View Single Post
Old 08-13-17, 05:46 PM   #2
The Bandit
Sonar Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 395
Downloads: 39
Uploads: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KJakker View Post
Okay, here goes my first post on SUBSIM.

In Cold Waters the only ASM defenses that warships have available are Chaff and CIWS gun systems.

However the various Soviet warships also have SA-N-1, SA-N-3, SA-N-4, SA-N-6, SA-N-7, and SA-N-9 SAMs as well as AK-130, AK-100, AK-726, and AK-725 radar directed DP guns with proximity-fused shells. Warships without AK-630 CWIS guns should still be able to defend themselves to one degree or another with these other systems.

As I understand it the SA-N-1, SA-N-4, and SA-N-9, are designed for low altitude use and as such should be able to engage a sea-skimming missile. As for the guns, I understand that the AK-725 does have fire control issues, but the AK-130, AK-100, and AK-726 should all have some level of effectiveness given how proximity fused AAA was the most effective AA type during and after WWII. Yes, the hit probability per round is comparatively low but it is not statistically zero ether.

I which we could see these weapons at least attempting to engage Harpoons and TASMs. It would make the older Soviet warships more than helpless missile targets.
You certainly have a point here, however the SA-N-1 (albeit better with newer versions of the missile), and to a lesser extent the SA-N-4 really have marginal capability (low kill-probability) when it comes to sea-skimming missiles (same with the longer-ranged "Area defense" weapons like the SA-N-3 although I think an SA-N-6 would do well), doubly true for AAA at the altitudes we're talking about (except for the pop-up maneuver), and manually aimed AAA, would just make for a nice light-show.

For sure though there should be some type of SAMs operating though if only to highlight some of the advantages the Harpoon had over the TASM
__________________
The Bandit is offline   Reply With Quote