Kh-15S "fast" death to ships

[topol-m]

But dont assume that just because something has been offered for export automatically means that any work has actually been done!

 

I agree but have in mind that we are not talking about completely new missile - Kh-15 (nuclear) is in service. Kh-15S is basically Kh-15 with conventional warhead and modified guidance. So it`s more like redesignment than a new missile. Though there were various difficulties in the convertion process i doubt if they weren`t solved or they couldn`t be solved the missile would have ever been promoted for export. Having in mind the experience and the traditions in missile building the russians have i doubt such redesignment was and is impossible or very hard to be done. ;)

 

Is it resistant to a wall of bullets? ;)

 

Oh the missile is not bullet-proof but it`s the complex of factors like its speed, size, trajectory that is making shooting it down (be it with missiles or gun stations) more difficult than shooting down a subsonic or mach 2 anti ship missile. I`ve never said it`s impossible but probably it will be able to penetrate a lot of the air defences currently deployed on some of its potential targets. Most of them are not designed for such type of protection, but there are some air defence systems and more will probably come in future (like SM-6 that GGTharos described) which are designed to counter weapons similar to Kh-15S. Though their performance in reality is a different thing that could be proved by unclassified testing results and wartime actions.

Edited August 18, 2009 by topol-m

[GGTharos]

I'm starting to think that a Mach 5 speed for this missile is more than a little exaggerated ...

 

Also keep in mind that a weapon like SM-6 is capable of attacking the carrier before it launches the Kh-15.

 

Edit: I'm starting to undertand a little better how the Kh-15 works. Given its rize over the horizon, I'd expected it to be attacked by anti-missile systems fairly early on. Further, its way of acquiring targets is, I believe, relatively counter-measures prone. Still a scary missile, but I wouldn't call it 'fast death to ships'. I think subsonic ASCMs are actually more dangerous.

Edited August 18, 2009 by GGTharos

[topol-m]

I'm starting to think that a Mach 5 speed for this missile is more than a little exaggerated ...

 

Also keep in mind that a weapon like SM-6 is capable of attacking the carrier before it launches the Kh-15.

 

Edit: I'm starting to undertand a little better how the Kh-15 works. Given its rize over the horizon, I'd expected it to be attacked by anti-missile systems fairly early on. Further, its way of acquiring targets is, I believe, relatively counter-measures prone. Still a scary missile, but I wouldn't call it 'fast death to ships'. I think subsonic ASCMs are actually more dangerous.

 

Well if S-300`s missiles can reach Mach 8 why shouldn`t Kh-15 reach 5?

 

SM-6 might be able to attack the carrier wich should be countered with increased launch distance of the anti ship missile - new redesignment :) Though i`m not sure about that. I remember we had similar discussion regarding the ranges at which long range systems like S-300, Patriot can engage targets (the real ones and in FC) and it turned out that max launching range can be achieved in ideal conditions while the real one was much shorter than the max one.

 

Same for the early on attack of the missile itself. Even more difficult as such targets are generally detected and attacked at closer ranges than aircraft targets.

 

Why do you think the subsonic ones are a harder target?

[GGTharos]

Well if S-300`s missiles can reach Mach 8 why shouldn`t Kh-15 reach 5?

 

It might, in a dive, which is how it works. It won't go anywhere near that speed otherwise :D

 

SM-6 might be able to attack the carrier wich should be countered with increased launch distance of the anti ship missile - new redesignment :) Though i`m not sure about that.

 

Usually you can have speed or range, not both, but that isn't always the case.

 

 

I remember we had similar discussion regarding the ranges at which long range systems like S-300, Patriot can engage targets (the real ones and in FC) and it turned out that max launching range can be achieved in ideal conditions while the real one was much shorter than the max one.

 

Correct - for many reasons.

 

 

Same for the early on attack of the missile itself. Even more difficult as such targets are generally detected and attacked at closer ranges than aircraft targets.

