Sunburst: The Invincible?
- Thread starter Khairul Alam
- Start date
- Status
Sorry I ment Sea Dart.
Your right my figures were well wrong, I was thinking of something else completely...
The Sea Dart entered service in 1973, so it was'ent to dated., But the radar did have serious shortcomings.
The Sea Wolf entered service in 1979, just before the war. It shot down 5 fighters and was a good preformer. It did suffer from numerous technicle difficulties.
The point I was trying to make was a lot of the problems that the British task force encountered with its kit only became evident after contact was made.
Excellent training and a bit of luck got the british through the dark early days. But kit that the British previously had a lot (perhaps to much) faith in failed in the first test of combat. THe Argintaines it must be said were afflicted with the same kind of problems.
Yes it is hard to discuss. I do believe that automation carries its own risks, havent you seen terminator
I'm not a luddite, I just dont trust salesmen!
Grand Danois
Entertainer
There is always common ground somewhere!
Grand Danois
The AN/SPY-1D radar is apparently capable of identifying and tracking up to and above 100 targets, if a target is determined to be hostile the destroyer can launch an SM-2 missile against the treat using tracking data from the SPY-1D, this is used to determine a mid-point which the missiles auto-pilot guides to.
After reaching the mid point the missile uses semi-active radar homing where the missile listens for reflected enegy from the target, where the SPY-1D tracking radar directs a AN/SPG-62 target illumination radar towards the target which them provides the radar beam which the missile homes in on.
Burke have 3 AN/SPG-62 target illumination radars, so can terminally guide 3 SM-2 missiles on target at any one time, however more missiles can be heading to the mid point while the previous set are being terminally guiding, with the AN/SPG-62 radar switching between targets as each is destroyed. ESSM operates in a similar manner, http://www.bjkmf.hu/bszemle/kulon0206.html.
If AEGIS can guide in terminal phase only 3 missiles (than switch for another three and in mean time guide hundred of other missiles in midcourse dont you think it is a rather catchy for a ship defences when you have a Mach 2.9 sea skiming missile heading your way) at the targets thats not good enought to keep the Yakhonts at range - its defences will be overwhelmed easily.
I found this site for horizon calculation and according to it Aleign Burke would detect for example cruise missile (with estimated hight of the radar for 20m - I dont have a clue about about ships radar real height) and Yakkhont flying at sea level 4m above sea water at 17.5km.
Now imagine cruise missile flying at Mach 2.5 or (Klub 3M54E with Mach 2.9) at 17.5km distance (with RAM coating and amoured plates against vital parts with wild manouevre ready to perform) and ship has only 18sec for reaction - I think its unstopable!
Wild thing.
Missiles has RAM coating as well as armoured plates for CWIS protection. I have a file on my computer but can not upload it due to a forum limitations.
The AN/SPY-1D radar is apparently capable of identifying and tracking up to and above 100 targets, if a target is determined to be hostile the destroyer can launch an SM-2 missile against the treat using tracking data from the SPY-1D, this is used to determine a mid-point which the missiles auto-pilot guides to.
After reaching the mid point the missile uses semi-active radar homing where the missile listens for reflected enegy from the target, where the SPY-1D tracking radar directs a AN/SPG-62 target illumination radar towards the target which them provides the radar beam which the missile homes in on.
Burke have 3 AN/SPG-62 target illumination radars, so can terminally guide 3 SM-2 missiles on target at any one time, however more missiles can be heading to the mid point while the previous set are being terminally guiding, with the AN/SPG-62 radar switching between targets as each is destroyed. ESSM operates in a similar manner, http://www.bjkmf.hu/bszemle/kulon0206.html.
If AEGIS can guide in terminal phase only 3 missiles (than switch for another three and in mean time guide hundred of other missiles in midcourse dont you think it is a rather catchy for a ship defences when you have a Mach 2.9 sea skiming missile heading your way) at the targets thats not good enought to keep the Yakhonts at range - its defences will be overwhelmed easily.
I found this site for horizon calculation and according to it Aleign Burke would detect for example cruise missile (with estimated hight of the radar for 20m - I dont have a clue about about ships radar real height) and Yakkhont flying at sea level 4m above sea water at 17.5km.
Now imagine cruise missile flying at Mach 2.5 or (Klub 3M54E with Mach 2.9) at 17.5km distance (with RAM coating and amoured plates against vital parts with wild manouevre ready to perform) and ship has only 18sec for reaction - I think its unstopable!
Wild thing.
