Military Review

Surface ships: evade anti-ship missiles

38

In the previous article, we considered kinetic methods of destruction that can be used to repel massive strikes inflicted by anti-ship missiles (ASM).


No matter how the developers try to increase the detection range of aircraft and anti-ship missiles attacking the ship, the number of detection and guidance channels of anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM), the ammunition of anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAM) and artillery shells of rapid-fire automatic cannons, aviation can still concentrate such a number of anti-ship missiles in a salvo that a surface ship (NK) cannot intercept.

Non-kinetic methods of destroying anti-ship missiles and evading their attacks can come to the rescue.

Electromagnetic ammunition


A potentially effective means of dealing with the raid of a large number of anti-ship missiles can be promising electromagnetic (EMP) ammunition equipped with a special warhead (warhead), which, when detonated, generates a powerful electromagnetic pulse. Such radiation can damage the electronics of the anti-ship missile system, primarily the guidance radar.

Surface ships: evade anti-ship missiles
Diagram of electromagnetic ammunition

It can be assumed that missiles with an electromagnetic warhead will be used at the very beginning of the battle, to attack anti-ship missiles at the maximum distance from the NK, so that EMP ammunition does not damage the operation of the ship's radar and other missiles.

The advantages of EMP ammunition include the fact that one ammunition can potentially hit several anti-ship missiles at once. In addition, a missile defense system with an electromagnetic warhead does not need precise guidance to an anti-ship missile system.

The disadvantages of EMP ammunition include the fact that there are effective ways to protect against this type of impact. For example, the means of opening circuits in the event of strong induction currents are zener diodes and varistors. Also, RLGSN can be made on the basis of EMP-resistant low-temperature co-fired ceramics (Low Temperature Co-Fired Ceramic - LTCC).

At a minimum, missiles with an electromagnetic warhead can be used against mass launches of small-sized kamikaze UAVs, in which it is unlikely that it will be possible to implement full-fledged methods of protection against EMP ammunition.

In addition to the physical destruction of anti-ship missiles, there are ways to evade their strike by deceiving the missile seeker. For this purpose, means of electronic warfare (EW), systems for setting up protective curtains and decoys are used.

Means of EW


The use of electronic warfare equipment on a surface ship is a fairly effective solution. However, there is a risk that the radiation itself from electronic warfare can be used by anti-ship missiles to target a surface ship. This risk can be reduced by firing off electronic warfare equipment with limited operating time away from the ship.

The Israeli company Rafael has developed a false target C-GEM of the "fire-and-forget" type, designed to counter anti-ship missiles with radar and infrared homing heads (radar seeker / IR seeker). The C-GEM decoys include high performance broadband emitters with electronically controlled beam control.


Active decoy C-GEM

In the previous article, we considered the possibility of increasing the viewing range of reconnaissance equipment by placing a radar station (radar) on board an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) of a helicopter / quadrocopter type, the electric motors of which should be powered via a flexible cable. Similarly, active emitters of electronic warfare equipment can be placed.


An octacopter-type UAV designed for the provision of telecommunications services, powered by an electric cable


Israeli electric tethered UAV "HoverMast-100" by Sky Sapience, designed for long-term reconnaissance in hover mode. The complex, which includes four UAVs "HoverMast-100", can be placed in containers with a diameter of 0,8 meters on a ground carrier or surface ship. At the command of the operator, "HoverMast-100" rises into the air to a height of 15 meters in 50 seconds

Placing the emitters of the electronic warfare system on an external carrier, which can move away from the surface ship by 200-300 meters to the side, will minimize the risk of passive guidance of the anti-ship missile system at the source of electromagnetic radiation.

The advantage of electronic warfare equipment, placed directly on board the ship, is their extremely high power. For example, on the American destroyers of the Arleigh Burke class, the AN / SLQ-32 (V) 6 SEWIP Block II electronic warfare equipment is installed (it is planned to upgrade to AN / SLQ-32 (V) 7 SEWIP Block III), the generated jamming power of which can reach 1 MW. Of course, it will be difficult to transfer such a volume of energy to the UAV via cable.


AN / SLQ-32 (V) 6 SEWIP Block II electronic warfare system aboard an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer

"Faithful follower"


The option of placing electronic warfare equipment on unmanned surface ships (BNK) - companions accompanying the surface ship with a crew, may be considered.

