TopHatter

But he isn't forgetting the difference in size of the warheads.

(Although I'd be the first to admit I wouldn't want anything slamming into my ship at Mach 3.5+)

Moroz

What is SM-2? Will you post a link, please. Let's compare SM-2 and Yakhont.

Moroz

This guy remembers that "The Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) is the Navy’s primary surface-to-air fleet defense weapon."
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/sm-2.htm
It hasn't antiship capabilities yet (?).

"...The SM-2 Block IVA utilizes a side-mounted imaging infrared seeker to detect and track incoming ballistic missiles and guide to a lethal intercept over a 100-kilomter-by-50- kilometer area, while retaining previous SM-2 Block IV capabilities...."

Can it intercept missiles, incoming at low altitude? I’m doubt. I suppose it can't intercept Yakhont.

HistoricalDavid

The US Navy's SM-2? This is the extended-range version, for example, . Depends which version you're talking about. Regardless, I'd rather have to deal with a small salvo of Yakhonts or Sunburns than a large salvo of SM-2s.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...tions/sm-2.htm

As far as I know, it does.

You'd have to ask a real expert on the subject.

The SM-2 not only makes up for that through the potential to launch in greater numbers, but also the fact that they're blast-fragmentation warheads (I think) which would be tremendously effective at taking out a ship's sensors, therefore leaving it vulnerable to slower, heavier missiles such as the Harpoon.

I like the SM-2/Harpoon combo a lot better than just a salvo of Yakhonts.

SRB

USN had supersonic cruise missiles in 70's, but modern USN doctrine (Carriers) made them useless. But Soviets in 70's start to work on new systems and know we have very deadly ex-Soviet missiles on market.

Once again USN dont fear couple of Iran Sunburns.
I really think that systems on new type carrier group will be build to fight of fast low flying missiles, but todays systems are all relics of cold war when US didnt know full capacity of Soviet old and esspecially new missiles. Once when iron curtion was down US find out about them and ultra fast torpedos.
Dont forget that Soviets play pocker with US navy, they always building some carriers(which was only a trick) Soviet navy was blefing in secretcy they build 2M AS missiles and fast topredos.

rickusn

How many times do I have to tell you guys that USN ships, planes, sensors and weapons systems are totally useless against the USSR er I mean Russia.

LOL

But I have news we(the USN) are not scared as Russia er I mean USSR is its own worst enemy.

And we find Russia a great asset and ally when it comes to war at sea.

My fondest hope is that China and other would be enemies keep buying from the USSR er I mean Russia.

I sleep well knowing this.

gunnut

All Standard missiles have a secondary surface to surface capability. It's not publicized as it's a primary surface to air weapon. Most articles would just give it a passing mention, nothing in depth.

The British Sea Dart also has surface to surface capability.

These are the primary supersonic surface to surface missiles in the west. It keeps the cost and complexity down by using only 1 type of missle. A single Burke can have 96 anti-air and anti-ship missiles, all supersonic. It's actually a much more formidable ship than the imposing Kirov class heavy cruiser.

RustyBattleship

Strange. I don't sleep well on this at all.

TopHatter

I think Rick is referring to the reliability and worksmanship of sophisticated Russian equipment.

Moroz

I think Rick is referring to the simple Russian nuke umbrella.
I hope that power projectilers are smart enough to disturb Russia never.
SWOT of SM-2
Strengths and opportunities:
It’s cheap and could be used in avalanche quantities.
It has good ballistic target’s interception capabilities
High speed (I didn’t find rely data yet)

Weakness and Threats
It can’t* intercept non-ballistic high speed and maneuver targets sort of Iskander, Yakhont, Topol-M etc.
It hasn’t* low altitude and maneuver flight capabilities to be used as successful anti-ship missile against equal equipped enemy.
IR seeker could be jammed easy.

*- It’s my opinion, based on open sources.

PS I’ve attached funny picture of cheap missiles salvo. It’s not counterpart of SM-2.

Attached Images

Смерч.bmp (307.7 KB, 134 views)

SRB

Gunnut SM-2 is supersonic but it using classic parabola to hit surface targets, so it is easy for interception. Sunburn is supersonic cruise missile it's fly is two stages, first is high alltitude fly and second (after locking target) is low alltitude almost on top of wave (couple of meters) so secend stage is stealth aproch and it is were fast which give ship crew with today's equpment only 10 second to react.
It is one very bad missile.

