4 ms·
It's far more complicated than you think to sink a modern combat ship with a missile. The Neptune would qualify as "minimally capable" and if it weren't for Rus
by exabrial 4y ago
It's far more complicated than you think to sink a modern combat ship with a missile. The Neptune would qualify as "minimally capable" and if it weren't for Russian incompetence and target intelligence, or it wouldn't have succeeded.
First, you have the sea. It's flat, it's quiet, and it's pretty much void of surface and aerial radar contacts. Missile stealth is really hard in this environment because of the quiet background, and the Neptune is not stealthy. The ship-based radars are really only limited to the curvature of the earth... so for the Moskva, that's probably 9miles in bad conditions, 18miles in best conditions. The cold background even allows IRST to work quite effectively (not sure if the Moskva has that capability). The target ship is going to know you're coming, especially the Moskva, as in the absolute worst conditions, that's about 30s-45s of warning time, or 10m-15m if you have an AEW radar.
Second, radar blindness is a two way street. You can fire a missile, but it will be blind to its target until it's pretty close and can activate some sort of terminal phase guidance. Navies _always_ keep their ships moving to avoid attacks. Basically, for a sub-sonic missile, you can fire it at where the target is now, but by the time it gets to where it thinks the target is, it may not be there anymore. There's a couple of ways to handle this. For Navy's very modern LRASM, that's a passive link receiving mid-course updates, with fallback to GPS/Inertial guidance. For the Neptune, it's just inertial guidance. Just _moving_ the target ship around randomly is enough to protect it from a Neptune strike and Russia did not do this.
Third, your missile needs to broadside. Ships are designed to cut through the water, so a head-on attack will just cause the missile to skip off the bow. Your missile needs to have enough spare fuel to turn about and detect the orientation of the ship. Again, you can defeat this by randomly turning your ship a bunch of times. There's a case in the Falklands war where an Exocet was coming in hard for a kill, but the ship's commander had enough time to orient the ship towards the missile with full rudder, and the Exocet bounced, then exploded on the deck rather than penetrating. There was damage, but ship stayed in combat. The Neptune doesn't have great loiter time. And its rudimentary radar terminal guidance it's probably easily attacked electronically anyway.
Finally you have point defenses. Russia actually has quite sophisticated CIWS systems, both missile and rotary cannon. It's speculated that the only really guaranteed way to defeat these systems is a saturation attack, which was not the case, or a supersonic terminal phase, which the Neptune is not capable of. Russia pretty much had all its defenses down.
So no, the Neptune is really not that sophisticated. This attack was successful purely based on knowing the limitations of the weapon system and timely intelligence.
- _0w8t 4y agoThere is an interesting speculation that perhaps most of its way the missiles where in either in the radar shadow of the Snake island or the island added sufficient noise to hide the missiles.
- ckozlowski 4y agoIt's possible they had fired them from the coast behind the island, doglegged them around the island (I dunno if the Neptune has this capability, but older AShMs do, so I don't think it's unreasonable), and therefor reduced the possible reaction time of the Moskava as they would have appeared only 40-50 miles away as opposed to 80, according to this map and my rough Google Earth estimates. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/04/satellite-image-pinpoints-russian-cruiser-moskva-as-she-burned/#prettyPhoto https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/04/satellite-image... Doing some really rough napkin math gives you 3-6 minutes of warning, assuming the missiles were detected the moment they cleared the island. The island wouldn't have generated "noise" (doesn't work like that) but as a shadow, sure. I don't know that I would say that was the winning factor however. But now that I think about it, given how tiny (some consider it a rock, not an island) Snake Island is, you'd have to be darn precise to get your launchers on a spot on the coast to perfectly place the island between them and the ship, and I can't see those constraints being practical to make an attack in a timely fashion. So I suspect it's a stretch at best. (On the other hand and slightly unrelated, in the flight sim DCS World, we'd take AJS-37 Viggens with RB-15 AShMs and dogleg missiles around features against ships on the Persian Gulf map. This sorta angling becomes a lot easier if your launch platform is far more mobile like an aircraft. Depending on where your target is, you can set up some good ambushes with very little warning if you get your timing right. It's part of the reason the littoral areas can be so darn scary to fight in.)
- _0w8t 4y agoThere are some military installations on the island that can reflect the radar signal and that are placed on top of the island, close to 40 meters above the see.
- JohnBooty 4y ago