lurker

Sure do
That is your personal beliefs.
When did anyone had any proof data on that?
Basically speaking active/passive homing on Sunburns means that in the case of really havy jamming - first missiles will home on jam.
I haven't seen any data on those. Can you post the data you have?
And again this is just buble talk.
Range of the Sunburns are greater than anything that Kidd's have.
And anyway, ballistic nukes from chineese SSBN's will kill taiwaneese fleet long before any aircraft can be airborne. :N

(just trying to talk in your style)

:D

__________________
Long time we thought that a million monkeys in front of a million typewriters would eventually type William Shakespeare's complete works.
After invention of the Internet, we understand that it's not true.

Anon

"That is your personal beliefs."

Actually, they would be his PROFESSIONAL BELIEFS.

Captain C was a sailor in the United States navy....he's been to sea on several cruises.

"When did anyone had any proof data on that?
Basically speaking active/passive homing on Sunburns means that in the case of really havy jamming - first missiles will home on jam."

"Home on Chaff" is not a very effective targeting method...

"And again this is just buble talk."

Um, no, that'd be professional analysis from a guy who's served.

"Range of the Sunburns are greater than anything that Kidd's have."

It's also greater than a Sov's ability to OTH target them. LOL, whoops...

"And anyway, ballistic nukes from chineese SSBN's will kill taiwaneese fleet long before any aircraft can be airborne."

No they won't. Taiwan is FAR inside the minimum range of an ICBM wrt to China. Besides, China won't be nuking anyone, they have no desire to glow in the dark themselves.

Oh, and one last thing....China has exactly ONE SSBN.

Anon

"Who needs unreal speeds on high altitude, since it's skimming? What it will do there? Count crows?"

Read the link i provided, it says what MA-31 will do on the deck.....Mach 2.7+

"rofl, sea skimming AA missile? To chase low profile flying crows, I presume?"

Um, what're you talking about? LOL, i doubt you know either.

"Sure they can't. Even before 1991 about 50% of WNP was spent on army.
But surely you know better."

Russians can't afford extensive testing anymore....not my fault, just a fact of life. They're broke.


"What SM3 missile? This SM3 missile?ttp://www.raytheon.com/feature/sm3/

There is no SM3 missile yet in the inventory."

SM-3 is scheduled to be in service by 2005-7. Even right now, today, the USN could deploy SM-3 in limited numbers in an emergency.

"The modified STANDARD Missile 2 Block IV (SM2 Blk IV) which destroyed the Lance TBM target this morning adds a state-of-the-art infrared seeker to the Navy's existing SM2 Block IV...

Surely you can count crows, but can you read? "

What ARE you talking about?

SM-2ER IV has been in limited service for close to a decade...

"SM3 is not yet there. SM2 block IV needed modifications to do that.
But surely it's IRBM capable 5 times out of 8."

SM-2ER Block IIIB also has the IR seeker and enhanced autopilot of the SM-2ER IV. Just like i told you. You don't pay much attention, eh?

SM-2MR Block IIIA(as used by kidd), lacks the IR seeker but is capable of intercepting an SRBM via the FCR. Hardly optomized for the role, but it is capable.

I said....

"Errrr, the latest Aegis can remote launch from any sensor in the fleet, can control all the weapons of the fleet, and coordinates all engagements to reach maximum efficiency. The Russians or Chinese have N O T H I N G comparable, get it?"

You said...

"Some systems can do more, some don't."

There is NO russian(or any other nation for that matter) system with the capability of the FCEC Aegis. You can pretend there is, fantasize there is, or just wish there is, but there's not.


"S-300 system is modular AA defence (not, it's not a missile)"

Um, yeah, it is. S-300PMU is the designation of the MISSILE SYSTEM, and no, it's not modular.

S-300PMU was the SA-10, S-300PMU1 was the SA-10B, and S-300PMU2 is the SA-10 Mod2(Still in prototype form).

"it can use system-integrated radars, and provide tracking data to the weapons."

ALL SARH missiles use system integrated radars and provide FCR data to the missiles.

"Radars can be anything from Mig-31 radars, AWACS planes and helos, to ship based or mobile land based.
The same with the weapons. "

Nope. There are only TWO radars that can control the SA-10 missile.

One is the naval Top Dome FCR, and the other is the land based Flap Lid FCR. ONLY SA-10 launch platforms have these radars.

"Can Aegis be easily integrated into the land-based defences?"

After the introduction of the Baseline7a FCEC Aegis in 2000 it gained that capability. So the answer is yes. Now the US Army is in the process of adding software that will further compliment that capability.

lurker

Speciality is general. Anti-air defence.
Retired in rank of Maj Lutenant in 1993.
The Army of USSR, of course.

lurker

Not really. Before 1995 there was a Ka-25Ts AWACS helos in service, and now there is Ka-27RLD.
Sovremenny can carry both types, but Chinese simply doesn't have them.

Depends on where chinese will be firing from. China have a long coast line.

Those reports were never confirmed.

Anon

"Not really. Before 1995 there was a Ka-25Ts AWACS helos in service, and now there is Ka-27RLD.
Sovremenny can carry both types, but Chinese simply doesn't have them."

China doesn't have them, and Russia doesn't embark them aboard Sov's.'

