Navy Lacks Plan to Defend Against `Sizzler' Missile

[Torpedo Fodder]

The Sunburn missile has never seen use in combat, to my knowledge, which probably explains why its fearsome capabilities are not more widely recognized. Other cruise missiles have been used, of course, on several occasions, and with devastating results. During the Falklands War, French-made Exocet missiles, fired from Argentine fighters, sunk the HMS Sheffield and another ship. And, in 1987, prior to the Iran-Iraq war, the USS Stark was nearly cut in half by a pair of Exocets while on patrol in the Persian Gulf. On that occasion US Aegis radar picked up the incoming Iraqi fighter (a French-made Mirage), and tracked its approach to within 50 miles. The radar also "saw" the Iraqi plane turn about and return to its base. But radar never detected the pilot launch his weapons. The sea-skimming Exocets came smoking in under radar and were only sighted by human eyes moments before they ripped into the Stark, crippling the ship and killing 37 US sailors.

First of all, as an O.H. Perry-class frigate, the Stark did not have an Aegis system; just a basic SPS-49 air search radar and four missile directors. As a relativly-low powered L-band radar, it's not terribly effective at detecting missles, unlike the S-band SPY-1 used by the Aegis system.

Second, although the Sunburn is still a good missile, it's reputation as a nigh-unstoppable superweapon is grossly overstated. Unlike subsonic sea-skimmers (like the aforementioned Klub), while fly at under 10 meters, the Sunburn flies at over 50m, meaning it will be detected much further out (especially by a radar as massively powerful as the SPY-1). And although it can pull limited evasive maneuvers, it is still a big missile and it's high speed gives it a huge IR signature. And although Phalanx would not be terribly effective (since even if it killed the missile at maximim range, buring wreckage would still hit the ship), that is hardly the first line of defence, and point-defence SAMs like RAM and ESSM most certainly would be able to out-maneuver a Sunburn.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by Torpedo Fodder

First of all, as an O.H. Perry-class frigate, the Stark did not have an Aegis system; just a basic SPS-49 air search radar and four missile directors. As a relativly-low powered L-band radar, it's not terribly effective at detecting missles, unlike the S-band SPY-1 used by the Aegis system.

On the negative side, the weight of the SPY-1s force them to hunker low. There's a reason why they wanted a SPS-49 to supplement the SPY-1 on the CG-47s.

Second, although the Sunburn is still a good missile, it's reputation as a nigh-unstoppable superweapon is grossly overstated. Unlike subsonic sea-skimmers (like the aforementioned Klub), while fly at under 10 meters, the Sunburn flies at over 50m, meaning it will be detected much further out (especially by a radar as massively powerful as the SPY-1).

Actually, the Sunburn AFAIK flies at 20m cruise, 3-7m terminal. Even the ancient Sandbox can hack 30m.

Second, what you really want is PROCESSING. Just throwing radar energy at the water just means you have to sort through more sea clutter. Because the Sunburn also has a passive tracking mode, your choice of active defence also means that you can stop hoping on your soft-kill measures - hmm, nice radar source+ECM (Nulka decoy) vs nice radar source + ECM + massive SPY-1 radar emission ... tough decision. Further, to kill something with Aegis, the SPG-62 must manage to illuminate the target clearly in the endphase.

And although it can pull limited evasive maneuvers, it is still a big missile and it's high speed gives it a huge IR signature.

If your radars are your primary means of acquisition, that won't matter. When the Soviets built it, they were probably counting on the American reliance on radar.

And although Phalanx would not be terribly effective (since even if it killed the missile at maximim range, buring wreckage would still hit the ship), that is hardly the first line of defence, and point-defence SAMs like RAM and ESSM most certainly would be able to out-maneuver a Sunburn.

ESSM relies on the radar. As for RAM, you still want the radar to point the RAM launcher in the right direction and it is based on Sidewinder. Its speed and kinematics are thus relatively poor. A missile can maneuver a lot harder than a aircraft. Fortunately, the Sunburn is a relatively simple weapon, and still uses preplanned jinks (the Yakhont graduates to using RWR to control the dodging).

[Torpedo Fodder]

Second, what you really want is PROCESSING. Just throwing radar energy at the water just means you have to sort through more sea clutter. Because the Sunburn also has a passive tracking mode, your choice of active defence also means that you can stop hoping on your soft-kill measures - hmm, nice radar source+ECM (Nulka decoy) vs nice radar source + ECM + massive SPY-1 radar emission ... tough decision. Further, to kill something with Aegis, the SPG-62 must manage to illuminate the target clearly in the endphase.

On the other hand, the Sunburn's IR plume is so large that it's probably visable over the horizon, and the SM-2 now has an auxiliary IR homing capability. I also imagine the newer SPY-1D(V) is much more effecive in picking out sea-skimmers from wave clutter.

Further, to kill something with Aegis, the SPG-62 must manage to illuminate the target clearly in the endphase.

And? You can prove that would be a problem, especially for the newer version of Aegis.

ESSM relies on the radar. As for RAM, you still want the radar to point the RAM launcher in the right direction and it is based on Sidewinder.

Given that standard ROE fires four RAMs against each incoming missile on slightly different vectors, I'm not too worried about it's capability to intercept Sunburns. As for ESSM, once again, can you prove that the the Aegis system would be incapable of keeping up with the missile's maneuivers, especially the latest versions?

[LoBlo]

Rumors abound that the Phalanx is too short ranged to handle the Sunburn. SeaRam's been rumored to be the next generation CIWS capable of handling the supersonic sunburn type missiles with very good results in testing (but of course totally unconfirmed).

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/966345/posts
http://www.raytheon.com/products/ste...s01_055726.pdf

I've never read any reports about the effectiveness of SeaRam on a two stage missile like the SS-N-27. Its probably not the speed of the missile that complicates the intercept, but the fact that the target you were tracking suddenly splits in two (the terminal phase and the residual of the subsonic phase) with not much time to respond to the sudden high speed addition of the terminal warhead.

I don't understand why they are still giving those lame NATO names these days when everyone has access to the Russian names now. The Cold War NATO names are still dominant, but the post Cold War? Who really remembers the SA-20 Gargoyle better than the S-300PMU? The SA-21 Growler instead of the S-400? And for some reason SA-23 is the S-300VM even though the S-300VM came almost a decade before the deployment of the S-400 (just starting right about now).

I don't understand it either. I think we should start calling the Akula sub the "Bars" and the Typhoon sub the "Akula" like Russia intended... going to confuse the heck out everyone though

[Torpedo Fodder]

Rumors abound that the Phalanx is too short ranged to handle the Sunburn.

It's not just a rumor, it's simple physics: At the speed Sunburn travels at, even if it was killed at the CIWS maxiumum range of 1,500 meters, flaming wreckage from the missile would still reach it's target.

SeaRam's been rumored to be the next generation CIWS capable of handling the supersonic sunburn type missiles with very good results in testing (but of course totally unconfirmed).

Sea RAM has actually been around since the mid '80s: Phalanx was actually orignally only intended as a stop-gap before Sea RAM was ready. But since Phalanx was cheaper, guess which one Congress was most willing to pay for?

Anyway, another promising future CIWS is the 57mm Mk.110 that will be used by the DD-1000, which has ten times the effective range of Phalanx, and double the range of even Sea RAM! Although it has a much slower ROF than Phalanx, it's high range coupled with it's ability to use fragmentation shells more than compensates for that.