Warfare Could a modern warship mangage simultanneous attack of 17 planes?

[Mokordo]

When the incident with HMS Duncan happened, I did myself that question, could she? How?

But the question is not only with the HMS Duncan, but with any modern ship, especifically AAW especialized ships.

To remember:

Royal Navy Destroyer swarmed by 17 Russian jets in Black Sea

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

 

[Jaybe]

With the one ship it is just matter of time to become sunken. I mean the question itself deny effective management.

 

[Chazman]

Two things:

1) Surprising the Russians were able to get 17 warplanes up at the same time for this.

2) Both sides gained electronic intelligence from this encounter.

 

[Mokordo]

I know that in practice, any air attack against a ship, even with only pair of planes, it´s difficult to manage, but, do they at least theoretically managed such an attack? Do they have at least the theoretical capacity to do it?

 

[Chazman]

I know that in practice, any air attack against a ship, even with only pair of planes, it´s difficult to manage, but, do they at least theoretically managed such an attack? Do they have at least the theoretical capacity to do it?

I'm not an expert, but I'd imagine in a real attack of this size, all 48 missiles would have probably been expended.

 

[Mokordo]

I'm not an expert, but I'd imagine in a real attack of this size, all 48 missiles would have probably been expended.

I know that the radar that use the Type 45 destroyers can track hundreds of targets simultaneously.

But...has the ship the capacity of illuminate 17 targets at the same time?

(I don´t know if I use the term "illuminate" in english correctly. In Spanish one thing is "seguir un blanco", track a target, and another is "iluminar con radar un blanco", illuminate?? a target with a radar beam??? to guide the missile)

 

[bfc1001]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I know , I know it's binkovs battlegrounds but does try to illustrate the problems faced by a defending ship against multiple targets . In my opinion , a completely unsupported warship in a highly defended area stands little chance . If it has support , that it is part of a wider fleet including air support then it's chances of survival would be increased proportionally to the support offered .

 

[Yevgeny]

Its more like single Su-30 carrying couple of Urans or one Onyx will be enough to sink it. The combat range of Uran anti-ship missile is twice that of Aster anti-air missile (250 km against 120 km), the range of Onyx is 4 times that of Aster (500km). In other words Russian naval aviation will be able to engage the warship without being exposed to its air defenses. Theoretically the destroyer can stay afloat after being hit by Uran, Onyx on the other hand is most likely to just break it in half.

 

[Mokordo]

If I understand well your video, if the attack consist in several waves form the same direction, a Burke could down about 10-15 missiles , without exterior aid, and they illuminated missiles both with the 3 radar illuminators and also with the An/Spy flat screen radar.

The remaining missiles that would not be destroyed with missiles will be managed with Phallanx Ciws, the main gun, and deviated/confused by chaffs and electronic countermeasures. isn´t it?

 

[Mokordo]

Its more like single Su-34 carrying couple of Urans or one Onyx will be enough to sink it. The combat range of Uran anti-ship missile is twice that of Aster anti-air missile (250 km against 120 km), the range of Onyx is 4 times that of Aster (500km). In other words Russian naval aviation will be able to engage the warship without being exposed to its air defenses. Theoretically the destroyer can stay afloat after being hit by Uran, Onyx on the other hand is most likely to just break it in half.

Yes, I know Russia has fantastic weapons, but I wanted to know if a modern AAW warship could manage alone this number of targets, at least theoretically.

 

[Marsch]

@Mokordo: Illuminate is absolutely correct. See for example HPIR (High Power Illumination Radar) AN MPQ-57.

 

[bfc1001]

If I understand well your video, if the attack consist in several waves form the same direction, a Burke could down about 10-15 missiles , without exterior aid, and they illuminated missiles both with the 3 radar illuminators and also with the An/Spy flat screen radar.

The remaining missiles that would not be destroyed with missiles will be managed with Phallanx Ciws, the main gun, and deviated/confused by chaffs and electronic countermeasures. isn´t it?

In theory mokordo yes . But if a modern destroyer were to be attacked by 20/30 anti ship missiles in 1 wave I doubt those systems would be able to eliminate all . Ships like HMS Duncan are great blue water ships ; ideal for the adlantic ; but in the confines of the black sea against land based aircraft I would nt fancy it's chances . If you look back at the Falklands the British effectively prevented the Argentinians from operating land based planes from the Falklands themselves which effectively allowed the British fleet to act far more effectively .

 

[bfc1001]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Was talked about not too long ago . That's what you get when politicians start making military decisions . I'm non military , but I'd consider that a suicide mission ( on the basis that things went " hot " ) .

