Vietnam Defence Forum

[Viet]

Yes, need to have long range stand off weapons, long range cruise missiles is one good way to go, particularly the Brahmos since it is supersonic and very difficult to intercept, that's why Vietnam is very interested in it. The Tomahawk is subsonic, its actually an old design in many ways and its easy to intercept.

Tomahawk has a range of 2,500km. It flies subsonic but it is NOT easy to be detected because of the missile's small radar cross-section and low altitude flight.

Brahmos has shorter range (500km) and flies supersonic. Yes, I think we need both.

 

[Carlosa]

Tomahawk has a range of 2,500km. It flies subsonic but it is NOT easy to be detected because of the missile's small radar cross-section and low altitude flight.

Brahmos has shorter range (500km) and flies supersonic. Yes, I think we need both.

Yes, both would be good because of the range of the Tomahawk, but....... these days, modern ships with good radars will detect a low flying cruise missile like the Tomahawk at a distance that gives enough time to intercept and since it is subsonic, its actually easy to intercept.

To give you some examples, a Sigma ship with the Thales radar Smart-S MK2 will detect a Tomahawk like missile at a distance of 50 km. The ship air defenses (Mica missiles) can intercept it rather easily and if a missile gets through then a good point defense systems like the Goalkeeper or the Palma will finish the job.

If the Tomahawk approaches a Gepard frigate, the Gepard radar will detect the Tomahawk at about 15 km distance, that's much tighter than with the Sigma ship, but still ok because the missile is subsonic. The Palma system will take care of it, first with the Sosma-R missiles and if needed, with the guns.

If a lone ship has to confront a saturation missile attack, well, the ship is toasted no matter what missile. Only an Aegis type of destroyer can deal with saturation attacks and only up to a point.

I've been talking about a Tomahawk attack, now, if the missile is a Brahmos, everything changes, at a speed of mach 2.8, the Gepard will most likely get toasted because it barely has enough time to react. The Sigma has a better chance, but still not easy to intercept, the Brahmos has terminal maneuvravility to evade the ship defenses, etc, its just a very good missile.

The americans are starting to work on a replacement for the Tomahawk. These days speed is the key.

Also, if we are talking missiles to attack a chinese fleet, then have to remember that they have air defense destroyers Aegis style with the naval equivalent of the S-300 (type 52C / D destroyers), they are able to intercept subsonic missiles rather easily, but the job gets much tougher against supersonic missiles.

To give you another example, the latest british air defense destroyer's radar can detect a golf ball at a distance of 25 km. A golf ball is a lot smaller than a cruise missile and yes, cruise missiles flying low are more difficult to detect than a fighter jet for example, but anyway, present radar technology has made a big difference in the last 10-15 years when it comes to detecting cruise missiles and it keeps getting better.

Tomahawk has a range of 2,500km. It flies subsonic but it is NOT easy to be detected because of the missile's small radar cross-section and low altitude flight.

Brahmos has shorter range (500km) and flies supersonic. Yes, I think we need both.

By the way, Russia also has good long range cruise missiles also, the KH-55 and its derivative, the KH-101 (3000 + km range) and India is working on the Nirbhay (1000 km range).

I would say that for Vietnam, for naval and air operations, the Brahmos is the missile that they need and a long range cruise missile like the Tomahawk would be best as a land system to attack targets deep into China where you need almost a 3000 km range if you want to hit Beijing from the Vietnamese border. I don't think it would be easy for Vietnamese ships to get close to China, so its easier and safer to launch those long range cruise missiles from Vietnamese territory.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

if we get the Tomahawk, that will be a new game. John McCain appears to be our friend for new toys. I like the idea of having a fleet of Aegis destroyers with Tomahawk. He wants to save jobs at Raytheon. We can help him a bit.

http://tucson.com/news/local/mccain-promises-continued-support-for-tomahawk-and-a/article_3ee28148-fb38-5bd7-b54e-7fa136e154cb.html

Each Aegis ship costs more than a billion, you can't afford these expensive toys.

 

[Nike]

hawkeye and orion will be a nice addition

Each Aegis ship costs more than a billion, you can't afford these expensive toys.

his like to day dreaming, even though the reality dictates otherwise

Vietnam is urgently need more platform for presence at sea than a single hull with costly prices. One arleigh burke will cost more than two billion US dollar, including all the missile and OTHT platform to accompany or complement them, is almost the same prices Vietnam paid for their Kilos class or with the same money they can bought at least six Sigma Class frigate.

 

[tonyget]

Each Aegis ship costs more than a billion, you can't afford these expensive toys.