Unmanned ships are currently being actively developed in the leading countries of the world, previously we considered them in articles Unmanned surface ships: the threat from the West и Unmanned surface ships: a threat from the East.

In aviation, the direction of interaction between UAVs and manned fighters, which has received the name "faithful wingman", is now actively developing. A similar solution can be applied to navy, when a surface ship with a crew will be accompanied by 2-3 BNK, searching for submarines, setting up curtains and using electronic warfare equipment.


Unmanned surface ships can become an integral companion of surface ships

In the worst case, the anti-ship missile will hit the "slave" BNK, and not the surface ship with the crew.

False targets


Another way to reduce the likelihood of hitting anti-ship missile ships is to use false targets of various types. Such targets can be inflatable metal structures or other float-type corner reflectors.


The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer sets up a float mock target containing corner reflectors to simulate a large radar contrast target


Deploy Rafael's Israeli Wizard decoys

The disadvantage of decoys is that they cannot move. That is, if the surface ship is moving at high speed, false targets will quickly lag behind it. The difference in speed can also allow the "advanced" RCC seeker to recognize real and false targets.

A partial solution could be the use of decoys towed behind the ship. A more advanced option is to equip decoys with electric motors, allowing them to follow the ship, receiving power from the cable. In fact, this will be the most primitive version of the BNK, the only purpose of which will be to take the blow. Given the presence of power supply, a mobile decoy target can simulate the thermal and electromagnetic radiation of a surface ship.

Thus, even a single surface ship will eventually turn into a "flock", including "tethered" mobile false targets, tethered UAVs with radar and / or electronic warfare means, as well as more "advanced" electronic warfare equipment and setting up camouflage curtains.

Setting up camouflage curtains


One of the most effective and inexpensive ways to combat anti-ship missiles is the installation by surface ships of camouflage curtains, which provide protection of surface ships from anti-ship missiles with radar, optical and combined guidance systems.


Russian shipborne passive jamming system KT-308. Source: bastion-karpenko.ru


Formation of a cloaking curtain by a surface ship (image in optical and thermal ranges)

It can be assumed that the improvement of the RCC seeker, the appearance of combined multi-band seeker, including radar, optical and thermal imaging channels, in combination with improved target selection algorithms, will significantly reduce the effectiveness of masking curtains. At the same time, electronic warfare systems are also being actively improved, and advanced laser self-defense systems for surface ships can be used against optical and thermal imaging guidance channels.

Laser weapons


Development of laser weapons in the navy was discussed in detail in the article Laser Weapon: Navy.

There is an opinion that laser weapons in the Navy will be ineffective due to the fact that the lower boundary of the atmosphere over the sea is maximally saturated with water vapor, which prevents the passage of the laser beam. In addition, the anti-ship missile system is a fairly large and massive target that requires high-power laser weapons to defeat. This is partly true, but only partly.

Firstly, although to defeat anti-ship missiles, laser weapons are required of much higher power than, for example, to destroy air-to-air or surface-to-air missiles, but the power of ship power systems is much higher than that which can be obtained on plane. And there will be no problems with cooling - the whole ocean is overboard. For example, if it is now planned to install laser weapons with a power of about 150 kW on aircraft (with the prospect of increasing to 300 kW), then on modernized nuclear submarines of the Virginia type, it is initially planned to install a 300 kW laser (with the prospect of increasing the power to 500 kW) ...

Secondly, at the initial stage, laser weapons can only be used to destroy optical guidance systems of anti-ship missiles, which, in combination with a radar, can significantly increase the likelihood of damage, even when using electronic warfare equipment and masking curtains. It can be assumed that a laser weapon with a power of up to 50 kW will be sufficient for this purpose. The same power is quite enough to destroy small and medium-sized UAVs, boats and motor boats.

The combination of electronic warfare and laser weapons will completely "blind" the anti-ship missile system. Moreover, in the case of an optical / thermal guidance channel, the blinding will be irreversible (with sufficient power of the laser weapon).

At the moment, the possibility of installing laser weapons is initially included in most projects of promising warships of the leading countries of the world.


In 2021, the Arleigh Burke-class USS Preble will receive a 60 kW HELIOS laser self-defense system - it will become the first ship in the US Navy to be equipped with laser weapons.

conclusions


The combination of kinetic and non-kinetic means of destruction of anti-ship missiles, as well as methods of evading an attack, can significantly increase the survivability of surface ships with the massive use of anti-ship missiles, even taking into account the fact that in the foreseeable future surface ships will lose the opportunity to get lost in the vastness of the oceans.

