What's new

Carbon fiber clouds hiding naval destroyers from anti-ship missiles

AMDR

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
1,109
Reaction score
16
Country
United States
Location
United States
Carbon fiber clouds hiding naval destroyers from anti-ship missiles | Defense Update:

The US Navy has tested radar absorbing carbon-fiber cloud generators on board ships, which could be used to protect naval vessels from attacks by radar-guided anti-ship and air-launched cruise missiles


pandora_fog725.jpg

USS Mustin (DDG 89), USS Wayne E. Meyer (DDG 108) and USS Frank Cable (AS 40) test maritime obscurants held south of Guam to assess their tactical effectiveness for anti-ship missile defense. Note how the distribution of the cloud can be manipulated by the ship, under the same wind conditions, while the vessels maintain the same heading. (U.S. Navy photo, Timothy Wilson)


The US Navy has recently tested a new anti-ship missile countermeasure system using an obscurant generator prototype. The systems and tactics were tested under a variety of at-sea conditions using assets from the U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force to evaluate how radar-absorbing, carbon-fiber clouds can prevent a missile from detecting and striking its target as part of a layered defense.

The Naval Warfare Development Command tested the maritime obscurant generator prototypes June 21-25 to assess their tactical effectiveness for anti-ship missile defense. The shipboard device generates carbon-fiber particles suspended in a cloud of smoke. These particles absorb and diffuse radar waves emanating from the seekers of incoming missiles, thus potentially obscuring the target from the missile’s seeker.

pandora_fog800.jpg

During the ‘Pandarra Fog’ evaluation, the systems and tactics were tested under a variety of at-sea conditions using Seventh Fleet units and assets from the U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force to evaluate how radar-absorbing, carbon-fiber clouds can prevent a missile from detecting and striking its target as part of a layered defense. Photo: US Navy, by Timothy Wilson.

“Pandarra Fog showed the value of quickly bringing together scientific and joint forces to tackle our hardest warfighting problems. This isn’t just smoke or chaff, this is high tech obscurant, which can be effective against an array of missile homing systems,” said Antonio Siordia, U.S. Seventh Fleet’s science adviser.

Vice Adm. Robert L. Thomas Jr., commander U.S. Seventh Fleet, kicked off the “Pandarra Fog”, the multi-ship experiment in Guam. “Pandarra Fog is example of the quick-turn integrated technical and tactical development the Fleet is doing to master electromagnetic maneuver warfare and assure access of joint forces,” Thomas said.

The experiment demonstrated maritime obscurant generation can be a key enabler of offensive manoeuvre of the fleet despite the global proliferation of anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles.

Thoughtful obscurant employment will significantly reduce the risk to surface ships from missile strikes

“We are developing a layered approach using a full spectrum of active and passive capabilities to give us the advantage. It is not just about the technology, but also practicing how the fleet will employ these emerging capabilities,” said Capt. David Adams, who leads the Seventh Fleet Warfighting Initiatives Group. “A defense in depth approach has a lot of advantages. Not only do we know the smoke is effective, it adds a level of uncertainty and unpredictability to the equation,” said Adams.

naval_flare_uk450-300x266.jpg

Smoke screening is part of a multi-layered defense of surface vessels, which also includes active defense (air defense missiles), active decoys (jammers and RF decoys) chaff. The flares (seen in this photo) may be used for a last ditch defense, luring thermal seekers off target.

In addition to having a significant level of effectiveness, the systems are relatively inexpensive when compared to othercountermeasures and can be tactically employed through typical fleet maneuvers. The materials are environmentally friendly and sized to maximize operational effectiveness. “Our initial assessment is the testing was very successful in terms of tactical employment, usability and cost-effectiveness,” said Adams.
 
.
I will write this a lot during my stay on PDF, but it is very important. Our adversaries can brag about their carrier-killing whatever or their new super/hyper sonic missiles that will end the US presence in whatever region they are in, but we are always one step ahead and thinking two or three beyond that. Just when you think you have found an answer for our tactics or a counter to our systems we change the game and add new ones. We are always testing, developing, redesigning, upgrading and theorizing new ways to protect ourselves and defeat our enemies. Good luck trying to keep up.
 
.
I will write this a lot during my stay on PDF, but it is very important. Our adversaries can brag about their carrier-killing whatever or their new super/hyper sonic missiles that will end the US presence in whatever region they are in, but we are always one step ahead and thinking two or three beyond that. Just when you think you have found an answer for our tactics or a counter to our systems we change the game and add new ones. We are always testing, developing, redesigning, upgrading and theorizing new ways to protect ourselves and defeat our enemies. Good luck trying to keep up.
Yup. Everybody hypes up the "carrier-killing" weapons like they are some silver bullets. They always want to talk about the offensive weapon but never the countermeasures deployed against it. Whether it be the AS-4, the DF-21D, the P-800, or the Moskit, time and time again we have adapted to emerging threats. That isn't going to change any time soon. Always innovating:usflag:
 
.
I will write this a lot during my stay on PDF, but it is very important. Our adversaries can brag about their carrier-killing whatever or their new super/hyper sonic missiles that will end the US presence in whatever region they are in, but we are always one step ahead and thinking two or three beyond that. Just when you think you have found an answer for our tactics or a counter to our systems we change the game and add new ones. We are always testing, developing, redesigning, upgrading and theorizing new ways to protect ourselves and defeat our enemies. Good luck trying to keep up.

But but but... how can that be??? They were supposed to be carrier killers!!! They were supposed to make carriers obsolete!!! It was supposed to be the end of the US navy and the rise of the carrier killers!!! How could this happen?? !:lol::lol::lol:
 
.
I will write this a lot during my stay on PDF, but it is very important. Our adversaries can brag about their carrier-killing whatever or their new super/hyper sonic missiles that will end the US presence in whatever region they are in, but we are always one step ahead and thinking two or three beyond that. Just when you think you have found an answer for our tactics or a counter to our systems we change the game and add new ones. We are always testing, developing, redesigning, upgrading and theorizing new ways to protect ourselves and defeat our enemies. Good luck trying to keep up.

Wouldn't this also increase ship's heat signature?
 
.
Thanks for the information. The Chinese and the Russians are now busy adjusting there carrier killer missile seekers to have radar guidance and close proximity switch to thermal and plume sensing. Just gives a larger blip on the radar to blow up! So much for US tech edge!
 
.
Thanks for the information. The Chinese and the Russians are now busy adjusting there carrier killer missile seekers to have radar guidance and close proximity switch to thermal and plume sensing. Just gives a larger blip on the radar to blow up! So much for US tech edge!
Have you even bothered to read the description of the ROC?

This is radar-absorbing, carbon-fiber clouds that can prevent a radar guided missile from detecting and striking its target. Proximity fuses need to be very near the target in order to initiate the warhead. If the radar is screened by the carbon-fiber clouds, how will a so called 'carrier killer' get even close to activate the proximity fuse?

Lastly, the thermal coefficient of a carbon-fiber cloud is extremely low, thereby defeating heat seekers.

Read before spouting rubbish!
 
.
Wouldn't this also increase ship's heat signature?

Yes it would, but in naval warfare that isn't much of a problem. There aren't too many IR guided AShMs in the world, and even if one was launched these types of smoke decoys act like the thermal grenades found on tanks and would lure away any missile by providing a larger signature.
 
.
The front of a ship is clearly exposed against such cloud/envelope. So frontal attack would cripple the vessel anyway..

12341.png
 
.
torpedoes....still the best way to sink a ship :-).
 
.
Have you even bothered to read the description of the ROC?

This is radar-absorbing, carbon-fiber clouds that can prevent a radar guided missile from detecting and striking its target. Proximity fuses need to be very near the target in order to initiate the warhead. If the radar is screened by the carbon-fiber clouds, how will a so called 'carrier killer' get even close to activate the proximity fuse?

Lastly, the thermal coefficient of a carbon-fiber cloud is extremely low, thereby defeating heat seekers.

Read before spouting rubbish!

You fcuking Moron!

