBS-15. UK the Sea Eagle. Germany the AS.34 Kormoran. With Exocet, which also made Martel (AS 37) with UK, there are the larger AShM of European countries. The US has Harpoon, SLAM and will have LRASM.Then there are a number of smaller missiles. Norway has Penguin and the much newer NSM. Uk has Sea Skua. Italy has MARTE MK2/A 'Sea Killer'. France has AS/SS-12 and AS15TT

there have been incremental improvements to the Exocet and Harpoon. Nothing fundamentally new.

Western navies do not face any real threat to build those kind of weapons

 

[Penguin]

What? What are you talking about? You are not so much important to me that I find your post and comment on it ( Lol, I even didnt look at the username before commenting) . Are you suffering from Paranoid Schizophrenia? That everybody want a fight with you.

I commented on a point, and you pointing fingers on me, are you fcuking crazy?

Sorry, bro I am a simple layman with jus IQ of 50,,not like you, another Einstein, It took me a while to understand a point. And please spare me with your ignorance,, I never intended for a personal fight.

I've reported your abusive response.

 

[kaku1]

I've reported your abusive response.

Why you telling this to me?
You reporting to me or to moderator?

 

[Sage]

You must have lost touch with Pakistan/China military development in the last few years.

View attachment 184684

View attachment 184685

That's my boy

 

[he-man]

RIP common sense

 

[kaku1]

RIP common sense

Check your IDF account, I am going to PM you.

 

[Penguin]

there have been incremental improvements to the Exocet and Harpoon. Nothing fundamentally new.

Western navies do not face any real threat to build those kind of weapons

As indicated by bolding a certain portion of a quote, I was referring to the claim that "Western navies never felt the need for anti-ship weapons", which is clearly incorrect in view of the list of dedicated anti-ship weapons. Besides, there are plenty of general purpose weapons that do quite nicely in anti-ship role e.g. Maverick, SLAM.

As for 'something fundamentally new', I did inform you about the Franco-German ANS (Anti-Navire Supersonique). A follow on to the abortive ANS is the ANNG/ANF (Anti-Navire Novelle Generation / Anti-Navire Future), later called ASURA, which is based on the operational ASMP (Air Sol Moyen Portee) nuclear strike missile. It would have Mach 2, 180 km, seaskimming capability. It is direct competition with SCALP cruise missile.

ASMP

Scalp

Also , I would not consider e.g. the Norwegian NSM an incremental improvement. It is a new missile, simple to operate, very sneaky and stealthy, so much tso the the USN will likely adopt it in large numbers. And it will be morphed in a multi-role VLS and encapsulated submarine launch compatible version for the US called Joint Strike Missile (JSM) that will feature an option for ground strike and a two-way communications line and improved range over NSM's 185km to 280 km. Further, just because LRASM-A isn't supersonic doesn't mean it is not in certain ways revolutionary e.g. in terms of operational autonomy.

 

[wiseone2]

As indicated by bolding a certain portion of a quote, I was referring to the claim that "Western navies never felt the need for anti-ship weapons", which is clearly incorrect in view of the list of dedicated anti-ship weapons. Besides, there are plenty of general purpose weapons that do quite nicely in anti-ship role e.g. Maverick, SLAM.


As for 'something fundamentally new', I did inform you about the Franco-German ANS (Anti-Navire Supersonique). A follow on to the abortive ANS is the ANNG/ANF (Anti-Navire Novelle Generation / Anti-Navire Future), later called ASURA, which is based on the operational ASMP (Air Sol Moyen Portee) nuclear strike missile. It would have Mach 2, 180 km, seaskimming capability. It is direct competition with SCALP cruise missile.