 

Why do you think the subsonic ones are a harder target?

 

The thing here is that you have a cruise missile popping up to 40km altitude. At this point it becomes as trackable as a TBM essentially. With an implementation of PAC-3 like hardware it becomes a 'standard target' for that type of weapon.

 

Subsonic ASCMs are probably harder to deal with because they just suddenly pop up near your ship, giving you less time to deal with them. Further they are not only very small in RCS, but they also hide in clutter, and because their sensors will see the targets at about the same time as the targets will see the missiles, countermeasures might not be employed before the sensors detect the desired targets, making countermeasures less effective.

 

Further, I believe these missiles are relatively cheaper to acquire and operate in bulk, so their (Relatively) slow speed is offset by spamming.

 

The next step up is supersonic ASCMs which are even more dangerous because they cut the time even shorter.

 

The Kh-15 doesn't operate like this - you can literally catch it in the climb and start dealing with it from that moment on. In other words, it telegraphs its intentions from very far away.

 

In both cases an AEGIS net and AWACS type aircraft are very helpful, and the very best way to deal with such a threat is tohave your fighter patrols nail the carriers before the missiles are launched.

 

But given the operational method of the Kh-15, I think it gives its targets more attack opportunities at range than sea-skimming missiles.

 

What it does take away is 'last ditch' defenses, because at mach 5 both the RAM and CIWS aren't capable of deflecting the missile from its target. You have to shoot it down sooner.

 

But again - you can. I'm not trying to claim that its easy, just that against a modern fleet equipped with and AEGIS system, it gives a lot of attack opportunities against itself.

 

Also consider that even a subsonic sea-skimmer is harder to attack with a radar guided missile even when you have over-the-horizon capability with ARH missiles and you detect it beyond the horizon.

 

For this reason a lot of modern CIWS combine radar, IR, TV and laser rangefinders as opposed to a single system, and a lot of last-ditch anti-missile defense is performed by heat-seekers like RAM or laser beam riders like Kashtan.

[topol-m]

^^^ :thumbup: Understood about the subsonic and super sonic low flying AS missiles. But:

 

Lockheed Martin recently began studing the deployement of Pac 3 on ships. I doubt there are many cruisers and destroyers equiped with it. I don`t know the strategical objectives of US Navy but shouldn`t Pac 3 compete with SM-6 for a place on ships. I mean i doubt they will be equiped with Aegis (SM-3) + Pac 3 + Sm-6. More like Aegis (SM-3) + 1 of those 2. Furthermore how small targets can the pac 3 actually hit as it is primarily an anti-ballistic missile weapon (i suppose targets with mach 5 speed won`t be a problem but the size of the target is another thing :huh:). The same question for the Aegis system (SM-3 missile). Is there any info at all suggesting that these 2 systems are capable of shooting such a small fast moving target. And about SM-3 the additional question is it capable of shooting such a small fast moving target in the altitudes ranges it flies.

SM-6 after the data you provided seems more capable for anti kh-15 defence.

 

Kh-15S - Mach 5 in descent looks pretty much achievable for a missile of that size and range.

[GGTharos]

You can't just look at missile size and range to determine speed. The trick here is that it achieves the speed in a dive :)

 

ANyway, going backto missiles: PAC-3 is a hittile. It doesn't miss. That's how accurate it is, even against small ballistic missiles (their frontal area is much smaller than an aircraft). It is without question one of the most accurate missiles in existance. The way it achieves this is by using ARH guidance and lateral thrust isntead of aerodynamic maneuvering, after it gets itself aligned with the target trajectory. In short, it is hit-to-kill. It is tested against things like these:

http://www.ordnance.org/aqm37c.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BQM-74_Chukar

http://www.cdi.org/missile-defense/tests-pac3.cfm

 

Also note that one of the tests done for PATRIOT missiles it to actually engage another PATRIOT missile ... ;)

 

My guess is that rather than using PAC-3 on those ships, SM-6 will be modified to achieve the same performance.

 

I think it is better to adapt SM-6 to deal with things like the KH-15 than to use a very expensive SM-3 missile ... the SM-3 sheds something like 3-4 boost phases on its way to its target. It's very accurate, and very fast, but I'm not sure it would be used on an intercept as short as a Kh-15 launch. But if it WAS, you could basically think of the Kh-15 as dead. I just think it's way inside SM-3's min range.

 

Also, the AEGIS system isn't a missile - it's an air defense network. An 'AEGIS cruiser' is the command center for it.

 

So for example if you have Ticos, AB's, and OHPs in your fleet, and maybe some P-3's or AWACS hanging around, they all datalink together to form a SAM umbrella. The missile launchers of all the ships in the fleet, and radars, etc, can be controlled from the commanding ship. This means that this Tico isn't just launching its own 90-cell VLS, it's launching anything in the fleet that it wants, at any time it wants to.

Edited August 18, 2009 by GGTharos

[topol-m]

I know the Aegis is not a missile ;) I ment Aegis weapon system with SM-3 as a part of Aegis BMDS.

Ok the 1st and 2nd links show small but slow targets. What i`m interested in is performance against small and very fast targets. Actually the Patriot missile is the one that`s closest to the Kh-15 in size and speed. The Kh-15S is actually shorter than PAC 2 missile. So how many tests have been done against similar targets? ;)

Oh and i doubt the patriot missile was flying with max speed (Mach 5) at the moment of impact.

[GGTharos]

Sorry, the mach-4 cruise missile surrogate is too slow for you? ;)

 

The PAC-3 is tested against other PAtriots as a matter of testing procedure; not all tests are made public. Either way length isn't very relevant ... diameter is, since this missile gets rightin the way of its target.

[topol-m]

It`s 0.7 to 4.0 Mach but we can`t be sure if it was tested with mach 4 and what was the performance of Pac 3. Kh-15S diameter - 45 cm. Pretty small for a direct hit with that speed, but who knows ;)

[GGTharos]

I can tell you the PAC-3 employs an advanced proximity fuze also. Further it has scored direct hits in real situations, not just tests ;)

 

The smallest missile it has intercepted in real situations is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTR-21_Tochka

 

This happens to be a mach 5 missile.

[topol-m]

I can tell you the PAC-3 employs an advanced proximity fuze also. Further it has scored direct hits in real situations, not just tests ;)

 

The smallest missile it has intercepted in real situations is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTR-21_Tochka

 

This happens to be a mach 5 missile.

 

Wow this one is huge. It`s almost twice as big.

[GGTharos]

65cm diameter. It isn't that much bigger if you consider it is hit reliably.

 

Even if at 45cm hit-to-kill became unreliable (ie. pk lowers, as if should) there is the proximity fuze.

 

This is completely ignoring the patriot as target tests.

[topol-m]

65cm diameter. It isn't that much bigger if you consider it is hit reliably.

 

Even if at 45cm hit-to-kill became unreliable (ie. pk lowers, as if should) there is the proximity fuze.

 

This is completely ignoring the patriot as target tests.

 

Ok let`s make a compromise that it will have 50:50 chance of hitting it :music_whistling:

BTW SM-6 has bigger chances of becoming ship air defence missile in mass production so its performance should be of more interest.

[GGTharos]

SM-6 is going to be operational in 2010. PAC-3 is already operational - the point being that SM-6 is probably being built with lessons learned from PAC-3. ;)

 

A 50-50 chance of hitting means that it is almost impossible for the Kh-15 to escape the proximity warhead. ;)

[topol-m]

A 50-50 chance of hitting means that it is almost impossible for the Kh-15 to escape the proximity warhead. ;)

 

Ok i correct myself - 50-50 chance of destroying the missile :P

[GGTharos]

Shoot 3 missiles (that's what's done RL by almost every missile-defense system out there anyway).

