Iowa Class vs Kirov Class

[IDonT]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

If you decided to engage an Iowa at 100 miles stand off distance your dead end of story. If her Harpoons have 85 nautical mile distance and her Toms have 1500 miles imagine how far her radars can see. The best strategy for the Kirov is sail away in the other direction and dont risk your ship over a fight you certainly wont win.

Being Americas most decorated battleship (18 stars) means that you dont run from anybody at anytime. After 48 years of service to the USN and several direct encounters in conflict they have a awesome track record second to none that has tested her time and again.

Kirov has yet to even see a conflict that would test even her slightest ability at conflict and sea handeling skills. That alot of wishfull thinking about a ship that still has yet to get her feet wet.

The problem is that the Iowa's surface search radar has only a range of the horizon. Your long range missiles range will be useless unless you have the ability to see your target. It's like having a sniper rifle but without a scope. You can still hit a target, but not the ones that arefar to see.

Secondly, modern naval warfare (even during the 80's) involved finding the location of the enemy without him locating you. This battle will always start out with both captain's launching their helo's over the horizon to locate the enemy. The main advantage of the Kirov is that it can shoot down a helicopter at altitude at range. On the other hand, the Helix can stay within 10 nm of the Iowa and be relatively safe.

Yes the Iowa's were great ships but they are unfortunately obsolete. A single burke Flight II/A destroyer has a much better chance of engaging the Kirov 1 on 1.

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by IDonT

The problem is that the Iowa's surface search radar has only a range of the horizon. Your long range missiles range will be useless unless you have the ability to see your target. It's like having a sniper rifle but without a scope. You can still hit a target, but not the ones that arefar to see.

Secondly, modern naval warfare (even during the 80's) involved finding the location of the enemy without him locating you. This battle will always start out with both captain's launching their helo's over the horizon to locate the enemy. The main advantage of the Kirov is that it can shoot down a helicopter at altitude at range. On the other hand, the Helix can stay within 10 nm of the Iowa and be relatively safe.

Yes the Iowa's were great ships but they are unfortunately obsolete. A single burke Flight II/A destroyer has a much better chance of engaging the Kirov 1 on 1.

The sat relay systems used aboard fare much farther and clearer then the old stlye surface sets. This is also why the helo is not used for spotting nor guidance for the missle sets (perhaps mid course but certainly not primary). We wouldnt trust something that important with something that can be easily shot down and we would be blind as a bat. This is not Korean/Vietnam era where the helo was used for spotting. We know long before Kirov gets into any position to fire. And I certainly wouldn't suggest the Kirov's helos are safe at 10 miles out. They certainly are not safe at all and it would be a simple matter of duck hunting although we wouldnt use an elephant gun to do it. In addition althought the helo is not used in the fashion that Kirov's is for spotting purposes you can rest assure that if she returns to sea she would be carring something much more lethal then a Seasprite for doing its normal chores such as mail and supply delivery.

[IDonT]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

The sat relay systems used aboard fare much farther and clearer then the old stlye surface sets. This is also why the helo is not used for spotting nor guidance for the missle sets (perhaps mid course but certainly not primary). We wouldnt trust something that important with something that can be easily shot down and we would be blind as a bat. This is not Korean/Vietnam era where the helo was used for spotting. We know long before Kirov gets into any position to fire. And I certainly wouldn't suggest the Kirov's helos are safe at 10 miles out. They certainly are not safe at all and it would be a simple matter of duck hunting although we wouldnt use an elephant gun to do it. In addition althought the helo is not used in the fashion that Kirov's is for spotting purposes you can rest assure that if she returns to sea she would be carring something much more lethal then a Seasprite for doing its normal chores such as mail and supply delivery.

The nature of this discussion was to isolate the Iowa's surface combatant capability vs that of the Kirov. In this case the 1980's vintage Iowa vs the 1980's Kirov. In order to do this you have to match them in an isolated controlled environment, no third party support other than what they can carry with them.

If the Iowa is travelling in full support of the USN. That is another matter.

Currently, there are 2 Kirov's still in commission with the northern fleet. The full sortie of the Northern fleet, minus a carrier, will be centered on the Kirovs and the Slava with escorting Sovs and Udaloy destroyers. I have no doubt that an adhoc surface strike group (SSG) of the Iowa escorted by Burkes and Tico's can take them on with high probability of victory. However, the same Burke and Tico's SSG can also defeat them on their own without the Iowa. The Iowa needs the Burke and Tico to successfully operate against such a powerful fleet. The Burke and Tico do not need the Iowa.

[SnowLeopard]

Originally Posted by Blademaster

Iowa's radars are only good for the on the horizon. They do not have any Over the Horizon radars. Now if the Iowa ships were escorted by the Aegis destroyers and data linked to the Aegis destroyers, well, Iowas can receive the targetting info and let loose her destructive power. IIRC, there are new technology today that allows shells to be fired further than 25 miles. Better refinement in propellment can allow the shells to be propelled up to 70 miles if I am correct.

Mmmmm, what data link? According to Polmar's book on the US Fleet for the mid 80's, Iowa's weren't NTDS ships. All they had in that category was Link 11 receivers.

Of course, for the question here, that's rather immaterial, isn't it? We are talking Iowa vs. Kirov, one on one, not Iowa battlegroup vs. Kirov battlegroup. Only what the ship carries in a full load.

No Aegis, no AWACS, no others. Further, keep in mind that anti ship missiles tend to be fire and forget ..... they don't talk back to the ships that fired them.
--------------------------------------------
("I thought I told you to come alone."--heavy to punk, wondering about the Sprint team behind him, (w,stte), Sprint commercial)

[gunnut]

Originally Posted by IDonT

Any competent Kirov Captain knows full well the capability of the Iowa at horizon range and he would not want fight an "Iowa's fight" but his own. The fact that the Iowa lacks even the most basic air defence (CIWIs is last ditch only) means that the targeting Helix can shadow the Iowa without harrassment.

If I was the Kirov Captain I would stay within 50-100 miles of target and let lose my Shipwreck. That way, these missiles will still have 66 percent of their fuel load when they hit the Iowa (creates more fire damage). In addition, my Air defence officer would be shoot down any Sea Sprite that comes snooping around in order to keep the Iowa captain blind as to where my location is.

Once my Shipwreck are exhausted, the Helix can send battle damage assessment to determine if I can finish off the Iowa at within the horizon range without significant risk. The shipwreck would target the armored box launchers and the harpoon launchers. These areas of the ship are estremely vulnerable from secondaries. Other shipwrecks would attack the 16 inch turrets. They may not penetrate, but the fire would make the turret less effective or uninhabitable. If the 16 inchers are still online, run away. If not sink her.

The initiative is always with the Kirov.

I agree. Kirov needs to stay out of horizon to have a chance.

The problem is what if Kirov expends all her Shipwrecks, with a few hits, but fails to do significant damage?

Let's for the sake of this thread, a totally outlandish scenario of 1v1 combat, Thunderdome fight (2 man enter, 1 man leaves), the Kirov couldn't finish off the Iowa with her Shipwrecks and thus forced to close the distance and use her secondary weapons, Iowa would probably pound Kirov to dust.

So basically Iowa needs to survive the formation of Shipwrecks from long distance in order to have a chance. Kirov needs to finish off Iowa from beyond the horizon in order to survive.

[tphuang]

Originally Posted by gunnut

Exactly. That's why I said point blank range Kirov is dead meat against Iowa. TPHuang's point is that Kirov does have within horizon range weapons in SAMs used for anti-surface role. Those missiles need to have a targeting lock to fire. In 1v1 duel (for the sake of this thread) that means Kirov is within the horizon of the Iowa to be able to use these weapons. That means Iowa is free to let loose the 16" guns. Dead Kirov.

do you know how the Russians used their shipwreck missiles? How they were able to make use of the maximum range? If you did, you wouldn't be saying something like this.

Even on top of that, they had a bunch of OTH radar that can detect a behemoth like Iowa. And on top of that, they had helicopters to provide targeting.

In a on the horizon encounter the Iowas are quite deadly for the Kirov. Normal eye sight to the horizon is nominal 12-15 miles before the curvature of the earth fools your eyes. The Harpoon is good for 85 miles out and the Toms are good for 1500 miles out. Needless to say these are the older versions of these missles and if upgraded such as the thread portrayed it would have to be taken into consideration the ranges of the newer missles and the power of their warhead. Kirov is a floating "open bag of fireworks" just waiting for a lit match.

Anti-ship version of tomahawk never had a range of 1500 miles. And you can't effectively target that far either. And a couple of harpoon has no chance of penetrating Kirov's air defense. Seriously, your degradation of Kirov is just non-sensical. Please read up on its capabilities before continuing to reply.

The problem is what if Kirov expends all her Shipwrecks, with a few hits, but fails to do significant damage?

as I said, all S-300 and SA-N-9 have secondary anti-ship mode. And it can always run away if it wanted to at anytime.

I was addressing the point made by tphuang about using the surface to air missiles on the Kirov in anti-surface mode. In that case, the missiles will need a firing solution in order to launch. That means the Kirov is within sight of the Iowa. The SAMs might have active radar guidence so it doesn't need any input from the mothership, but it can still be fooled by counter meansures.

what anti-ship missiles out there don't use active radar guidance?

Shells on the other hand, are dumb. That means they can't be fooled, since they are dumb already. That also makes them cheap and Iowa packs a lot of them. In a 1v1, point blank fight, Kirov is toast. The only change Kirov has is to keep the distance and hope the Granits can do enough damage from long range.

only chance? first, the obvious part is that the reactor on kirov allows it to sustain a higher speed. Then, even the shells still have to penetrate the close in defense systems of kirov. Not the easiest task to do.

This doesn't mean it can't be penetrated, but you have to use a lot of modern lo missiles + modern sensors.

[gunnut]

Originally Posted by tphuang

do you know how the Russians used their shipwreck missiles? How they were able to make use of the maximum range? If you did, you wouldn't be saying something like this.

Did you read what I posted? I was talking about how you mentioned SAMs, surface to air missiles, in antiship role. NOT Shipwrecks. Tell me how you can fire S300 in Shipwreck mode.

Originally Posted by tphuang

Even on top of that, they had a bunch of OTH radar that can detect a behemoth like Iowa. And on top of that, they had helicopters to provide targeting.

Enlighten me how you can have over the horizon radar unless it's located on the helo. For the sake of this thread, we're talking a single ship, not a battle group, no satellites, no gps, no nothing. Just what's on the ship.

Originally Posted by tphuang

as I said, all S-300 and SA-N-9 have secondary anti-ship mode. And it can always run away if it wanted to at anytime.

And I've said that FOR THE SAKE OF THIS THREAD, if the Kirov had to close the range and use these missiles, she would be within horizon and subject to 16" bombardment.

Originally Posted by tphuang

what anti-ship missiles out there don't use active radar guidance?

Again, did you read anything I posted? In THREE replies? Can you fire S-300 over the horizon in anti-ship mode without any guidence from the ship?

Originally Posted by tphuang

only chance? first, the obvious part is that the reactor on kirov allows it to sustain a higher speed. Then, even the shells still have to penetrate the close in defense systems of kirov. Not the easiest task to do.

This doesn't mean it can't be penetrated, but you have to use a lot of modern lo missiles + modern sensors.

FOR THE SAKE OF THIS THREAD, it's a 1v1 fight, and Kirov has to close the range if she fails to destroy the Iowa from long range. SHE CANNOT RUN AWAY as it defeats the purpose of this thread.

The 30mm CIWS and SAMs might be able to intercept 16" shells. How many volleys of 30mm and how many SAMs does the Kirov carry? After launching those SAMs at the Iowa? How many 16" shells does the Iowa carry? At that range, it's simply a matter of who has more weapons to throw at the other side.

Close range slug fest, Iowa wins.

Kirov's only chance is to destroy Iowa at long range.

[SnowLeopard]

Originally Posted by gunnut

........Enlighten me how you can have over the horizon radar unless it's located on the helo. For the sake of this thread, we're talking a single ship, not a battle group, no satellites, no gps, no nothing. Just what's on the ship........

One does it with sonar. It's not radar, but it is a way to get a bearing on the other guy when he is over the horizon. Further, if one has two or more lines of bearing, does a running fix, then they could have a range, position, and perhaps a course.

Here's the catch: Iowas don't have sonar; Kirovs do, hull mounted and VDS.
--------------------------------------------------------
("Can you hear me now? Good!"--The Sprint Man, (wtte))

[gunnut]

Originally Posted by SnowLeopard

One does it with sonar. It's not radar, but it is a way to get a bearing on the other guy when he is over the horizon. Further, if one has two or more lines of bearing, does a running fix, then they could have a range, position, and perhaps a course.

Here's the catch: Iowas don't have sonar; Kirovs do, hull mounted and VDS.
--------------------------------------------------------
("Can you hear me now? Good!"--The Sprint Man, (wtte))

Can S-300s be directed by sonar for over the horizon attack on a ship?

[IDonT]

Originally Posted by gunnut

So basically Iowa needs to survive the formation of Shipwrecks from long distance in order to have a chance. Kirov needs to finish off Iowa from beyond the horizon in order to survive.

The Kirov may have a better chance with the ship wreck of seriously disabling the Iowa. Its Harpoon launchers are not armored, and its Tomahawk armored box launchers have only about 3-5 inches of armor. A high velocity top down attack profile (no need to worry about your missiles being intercepted) would do massive damage form kinetic energy, warhead, and unspent fuel. Igniting the Harpoon and Tomahawk missiles are bonuses. Such an attack would cause so much damage that it would hinder the combat effectiveness of the Iowa. Remember fire is the bane of all warships.

Furthermore, after such an attack, I doubt the Iowa's radar would still be function, including its fire control radar. With radar assistance, accurate long range fire is minimized. (Note that the longest ranged hit in any of these engagements was by Warspite at Calabria at a range of about 26,000 yards.)

At extreme horizon range, there are some tricks that a Kirov commander can use. Namely, going in an out of range of the gun, get a firing solution for the S-300 sams, fire then retreat. Without radar aid (Destroyed at the shipwreck salvo) Iowa would have a hard time finding the range quick enough for the S-300 to hit and the Kirov sprints out of gun range. Its a risk for the Kirov but its a minimal risk.

[SnowLeopard]

Originally Posted by gunnut

Can S-300s be directed by sonar for over the horizon attack on a ship?

I don't know ....... and even if I did know, I wouldn't answer because that's the kind of weapons specific answer that was secret when I was in. It was over 20 years ago but I still maintain my loyalties.

But, as long as we are talking somethng of U-Boat tactics, of studying your enemy for a firing solution while still over the horizon, let me point out something else. Stack gases are a great give away for that. The Iowas have them; the Kirovs without the superheater don't.
______________________________________________
("I remind you that you are still bound by the Official Secrets Act."--M to 007 on his resignation, (w,stte), "License to Kill")

[tphuang]

Originally Posted by gunnut

Did you read what I posted? I was talking about how you mentioned SAMs, surface to air missiles, in antiship role. NOT Shipwrecks. Tell me how you can fire S300 in Shipwreck mode.

Enlighten me how you can have over the horizon radar unless it's located on the helo. For the sake of this thread, we're talking a single ship, not a battle group, no satellites, no gps, no nothing. Just what's on the ship.

haven't you heard of bandstand type of OTH radar? (it bounces off ionosphere) The Russians have been putting that kind of OTH targeting radar + light bulb type of OTH datalink for a while now.

And I've said that FOR THE SAKE OF THIS THREAD, if the Kirov had to close the range and use these missiles, she would be within horizon and subject to 16" bombardment.

and as I said, they can perfectly track and target iowa from outside of visual range. And with targeting info from helix, they can send guidance info to S-300s. And then the S-300s can turn on the active seeker during the terminal stage. Not sure if it works like this in practice.

Again, did you read anything I posted? In THREE replies? Can you fire S-300 over the horizon in anti-ship mode without any guidence from the ship?

I've been telling you they have guidance. Why is it so hard for you to understand? Kirov was designed to be able to operate alone, to be able to target from long range.

FOR THE SAKE OF THIS THREAD, it's a 1v1 fight, and Kirov has to close the range if she fails to destroy the Iowa from long range. SHE CANNOT RUN AWAY as it defeats the purpose of this thread.

if it runs out of missiles, it will run away.