Missiles has RAM coating as well as armoured plates for CWIS protection. I have a file on my computer but can not upload it due to a forum limitations.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
So the Burke can only shoot down one cruise missile per second?
You do realise the illuminators are not used for the uplink? They are used for the last 2-4 seconds of the endgame/terminal illumination.
- AEGIS can track hundreds of targets.
- The fire control illuminators can engage 3 targets at a time, each engagement takes a few seconds.
- More than one missile can be used per engagement - increases PK.
- It has been previously mentioned that 18 missiles can be uplinked, or be in the air at the same time.
- Midcourse means until the missile is close enough to the target to use the endgame illumination. It doesn't mean midpoint.
That's for visual horizon. Use this instead for radar horizon. IIRC the SPY-1 is 17-18m above sea level and the illuminators are something like 21m meters above. This is important as the Burke can use the E-2C above through CEC, it don't need to use the SPY-1.
And no. At 4 meters the cruise missile will ditch into the sea! Use 5-7m.
Btw, what became of this earlier posted material?
Continuing.
OK on the armour, not on the RAM.
That has to be convincing. You could convey the explanation of how the RAM survives?
Last edited:
Forgive me, as I have not read the entirety of the thread (its huge), but this little tidbit, if you are referring to Radar Absorbing Material not being able to take large amounts of heat, then the assumption is incorrect.
There are Radar Absorbing Materials that can take quite a lot of heat and be ablative to boot. Meaning that if you were a tricky dicky you could create your own IR (as its hot) and radar chaff.
In fact (if you think about it) the USSR created the first usable ablative heat shield for re-entry in the form of cork. How's them for apples?
Just playing devil's advocate, I guess.:devil :devil
cheers
w
it also only have 18 seconds to find the target, lock onto it and hit it. And until it locks onto the target, it's not going to dive lower into the attack mode.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Those 18 seconds were based on two premises, which I challenged:
- The Yakhont flies at 4 m asl.
- That visual horizon = radar horizon.
The radar horizon calculator uses the rule of thumb that radar have a horizon of 4/3 the visual horizon. I also suggested that the SPY-1 was at 17-18m and not 20m (works against the Burke). Lastly, I suggested that 4m is too low. The numbers Viktor posted earlier said 5-10m, I suggest 5-7m.
If you insert 17.5m and 6m, respectively into the radar horizon calculator you will get a horizon of 27.4 km. As the Yakhont moves at 750m/s you will get twice the reaction time - 36.5 seconds.
Not sure I understand your last sentence.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Ablation is a different approach than what I had in mind, and somewhat a challenge to make it work under these conditions. I'll think about it and get back.Forgive me, as I have not read the entirety of the thread (its huge), but this little tidbit, if you are referring to Radar Absorbing Material not being able to take large amounts of heat, then the assumption is incorrect.
There are Radar Absorbing Materials that can take quite a lot of heat and be ablative to boot. Meaning that if you were a tricky dicky you could create your own IR (as its hot) and radar chaff.
In fact (if you think about it) the USSR created the first usable ablative heat shield for re-entry in the form of cork. How's them for apples?
Just playing devil's advocate, I guess.:devil :devil
cheers
w
In the meantime, I'll throw out this question:
The SPY-1 pumps out 2MW of juice per face when active (that's 1 MW on average, but the 2MW is the number to use). It also has a 3.6 m aperture. And at a range of 36.5 km - then what's the use of RAM??
SPY has an effective range of more than 200 miles and mid-course guidance is handled by the SPY and Command and Decision systems until the terminial homing phase.
I think it can guide more than just the 3, I'll have to talk to some FCS techs but I remember one of them telling me that in a lot of cases one illuminator can illuminate more than one target at a time if they are close enough together, of course he didn't tell me how close that has to be. Also the CND system has a feature called Command All The Way that can guide a certain number of missiles using just SPY data, it isn't as accurate as the illuminators though.
I don't think armor plates on the missile would help it much, the airframes on modern missiles have very fine tollerances and any glancing blow would probably be enough to destroy it or send it crashing into the sea.
But you also seem to be forgetting that in any engagement it just won't be Aegis flinging missiles everywhere, EW, the gun, chaff, flares, Nulka all have a roll to play in protecting the ship as well.
And? Radars have been pumping that sort of energy out for over 40 years and in particular ,exactly 2MW, which gives you reasonable coverage out to 136 NM.
Its well known public information that radar "reflection" is a function of material resonance; meaning that a radar must transit enough energy into the material to reach its resonance level before it starts reflecting radar energy.
Given the above, it may well be possible to make a missile radar stealthy to about 4NM. But the point is moot, you still have a huge IR signature and you should be able to spot it at least 18NM out. And as someone pointed out armor will be quite ineffective, as the missile will be approaching "head on" increasing the relative velocity of impact of a projectile or anti missile missile.
People keep forgetting that KE is a function of velocity squared. An increase of just 10m/sec at the velocities we are talking about will have a devastating effect upon the missile.
cheers
w
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Busy day. So one thing at a time...
In my optics a supersonic ASCM is a missile that sacrifices everything in order to be fast. Though range has been solved by making a huge missile with a ramjet.
Signature management of the supersonic ASCM.
Acoustic - Not that relevant here.
IR - well, not much to be done here.
RCS - yes, it can be reduced. Will RAM play a role in this?
There are already a host of requirements for the materials of the missile. Using the picture of the Yakhont, which Viktor posted, as reference. See attachment.
The nose cone will have to be narrow bandwidth bandpass, offer good structural integrity (this is M2.4), and conform with tolerances to manage the airflow into the ramjet, have a surface texture throughout the ablation that manage the boundary layers and does not increase RCS (oh, I did say tolerances). This is not a rocket.
This material will also have to be
A) radar absorbing and be able to conduct and/or radiate the extreme heat away without compromising the other properties of the material.
or
B) radar absorbing and be able to ablate in a controlled manner (tolerances) without compromising the other properties of the material and the shape of the cone.
This is a very, very highly controlled and specced material. You may have some suggestions on concepts to use, but I don't think any such material is in operational use. But I'm not a materials engineer anyway.
Actually, if this was a rocket, this part could maybe be solved with an aerospike, like the Igla ('needle'), uses for reducing the atmospheres friction with the IR seeker head. Oh, that was a sidetrack.
Next to the inlets of the ramjet. Here we don't need the bandpass, but geometry and RAM properties have to be managed across the temperature range in order not to disrupt the intake of air into the ramjet. Again a very controlled material.
The body itself is not that exposed, and a thin coating could survive. It probably wouldn't need more anyway.
The fins probably are the easiest part to fit RAM to, as they are the most forgiving. But this is still M2.4 at sea level!
The weapon/platform (missile) also has to be sympathetic to the signature management method, in this case radar absorbing materials. My reflections on this is above, I will add that generally the larger the platform is, the better it can use RAM coatings, as thickness of applied material matters. Example of this is how a Bragg cell works.
The supersonic cruise missile trades agility and VLO with speed.
RAM, also ablative, has to have many other properties to it on top of being radar absorbing - tricky in such a harsh environment. And ablation adds the queston on how to control the shape and geometry of surfaces at various stages of ablation. If this can be done.
I suggest that most of the RCS reduction is done with shaping ie removal of radar corners and a simple bandpass nose cone, without RAM.
Head on RCS in the order of 0.1-1 m^2?
In my optics a supersonic ASCM is a missile that sacrifices everything in order to be fast. Though range has been solved by making a huge missile with a ramjet.
Signature management of the supersonic ASCM.
Acoustic - Not that relevant here.
IR - well, not much to be done here.
RCS - yes, it can be reduced. Will RAM play a role in this?
There are already a host of requirements for the materials of the missile. Using the picture of the Yakhont, which Viktor posted, as reference. See attachment.
The nose cone will have to be narrow bandwidth bandpass, offer good structural integrity (this is M2.4), and conform with tolerances to manage the airflow into the ramjet, have a surface texture throughout the ablation that manage the boundary layers and does not increase RCS (oh, I did say tolerances). This is not a rocket.
This material will also have to be
A) radar absorbing and be able to conduct and/or radiate the extreme heat away without compromising the other properties of the material.
or
B) radar absorbing and be able to ablate in a controlled manner (tolerances) without compromising the other properties of the material and the shape of the cone.
This is a very, very highly controlled and specced material. You may have some suggestions on concepts to use, but I don't think any such material is in operational use. But I'm not a materials engineer anyway.
Actually, if this was a rocket, this part could maybe be solved with an aerospike, like the Igla ('needle'
), uses for reducing the atmospheres friction with the IR seeker head. Oh, that was a sidetrack.Next to the inlets of the ramjet. Here we don't need the bandpass, but geometry and RAM properties have to be managed across the temperature range in order not to disrupt the intake of air into the ramjet. Again a very controlled material.