How would the ship know that the radar is coming on its @ss? The damn thing still presents a large @ss signature from the sides and the front especially when the missile is fired from an aircraft! Secondly, what about windy weather and high sea states where blowing this high tech smoke out of a ships @ss would just be that! What the heck, why not fire 2-3 carrier killers from all sides of the armada to see how the smoke in the rear holds up?

So go preach your fcuk all math to those 5th graders in India!

You fcuking Moron!

How would the ship know that the radar is coming on its @ss? The damn thing still presents a large @ss signature from the sides and the front especially when the missile is fired from an aircraft! Secondly, what about windy weather and high sea states where blowing this high tech smoke out of a ships @ss would just be that! What the heck, why not fire 2-3 carrier killers from all sides of the armada to see how the smoke in the rear holds up?

What the heck! Knowing these frigates have smoke, let shoot a dummy up the rear and the real ones from the sides or front!

So go preach your fcuk all math to those 5th graders in India!
 
Last edited:
.
You fcuking Moron!

How would the ship know that the radar is coming on its @ss? The damn thing still presents a large @ss signature from the sides and the front especially when the missile is fired from an aircraft! Secondly, what about windy weather and high sea states where blowing this high tech smoke out of a ships @ss would just be that! What the heck, why not fire 2-3 carrier killers from all sides of the armada to see how the smoke in the rear holds up?

So go preach your fcuk all math to those 5th graders in India!

The ship will know the direction of a radar emission based on its own sensors that indicate the direction of hostile emissions. Just as aircraft have radar warning receivers, so to do ships. We use such sensors to determine the direction of hostile emissions so we can identity the source or more accurately predict the path of incoming munitions so countermeasures can be launched or taken. Also, if the weather is windy than this smoke is going to be augmented by airborne sea water who's salt particles can help provide false reads to hostile radars.

Thanks for the information. The Chinese and the Russians are now busy adjusting there carrier killer missile seekers to have radar guidance and close proximity switch to thermal and plume sensing. Just gives a larger blip on the radar to blow up! So much for US tech edge!

Russia and China would be taking a shot in the dark. Nothing of value has been released in this post, so if they decide to tweak their sensors they are doing so based on perceptions and not reality. It would be a waste of time.
 
Last edited:
.
I will write this a lot during my stay on PDF, but it is very important. Our adversaries can brag about their carrier-killing whatever or their new super/hyper sonic missiles that will end the US presence in whatever region they are in, but we are always one step ahead and thinking two or three beyond that. Just when you think you have found an answer for our tactics or a counter to our systems we change the game and add new ones. We are always testing, developing, redesigning, upgrading and theorizing new ways to protect ourselves and defeat our enemies. Good luck trying to keep up.

The US ability to innovate is what we do best!
 
.
The front of a ship is clearly exposed against such cloud/envelope. So frontal attack would cripple the vessel anyway..

View attachment 138226
Aaaahhh...No...

What you see is in the visual spectrum, that means YOU can see features such as the sea, the ships, and the smoke. But if an attacker is radar equipped, that mean his spectrum of detection is limited to the EM region, and that mean he cannot see the ship or the sea as distinct features like you can but only by their EM emissions, if any.

This EM countermeasure is improved chaff, in a manner of speaking.

Chaff (countermeasure) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The advantage over chaff is lightweight, which will enable the defense to carry more of it, and it can be more tailored according to the EM threat. This is actually not new since the US Army have been using them for yrs.

http://www2.l-3com.com/linkabit/pdf/Data_Sheets/Obscuration/M56A1 Coyote.pdf
The M56A1 provides 90 minutes of Visual, 30 minutes of Infrared (IR), and 30 minutes of Millimeter Wave (MMW) obscuration without re-supply.
The highlighted is significant for the US Navy here.

This countermeasure is called 'electromagnetic obscurant'. The word 'obscurant' came from 'obscure' which means to make indistinct or blurry or hide or uncertain. To put something under an 'EM obscurant' mean to make that object difficult to discern in the EM spectrum. So when this cloud of carbon powder/fiber is dispensed into the air, any radar guided attacker would have difficulty finding any other EM distinguishing bodies out there. The analogy is putting a candle next to a searchlight and you would not be able to make out the candle. This radar guided attacker could be literally in front of the ship but would see nothing but the smoke.
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom