Ship defense systems

[Dragunov]

Hi,

 

i just bought FC2 because i red somewhere that a Kirov class cruiser is now available. Great to have it in the game now.

 

After testing it i have got some questions, maybe some of them are bugs.

 

 

The SA-N-9 missles work well against incoming missiles, but they are launched when the enemy missiles are very close. SA-N-9 and guns seems to engage at the same time every time. I thought SA-N-9 has a little bit more range than guns.

 

Are the SA-N-11 missiles of the Kashtan CIWS available onboard of the ships? I have never seen any of these.

 

Carriers, the one from US and also the one from Russia, have got problems to attack incoming missiles. They do not start engaging.

 

I put some Backfires (16 to be exactly) with an A50 against three Ticonderogas and a Nimitz. The cruisers engaged the incoming 48 missiles, but they needed 4 to 5 SM2 to kill one AS4. Is the kill chance really that bad?

 

 

 

 

Dragunov

[vanir]

Based upon what I've been reading...

 

The Kitchen is a supersonic cruise missile, it's not an easy target for older systems like the SM-2, hence point defence systems (CIWS). The SM-2 is basically a 70s missile system rebuilt around the Aegis phased radar-intercept system and pioneered this kind of fleet air defence for the USN. It's not as fast tracking or predictive as a CLOS/CIWS like the Phalanx or some short range European naval missiles and really works better against transonic missiles or aircraft than fast supersonic missiles at medium range.

 

In game the Russians have actually the newer weapons fits on their ships. Most of the weapons in the American ships are early-80s weapons (Sea Sparrow, SM-2, Harpoon, Tomahawk), whilst most of the Russian fit are fairly new weapons (Rastrub/Silex, Bazalt, Granit, Kashtan, Kynshal). These are all brand new refits made during the late 80s-early 90s where the USN fits are from the early 80s and based on older development programs (that being said the American mid course guidence system for long range weapons is more autonomous and higher tech in theory).

 

There's no real comparison between the SM-2 and the Kashtan (which isn't really a CIWS but a short range point defence system, ships with Kashtan also have AK-630 CIWS). The Kashtan is a navalised version of the Tunguska mounting, the long barrel 30mm cannon have an effective range of just over 3km while the SA-N-19 is a boosted version of the SA-19 optimised for high speed missile interceptions, nominal range would be out to around 10km although it is better suited to fast tracking (CLOS, or command to line of sight fire control system) at closer range. The idea would be to start firing at about 5km and follow up with a barrage of supporting cannon shells so the whole lot intercepts the incoming missile roughly the same time, this is independent of the AK-630 CIWS point defence which wouldn't start offering firing solutions until within 3km.

 

By comparison the SM-2 is a 70s weapon built around the 80s Aegis system. The Kashtan wasn't even heard of in the 80s, the Russian Navy was refitted by 1992 and this was perhaps one of the elements contributing to the economic collapse of the USSR. The Russian Navy is a very powerful and modern surface action battlefleet, where the USN is designed more with force projection in mind, not so much surface action warfare (it was always assumed a major conflict with the Soviets would go nuclear, and the SM-2 is nuclear capable).

 

The USN is only recently being refit with newer weapons upgrades, including the SM-3 which is an improvement on the old SM-2, more suited to intercepting supersonic anti-shipping warheads conventionally. The older weapon would be good for transonic cruise missiles at medium range, but these passed out of service in favour of a whole new shipboard weapons fit throughout the Russian Navy starting in the late-80s, even their corvettes carry newer fast supersonic anti-shipping missiles (Moskit, it caused quite a stir for NATO when first identified).

 

The Kashtan and Kynshal (SA-N-15) mounted to the newer Russian supercruisers (Admiral Kuznetsov and their battlecruisers), is an extremely effective and very new, dedicated anti-missile screen extending around 12km from the motherships. Then after passing through that you've still got the AK-630 to deal with (not so good against nukes though, they're primed within a few km of the target and will go off if hit).

The Russian Navy in the 90s is about a generation ahead of the 90s USN weapons fit, it just sorta worked out that way. If you backtracked to about 1986 then it would be the USN weapons fits which are about a generation ahead of the Soviets.

 

The whole thing about the Arms Race was that it fluxed and waned, advantages shifting as industry continually fought to compete with the other side's latest developments. Then in the 90s of course the Russians stopped dead, but had just performed their most recent full scale military upgrade. The US was due for one. That's coming though now.

[GGTharos]

Actually supersonic missiles are exactly the sort of targets SM-2 would be targeted at, traditionally. However, those ships also had serious ECM and other countermeasures to 'soft kill' a lot of those weapons, measures which are not present in the game.

 

Both the SM-2 and Aegis have gone through modernization before 'new versions' of those systems were introduced. Currently the USN is looking at using SM-6 along-side the SM-3.

ESSM and RAM are obviously no slouches either. The CIWS is not really considered an adequate weapon.

 

The AEGIS network is not really represented in the game, nor is the tremendous anti-aircraft firepower of the Tico's. These things should have 19 missiles in flight with 4 targets being guided on at any given time, with the illuminators ready to switch to a new target at any time.

[vanir]

I'm not sure I'm entirely convinced about the Aegis/SM-2 ability to fast track modern supersonic missiles once they get within say 10km and start the acquisition/manoeuvring phase. Even the manufacturer recognises it's not quite as desirable as CLOS for point defence on small very fast moving targets (where the outgoing missile and its target are both within the beam), although it has range benefits over that. This would be why both the main air defence systems on the Russian carrier are limited to around 12km.

 

Don't get me wrong, you probably know more about it than me, this is simply the impression I have thus far, I hope it doesn't seem arrogant.

[GGTharos]

You are correct that the SM-2 system is not a short-range defense platform ... if you have not launched by the time they're within 10km, you have issues. The idea behind AEGIS is that integrated AWACS or picket ships will allow you to track the incoming before this. I'm not going to claim that the SM-2 system is perfect, really the entire prospect of fighting off tens of supersonic ASMs is quite frightening.

Just saying it isn't an impotent system.

[Dragunov]

Thx for the answers. Could anyone please take a look at the other questions:

 

 

-Are the SA-N-11 available on ships ingame? They only engage with SA-N-9 and guns.

 

-Aircraft carriers do not engage missiles at all. Obviously it is a bug. Can anyone confirm that?

[vanir]

Sorry Dragunov, I'm still sorting the graphics on my new FC2 to get it playable so I can't playtest for you yet. I thought all the Russian ships had SA-N-15, 19, 10 and 6 plus the AK-630 and DP guns, being the navalised versions of their land based counterparts.