Budding destroyer for the Russian Navy — what and why? (End)

The perspective for the Russian Navy destroyer - what and why?  (End)

Now, it's time to go back to the comparison of tasks and abilities promising EM for the Russian Navy and "Arleigh Burke". Americans do ship air defense / PLO abilities of the functions of the "arsenal ship" The everyday destroyer ammunition (74 missiles CM2, 24 — "Sea Sparrow", 8 "Tomahawk" and ASROK 8) gives the ability to craft a good defense compounds. On missile defense, as would be a shame as it sounds, is not so rosy. The fact is that in the U.S. to intercept low-flying supersonic missiles remained an unresolved issue.

At the theoretical level, low-flying supersonic anti-ship missiles can be intercepted "Standards CM2", but they are limited to intercept — 15 meters above sea level, and our new anti-ship missiles fly below. "Sea Sparrow" on the beliefs themselves are able to capture only the Yankees subsonic missile. True Americans not so long ago made medium-range missiles ESSM which, they claim, is able to intercept low-flying supersonic target, but …

You can peresherstit marketing brochures and all the reports about the tests' Standard SM2 "and ESSM. You will see that the data on the tests missile successfully hit the high-altitude supersonic and subsonic low flying targets. But reports of the defeat of supersonic low-flying targets I could not find any 1st. General. So even the opportunity hit low-flying supersonic target U.S. missile weapons available — at least debatable. But suppose even ESSM still can do it.

I wrote above about the differences between the active and semi-active homing missiles. So here, ESSM is armed with a semi-active seeker, which means that targeting it needs a station lighting purposes. Such stations to "Arleigh Burke" of all three — and, of course, run all three at once are not far from all angles. Since the two radar illumination are placed behind the second chimney, then the nasal angles "Arleigh Burke" has opportunity Single-moment imposing ESSM of only one RCC.

A small amount of crosstalk channels, coupled with a very average detection capabilities of low-flying targets SPY-1 radar is very limiting the ability of missile defense, "Arleigh Burke". The fact that the UHF radars are not very well behold the fact that flies just above the sea surface (DECADES Americans have tried to adapt it for this purpose) They are generally squeezed everything possible done a real feat in software, learning to peel most of the noise and Currently "Spy" relatively well distinguish low-flying targets, but it does not in totality South American champions ships in PRO opportunities.

There is much stronger than "Arleigh Burke" new British destroyer "Daring" Its surveillance radar SAMPSON is actually two in one radar — UHF and microwave spectrum. In the UHF spectrum radar produces a distant target detection, but in the centimeter perfect "see" what is happening at the surface of the water (there is no interference centimeter range is not an obstacle, the water he sees a lot better than the UHF radars :)). And leads for any purpose with an active homing missiles.

Even such a thing as the radio horizon for the "Daring" is much larger than for the "Arleigh Burke". I think it is clear that the radio horizon is a relative concept and depends on the height of the radar placement above the sea level. Look, where are placed by a 'solder a "to" Arleigh Burke "(rectangular blotches on the superstructure)

The perspective for the Russian Navy destroyer - what and why?  (End)

and where — Daring radar (the ball on the very highest mast)

The perspective for the Russian Navy destroyer - what and why?  (End)

Previously on "Berke" was a pair of "Vulcan-Phalanx" It was very good for its time complex. But it was calculated to counter relatively small subsonic anti-ship missiles, or a huge, but warped close gaps anti-aircraft missiles. His ability to counter languid supersonic anti-ship missiles tend to zero. And in the last series, "Burkes" "Phalanx" is already taken.

PLO ability to "Arlie" perhaps even more modest than the defense — all about the latest anti-impotence of his arms. The complex is a long ASROK time did not fly a distance of over 10 kilometers (currently flies to 20) Available 324-mm tubes with Mk46 were still the smallest distance of the lesion. At the same time, today it fades away submarines under certain circumstances allow "vytselivat" enemy surface ships in immaculate criteria, even from a distance of 90 km., And in the least ideal … well, at km 10's. And at such distances all hope "Arleigh Burke" was only and only on their deck helicopters, of which there was only 2 and organize hour patrol, they could not. However, the situation could change in the best possible way with the emergence of a very strong sonar AN/SQS-53B/C, which if successful could detect enemy submarines at a distance of some 10 kilometers s … but in practice, it would look like that. Found unknown underwater target is 40 kilometers away from the ship.