The growing threat of massive attacks by the enemy anti-ship missiles will lead to the fact that the main task of surface ships will be to protect themselves and a certain area around them from aviation and air attack weapons. At the same time, the execution of strike missions will fall on nuclear submarines - carriers of cruise and anti-ship missiles (SSGNs).
Author:
Photos used:
bastion-karpenko.ru, integral-russia.ru, alternathistory.livejournal.com
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. malyvalv
    malyvalv April 28 2021 05: 07
    +6
    All this may not save you. The missiles are now equipped with computer brains that, when the sensors are blinded, can simply direct the missile to the intended target location, calculating the lead, that is, just like a blunt artillery shell. Considering the huge difference in the speed of the rocket and the ship, the probability of destruction will be high.
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar April 28 2021 11: 17
      +1
      Quote: malyvalv
      The missiles are now equipped with computer brains that, when the sensors are blinded, can simply direct the missile to the intended target location.

      I think the missile is supposed to be blinded before it can pinpoint the target position. In this case, there will be a good chance that it (the rocket) will eventually aim at a false target or even go past. It is clear that the probability of such an event is far from 100%, but such are the realities - no one can give absolute guarantees.
  2. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I April 28 2021 05: 37
    +6
    "What should we build a house? Let's draw ... and we will live!" For example, what the "gloomy German genius" suggested at one time ... coal (more precisely, coal dust) was thrown into a certain part of the airspace ... so to speak, "fine, but up to ... a lot!" And then, set fire to the "corner cloud" to cause a "volumetric" explosion ("effect" ODB ...). And there were also "whirlwinds"! What? We take small-sized "remote-controlled" boats with "vortex cannons" and put them under the target! Well, come on ... God bless them ... the Fritzes and the Hans! And in the Russian Federation there are talented crazy people! There was once an "epic" with SDI ... "antidotes" were offered in response ... One of them was this proposal: with the help of maser lasers and other "creativity", a "plasmoid" was created in front of air targets ... the enemy the "object" collided with the plasmoid and "was launched into the blast" ...! And you can also remember: 1. the effect of curvature of space; 2. "Tesla's rays"; 3. "miniature" "pure" thermonuclear charges; 4. to the extreme "end", "Shilka" with californium shells ... 5. or we install a network-fence using a UAV and connect it to a voltage of 1 million volts! 6. Air minefields! Well, for now! But wait a little! I still have "ideas" on the way!
    1. Momotomba
      Momotomba April 28 2021 07: 52
      +3
      Colleague, just admit that you are over 30 years old)))) most of the inventions and discoveries were created by people under 30 who simply did not know that something is impossible or that something will definitely not work out laughing
      Maybe at this moment, graduate student Vasya is completing an air minefield from Tesla beams on clean bombs from Shilka using a UAV on a water cushion using reverse osmosis technology ...
    2. Aviator_
      Aviator_ April 28 2021 08: 27
      +4
      a "plasmoid" was created in front of air targets ... the enemy "object" collided with a plasmoid

      Your irony is quite understandable, it is from lack of information. The issue of creating a thermal inhomogeneity at the entrance to the air intake of a cruise missile was actually considered, which caused problems in the compressor of its VRM with engine shutdown. Agree that this requires much less laser power than burning a hole in a metal case, and the requirement for guidance and tracking accuracy is much lower. "Plasmoid" has nothing to do with it.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I April 28 2021 08: 42
        +2
        Quote: Aviator_
        "Plasmoid" has nothing to do with it.

        If The issue of creating a thermal inhomogeneity at the entrance to the air intake of a cruise missile was actually considered, then, indeed, "Plasmoid" has nothing to do with it. yes But I'm talking about another clinical case ... "Plasmoid"! stop
    3. Normal ok
      Normal ok April 28 2021 11: 01
      -1
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      "What should we build a house? Let's draw ... and we will live!" For example, what the "gloomy German genius" suggested at one time ... coal (more precisely, coal dust) was thrown into a certain part of the airspace ... so to speak, "fine, but up to ... a lot!" And then, set fire to the "corner cloud" to cause a "volumetric" explosion ("effect" ODB ...). And there were also "whirlwinds"! What? We take small-sized "remote-controlled" boats with "vortex cannons" and put them under the target! Well, come on ... God bless them ... the Fritzes and the Hans! And in the Russian Federation there are talented crazy people! There was once an "epic" with SDI ... "antidotes" were offered in response ... One of them was this proposal: with the help of maser lasers and other "creativity", a "plasmoid" was created in front of air targets ... the enemy the "object" collided with the plasmoid and "was launched into the blast" ...! And you can also remember: 1. the effect of curvature of space; 2. "Tesla's rays"; 3. "miniature" "pure" thermonuclear charges; 4. to the extreme "end", "Shilka" with californium shells ... 5. or we install a network-fence using a UAV and connect it to a voltage of 1 million volts! 6. Air minefields! Well, for now! But wait a little! I still have "ideas" on the way!

