Indonesia: 'green water navy'

[STURM]

The report claim that modified sea cat performed better than Mistral that being procured as the replacement of Original Sea Cat in the first place.

But the Seacat is wire-guided so how can it perform better than Mistral? It also has a shorther range.

In a profile on the TNI-AL I did for Warships IFR some time back, I mentioned that Indonesia last bought some Seacats in the 80's. I have to look back at the article for exact figures.

 

[Ananda]

But the Seacat is wire-guided so how can it perform better than Mistral? It also has a shorther range.

In a profile on the TNI-AL I did for Warships IFR some time back, I mentioned that Indonesia last bought some Seacats in the 80's. I have to look back at the article for exact figures.

Like I said Sturm, it's still not clear how the extent of modifications being done. The previous report only talking about replacing the propelant, thus if that's the only thing they done, and means it's still old Sea-Cat with new propelant.

However some talk also speculated on the modification of sensors and electronics (since the existing Sea Cat sensors and electronics also should be expired). If that's also can be confirmed, and there's possibility the modifications included some changes on Sea Cat sensors and seakers. This speculation arrise since some present days 'on the shelf' sensors and electronics can be modified to Sea Cat and the supporting sensors.

Yes the Sea Cat acquaired in the 80's the same time TNI-AL acquaired the Van Speijk. It's the same packages with the Harpoon and all standard Van Speijk's weapons system.

 

[StevoJH]

Sea Cat as well as the short range and wire guidance, its also subsonic, wouldn't that limit its usefulness against fast moving jets? Mistral (presumably in Simbad form?) is supersonic, which would give it more utility against fixed wing targets.

 

[Ananda]

Sea Cat as well as the short range and wire guidance, its also subsonic, wouldn't that limit its usefulness against fast moving jets? Mistral (presumably in Simbad form?) is supersonic, which would give it more utility against fixed wing targets.

Agree on the point that the original Sea Cat can't compete with Mistral as short range/point defence SAM. However this 'unconfirmed' report based on some remarks from local company that suppport TNI-AL conducting modification to Sea Cat. Personally since I also do not know the extent of modifications TNI-AL done to the Sea Cat, I have my doubt.

I Think this modifications being done by TNI-AL just to further use of expired missiles on their inventory (due to limited budget on buying new ones). Although some voices in here argue that the modifications also being done to give room for local propelant company to gain the experiences.

As Sea Cat with wire guidance, Is it true the latest versions (on the 80's), the Mk 3 if I'm not mistaken already replacing Wire Guidance with IR guidances ?

 

[StevoJH]

No, as far as I can work out through reading passages out of Google books the last versions of Sea Cat (GWS-24) was still wire guided, though they didn't have to manually control the missile, it was done by a computer via radar or closed circuit TV tracking.

Google Books Link

 

[STURM]

The Royal Malaysian Navy had Seacat on a British made frigate but later replaced it with a Bofors mount, probably wasn't worth the effort in maintaining it.

In all fairness to Seacat, though it wasn't exactly a commercial success or a high performance missile, it did score a few kills in the Falklands and the Iran/Iraq war [Tigercat]. I just can't see the logic in 'upgrading' a 60's technology missile but as Ananda said it is probably intended to give the company some experience in the related field.

 

[StevoJH]

It didn't score any kills during the Falklands, I think you've confused it with Sea Wolf or Sea Dart.

 

[STURM]

It didn't score any kills during the Falklands, I think you've confused it with Sea Wolf or Sea Dart.

No, I meant Seacat not Sea Wolf or Sea Dart. I could be mistaken about Seacat kills at the Falklands, but I do recall reading about it somewhere, I think in Max Hasting's or Sandy Woodword's book.

The link below mentions an A-4 deing downed by Seacat.

http://sea-cat-missile.co.tv/

I do recall reading somewhere that at the early stages of the conflict, Iran scored a couple of kills with it's Tigercat, at that shortly after they stopped using it because of lack of spares.

 

[Ananda]

Yes, I also read Sea Cat was acknowledged for at least one kill of an Argentinian A-4C. Whatever the limitations of Sea Cat, it's being regraded as dependable system. The modifications by TNI-AL of their Sea Cat stockpiles, will not give them an Updated Point-defence SAM system, but it will do to augmented Mistral in the Van Speijk in which sloted to be replaced by PAL's build Damen design Light Frigates (in which seems will used Mica VLS and Tetral Mistral for SAM system).

As a stop gap system, utilising those modified Sea Cat as point defence system, will be acceptable for TNI-AL standard due to their existing Stockpiles.

 

[StevoJH]

STURM, your link doesnt work.

From memory its thought that the Sea Cat *might* have scored a kill in the Falklands, but it was never confirmed that it got the kill, I could be wrong. Besides, even one kill out of who knows how many fired puts them no where near the effectiveness of Sea Dart and Sea Wolf.

Though, possibly more effective then Sea Slug? Sea Slug could (and was) used as Artillery though.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

The Indonesian Navy has received an KCR 40, a fast missileboat, made by PT Palindo Marine. Click the link for the full Indonesian article.

Menhan Resmikan Kapal Patroli Cepat Rudal, KRI Clurit

BATAM - Menteri Pertahanan Purnomo Yusgiantoro meresmikan Kapal Cepat Rudal (KCR) KRI Clurit yang memiliki panjang 40 meter, buatan putera-puteri Indonesia yang akan menambah armada mengamankan perairan Indonesia bagian barat.

KRI Clurit-641

Sumber : ANTARA

 

[SASWanabe]

Pictures from Vivanews.Com

On 20th of April 2011 at 10:30 AM (western Indonesia time), KRI OSwald Siahaan, one of 6 Van Speijk fregats in TNI AL inventory sucessfully fires Yakhont missile to a target (decommisioned US build LST) 250 Kilometers from the fregat.

From the Pictures it's clear the possitions of Yakhont VLS on the side of Aft Hanggar.

have you seen a video of the missile actually hitting its target? i have seen plenty of the launch but not a single one showing impact.

 

[Bonza]

have you seen a video of the missile actually hitting its target? i have seen plenty of the launch but not a single one showing impact.

Is it possible that users could get a little bit sensitive about showing off the real-world terminal effects of their new missiles to all and sundry? I must admit I haven't the foggiest idea if it's a relevant concern, and granted there's a wealth of weapon impact videos available to anyone visiting youtube, but likewise I'm sure some footage has the potential to yield useful information if examined by a trained analyst.

Maybe the Indonesians would just prefer to keep it to themselves - it's not like they can market/export the missile and I doubt it's regarded as a regional game-changer, so what inclination would they have to publicly release a full demonstration?

Or I could be totally off-base with the whole thing, as I said earlier. Ah well, just thinking out loud - all corrections are welcome.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Is it possible that users could get a little bit sensitive about showing off the real-world terminal effects of their new missiles to all and sundry? I must admit I haven't the foggiest idea if it's a relevant concern, and granted there's a wealth of weapon impact videos available to anyone visiting youtube, but likewise I'm sure some footage has the potential to yield useful information if examined by a trained analyst.

Maybe the Indonesians would just prefer to keep it to themselves - it's not like they can market/export the missile and I doubt it's regarded as a regional game-changer, so what inclination would they have to publicly release a full demonstration?

Or I could be totally off-base with the whole thing, as I said earlier. Ah well, just thinking out loud - all corrections are welcome.

agree on all counts.

its surprising anyway as the Indons aren't big on publicisng these events in the first place.

I'm not surprised in the least that they haven't shown termination - esp on what is a new weapons systems.

nobody is going to broadcast outcomes outside of manufacturer releases.
Its basic OPSEC on new systems.

 

[STURM]

Maybe the Indonesians would just prefer to keep it to themselves - it's not like they can market/export the missile and I doubt it's regarded as a regional game-changer, so what inclination would they have to publicly release a full demonstration?

It's not a game changer but still interesting in the sense that the Yakhont is I think, the region's first supersonic ship launched ASM with the longest range and the biggest warhead. Whether the Indonesian's will be able to exploit it's long range will depend on the availibity of OTHT platforms with a data link.

 

[gf0012-aust]

It's not a game changer but still interesting in the sense that the Yakhont is I think, the region's first supersonic ship launched ASM with the longest range and the biggest warhead. Whether the Indonesian's will be able to exploit it's long range will depend on the availibity of OTHT platforms with a data link.

unless they manage to integrate into their french based shore systems they can't use it to maximum effect. IOW. next to zero chances, although I suspect that the french would love to get their hands on the integration data

unfort, without all the other combat control and integration sets, they've bought an orphan capability

its not a gamechanger

 

[Bonza]

unless they manage to integrate into their french based shore systems they can't use it to maximum effect. IOW. next to zero chances, although I suspect that the french would love to get their hands on the integration data

unfort, without all the other combat control and integration sets, they've bought an orphan capability

its not a gamechanger

Orphan capability? I thought the Russians were making use of the missile themselves - or is the Yakhont export missile distinct from the Oniks? I'm just curious as to how the term orphan capability is defined in this context.

Those sensor issues must be a bit of a letdown... I've always been somewhat confused by the design intent behind some of the big Soviet anti-ship missiles like the Granit or Bazalt - they're gigantic, and immensely long-legged for their class of weapon, but how in the hell was the Soviet Navy planning to acquire sufficient sensor data to make use of the range advantage? Publicly the weapons are listed as effective out to 500-600 kilometres, which looks nice on paper but I imagine attacks made at this distance would require some pretty spot-on timing and coverage from an offboard targeting system, wouldn't they? Realistically, could the Soviet Navy deploy sensors with the depth and distribution necessary to carry out missile attacks on surface vessels at such extended ranges?

To a lesser extent I see the same issue with the more modern BrahMos and Yakhont missiles, in that the weapons are quite capable of out-performing the sensor capacity of small or isolated launch platforms. It seems to me that the missile's size/space requirements make for a somewhat inefficient capability unless you have sufficient sensor platforms and data-sharing capacity to consistently make long range, remotely cued shots. Otherwise why bother with 3 tons and 8 metres of missile? Weight-wise each Yakhont is the equivalent of what, about four Exocets...

