Israeli Navy capability against coastal targets

[Grand Danois]

here is a photo of the damaged ship.

That is not battledamage. The smudge/hole is also on pictures of Saar 5's that predates the missile attack.

Look at these:

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/naval/saar5/Saar5.html


This one is particularly good.

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/naval/saar5/saar5_2b.jpg

 

[tphuang]

It appears the Israeli corvette had her anti-air/missile warfare systems turned off due to the number of Israeli aircraft in the air, unaware of Hezbollah's anti-ship missile capability.

I don't think the system were completely turned off, maybe they just weren't on auto mode, that's all. And the question remains: Why would you leave it in there if it's going to do nothing? Just to show off to the world? That doesn't sound like something that a professional force like IDF would do.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

here is a photo of the damaged ship.

Just for future reference, that's the exhaust.

 

[icelord]

Could the design of Anti- air warfare have been made to eliminate something coming at the same speed as a bird, perhaps this is what the Auto- system read.
If its coming in at say, 20-40 Km/hr, would it be read as hostile, keeping in mind that a hostile typically comes at a much faster speed, being either Aircraft or missile
and yes, some birds can fly at the speed of UAV, especially home made UAVs

 

[.pt]

battle damage

Well, i´m no expert at evaluating damage, and the pictures quality isn´t the best, but as far as i can see, there seems to be some damage to the structure that houses the helicopter, altough the helicopter itself on this picture( if its real) doesn´t seems to be too damaged. The suposedly missile hole its settled, its just an exaust. But if information about the warhead provided earlier is correct, the picture does not show that much damage, nor is the vessel guted on this side, yet the explosion caused casualties, perhaps the other side of the vessel, not shown, is in worse shape? Or the damage was just internal, and not visible on the picture?
Just in case the weapon used was not a C802, what other ASM weapon could have been used, one that would fit in known weapons in use in Lebanon, or Siryan/Iran navy?
Also, whatever the cause of the failure to intercept the missile(s), the end result is, militarly, and politically a hard blow to the Israeli side. Guess we won´t be seeing much more parading of warships so near the Lebanese coast in a while, until the Israeli sort it out.
My question is, due to the threats delivered by Hizbollah, and aparently some capacity on their side to deliver, what other surprises they could have to throw at the Israeli navy?
regards.
Edit just saw acurious article on defense-updates blog that describes the atack on the Hanit link:http://www.defense-update.com/2006/07/ins-hanit-suffers-iranian-missile.html
please bear in mind that this site is very close to the israeli side, so it could be biased, but since we don´t have any other acurate source to compare, it´ll do for now.

.pt

 

[contedicavour]

Well, i´m no expert at evaluating damage, and the pictures quality isn´t the best, but as far as i can see, there seems to be some damage to the structure that houses the helicopter, altough the helicopter itself on this picture( if its real) doesn´t seems to be too damaged. The suposedly missile hole its settled, its just an exaust. But if information about the warhead provided earlier is correct, the picture does not show that much damage, nor is the vessel guted on this side, yet the explosion caused casualties, perhaps the other side of the vessel, not shown, is in worse shape? Or the damage was just internal, and not visible on the picture?
Just in case the weapon used was not a C802, what other ASM weapon could have been used, one that would fit in known weapons in use in Lebanon, or Siryan/Iran navy?
Also, whatever the cause of the failure to intercept the missile(s), the end result is, militarly, and politically a hard blow to the Israeli side. Guess we won´t be seeing much more parading of warships so near the Lebanese coast in a while, until the Israeli sort it out.
My question is, due to the threats delivered by Hizbollah, and aparently some capacity on their side to deliver, what other surprises they could have to throw at the Israeli navy?
regards.
Edit just saw acurious article on defense-updates blog that describes the atack on the Hanit link:http://www.defense-update.com/2006/07/ins-hanit-suffers-iranian-missile.html
please bear in mind that this site is very close to the israeli side, so it could be biased, but since we don´t have any other acurate source to compare, it´ll do for now.