      So volumetric explosion ammunition was invented even before the Second World War. And, graphite dust was used by the Americans in Yugoslavia to disable electrical networks.
      1. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A April 28 2021 13: 11
        +3
        Quote: Normal ok

        So volumetric explosion ammunition was invented even before the Second World War. And, graphite dust was used by the Americans in Yugoslavia to disable electrical networks.


        Not dust, but threads ...
        myriads of threads.
        1. gaudin
          gaudin April 29 2021 22: 31
          0
          Quote: SovAr238A
          Not dust, but threads ...
          myriads of threads.

          Carbon filaments were used to short-circuit power lines, and coal dust munitions were used to destroy electrical substations.
  3. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 April 28 2021 08: 24
    -4
    the conclusion is obvious and sure the future belongs to submarines, surface ships are coastal frigates of PLO in 3000 tons, they are also patrolmen, anti-pirates and guards of fish catchers in peacetime
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar April 28 2021 11: 22
      +4
      Quote: vladimir1155
      the future belongs to the PL

      The PL has its own troubles. For example, now there simply does not exist intelligible air defense systems for them, which greatly complicates their relationship with anti-submarine aviation. Or communication: organizing communication with the submarine is a separate attraction, which makes managing them not the easiest thing to do. In general, submarines alone cannot do.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 April 28 2021 13: 20
        0
        the purpose of the anti-submarine missile forces is a retaliatory strike against the aggressor, this does not even require two-way communication, and survival is ensured by the size and depth of the ocean, which is very difficult to tightly cover with anti-submarine aviation. The objectives of the non-nuclear submarine are the defense of the water area around the bases of the nuclear submarines, the air defense of this water area is provided by ground air defense and shore-based aviation.
        1. Kalmar
          Kalmar April 28 2021 13: 39
          0
          Quote: vladimir1155
          the purpose of the RPKSN is a retaliation strike against the aggressor, for this it does not even need a two-way communication

          Yes, as it were useful: SSBNs must receive an order to launch, and before that - somehow report their current status.

          Quote: vladimir1155
          survivability is ensured by the size and depth of the ocean, which is very difficult to densely cover by anti-submarine aircraft

          You have to get out into the ocean somehow; the geographical aspects of this issue have been discussed many times. One of the most important tasks of NK in this story is the dispersal of enemy aircraft.

          Then, you "lost" the SSNS, which, in order to fulfill their tasks (strike on the coast, fight against enemy fleets), may need to operate at a great distance from your coast, where your own aviation will no longer help you. And yes, for them two-way communication is even more important.
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 April 28 2021 20: 05
            0
            Quote: Kalmar
            SSBNs must receive an order to launch, and before that - somehow report their current status.

            what for? I have already proved everything to myself, ... it is enough to receive an order to start, and the fact of its existence will become obvious by the results of the destruction of Washington, New York and further down the list
          2. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 April 28 2021 20: 07
            -1
            Quote: Kalmar
            You have to get out into the ocean somehow; the geographical aspects of this issue have been discussed many times. One of the most important tasks of NK in this story is the dispersal of enemy aircraft.

            to enter the ocean of SSBN submarines, control of 2000 km from the base is sufficient, this is the shoulder of front-line aviation from the shore, they will easily destroy all weak enemy decks
            1. Kalmar
              Kalmar April 28 2021 20: 28
              0
              Quote: vladimir1155
              control of 2000 km from the base is sufficient, this is the shoulder of front-line aviation from the shore, they can easily destroy all weak enemy decks

              This myth, it seems to me, has already been sorted out many times: you have an extra zero in "2000". Yes, and deck ships are never weak in our time. And the SSNS still need to get close to their goals, and it is not a fact that this event will take place where the basic aviation can reach.