 

[gf0012-aust]

Orphan capability? I thought the Russians were making use of the missile themselves - or is the Yakhont export missile distinct from the Oniks? I'm just curious as to how the term orphan capability is defined in this context.

its not an orphan for the russians as they have the ISR, GIS, INT combat systems available to integrate and use it effectively.

the indons don't. they basically have platform specific launch and whatever feeds the launch platform - nowhere anywhere near as sophisticated

Those sensor issues must be a bit of a letdown... I've always been somewhat confused by the design intent behind some of the big Soviet anti-ship missiles like the Granit or Bazalt - they're gigantic, and immensely long-legged for their class of weapon, but how in the hell was the Soviet Navy planning to acquire sufficient sensor data to make use of the range advantage? Publicly the weapons are listed as effective out to 500-600 kilometres, which looks nice on paper but I imagine attacks made at this distance would require some pretty spot-on timing and coverage from an offboard targeting system, wouldn't they? Realistically, could the Soviet Navy deploy sensors with the depth and distribution necessary to carry out missile attacks on surface vessels at such extended ranges?

its a legacy of the soviet philosophy to compensate precision issues with yield and kinetic effect. if you can't effectively update the weapon close to termination, then you take your best shot by increasing blast effect.

To a lesser extent I see the same issue with the more modern BrahMos and Yakhont missiles, in that the weapons are quite capable of out-performing the sensor capacity of small or isolated launch platforms. It seems to me that the missile's size/space requirements make for a somewhat inefficient capability unless you have sufficient sensor platforms and data-sharing capacity to consistently make long range, remotely cued shots. Otherwise why bother with 3 tons and 8 metres of missile? Weight-wise each Yakhont is the equivalent of what, about four Exocets...

personally I think the Indians got hosed on Brahmos, and I think I've outlined it on here as to why prev (but also on SP)

If anything the Indon purchase reinforces it for me.....

its a good weapon for the russians - not so good for everyone else where they don't have the same data sources and/or feeds.

successfull disparate systems are highly dependant on the quality of integration, and the quality of the data sources . IMO Indonesia and India both don't have it and that impacts upon effectiveness as well as value for money

 

[STURM]

the indons don't. they basically have platform specific launch and whatever feeds the launch platform - nowhere anywhere near as sophisticated

Sorry I'm a bit lost here.... In Indonesia's case, wouldn't an MPA or a helicopter fitfed with a data link be sufficient?

its a good weapon for the russians - not so good for everyone else where they don't have the same data sources and/or feeds.

What about the PLAN and it's Sunburns on the Soveremeny's?

I've always been somewhat confused by the design intent behind some of the big Soviet anti-ship missiles like the Granit or Bazalt - they're gigantic, and immensely long-legged for their class of weapon, but how in the hell was the Soviet Navy planning to acquire sufficient sensor data to make use of the range advantage?

I'm not sure about the Yakhont, but if I'm not mistaken for the Soviets, the whole idea of having extra large missiles like the Sunburn and Shipwreck was to cause massive damage to carriers and other large ships. At the speed these missiles travel, even if the warhead fails to ignite it would probably slice a frigate or a destroyer in 2.

Prior to the ASTER 15/30 and ESSM entering service, was there any Western air to surface missile that could handle supersonic anti-ship missiles?

Is there any truth to a number of reports that indicate that CIWS's like Goalkeeper, Meroka and Phalanx can only handle subsonic missiles?

Some more imfo here on theYakhont launch.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Se...s-Yakhont-missile-finally/UPI-35041303986180/

Info on the Brahmos.

http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2008/12/brahmos-mrcm-operational-with-indian.html

 

[StevoJH]

Is there any truth to a number of reports that indicate that CIWS's like Goalkeeper, Meroka and Phalanx can only handle subsonic missiles?

It wouldn't surprise me at all. They just don't have the range to take out the target early enough to prevent shrapnel damage.

Lets say the target supersonic missile is destroyed at 500m from the target vessel. The fragments from the destroyed missile will still be moving at a high rate of speed (possibly still supersonic) when they hit the target.

I'm assuming this is why all the newer CIWS seem to be going away from gun's and moving towards missile systems such as RAM.

The following is from wikipedia and hasnt been referenced, but it illustrates the problems of gun based CIWS.

• Short range: The maximum effective range of 30-mm gun systems is about 4500 m; systems with lighter projectiles have even shorter range. The expected real-world kill-distance of an incoming anti-ship missile is about 500 m or less,[citation needed] still close enough to possibly cause damage on the ship's sensor or communication arrays. This makes the timeframe for interception relatively short; for supersonic missiles moving at 1500 m/s it is approximately one-third of a second.
• Limited kill probability: even if the missile is hit and damaged, it may not be enough to destroy it or change its course enough to prevent it or fragments of it from hitting its intended target, particularly as the interception distance is short. This is especially true if the gun fires kinetic-energy-only projectiles.
• Guns can only fire at one target at a time; switching targets may take up to one second for training the gun.
• A gun must predict the target's course and aim at the predicted position. Modern anti-ship missiles make erratic moves before impact, reducing the probability of being hit by unguided projectiles.