A billion ? Last time I checked, Burke II cost 1.8 billion

 

[Carlosa]

A billion ? Last time I checked, Burke II cost 1.8 billion

Correct! That's the current price.

hawkeye and orion will be a nice addition


his like to day dreaming, even though the reality dictates otherwise

Vietnam is urgently need more platform for presence at sea than a single hull with costly prices. One arleigh burke will cost more than two billion US dollar, including all the missile and OTHT platform to accompany or complement them, is almost the same prices Vietnam paid for their Kilos class or with the same money they can bought at least six Sigma Class frigate.

Even an Aegis destroyer will not change things much.
The US Navy already knows that they can't operate close to China's coastline by at least 1000 km and we are talking the US Navy here, with carrier battle groups and all the other support elements, etc, etc.

I'll quote what a Vietnamese naval officer said in the MP thread about how the Vietnamese navy is supposed to operate:

"The Vietnam People's Navy doctrines dictate that the surface ships should try to avoid direct ship-to-ship engagements, or at least attack the vulnerable and soft targets (logistic ships or LDP). The VPN ships would be protected by the Air Defense Force so we need highly agile and high speed ships/missile boats for quick hit-and-run attacks of targets of opportunity. Any investment in fleet air defense ships before 2020-2025 would be a total waste of money."

That's why Vietnam is giving priority to submarines and that's why Vietnam wants the Brahmos really bad. Subs, air power and coastal missile batteries is what Vietnam depends on to defeat Chinese naval forces in the south china sea.

Another strategy that Vietnam also has is to disrupt the shipping traffic to China since that can cause significant economic damage and can probably force others to intervene.

 

[Viet]

@Carlosa @madokafc
is there any chance to get the tomahawk stealthy, such as with radar-absorbing coatings used on stealth aircraft f-22/f-35?

if the conflict runs out of control and slips into a full scale confrontation, we need long distant weapons to strike possible military targets in china, and the tomahawk is a good means. our scud ballistic missile scud can only strike targets at 300km distance, or 700km (unconfirmed).

 

[Carlosa]

@Carlosa @madokafc
is there any chance to get the tomahawk stealthy, such as with radar-absorbing coatings used on stealth aircraft f-22/f-35?

if the conflict runs out of control and slips into a full scale confrontation, we need long distant weapons to strike possible military targets in china, and the tomahawk is a good means. our scud ballistic missile scud can only strike targets at 300km distance, or 700km (unconfirmed).

The stealth coating can be applied to the body of the missile, but I don't know if it can be applied to the head of the missile since there is a radar seeker in there and the coating might interfere with the emissions of the radar.

And definitely yes, VN needs long range stand off weapons and that pretty much means long range cruise missiles (if they are long range meaning 1000 km or more, they are always subsonic at the moment) and ballistic missiles.

VN is getting the Iskander ballistic missile and the Russians have an extended version of it that goes to 2000 km range, VN needs to get its hands on that one.

I believe all the Scuds B in VN (that's the one that has 300 km range) have been upgraded to the C version that has 500-550 km range.

VN had announce that it has tested ballistic missiles of up to 1500 km range, but further details are not known, but North Korea is known to be providing technical assistance on that program.

By the way, VN already self produces the stealth coating and they get applied to the new ships.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

hawkeye and orion will be a nice addition


his like to day dreaming, even though the reality dictates otherwise

Vietnam is urgently need more platform for presence at sea than a single hull with costly prices. One arleigh burke will cost more than two billion US dollar, including all the missile and OTHT platform to accompany or complement them, is almost the same prices Vietnam paid for their Kilos class or with the same money they can bought at least six Sigma Class frigate.

Even the US donates the ship to Vietnam for free, they still can't maintain or even operate it.

This is the harsh reality, but most Viet members simply can't see it.

A billion ? Last time I checked, Burke II cost 1.8 billion

I meant the watered down Aegis from Japan and South Korea, since the US Aegis will definitely cost close to 2 billion.

@Carlosa @madokafc
is there any chance to get the tomahawk stealthy, such as with radar-absorbing coatings used on stealth aircraft f-22/f-35?

if the conflict runs out of control and slips into a full scale confrontation, we need long distant weapons to strike possible military targets in china, and the tomahawk is a good means. our scud ballistic missile scud can only strike targets at 300km distance, or 700km (unconfirmed).

Stop dreaming, the war between China and Vietnam will be Vietnam playing the defensive role, it is absolutely impossible for you to launch a hit on China's soil.

Buying a single weapon is useless, since you don't have the whole ecosystem to confront against China.

 

[tonyget]

And definitely yes, VN needs long range stand off weapons and that pretty much means long range cruise missiles (if they are long range meaning 1000 km or more, they are always subsonic at the moment) and ballistic missiles.