The body itself is not that exposed, and a thin coating could survive. It probably wouldn't need more anyway.
The fins probably are the easiest part to fit RAM to, as they are the most forgiving. But this is still M2.4 at sea level!
The weapon/platform (missile) also has to be sympathetic to the signature management method, in this case radar absorbing materials. My reflections on this is above, I will add that generally the larger the platform is, the better it can use RAM coatings, as thickness of applied material matters. Example of this is how a Bragg cell works.
The supersonic cruise missile trades agility and VLO with speed.
RAM, also ablative, has to have many other properties to it on top of being radar absorbing - tricky in such a harsh environment. And ablation adds the queston on how to control the shape and geometry of surfaces at various stages of ablation. If this can be done.
I suggest that most of the RCS reduction is done with shaping ie removal of radar corners and a simple bandpass nose cone, without RAM.
Head on RCS in the order of 0.1-1 m^2?
Last edited:
The appropriate response to that post is.... "Yes" :nutkickBusy day. So one thing at a time...
In my optics a supersonic ASCM is a missile that sacrifices everything in order to be fast. Though range has been solved by making a huge missile with a ramjet.
Signature management of the supersonic ASCM.
Acoustic - Not that relevant here.
IR - well, not much to be done here.
RCS - yes, it can be reduced. Will RAM play a role in this?
There are already a host of requirements for the materials of the missile. Using the picture of the Yakhont, which Viktor posted, as reference. See attachment.
The nose cone will have to be narrow bandwidth bandpass, offer good structural integrity (this is M2.4), and conform with tolerances to manage the airflow into the ramjet, have a surface texture throughout the ablation that manage the boundary layers and does not increase RCS (oh, I did say tolerances). This is not a rocket.
This material will also have to be
A) radar absorbing and be able to conduct and/or radiate the extreme heat away without compromising the other properties of the material.
or
B) radar absorbing and be able to ablate in a controlled manner (tolerances) without compromising the other properties of the material and the shape of the cone.
This is a very, very highly controlled and specced material. You may have some suggestions on concepts to use, but I don't think any such material is in operational use. But I'm not a materials engineer anyway.
Actually, if this was a rocket, this part could maybe be solved with an aerospike, like the Igla ('needle'
Next to the inlets of the ramjet. Here we don't need the bandpass, but geometry and RAM properties have to be managed across the temperature range in order not to disrupt the intake of air into the ramjet. Again a very controlled material.
The body itself is not that exposed, and a thin coating could survive. It probably wouldn't need more anyway.
The fins probably are the easiest part to fit RAM to, as they are the most forgiving. But this is still M2.4 at sea level!
The weapon/platform (missile) also has to be sympathetic to the signature management method, in this case radar absorbing materials. My reflections on this is above, I will add that generally the larger the platform is, the better it can use RAM coatings, as thickness of applied material matters. Example of this is how a Bragg cell works.
The supersonic cruise missile trades agility and VLO with speed.
RAM, also ablative, has to have many other properties to it on top of being radar absorbing - tricky in such a harsh environment. And ablation adds the queston on how to control the shape and geometry of surfaces at various stages of ablation. If this can be done.
I suggest that most of the RCS reduction is done with shaping ie removal of radar corners and a simple bandpass nose cone, without RAM.
Head on RCS in the order of 0.1-1 m^2?
Here, one of my favorite piccies that helps one's brain wrap around ablation.
A thing of beauty...This is the form factor that dense air (such as that experienced by an object encountering a supersonic shockwave) will try and form your solid into through ablation. Now go back and look at the shape of the missile in question.
Not impossible, is it? Then there is the other item of a nation backing the development and production of such a missile. It means there are people out there (you know, like you and me but with a funny accent) that think the platform is capable and worth spending money on.
So really, it comes down to which camp you are in. The missile guys or the missile defense guys
I can tell you from experience that in the USA, if you even suggest the remotest tiny bee's schwarz possiblility that an Aegis system could maybe, might one day "let one through" you will be hexed and hissed at. I was lucky to get out of the room with all my parts intact and attached to my person.
It comforts me that the USN are so confident
cheers
w
No question about it - AEGIS can track hundrets of targets and it can guide hundreds of missiles but on midcourse not in terminal phase. Those few seconds ilumination radars take to guide three missiles in terminal phase is something you destroyer can not spare. (by my opinion). I im aware of the midcourse and midpoint - still it makes some differences.Grand Danois said:
Thats for SM-2 - but for a sea skiming missiles SM-2 is useless.Grand Danois said:
Does ESSN have semi-active radar terminal homing??
