Iran says tests missiles able to sink "big warships"

[tphuang]

Funny enough that Tphuang being the one mentioning that Sunburn is one of the most over-rated missiles out there but that it is chinese missiles that tops it in every aspect

I admitt that there is a hype conerning the Moskit, but its hardly over-rated. It was revolutionary and superior to anything else when first introduced and if you look simply to the statistics (which sadly most of you ever do) it still outperforms all non-russian SSMs. In fact only missiles that really out performs it in its over chategory is Yakhont which altough orginally started as a competitor to the Moskit ended up being its replacement.

But we shouldn't be looking the statistics alone but actually paying attention to the doctrines and the idea of how the missile was mented for being used.
Moskit is the main weapon of the soviet BRK (large rocket ship) concept. Its basicly the orginal idea of destroyers adopted to present day (then) armed with missiles instead of torbedoes and mented for attacking against surface ships. This seems quite locigal and many of you might think that Duh...so does every other surface warships. Well no. It isen't so. Western navies have somewhat given away the anti-surface ship role from surface ships and their destroyers are despite their names completely different ships and mented for different tasks.
Unlike western navies, soviets adopted the SSMs for the conceptual replacement of torbedoes onboard destroyers as well. Soviet thinking called large missiles as they tought that the needed damage against the large surface ships was larger than eventually was the case (as showed in the Falklands war). Also the performance requirements for the missiles were of such that smaller missiles woudln't be adequate. So thus came the Moskit. It was succesor to the Termit and in someway to surface launched Malakhits. Altough there were supersonic SSMs existing back then, but none in the size/concept cathegory of the Moskit.

In general its bit naive to compare/make top 5 list of missiles from different chategories but IMO its unwise to jump over the doctrines as well. If you take Moskit for example from its orginal concept and try to fit it in to something completely different philosofy and tacktics, you wont end up good. I admitt that the western missiles, due their far smaller size makes then bit more versitale and at least more suitable to various western naval strategies but then again no western nor even chinese missiles are suitable for the soviet/russian ideas.

But if we humour our younger ones and stick solely in the narrow perspective of "globalsecurity" worldview and look only for the specs, I still bit wonder the top 5 list of Tphuangs...exspecially the strong emhasis over chinese missiles (well In reality I don't wonder it at all ). What makes Yj-83, Yj-62 and Yj-12 better than Moskits?

Range? Well yeas, perhaps. At least on paper all those missiles, except Yj-12 has a longer range than Moskit. Thats natural as they all have completely different propulsion mehtods compared to the Moskit. They all have small turbojet engines which is good for the range, but not for the speed and power needed for the supersonic flight of Moskit. Yj-83 at least in chinese circles enjoys the terminal supersonic speed, but IMO this is just hype and boasting. The concept of the missile just doesen't allow this. Only other SSM with turbojet as the sole propulsion is supersonic and that is the huge Bazalt which is completely different chategory missile. No other missile ever been in service, even in the size of Moskits, fitted with turbojets can go supersonic.
3M-54 has a turbojet and is only slightly larger than Yj-83, but it's terminal supersonic speed is made possiple with the solid rocket engine that takes over after the last stage of the missile departs from the rest.

So is the range, which would require extensive OTH targetting to be achived in effectual means anyway really that cruisal factor in modern naval warfare? Well here we end up back to the larger picture and then we would have to take the doctrines and concepts along again...and that is apparently just too booring for the rest of you...or is it?

The first problem is that Sunburn has accuracy issues. YJ-83K was tested to have hit rate of 98.5%. Sunburn hasn't shown that in PLAN. It's a simple reality that modern missile like YJ-83 will use a more advanced digital seeker compared to what you get with Sunburn. The second issue is that generally speaking, Sunburn is a much larger target with higher infrared/radar profile and flies at a higher altitude. Therefore, against a modern navy like USN, it will simply be tracked and engaged at a much earlier point in the flight. That's why I'm not a fan of Yakhont either. The increased range came through flying the lo-hi-lo profile, which will simply allow the missile to be tracked earlier. You know the reason why the much hyped MBE (which has the reported 240 km range) never got purchased by China? I don't know all the reasons, but I'm sure PLAN wasn't too amused by the fact that the increased range was achieved mainly through flying a higher profile. It's nothing new. We've been hearing issues about failed tests of Russian missiles and not meeting requirements for a while. What you hear on the brochure isn't what you get in real life.

Think about PLAN's possible opponents, do you really think flying faster will make it tougher for them to track/engage or flying lower(being smaller)?