              In general, there is no need to try to outsmart reality: there is no "silver" bullet, each type of weapons and military equipment has its own strengths and weaknesses, and you cannot manage with one thing. An integrated approach reigns supreme)
              1. Vladimir1155
                Vladimir1155 April 28 2021 23: 24
                -1
                Quote: Kalmar
                This myth, it seems to me, has already been sorted out many times: you have an extra zero in "2000".

                you just miss zero ... Su-57 / Flight range
                5 500 km ...... Tu-160 / Flight range
                12 300 km .....
                Tu-22M / Flight range
                5 100 km
                1. Kalmar
                  Kalmar April 29 2021 08: 58
                  0
                  Quote: vladimir1155
                  Su-57 / Flight range

                  Are we going to rehearse this dialogue every couple of months? )) Well, ok: the flight range and, let's say, the effective combat radius are not the same thing at all.

                  The plane needs fuel for the return journey, for the conduct of an air battle (and there the afterburner will go into action, which eats fuel from the heart). And he also has to banal time to intercept enemy aircraft before she gets the opportunity to use her ASP. So a successful interception 2000 km from the coast is almost a fantasy.
                  1. Vladimir1155
                    Vladimir1155 April 29 2021 09: 19
                    0
                    Quote: Kalmar
                    Well ok: flight range and, let's say, effective combat radius

                    now everyone is fighting on the principle of a shot washed away, no one there will sing Nesterov and go to the ram, you stayed in my opinion in 1945 still ...... air-air missiles fly a hundred kilometers, so the combat radius is the ultimate fuel range divided by two, plus missile range ...
                    1. Kalmar
                      Kalmar April 29 2021 09: 41
                      -1
                      Quote: vladimir1155
                      air-to-air missiles fly a hundred kilometers, so the combat radius is the maximum fuel range divided by two, plus the missile range ...

                      To carry out a launch for a hundred kilometers, the enemy still needs to be reliably detected. After the launch - check the defeat, re-launch if necessary, so that "shoot and forget" will not work. The enemy, by the way, can also shoot back, so you have to turn around.

                      Second aspect: the adversary may not be punctual. You are at the point of interception of profits, and he is half an hour late. You will not be able to wait, otherwise there will not be enough fuel for the return journey. Or the enemy can blatantly change course and go to a different point. It's impossible to predict his behavior 100%.

                      Finally, do not forget the speed factor: you still need to fly to the maximum range. This means that you need to know about the appearance of enemy aircraft at some point in a few hours. I don't think intelligence is capable of that.

                      As a result, "maximum fuel range divided by two ..." - this is just a certain theoretical limit, unattainable in real life.
                      1. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 April 29 2021 09: 45
                        0
                        Quote: Kalmar
                        "maximum fuel range divided by two ..." is just a theoretical limit

                        firstly, sometimes you have to work at maximum capabilities, and secondly, even with a decent margin of 25 percent along the radius, front-line aviation covers the guaranteed 2000 km sought, and not the ridiculous Timokhinsky 200, ... and the long-range one is capable of hitting the territory of the United States
                      2. Kalmar
                        Kalmar April 29 2021 10: 05
                        -1
                        Quote: vladimir1155
                        even with a decent reserve of 25 percent along the radius, frontline aviation covers the guaranteed 2000 km sought, and not the ridiculous Timokhinsky 200

                        "Funny Timokhinskie 200", as far as I remember, was conditioned not by the radius, but by the reaction time: well, the plane cannot jump into the air at the snap of its fingers and instantly travel a couple of thousand kilometers.

                        Preparing for departure, getting up into the air, the actual flight - all this takes time. Those. it is necessary to very much in advance detect the actions of enemy aircraft and very accurately determine where it is headed in order to select an interception point. Where to get such intelligence.
                      3. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 April 29 2021 11: 05
                        0
                        Quote: Kalmar
                        Those. it is necessary to very much in advance detect the actions of enemy aircraft and very accurately determine where it is headed in order to select an interception point. Where to get such intelligence.

                        there is an answer A50 A100
                      4. Kalmar
                        Kalmar April 29 2021 11: 28
                        -1
                        Quote: vladimir1155
                        there is an answer A50 A100

                        A-50 nine pieces for all of our vast homeland. And he cannot hang in the air all the time, and the enemy is clearly not attacking on schedule. The A-100 is still in development with rather vague prospects. In any case, no one will send an AWACS aircraft on a single flight for 2-3 thousand km, where there is nothing and no one to cover it with.
  • Ka-52
    Ka-52 April 28 2021 08: 33
    +3
    Formation of a cloaking curtain by a surface ship (image in optical and thermal ranges)

    not true by definition. Thermal (infrared) radiation refers to optical radiation. It was correct to write "in the visible and infrared ranges".
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 28 2021 10: 22
      +2
      Quote: Ka-52
      Formation of a cloaking curtain by a surface ship (image in optical and thermal ranges)

      not true by definition. Thermal (infrared) radiation refers to optical radiation. It was correct to write "in the visible and infrared ranges".


      I agree.
  • Undecim
    Undecim April 28 2021 10: 19
    +1
    The number of various sofa naval theorists on the site has already exceeded all reasonable limits, and the "projects" they are rushing are already far from reality.
    The growing threat of massive attacks by the enemy anti-ship missiles will lead to the fact that the main task of surface ships will be to protect themselves and a certain area around them from aviation and air attack weapons.

    But what about underwater attack weapons?
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 28 2021 10: 22
      0
      Quote: Undecim
      The number of various sofa naval theorists on the site has already exceeded all reasonable limits, and the "projects" they are rushing are already far from reality.
      The growing threat of massive attacks by the enemy anti-ship missiles will lead to the fact that the main task of surface ships will be to protect themselves and a certain area around them from aviation and air attack weapons.

      But what about underwater attack weapons?


      There will be an article about this.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim April 28 2021 10: 24
        +3
        There will be an article about this.

        This music will be eternal
        If I change the batteries ....
        1. The leader of the Redskins
          The leader of the Redskins April 28 2021 20: 49
          +1
          Not worth changing. It seems the authors have invented the "perpetual motion machine" of this theme and are exploiting it mercilessly!))
          laughing
          1. Undecim
            Undecim April 28 2021 20: 58
            +2
            It was the administration of the site that groped for the topic for the next holivar, to which the couch Alfreds Mahan flock, like these, like bees. And now it maintains heat.
      2. 971
        971 April 28 2021 15: 26
        0
        Quote: AVM
        But what about underwater attack weapons? There will be an article about this.

        wassat

        I promise not to laugh loudly and it hurts not to kick laughing
  • 971
    971 April 28 2021 15: 28
    -1
    the funny thing is that the author "elephant"I didn't notice lol
  • Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo April 28 2021 18: 21
    0
    Electromagnetic ammunition

    Best EMP munition known to be nuclear laughing
  • Aleksandr1971
    Aleksandr1971 April 29 2021 10: 30
    0
    The author has a question: "To what extent, in your opinion, are these ideas being implemented in the Russian surface fleet?"
    Personally, I would assume that, with the exception of thick black smoke, none.
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 29 2021 12: 30
      -1
      Quote: Aleksandr1971
      The author has a question: "To what extent, in your opinion, are these ideas being implemented in the Russian surface fleet?"
      Personally, I would assume that, with the exception of thick black smoke, none.


      On two articles at once:
      There are curtains, 30-mm shells with remote detonation seem to have been developed, but in my opinion they were not tested in the navy. AFAR is, but not enough, and it is being developed. SAM with ARLGSN and IR seeker is, but I can assume that it is not enough.

      We seem to have good electronic warfare equipment, but as with them in the navy, I have no data. For false inflatable and corner targets, the same thing - there is inflatable equipment for ground forces, I don't know about the fleet, but to be honest, I didn't go too deep, PMSM is a solvable problem.

      There is no UAV for DRO and EW on the cable yet, but no one has it either. In principle, the technology is quite achievable for us.

      Lasers are probably bad.
  • Alisher
    Alisher April 30 2021 00: 58
    0
    The American idea of ​​graphite filaments can be transformed. Aircraft during a volcanic eruption with ash ejection - do not fly, the ash knocks out the engines. If you make super-strong lightweight and long threads, in the form of a spider-web, scattered in the air by a projectile (rocket) on the path of the KR (whose flight altitude is low), then they can be sucked into the engine. A small sturdy pin in the mesh is enough to break the engine blades. But the thread must be heat resistant. Against propeller drones, it is also suitable if it is wound around the propeller.
  • fomin
    fomin 9 May 2021 18: 47
    0
    Of course, everything said in the article can work only if the profile of the enemy ship that needs to be hit is not included in the rocket's memory, or if the missile is not guided through the television channel.