The 30mm CIWS and SAMs might be able to intercept 16" shells. How many volleys of 30mm and how many SAMs does the Kirov carry? After launching those SAMs at the Iowa? How many 16" shells does the Iowa carry? At that range, it's simply a matter of who has more weapons to throw at the other side.

Close range slug fest, Iowa wins.

Kirov's only chance is to destroy Iowa at long range.

192 gauntlet missile, 44 gecko missile, 6 kashtan (each kashtan carries 24 9M311 missiles + 1000 rounds) for air defense. This is assuming that S-300 are not being used to intercept shells (which would make no sense) I'm really not aware how many 16" shells Iowa carries.

[gunnut]

Originally Posted by SnowLeopard

I don't know ....... and even if I did know, I wouldn't answer because that's the kind of weapons specific answer that was secret when I was in. It was over 20 years ago but I still maintain my loyalties.

But, as long as we are talking somethng of U-Boat tactics, of studying your enemy for a firing solution while still over the horizon, let me point out something else. Stack gases are a great give away for that. The Iowas have them; the Kirovs without the superheater don't.
______________________________________________
("I remind you that you are still bound by the Official Secrets Act."--M to 007 on his resignation, (w,stte), "License to Kill")

Perhaps. But stack gases and sonar readings will give general bearing and range. I don't think they are accurate enough to be fed into a SAM fired in surface to surface mode.

[gunnut]

Originally Posted by tphuang

if it runs out of missiles, it will run away.

OK I give up. I said FOR THE SAKE OF THIS TOTALLY UNREALISTIC THREAD, the Kirov has to close in to Iowa to destroy her. It's a THUNDERDOME fight. Two men enter, one man leaves. There is no running away in this thread.

Originally Posted by tphuang

192 gauntlet missile, 44 gecko missile, 6 kashtan (each kashtan carries 24 9M311 missiles + 1000 rounds) for air defense. This is assuming that S-300 are not being used to intercept shells (which would make no sense) I'm really not aware how many 16" shells Iowa carries.

Iowa carries around 1200 16" shells, from this thread:

Largest Iowa ammo load?

Plus undetermined number of 5" shells.

[SnowLeopard]

I watch this go back and forth, one side holding its ship supreme no matter what, that it can't be beaten no matter what. It is a fair enough and if not that, then an expected position.

Personally, I give the Kirov the better chance for better shoot first from farther, more nukes aboard. Quite frankly, with a sonar bearing, possibly a range, trying to go for something of a high altitude air burst to take out the Iowa's electronics might be in the cards.

But that's the thing of it. It's not just a question of what weapon will out do another flat out, but how the commander uses it to outdo the other guy.

Since I'm a smart American, that might be presented to me. "Ounce, give me a plan I, the Iowa can win with."

But no plan, really, is a quick one-two step, but involves various points.

Kirov, on the face of it, has longer range detection gear. I can hide from it, I can deceive it, I can destroy it. Don't know of any viruses that can be transmitted thru the water, so destroying it is probably out of the question. I don't have any ASROC/SUBROC depth bombs, so I can't blue out his sonar. We are suppose to engage and destroy, so hiding, like in port, is out of it. But can I deceive it? Or can I deceive the enemy into doubting his detection gear?

It seems to me that it would be hard to deceive on the basis of the Iowa's props. They may be the loudest thing in the ocean. There may be situations, however, that might work to the advantage, such as physical features of the ocean. That here, however, is a very big iffy. Though, could creative zig-zagging upset sonar bearing detection?

Can I deceive him, get him to disbelieve his detection equipment? Or if he does fire, give him another target?

One of the things I came across when I was in was a 5 inch chaff shell in inventory. Was there a 16 inch shell as well? Could you fire one of those away from the ship and then where it explodes, illuminate that area with fire control radar, light up that spot of the ocean, make him think that you are there?

I don't know if you can or not, but in a match like this, to the death, one should think about it, of all the things one has at their disposal.
-----------------------------------------------------------
("Zac, we're not going to win this by giving them our backs. How many do you count back there?"--Apollo, (wtte), "Battlestar Galactica")