[topol-m]

You mean 3 missiles at one target? What happens when you`re spammed then? Fire what you`ve got and then: " Our Father which art in Heaven..." :D

[tflash]

SM-6 is going to be operational in 2010.

 

Are you sure? I only find one dubious internet source supporting this. Even Raytheon itself has no news on an IOC date.

 

Besides, what means "operational"? How many Aegis-destroyers/cruisers will be equipped with it in 2010? Bae just received a contract for *integration* with the Mk41 vertical launch system, see: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/mk-41-naval-vertical-missile-launch-systems-delivered-supported-updated-02139/

 

I guess 2011 intro to fleet would be already very optimistic. Anyway, the missile and its capabilities are very real.

 

In my view, SM-2ER block IV and SM-3 are already all that it takes to beat current threats.

[GGTharos]

Pretty much. But remember, that's why you have AEGIS.

 

And that's why the main attack tactic is to try and spam missiles from several directions (but the reality of the battliefield usually prevents such a tactic I think).

 

At this point destroyers and frigates will use blip enhancement jammers to make themselves look like a carrier sized ship on radar - so maybe at least the missiles will not attack the carrier ... or less missiles will try to attack the carrier and they are easier to handle.

 

It's really a big, big game that involves more than just shooting missiles.

[GGTharos]

Are you sure? I only find one dubious internet source supporting this. Even Raytheon itself has no news on an IOC date.

 

I could be wrong. I forget where I read it.

 

In my view, SM-2ER block IV and SM-3 are already all that it takes to beat current threats.

 

IN fact SM-2ER is not adequate. It has no over-the-horizon capability and limits the numeber of simultaneous target engagements.

 

SM-3 seems to be a purely exoatmospheric weapon. You launch it at stuff in orbit, and that leaves an intermediate gap which I believe SM-6 will fill.

[Groove]

Topol-M, try to loose yourself from the idea of russian weapons being made to target american CVG's. Only way to attack CVG's with a possibility to actually hurt them are torpedos, and then best would be nuclear torpedos.

 

Russia wants to sell this weapons to countries wich advesaries don't have the latest and greatest ADs around. Cold war is LOOOOONG over.

 

A more suitable debate would be: How can a Pakistani or Indian ship be defended against the Kh-15S and not a SM-6 equipped, gold plated USN DD ;)

[GGTharos]

Answer: Launch gold dust into the air :D

[Groove]

And turn on the disco light ball ? STUDIO-54 SHORAD ?

[GGTharos]

Yes, and also the poledancer operators.

[topol-m]

Topol-M, try to loose yourself from the idea of russian weapons being made to target american CVG's. Only way to attack CVG's with a possibility to actually hurt them are torpedos, and then best would be nuclear torpedos.

 

Russia wants to sell this weapons to countries wich advesaries don't have the latest and greatest ADs around. Cold war is LOOOOONG over.

 

A more suitable debate would be: How can a Pakistani or Indian ship be defended against the Kh-15S and not a SM-6 equipped, gold plated USN DD ;)

 

I`m far from the idea of Russia vs US military conflict. At least not in close future. But i disagree that the customers of russian weaponry wouldn`t use it against US hardware in case of war actions. There are many big customers with billions of dollars of orders and contracts. I don`t want to politicize the matter but the possibility of such weapons to be used against US assets exists. To say: "We are not interested in what missiles you guys have, cause we have missiles too." is not serious. So to say you should be prepared for all kind of attacks with all means. In reality what i believe we are trying to find out here is how ships currently in service are prepared to deal with a threat like Kh-15S or similar missiles. When you think of it not all US military ships are part of the Aegis system and not all have top notch defence from all types of threats meaning you shouldn`t send them here and there without additional support thinking they are invulnerable. You can find examples of badly damaged US ships in the gulf due to missile fire and those were not Kh-15S...