ASMP

Scalp

Also , I would not consider e.g. the Norwegian NSM an incremental improvement. It is a new missile, simple to operate, very sneaky and stealthy, so much tso the the USN will likely adopt it in large numbers. And it will be morphed in a multi-role VLS and encapsulated submarine launch compatible version for the US called Joint Strike Missile (JSM) that will feature an option for ground strike and a two-way communications line and improved range over NSM's 185km to 280 km. Further, just because LRASM-A isn't supersonic doesn't mean it is not in certain ways revolutionary e.g. in terms of operational autonomy.

There have been improvements in standoff weapons that can attack any kind of target especially fixed or slow moving.
You forgot to mention the Tomahawk which can be used to attack naval warships. You could drop laser guided bombs, JDAMs, daisy cutters on slow moving warships. That was never the primary purpose.

Is there a fundamental sea based threat to US Navy from anyone ? Russian nuclear submarines are one of the few threats remaining. Their presence is reduced somewhat compared to the cold war. The threat from the Chinese navy is dwarfed by the threat from land based weapon systems.

 

[Taygibay]

The general idea could be stated :

that carriers are for power projection / sea domination.

They can attack inferior land based AFs but it is not their primary function and in the Bharat-Pakistan geographic set-up, it is not a correct case of this derivative use.

Most logically, the Indian Navy will use them further out to amplify its reach.
Thus, countering Indian carriers this way ( air-based missiles vs land based ones ) is not stupid by any means, say as an insurance policy, but unlikely to be necessary.

Good day all, Tay.

 

[Penguin]

There have been improvements in standoff weapons that can attack any kind of target especially fixed or slow moving.
You forgot to mention the Tomahawk which can be used to attack naval warships. You could drop laser guided bombs, JDAMs, daisy cutters on slow moving warships. That was never the primary purpose.

Is there a fundamental sea based threat to US Navy from anyone ? Russian nuclear submarines are one of the few threats remaining. Their presence is reduced somewhat compared to the cold war. The threat from the Chinese navy is dwarfed by the threat from land based weapon systems.

Modern conventional subs (esp with AIP) pose a threat to the USN, particularly when equipped with modern heavy torps as well as missiles.

RGM/UGM-109B Tomahawk Anti Ship Missile (TASM) variant was withdrawn from service in the 1990s and many of the anti-ship versions were converted into TLAMs at the end of the Cold War.

In 2014, Raytheon began testing Block IV improvements to attack sea and moving land targets. The new passive radar seeker will passively pick up the electromagnetic radar signature of a target and follow it, and actively send out a signal to bounce off potential targets before impact to discriminate its legitimacy before impact. Mounting the multi-mode sensor on the missile's nose would remove fuel space, but company officials believe the Navy would be willing to give up space for the sensor's new technologies. The new seeker could make the Tomahawk a candidate for the U.S. Navy's Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW) Increment II requirement. The previous Tomahawk Anti-Ship Missile, retired over a decade ago, was equipped with inertial guidance and the seeker of the Harpoon (missile) and there was concern with its ability to clearly discriminate between targets from a long distance, which would be more reliable with the new seeker's passive detection and active millimeter-wave radar; the Tomahawk would likely compete against a version of the Lockheed Martin Long Range Anti-Ship Missile for ship-launched needs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)

It's all still besides the point: Western countries do have a multitude of AShMs. The list grows as we as countries like Turkey (ATMACA ), Israel (Gabriel 1 through 4), South Korea (SSM-700K Haeseong), Japan (ASM/SSM-1, ASM-2), Brazil (MANSUP), Taiwan (Hsiung Feng 1 through 3, the latter supersonic).

Quick and dirty: bolt the warhead and guidance of a mm40 block 3 onto an ASMP missile body 'et voila' a 300km supersonic antiship missile. Likewise GQM-163 Coyote supersonic target body ( range circa 445km) and a Harpoon front end. Admittedly not ideal solutions for use in torpedotubes, VLSs, internal carriage, but easily deck mounted in a box on a ship.

Other than going supersonic, what developments has the West 'missed' (i.e. only not implemented)
Vice vera, can those supersonic missiles do what modern subsonic AshMs can? (i.e. who missed out one what?)