 

[Gollevainen]

The problem with Russian AshMs is that there are way too many types, which means less resources and time spent to debug each and every one of them as compared to having only a few, if not one single standardized type. The result of having too many designs also leads to lack of rationalization, high cost due to lack of volume, forces invention of too many different fire control systems, and inability to adapt to different platforms. The Moskit is only ship launched, and not all ships, being two destroyer classes and some FAC classes. The air launched version is still born, and is frankly too heavy for most aircraft. No sub launched version, its too big. Quite inflexible. Its not likely you can set waypoints for it in order to attack from a direction without trying to give away the original location of the shooter or from a direction not expected by the target or at an aspect that is the weakpoint of the target. The sheer weight of the missiles is going to force the ship's design to be build around this missile as its main consideration, and stunt the other mission roles of the vessel. For example I have a hard time seeing how you can design a proper air defense and ASW destroyer while loading the ship with this missile. The Moskit lays too many design consequences.

Having way too many SSMs isen't a proplem, its a indication of the soviet naval doctrine. Saying so just reveals that you haven't paid enough attention to what is behind the missiles, doctrines and concepts (those two words have come one of my favorites, haven't they)

You can compare the various type of soviet/russian SSMs with the idea of having 3 inch and bellow guns for AA, 4 inch guns for AA or dualpurpose work for small destroyers and older destroyers, 5 inch guns for main DD guntype, 6 inch gun for light cruisers and anti-torbedoboat armament of battleships, 8 inch guns for heavy cruisers and so on...Back in the days when the main role of surface ships in all navies was fighting against other surface ships, there were huge numbers of gun calibres for each different operational enchelon. Soviet SSM arsenal can bee seen in the light of this. As they kept focusing on the anti-surface operations, the modern technological leaps ment that the guns and torbedoes were replaced with SSMs. The reason why there is so many SSMs is becouse there is so many different roles and levels where you need to have different missiles. Western navies have used sinlge type of SSMs mainly becouse the roles of their ships are considerably different.

Moskit is narrow missile in its conceptual frames, its hard to adopt it to be used in any other roles than to where it was designed. But in that role its a killer, was when it was first introduced and is still as Yakhont, its replacor never really went for service.
If we use the "jack-of-all-trades" as a determion of which missile is the greatest SSM, then natuarally the western SSMs (and things like Klub) triumphs over the soviet ones. Western SSMs were designed to be universal, to be able to be fitted to just about anything and give all the ships equal surface strike ability, which is merely a self-defence oriented. They were small so that they could be fitted to ships designed to fullfill completely different roles and so that the new additions would cause design changes. But when your ships main role is anti-surface strike, the whole ship is designed to use the SSMs as its primary operational tool. Thus you can have far larger and more cabable missiles onboard. Multirole is a nice cathc phrase but its always the sum of missions in the expense of being great in one. No matter wheter its ship, plane or automobile. The reason why you have multipurpose platforms is purely monetarical, its more cost-effective. But in very large navies where the budget is large, you can go for dedicated spezialied ships.

The first problem is that Sunburn has accuracy issues. YJ-83K was tested to have hit rate of 98.5%. Sunburn hasn't shown that in PLAN. It's a simple reality that modern missile like YJ-83 will use a more advanced digital seeker compared to what you get with Sunburn. The second issue is that generally speaking, Sunburn is a much larger target with higher infrared/radar profile and flies at a higher altitude. Therefore, against a modern navy like USN, it will simply be tracked and engaged at a much earlier point in the flight. That's why I'm not a fan of Yakhont either. The increased range came through flying the lo-hi-lo profile, which will simply allow the missile to be tracked earlier. You know the reason why the much hyped MBE (which has the reported 240 km range) never got purchased by China? I don't know all the reasons, but I'm sure PLAN wasn't too amused by the fact that the increased range was achieved mainly through flying a higher profile. It's nothing new. We've been hearing issues about failed tests of Russian missiles and not meeting requirements for a while. What you hear on the brochure isn't what you get in real life.

Well I haven't heard any single case where Moskit has prooven itself being innacurate. Have you? If you do, then please could you share the reports of these occasions. Also most of the "reports" about other Russian missiles failing test are pure propaganda and some isolated events been taken out of context in order to boost up own domestical missilemarket getting the orders.

But I think we agree that Moskit is not the ideal missile for China. This isen't due the Moskits poorness, but that its designed to completely different operations and roles than to which china is using it. The project 956, which was tailored for this missile was not intended to the roles which china is using it, nor does it work well in the quantites that china has it. But china was desperetly in the need of modern ships and Russia had nothing else than 956s to offer so thus the deal was made.