.pt

Syrians and/or Iranians don't have anything better than C802. Iran had Harpoons but the stocks have long since been depleted. Styx missiles in the Syrian arsenal are much less capable than C802 (in range, anti-ECM, low altitude flightpath...). However Iraq had Exocets and I'm not sure the US and other allied countries found all of the remaining stocks.
Another much less sophisticated threat the IDF Navy may encounter is MLRS-type launchers or just simply 152mm calibre heavy artillery. Range is 25+ km so even if the ships retreat from the immediate proximity of the coastline, a lucky volley could still cause serious damage to other ships

 

[merocaine]

It appears the Israeli corvette had her anti-air/missile warfare systems turned off due to the number of Israeli aircraft in the air, unaware of Hezbollah's anti-ship missile capability.

Apperantly it happens a lot, doesent the US navy keep its Aegis systems off line when not in combat situations for the same reason after they shot down that iranian airbus?
I do know that when the fleet was moored of beruit in the 1980's they kept the Anti air/anti ship systems off line for the same reason( they had guys with stingers hanging around the decks because if they turned the systems on it would have been a civi barbeque).

anyway the ship had about 18 seconds to respond from launch to impact, not sure how long those systems take to warm up but even if the sailors reacted instantly they did'ent have a chance.

 

[icelord]

Range is 25+ km so even if the ships retreat from the immediate proximity of the coastline, a lucky volley could still cause serious damage to other ships

How bloody lucky would you have to be to hit a corvette, not more then 60-80m 20+km off the coast, while moving. If it hit, i'd just say gods not on my side and go home

 

[tphuang]

Apperantly it happens a lot, doesent the US navy keep its Aegis systems off line when not in combat situations for the same reason after they shot down that iranian airbus?
I do know that when the fleet was moored of beruit in the 1980's they kept the Anti air/anti ship systems off line for the same reason( they had guys with stingers hanging around the decks because if they turned the systems on it would have been a civi barbeque).

anyway the ship had about 18 seconds to respond from launch to impact, not sure how long those systems take to warm up but even if the sailors reacted instantly they did'ent have a chance.

actually, according to BD Popeye on SDF, Aegis normally always stays on alert.
"Intresting you should ask that. Since 9/11/2001 Ageis ships never turn there systems off. Unless they are in re-fit. It is very redundant and is totally interlinking with the whole Aegis system. The ships share all the information with each other. In fact when a Arliegh Burke ship is still being built a ceremony is performed when the Aegis system is "lit off". Here's a link about the PCU Kidd(DDG-100) lighting off Aegis.

http://www.news.navy.mil/search/disp...story_id=24196"

To .pt, we are saying that the picture is pre-damage, so we haven't really got a picture showing the real damage.

 

[Waylander]

Attacking ships with land based howitzers is not new.
With bomblet rounds you should be able to increase the chance of hitting the target and cause a mission kill.
Do the Iranians, Syrians or Libanese use bomblets?

 

[merocaine]

"Intresting you should ask that. Since 9/11/2001 Ageis ships never turn there systems off. Unless they are in re-fit. It is very redundant and is totally interlinking with the whole Aegis system. The ships share all the information with each other. In fact when a Arliegh Burke ship is still being built a ceremony is performed when the Aegis system is "lit off". Here's a link about the PCU Kidd(DDG-100) lighting off Aegis.

http://www.news.navy.mil/search/disp...story_id=24196"

Cheers man, do you know how they can tell nutrals from hostiles and at what point an inbound craft is considered threat?

 

[Jtimes2]

Cheers man, do you know how they can tell nutrals from hostiles and at what point an inbound craft is considered threat?

Ha ha ha...if you believe the current US Navy recruiting television commercial; they can track a house fly a hundred miles inshore...........

I think both SPY-1 and SPY-2 have "in-house" IFF interrogator subsystems.

 

[tphuang]

Cheers man, do you know how they can tell nutrals from hostiles and at what point an inbound craft is considered threat?

I guess they really trust their IFF software. If you want more details, you might want to ask Popeye personally.

A new twist, one of the current explanations is that Hezbollah first send a C-802 as a decoy and attract the attention of SAAR5. That was the one that hit the egyptian ship. A second missile which is C-701 was then send against SAAR5. It did not have have active radar seeker. Rather, it uses IR/TV seeker. And that was the one that supposedly struck SAAR5.

you can read more about it from
http://www.defense-update.com/2006/07/ins-hanit-suffers-iranian-missile.html

 

[merocaine]

A new twist, one of the current explanations is that Hezbollah first send a C-802 as a decoy and attract the attention of SAAR5. That was the one that hit the egyptian ship. A second missile which is C-701 was then send against SAAR5. It did not have have active radar seeker. Rather, it uses IR/TV seeker. And that was the one that supposedly struck SAAR5.

Thats very interesting, and would point to a high level of coodenadion between hezbullah, the leb army radar stations( or elements in the Leb army)
and the suppliers or the missles( iran or syria). It would explain the israelies hitting the leb army base today, as a dont mess around with us kind of statement.

To be honest i never thought Hezbullah capable this kind of attack, and neither did the israelies, i suspect this will make the israelies much more wary of any kind of long term incursion into south leb. As the Israelies have racheted up attacks hezbullah have been able to hit back with ones the israelies publicly never credited them with. This is turning into an elaborate dance with an almost powerless Lebonese goverment(and population) being ground in between. I can see no happy ending at the moment.:unknown

 

[rossfrb_1]

according to
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/naval/saar5/Saar5.html

the saar 5 has a phalanx 15 OR 76mm OTOBreda capability, not both.
If they were using the ship for shore bombardment, then I'm guessing the 76mm was installed instead of the phalanx. The phalanx can have its own sensor/firecontrol package independent (or linked to) the ship's sensor/targetting suite, don't know about the 76mm.
But the Barak point defence missile (with which this class of vessel can be equipped) is supposed to be quite effective (but only if you are expecting to use it, not if it's turned off).

rb

 

[Waylander]

Another question is, how effective is the Barak as a CIWS? A missile which main task is to interecept missiles and planes at middle ranges may be quite useless against missiles fired close to the ship.

 

[contedicavour]

according to
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/naval/saar5/Saar5.html

the saar 5 has a phalanx 15 OR 76mm OTOBreda capability, not both.
If they were using the ship for shore bombardment, then I'm guessing the 76mm was installed instead of the phalanx. The phalanx can have its own sensor/firecontrol package independent (or linked to) the ship's sensor/targetting suite, don't know about the 76mm.
But the Barak point defence missile (with which this class of vessel can be equipped) is supposed to be quite effective (but only if you are expecting to use it, not if it's turned off).

rb

Yes, this is exactly the point I made a couple of days ago. It appears 99% sure that Phalanx was installed, so shore bombardment was left to the Saar 4.5 with the 76mm gun mounted aft.
76mm oto melara guns can be used as CIWS but only as part of a dedicated system (Dardo-E), with faster rate of fire (super rapid , 120 rounds a minute of 6kg each), and ideally with guided munitions (Vulcano programme with the Netherlands). And you need 3 76/62mm to cover appropriately 360° the ship.
Barak can be effective as CIWS but requires engaging the target before it gets 1km or closer. Given the timings of the attack, the missile was already too close,whether the barak was "on" or "off"

 

[sidishus]

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=107685

Barak Anti-Missile System May Be Used in Haifa
14:09 Jul 18, '06 / 22 Tammuz 5766

(IsraelNN.com) The Israeli navy has begun to study the possibility of deploying navy ships in Hafia bay equiped with the Barak anti-missile system.

The system would be used to defend Haifa and the surrounding communities.

The anti-missile system is normally carried by advanced navy ships, such as the Saar-5 and Saar-4.5 class destroyers.

Over one thousand five hundred rockets have been fired at Israel since the outbreak of hostilities seven days ago.[/i]

 

[merocaine]

Over one thousand five hundred rockets have been fired at Israel since the outbreak of hostilities seven days ago.[/i]

i think its more like 700 plus about 80 today.
you can check it on Haaretzdaily, eng lan Israeli news paper.

Dont think the anti missle system is a good idea, did'ent Israeli causlties rise when the Pariot was deployed during GW1 due to falling debries? anti missle systems only really work if you want to avoid pin point strikes, over densley populated areas there a bit counter productive, esp against unguided war heads.

 

[Sea Toby]

I'm sure after this conflict is over Israel will be acquiring a better missile defense system near its northern border with Lebanon and Syria, and around the Gaza Strip. Its gonna be expensive, and the opposition will probably return to mortars and artillery. If Israel does invest in an air missile defense system, it would be best to intercept the incoming missiles over enemy held territory, otherwise the carnage will land on Israeli soil.