In other words, they don't have the capability because the neccesary aircraft is either not embarked by choice or neccesity.
Anyway you slice it, the Sov's organic OTH capability cannot take advantadge of Sunburn's maximum potential.

"Depends on where chinese will be firing from. China have a long coast line."

Even IF China could fire ICBM's at Taiwan, why would they? Those are for deterring the US/Russia, and the Chicoms have very few ICBM's in their inventory.

"Those reports were never confirmed."

They were never refuted either. For all any of us know, china has ONE SSBN, and it's got a US SSN on it's six at all times anyway.

lurker

Each standard command post of the S-300, index 96LE6 can control up to six systems. They can be S-300PMU, S-300PMU1, S-300PMU2, S-200DE or S-200VE.

Command post is intgrated with radar, so surely it's easy to be mistaken.

The same command post can be feeded from Su-27 or Mig-31 radars ("Universal-1E" system, if you are interested in indexes).

p.s. nm about "count crows" it's the same as "train spotting".
Furthermore i propose not to lower a level of discussion by focusing on personal attacks.

Anon

"Each standard command post of the S-300, index 96LE6 can control up to six systems. They can be S-300PMU, S-300PMU1, S-300PMU2, S-200DE or S-200VE.

Command post is intgrated with radar, so surely it's easy to be mistaken. "

I'm not refutting that the CP can be integrated with other SA-10 sites and disparate remote sensors, but that the SA-10 missile cannot be guided by other remotely located disparate sensors because the only sensors that can guide the SA-10 are the Top Dome and Flap Lid. Only SA-10 batteries and Slava/Kirov/Karas have such radars. SO an SA-6 battery)or whatever) cannot provide illumination for a SA-10. Further, an SA-10's Top Dome or Flap Lid FCR cannot provide illumination for a remote SA-6(or whatever) launch.

Comparing to Aegis, the Mk7 Aegis can control not just other platforms weapons, but also their sensors. IOW, An Aegis can use ship A's sensor suite/FCR to target ship B's weapons, while the actual Aegis controlling the engagement has neither LOS or radar lock on the incoming target.

Or, an Aegis can use it's own sensors to illuminate for another missile from a different ship(or vice versa). Why?

Partly because all USN missiles operate on the same radar band and use common FCR's. Russian missiles do not. They operate on all kinds of different bands, and have missile specific FCR's.

ESSM, NSMMS, SM-1, SM-2, and SM-3 all use a common FCR radar, the latest version being the SPG-62.

The other enabler that makes the remote Aegis engagement capability possible is the FCEC/JTIDS-FDL datalink system, and the Russians simply do not have any system remotely comparable to FCEC(Niether does anyone else outside of NATO- who have access to the US FCEC- except Sweden, who have developed their own system).

lurker

Chinese simply did not order them, Indian navy is getting 10 for their fleet. Alhough the deal was signed in 1999, I dont' have any info on how it's advancing.

For anyone interested, there is a photo:



Well, since we are discussiang a theoretical question about Sovremenny encountering Kidd, I dont' think that we should limit ourselvs by discussing politics also.
I think that chineese naval doctrine is not much dufferent from Soviet, and that was "Any big ship should get a big nuke".

That is why I think in the case of a conflict - nukes may and will be used.

So therefore, nothing prevents Chineese from installing a nuc. warheads on Sunburns.


Well... I prefere to overestimate in case of the unknowns, since underestimation usually leads to unpleasant surprises.

I've heard that Chineese SSBN's are spending all their time in the internal chineese waters, which is not different from an old soviet "bastion" approarch.

Another thing - soviet ships were usually changing numbers for each voyage, if chinese are doing the same - nobody actually knows how many SSBN's are in chineese navy.

I've found that some data on Chinese nuc. forces are obviously wrong, but they got reprinted over and over for the last 20 years.

bigross86

It doesn't make a differece where the ChiComms launch from. It matters where it lands, Taiwan, which will make the ChiComms glow in the dark too.
btw your signature line, or something VERY similar to it is credited to Gen. George S. Patton Jr., during WWII, not an unknown Russian soldier...

__________________
You're a naughty girl, go to my room!

lurker

Yes, maybe it will. But neverless, if chinese are following soviet steps - then nukes wil most sertainly be used in any form of such a conflict.

And I have serious doubts that someone will retaliate agianst the mainland in a case of losing some task force to tactical nuke.

The signature is a direct translation from russian. It belongs to some captain teaching the first classes in the military academy. Maybe he was quotting Patton, - I don't know.

bigross86

Why? When the Sov's went into Afdirtistan/Chechnya they didn't use nukes. And arab countries that follow the doctrine haven't used bio weapons (which they have plenty.)

Anon

No one is going to nuke anyone.

It would be suicide, and i can't see any except MAYBE Kim In Sane doing something that blatantly stupid.

Officer of Engineers

There were persistent rumours concerning the number of SSBN in 2AC service, not the PLAN. Four XIA hulls were reported being laid but only one has been confirmed in operations. Current reports from JDW suggest that the Chinese haven't quite nailed down the reactor design yet that could take the punishment of a missile launch.

Former members of the PLAN acquainted with the program said the three hulls are rusting in harbour and there's no plan to get the money to finish them. The SONG class seems to be the current local production priority.

__________________
Chimo

bigross86

So in essence half the ChiComms nuke arsenal could be destroyed with one torpedo?