Sorry - Im lately in a hury so I made mistake- I war refering to 3M45E missile or SS-N-27 (it is stated to have 3-5m flight above sea level, it has RAM coating and it flys Mach 2.9 in terminal phase (40km before impact) and performs manoevre when missile detect threat (another missile homing at it))Grand Danois said:
Grand Danois said:
Thanks man for that link - I had no idea. When I use information 21m for ilumination radar and 4m for a sea skiming 3M45E missile it still makes 27km distance or 27 sec for reaction with one thing in mind final few second is useless for defence whitch further reduces reaction time.
BTW - few questions.
1. Have you any information about SPG-62 Continuous Wave Illuminator
2. Does SPY-1 or Illuminator detects target first? Because if SPY-1 detects it first than distance will be further reduced. (that would leave 25.5sec for reaction with last few incapable for defences)
And the RAM too.Grand Danois said:
Well destroyer is not so small target and missile can recive updates throw satelites etc.tphuang said:
Grand Danois said:
Once again sorry - I was refering for mutch stronger missile and mutch more lethal. SS-N-27. Amour class will be armed with that as well as new Grany class SSGN
AegisFC said:
It makes sence but as I read Russians placed armour with CWIS in mind and most expensive titanium alloy was used. I know physics and know that energy unleashed upon missile when hit by the CWIS gun is enourmos because of relative speeds but I dont know that Russian designers will incorporate something whitch is useless.
Homing of the missile in the terminal phase is active and pasive combined with combined turning off and on (So far as I know). They are prety un-jammable.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Several missiles can be guided on to the same illuminated target. In other words illumination is provided for say 6 missiles at one time against 3 targets.
The ESSM uses semi active radar homing. The SM-2 uses very well suited for low altitude intercepts. From the USN themselves.
Are we discussing Klub, Sunburn or Yakhont? Are they all M2.9, 3m altitude, superstealthy and super agile?
First we have to agree on that it will not fly below 5 meters.
1. Curvature of earth approximates geoid, which approximates mean sea level. The two latter are what matters in operational terms.
2. See this link for definition of Significant Wave Height.
"Significant Wave Height, also known as SWH or Hs, is the average height (trough to crest) of the largest one third of waves. A well developed significant wave is approximately four times the standard deviation from sea level."
The profile and nature the waves are that the trough is slightly below the msl, whilst most of the significant wave is above msl, see the underlined part. Equal volume under and over msl. Also statistically there are waves above the significant wave height.
Now take a look at the current SWHs in the oceans across the world, click on a region:
http://www.oceanweather.com/data/
In any area were the SWH is above 2 meters your supersonic missile ditches into the sea - turns into a Shkval, so to speak.
So 3 meters is rubbish. You need at least 5-6 meters in operational terms.
Use 5-6 meters, at least. If AAW vessel is alone use 17-18m for SPY-1.
1. Google.
2. It can't detect - it illuminates. It recieves the track through CEC.
How does it work?
Last edited:
contedicavour
New Member
Somebody (Distiller) previously asked a very good question.
What launch platforms would the Iranians use to launch Sunburns ?
Too big for the Kilo SSKs or for the Combattante or Hegu FAC(M)s, and probably too big for the Vosper corvettes.
What Iranian jets could carry such a heavy weapon ?
Does the Iranian Navy have coastal units capable of launching Sunburn or are they still restricted to obsolete Silkworm and C802 ?
cheers
What launch platforms would the Iranians use to launch Sunburns ?
Too big for the Kilo SSKs or for the Combattante or Hegu FAC(M)s, and probably too big for the Vosper corvettes.
What Iranian jets could carry such a heavy weapon ?
Does the Iranian Navy have coastal units capable of launching Sunburn or are they still restricted to obsolete Silkworm and C802 ?
cheers
do the sums between a Hawk and a Sunburn.
contedicavour
New Member
do the sums between a Hawk and a Sunburn.
hwell Not sure I get your point ... you mean a launch ramp comparable to that of the Hawk ?? may be mobile on a truck ? Would be better than a fixed position though the radar would remain vulnerable to Harm missiles the moment it lights up a ship in the Gulf.If Iran could get its hands on Backfires and arm them with Sunburns then it would be much more dangerous. Of course it would be a one way trip as the TU22M3 would get shot down, but it would still wreck havoc.
cheers
- Status