 

[AAR Galileo]

I will try to simulate this "engagement" in Command: Modern Air Naval Operations mutiple time to see the stats.

 

[Yevgeny]

Yes, I know Russia has fantastic weapons, but I wanted to know if a modern AAW warship could manage alone this number of targets, at least theoretically.

The Aster anti-aircraft missile has active-homing ie once launched it doesn't need "illumination" (proper term is homing) from the warship because it uses its own radar. Thus the number of targets that can be potentially engaged is only constrained to the amount of missiles onboard the destroyer. The problem is since modern long-range anti-ship missiles (P-800 Onyx for instance) can be launched from outside the radar coverage area (400 km) or the radar can be potentially jammed by EW aircraft the low flying supersonic missile will only be detected at the terminal stage and there might be not enough time for the adequate reaction to the threat.

 

[Marsch]

"Homing" means a missile is riding a beam to the target. Like the HAWK (Homing All the Way Killer) missile.
"Illuminating" means marking a target with a radar in this case.

Btw, how many of these missiles you mentioned does the Russian naval aviation and airforce actually have in their stock? A couple hundred Urans and not a single Onyx from what I get.

 

[Yevgeny]

"Homing" means a missile is riding a beam to the target. Like the HAWK (Homing All the Way Killer) missile.
"Illuminating" means marking a target with a radar in this case.

"Homing" means missile guidance system that relies on external signal. The source of signal can be targets own emission (passive homing), it can be reflection from target designation radar (semi-active homing like the one HAWK has) or it can reflection from its own radar (active homing). No beam riding here. So the most proper term for "illuminating" is "target designation". In any case it doesn't apply to Aster missiles.

Btw, how many of these missiles you mentioned does the Russian naval aviation and airforce actually have in their stock? A couple hundred Urans and not a single Onyx from what I get.

Ok I lied about Russian naval aviation using Onyxes I just assumed you are not going to check. They only use sea and land based platforms at the moment. However there WERE PLANS to put Onyxes on duty with naval aviation.

 

[Marsch]

That was obviously a simplification in relation to radar guided missiles like shown in the Aegis video. In the case of active homing it's actually an internally generated signal. You can of course also home in on other sorces like for example heat.

You're delibaretly lying to make a point in the hope that nobody will notice? I'm speechless!

 

[AAR Galileo]

Ok, so for the simulation.
The swarm was composed of Fencer and Su-30 according to the reports

The missions will be played on the Russian side, the computer controlling the T-45 - ROE "hold fire until fired at" then weapon free!.

The Russian swarm (The planes loadout is correct to the Russian OrBat in 2018) :
1x fencer E Elint SRS14
3x Fencer D ARM (2xKh-31P )
8x Fencer D ASuW (2x Kh-59P)
2 x Su 30SM ARM (2x Kh-31P)
5 x Su30 SM ASuW (2x Kh-59P)

1 - scenario full stand off: Kripton - missile -range max 60nm - firing a 2/3 of the max range (40nm). First ARM missile then 15sec later all the anti surface missiles.
three run of the simulation will be conducted:
1.a Attack on one axis
1.b 2 axis attack (90 deg)
1.c multi axis attack

2 - Scenario stand off (ARM weapons fired at 40mn) and close range 6mn antiship missile (Kh-29P or L)
2.a Attack on one axis
2.b 2 axis attack (90 deg)
2.c multi axis attack

For those interested, I will upload the missions files, and a link to the a youtube video of the first scenario (1a).

 

[Mokordo]

Ok, so for the simulation.
The swarm was composed of Fencer and Su-30 according to the reports

The missions will be played on the Russian side, the computer controlling the T-45 - ROE "hold fire until fired at" then weapon free!.

The Russian swarm (The planes loadout is correct to the Russian OrBat in 2018) :
1x fencer E Elint SRS14
3x Fencer D ARM (2xKh-31P )
8x Fencer D ASuW (2x Kh-59P)
2 x Su 30SM ARM (2x Kh-31P)
5 x Su30 SM ASuW (2x Kh-59P)

1 - scenario full stand off: Kripton - missile -range max 60nm - firing a 2/3 of the max range (40nm). First ARM missile then 15sec later all the anti surface missiles.
three run of the simulation will be conducted:
1.a Attack on one axis
1.b 2 axis attack (90 deg)
1.c multi axis attack

2 - Scenario stand off (ARM weapons fired at 40mn) and close range 6mn antiship missile (Kh-29P or L)
2.a Attack on one axis
2.b 2 axis attack (90 deg)
2.c multi axis attack

For those interested, I will upload the missions files, and a link to the a youtube video of the first scenario (1a).

Post a link with the video, please. I am curious abou this.