VN is getting the Iskander ballistic missile and the Russians have an extended version of it that goes to 2000 km range, VN needs to get its hands on that one.

I believe all the Scuds B in VN (that's the one that has 300 km range) have been upgraded to the C version that has 500-550 km range.

Iraq lunched Scuds against Israel and Saudi during Gulf war, didn't cause much damage.

 

[Carlosa]

Even the US donates the ship to Vietnam for free, they still can't maintain or even operate it.

This is the harsh reality, but most Viet members simply can't see it.



I meant the watered down Aegis from Japan and South Korea, since the US Aegis will definitely cost close to 2 billion.



Stop dreaming, the war between China and Vietnam will be Vietnam playing the defensive role, it is absolutely impossible for you to launch a hit on China's soil.

Buying a single weapon is useless, since you don't have the whole ecosystem to confront against China.

You are mostly right, and I do agree that VN will play defensive for the most part, but actually ballistic missiles is one card that VN can play, particularly if we are talking Iskanders, I don't think China is able to intercept Iskanders.

Yes, most people don't get the big picture that modern warfare depends on a whole, complex, very expensive ecosystem and just a few countries are able to play that game.

To give credit where it belongs, even with limited resources, VN is working towards a limited, but reasonably effective A2 / AD strategy (anti access / area denial) against China, again, limited, but never the less with ok possibilities of exacting a heavy price that China might NOT be willing to pay. Over time VN is creating a decent defensive ecosystem, but anyway, it does take time and money.

Iraq lunched Scuds against Israel and Saudi during Gulf war, didn't cause much damage.

Those were old, very inaccurate Scuds, VN Scuds have been upgraded to a 50 meter CEP (with help from North Korea). Iskanders have a 3 to 5 meter CEP.

Ballistic missiles are not easy to intercept, most tests of interceptions are done under not realistic conditions that favor the interception and makes the intercepting system look good, but in real life conditions its estimated that the Aegis / Patriot system can only have a 20% success rate. The Russians are adamant that the Iskander can't be intercepted. Time will reveal more.

 

[Viet]

a new pic of Turya class vessel, equipped with 4× 533mm torpedo tubes. reportedly we have 5 of this class.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

You are mostly right, and I do agree that VN will play defensive for the most part, but actually ballistic missiles is one card that VN can play, particularly if we are talking Iskanders, I don't think China is able to intercept Iskanders.

Yes, most people don't get the big picture that modern warfare depends on a whole, complex, very expensive ecosystem and just a few countries are able to play that game.

To give credit where it belongs, even with limited resources, VN is working towards a limited, but reasonably effective A2 / AD strategy (anti access / area denial) against China, again, limited, but never the less with ok possibilities of exacting a heavy price that China might NOT be willing to pay. Over time VN is creating a decent defensive ecosystem, but anyway, it does take time and money.



Those were old, very inaccurate Scuds, VN Scuds have been upgraded to a 50 meter CEP. Iskanders have a 3 to 5 meter CEP.

Of course we can.

China can even intercept the ICBM, and what make you think that we cannot intercept a much slower SRBM?

Remember, Vietnam has to face China's entire ecosystem, and this is the modern warfare where it heavily depends on the ecosystem. Because of this, the military gap between the major nations and the lesser nations is only getting bigger than before.

 

[Viet]

the new gunship TT400 class on sea trail. the #4 of this class.

 

[Carlosa]

Of course we can.

China can even intercept the ICBM, and what make you think that we cannot intercept a much slower SRBM?

Remember, Vietnam has to face China's entire ecosystem, and this is the modern warfare where it heavily depends on the ecosystem. Because of this, the military gap between the major nations and the lesser nations is only getting bigger than before.

Only a real life war environment will show what China can really intercept, tests are not the same.
Ballistic missiles are not easy to intercept, most tests of interceptions are done under not realistic conditions that favor the interception and makes the intercepting system look good, but in real life conditions its estimated that the Aegis / Patriot system can only have a 20% success rate. The Russians are adamant that the Iskander can't be intercepted. Time will reveal more.

China did 2 test of intercepting an ICBM, the first one was successful, but the second one (just a week ago or so) was not.

Only a real life war environment will show what China can really intercept, tests are not the same.
Ballistic missiles are not easy to intercept, most tests of interceptions are done under not realistic conditions that favor the interception and makes the intercepting system look good, but in real life conditions its estimated that the Aegis / Patriot system can only have a 20% success rate. The Russians are adamant that the Iskander can't be intercepted. Time will reveal more.

I'm very clear about the ecosystem, that's what I keep talking about here.