SRB

Burke is inferior to Kriov beacuse it doesn't have supersonic cruise missiles and if it use SM-2 against Kirov airdefence of Kirov will have very easy targets, as I said SM-2 is parablolic missile when attack surface ships.
Kirov against Bruke is another story because Kirov have 20 Sunburn missiles which can penetrate air defence of Carrier group (of 20 I think 10 to 8 will strike Carrier others will be destroied), so what they will do to Bruke defence I just wouldn't like to be on Bruke if it is facing allone with Kirov.

USN need new systems to fight of Sunburn missiles.

HistoricalDavid

So? Those are means to an end, not ends in themselves.

In large salvoes going Mach 3.5+. Good luck.

How did you estimate those figures?

Why would it face it alone?

Compare how many Burkes and Ticonderogas there are against one Kirov.

What, like SM-2?

Like ESSM?

Like SeaRAM?

Like electronic counter-measures?

Like carrier airwings?

Oops, all either in service or being introduced.

Despite being launched in salvoes and going Mach 3.5+?

Nice and detectable.

More like at least 15, maybe 20, with just shipborne sensors to rely upon, never mind patrolling E-2C Hawkeyes.

Not really.

What the hell...

The Topol-M is most definitely a ballistic missile and an ICBM at that, and no way could an SM-2 intercept it.

Which is why the SM-3 exists.

And why can't it intercept sea-skimmers?

Why are those characteristics necessary? If anything, flying high will severely reduce the effectiveness of gun CIWSes, for example.

How?

Dreadnought

IMO The Iowa Class could answer anything the Kirov's have to throw at her and still survive the question is with all those missles could the same Kirov survive one salvo being laid on her from an Iowa class's 16"/50's and all those missles lying around. With the Kirovs armor only being 6" at max (conning) and the Iowas at some (17.5" conning) and this is only one comparrison I would speculate that if bracketed even once the Kirov is finished she dont have the armor to withstand the Iowas guns as well as missles.

The Kirov class against any destroyer had better win if not I would certaily be embarrased being its owner country.

Question how many of the Kirovs are even sea worthy these days?

I 'd love to see the USS New Jersey (BB62) back at sea and all but I tend to enjoy working on her and taking the time to notice and learn the things books never print about the Iowa class. Nothing like working on something that interests you greatly even if its for free.

SRB

DAvid someone said that Burke will kick Kirov this why I said that why I said Burke vs. Kirov in realty there will be whole Carrier group vs. Kirov.
Salvo of parabolic missiles even on 5M are easy target because they path is predictible and 6-barrels guns will make short work of them.

SM-2 cant destroy Sunburn when it is in low fly I dont know what can do that 15 seconds are small time to react, as I read 6 barrel rapid gun is what US navy thinks is only option (today), maybe puting more this guns can help but on today's ships, missiles are slow beacuse 15 seconds ( for this 15 seconds Sunburn is from 11km get to zero and dont forget that many of missiles on ships cant be fire in on close range target (10km). If you look future plans for defence systems you will see that lasers are one of very possible systems (esspecialy for this 10km range they are perfect)

Off course Iowa can wipe floor with Kirov on gun range but on long range (100 km) it will get all sunburn 20 on deck, so you will have diseable Iowa and full operational Kirov. This 20 Sunburns against deck will criple Iowas senzors and navigation which allow Kirov to came from back of Iowa and fire salvo of topredos.Some directly against rudder and propeler and another against hull.After that Kirov can use it 100 mm guns (fast fire with heavy penetrator on less protected parts of Iowa) and it can fire multishots against better protected parts of Iowa.

You guys are fantastic first someone say that Burke or Iowa can kick Kirov without problem and they atnother guy say there is small number of Kirov's on sea now.
Are we are talking about one on one with Kirov or whole carrier group against Kirov?
Also this thread is about why many demage can sunk carrier and because you dont need to sunk carrier you just need to make it not operational we go to missiles which this task can done and in today it is minimum 16 to 20 sunburns to be fire and 6-8 to hit carrier.

I dont now is it possible to get 6 Sunburn to carrier but also you guys dont now that.
So we need to wait some conflict in which there will be 16 or 20 Sunburn fire against Carrier group to see how defence is good. And it need to be soon because I belive if new US carrier program get defence lasers (it is one of possibilies) for close defence Sunburn will be past, and maybe any anti ship missile, because you cant build normal weight AS missile will heavy armor.