Domestically produced and designed weaponsystems are often prefertable as they can be designed to fit exactly to the required operations and doctrines. But if some missile is more suited for PLAN work, it doesen't mean that its the best missile in the world, PLAN hardly is the pacesetter in the wolrd retrospect.

 

[tphuang]

Well I haven't heard any single case where Moskit has prooven itself being innacurate. Have you? If you do, then please could you share the reports of these occasions. Also most of the "reports" about other Russian missiles failing test are pure propaganda and some isolated events been taken out of context in order to boost up own domestical missilemarket getting the orders.

the hit rate given for Moskit is 60-80% as stated on SDF. And the rate given for Club missile was 75% even in the Russian testing. Does that sound high to you? That was before we heard about all the Indian fiasco. C-802, despite being a downgraded YJ-83, has been getting plenty of orders world wide. So, I don't think boosting domestic sales is relevant here.

But I think we agree that Moskit is not the ideal missile for China. This isen't due the Moskits poorness, but that its designed to completely different operations and roles than to which china is using it. The project 956, which was tailored for this missile was not intended to the roles which china is using it, nor does it work well in the quantites that china has it. But china was desperetly in the need of modern ships and Russia had nothing else than 956s to offer so thus the deal was made.

look at what China got out of 956, it liked bandstand, so it developed a indigenous version that looks like that. It liked shtil system, so it developed the HH-16 system using a similar architecture (although more modern). It liked the 130mm and I'm pretty sure it's working on one right now. It liked Ka-28 and it's continually buying more. It liked the concept of kashtan and we've seen developments along that line too. But we've seen nothing that would indicate that it likes sunburn.

Domestically produced and designed weaponsystems are often prefertable as they can be designed to fit exactly to the required operations and doctrines. But if some missile is more suited for PLAN work, it doesen't mean that its the best missile in the world, PLAN hardly is the pacesetter in the wolrd retrospect.

of course not, I just have very low opinion of sunburn, that's all. I prefer the high subsonic, lo flying missiles.

 

[Gollevainen]

the hit rate given for Moskit is 60-80% as stated on SDF. And the rate given for Club missile was 75% even in the Russian testing. Does that sound high to you? That was before we heard about all the Indian fiasco. C-802, despite being a downgraded YJ-83, has been getting plenty of orders world wide. So, I don't think boosting domestic sales is relevant here.

Well from site's like testpilot.ru, there is mentioned 94-99 % hit propability for the Moskit, so what do you know? Who to belive? Also as for the Club testing, From the book of armaments (Naval Institutes world naval weapon systems, excelent read) there is spesifically listed the incidence where the Submarine launched Club failed to hit the target (by the already mentioned proplems with the INS syncro) but that all the russian made tests had proven out to be complete success. And of the "plenty" of orders of Yj-83, just how many country was buying them, and compared to what?

look at what China got out of 956, it liked bandstand, so it developed a indigenous version that looks like that. It liked shtil system, so it developed the HH-16 system using a similar architecture (although more modern). It liked the 130mm and I'm pretty sure it's working on one right now. It liked Ka-28 and it's continually buying more. It liked the concept of kashtan and we've seen developments along that line too. But we've seen nothing that would indicate that it likes sunburn.

Ofcourse not becouse the Moskit is tailored missile for the BRK-concept which the pr. 956's were orginally designed. Chinese doesen't use that doctrine nor concept so why should it adopt old missile which is large and crumblesome to ships which are designed to do completely different task?

 

[crobato]

I think China did buy the 3M80MBE. Its development and purchase is part of the contract cost for the 956EM. In addition, China may have bought a large number of Sunburns (500?) in a fire sale situation. A few years ago, that spurned rumors (pre-Houbei introduction) that China may acquire Tarantuls which never came to pass. I think the missiles may end up being used in coastal launchers.

 

[DrewUSA]

Look at spending.

Look at overall us spending after 9/11. Prompt Global Strike became our first priority, which has helped with both other us new long range stand off wepons and BMD spending on radar tracking and homming are both for the SM3 block 3 with the soon to be deployed patriot system. These with air/ land and sea launched cap. This is what will help us keep in the race. Maybe a year or two behind, but currently i dont see mass stockpiles of iranian cruise missles. I read of first or second test. Idk. I always follow the money... And look at yes we neverr produced a supersonic cruise missile but developed multiple. And i read somewhee and want to find it, that we have a cruise missile that reaches mach 2.0+. Wasnt aware of the us having anything besides the typical 500 mph.

iam not 2 sure.what kind of proof do u require.but as u keep on denying it care to explain how.