And off we go — as long as prepare the helicopter for the flight until it takes off, while in the area will find the submarine … all this time only remains to pray that all sea gods so times a second to wipe the sweat cool, looking at the radar — will not appear whether exposure of cruise missiles from this very submarines? Our ships are filled with rocket-torpedoes with a range of 50 km on this background look much more successful.

Probably the thing that puzzles PLO U.S. lozhili mainly on carrier aviation — in an old time they decided not only ASW helicopters, and staffing Squadron "Viking", capable by the mere suspicion of something huge and unwelcoming quietly creeping to the AUG under water, check out the surface of the sea 300 km in any direction from the aircraft carrier … But times of war were cool, the Vikings have written off for depreciation, and the new aircraft are not designed — saving, sir. In general, I digress again.

"Arleigh Burke" has the very highest potential for attacks on land targets — in the impact on option ship loaded to 56 KR "Tomahawk". This is a great power that can suppress air defenses malehankih country. But here's the potential for "Arleigh Burke" to destroy surface ships — is very small.

Almost at the disposal of the commander, there are only 8 ASM "Harpoon", which is enough except that the elimination of a Corvette or a missile boat, caught at the wrong time and the wrong place. And then — the latest version of the "Arleigh Burke" depr
ived "Harpoon" at all. "Tomahawk" in the form of RCC has long been not used, and, frankly, subsonic anti-ship missiles — not very severe danger to the ship with a modern air defense / missile defense. There is still firing anti-aircraft "standards" on the range line of sight. That's all.

So makarom easily conclude — even "Arleigh Burke" support AUG United States, which many military analysts considered the best destroyer of all time, a beautiful main militant rocket and artillery ship of modernity, far does not fully meet the requirements of a promising Destroyers of the Russian Federation . Although, of course, is perfect, the infection The perspective for the Russian Navy destroyer - what and why?  (End)

The perspective for the Russian Navy destroyer - what and why?  (End)

What to read about the smaller ships, such as "Alvaro de Bazan"? This ship, as opposed to "Arleigh Burke" has not even 3 stations illumination purposes, and just only two. That is, from different angles, he is able to direct missiles at a single, maximum — two attackers RCC. If we compare this with our promising 9M100 missiles, which should capture an enemy missiles for its infrared homing heads even before it leaves our anti-missile missile launcher … OHR to 48 spaces acceptable to the ship operating in the near-sea zone, but for the ocean — is minuscule. He put his back four 10-ka "Standards" yes 40 ESSM could be read as a defense of the ship, but the ability of shock will be reduced to virtually zero. Eight "Harpoon" in the deck installations can scare except that the Somali pirates. Though much-or sane PLO can only be achieved by placing a UVP PLUR ASROK — a cell and so its weight in gold …

Again the same — as I wrote above, the OHR Mk41 is designed for approximately polutoratonnye rocket. If you build a Russian "base" with the same Russian weapons (and who we will sell the "Aegis" with a "standard"?), Then either have to forget about the general languid missiles, limiting "polyment-redoubt" with missiles and medium-range, or set the OHR to start the languid missiles and "Onyx" with "Movement" … but at the cost of reducing the ammunition. And we will not 48 spaces, but fine if 32.

127-mm artillery system virtually worthless for the purpose of supporting the troops — very weak effect of the projectile (this applies to the "Arleigh Burke" and (as it is funny), and even to our AK-130)

Range — 5,000 miles by 18 knots — a relatively small but not too small ("Arleigh Burke" — 6000 miles, "Daring" — 7000 miles, our BOD Project 1134 — 6500-7100 miles).

In general, a small ship — it is a small ship, and his ability to always be very limited. As said one Briton: "If ship, can accommodate 8 guns put 10, the shoot will be only 6 ". Or, as more laconically expressed the same idea in a minibus inscription:

"Do not shove nevpihuemoe"

Spaniards themselves in any way not behold the series of "Alvaro de Bazan" as some kind of Open Ocean Squadron. They are designed for operation as part of search-and-strike group led by the aircraft carrier in the region of Gibraltar — and only.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: