First photo of US Navy P-8A Poseidon with LRASM missile emerges

9 168 27
First photo of US Navy P-8A Poseidon with LRASM missile emerges
P-8A aircraft with rocket LRASM over the Mojave Desert in mid-August 2025. The inset shows a visualization of the LRASM CR.


A US Navy P-8 Poseidon aircraft was recently spotted for the first time carrying a Long Range Anti-Ship Cruise Missile (LRASM) in flight on August 28, 2025 aviation Photographer Aaron Maurer posted a photo on the X blogosphere of a plane flying over the Mojave Desert with a missile clearly visible under the left wing.



The Navy later confirmed to Newsweek that the missile was an LRASM and said work was underway to integrate it with the P-8A.

The integration of LRASM has been known for several years, but Maurer's image is particularly interesting because it is the first photo in which weapon installed on the aircraft's underwing pylon in flight, likely during a test flight.

“This photo was taken in mid-August over the Mojave,” Maurer said. “I didn’t mention LRASM at first because I was trying to keep it low-key, but people noticed it anyway.”

“Spending a lot of time in the Mojave area, I watch the skies constantly. I wasn’t listening to the scanner, just listening for the faint hum of something in the air. The first one to fly overhead was a KC-46 Pegasus. A few seconds later, a P-8 Poseidon followed in the same direction. Both continued north until they were finally out of sight. I don’t know where they came from, but it was cool to see them. Nothing should surprise you in the Mojave Desert, but a P-8 with an LRASM under its wing was a surprise. It’s always good to keep your eyes and ears open.”
— from Aaron Maurer's publication.

AGM-158C anti-ship missile


The AGM-158C Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) is a derivative of the AGM-158B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile – Extended Range (JASSM-ER) and is a new stealth cruise missile developed by DARPA for the U.S. Air Force and Navy. According to NAVAIR, the LRASM is a short-term solution to the Over-the-Sea Surface Warfare (OASuW) mission, filling a gap in air-launched capabilities with a flexible, long-range weapon capable of striking high-value maritime targets in hardened environments.

The missile is designed to operate with minimal reliance on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), datalinks and GPS, even in the face of intense electronic countermeasures. Once launched, LRASM navigates to its home point using GPS guidance and then autonomously detects, classifies and attacks a target vessel using onboard electro-optical sensors. Advanced algorithms allow it to refine target coordinates and target specific vessels in contested waters.

The OASuW Increment 1 program includes three variants: LRASM 1.0, LRASM 1.1, and LRASM C-3. The baseline LRASM 1.0 cruise missile achieved early operational capability in 2019 and is already installed on the B-1B Lancer and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

The next missile, LRASM 1.1, scheduled to enter service in 2023, is currently undergoing initial operational testing and technical evaluation, according to the director of operational test and evaluation. Integration with the P-8A Poseidon is also underway, with completion originally expected in the summer of 2024 but later pushed back to 2025. The P-8A Poseidon can already carry four AGM-84 Harpoon missiles on four underwing hardpoints for surface and land strike missions, but the new missile gives the Poseidon additional, improved capabilities for long-range maritime and land strike missions.


On September 10, 2025, the F-35 Lightning II fighter jet completed flight tests to certify the fighter variant as a carrier for the AGM-158C Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM).

Modification Module 3 block 2


The new missile is being integrated into the U.S. Navy's Increment 3 Block 2 upgrade of the first of 141 P-8A aircraft.

Module 3 Block 2 represents a significant step forward for Poseidon, introducing improvements to both the airframe and avionics. The package includes new pylons, radomes, antennas, sensors and wiring, as well as a completely updated onboard systems suite. This includes increased computing power, a more secure architecture, a wideband satellite communications system, anti-submarine electronic intelligence capabilities, a missile trajectory management system, and expanded communications and acoustic detection systems for improved search, detection and targeting.

"Increment 3 Block 2 delivers the capabilities for which the P-8A was originally designed. These modifications will enable crews to search, detect, and track the world's most advanced submarines, enabling the fleet "We are committed to ensuring that our mission is effective in combat and that we have the capabilities and capabilities to win the fight," said Capt. Eric Thomas, program manager for the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aircraft Command (PMA-290). "This delivery demonstrates the outstanding work ethic, professionalism and dedication of the PMA-290 crew to the fleet."

According to the service, these modifications will equip the fleet with the full range of anti-submarine warfare (ASW), anti-surface warfare (ASuW), and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities envisioned in the P-8A program's evolutionary acquisition strategy.

The modification work is being performed by Boeing at its Cecil Airport maintenance, repair and overhaul facility in Jacksonville, Florida, and the first P-8A Poseidon "Increment 3 Block 2" (I3B2) aircraft made its first flight after the modification in June 2025.


Render showing Poseidon equipped with the new Multi-Purpose Pod (MMP).

Improving the capabilities of the P-8 aircraft


The continued integration of LRASM missiles onto U.S. warplanes comes as China seeks to project growing military power, highlighted by a massive parade held on Sept. 3 to mark the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany and militaristic Japan in World War II. At the same time, tensions are also rising in the Western Hemisphere, where the U.S. military launched a missile strike on a vessel suspected of carrying drugs from Venezuela. It was reportedly the first known direct use of military force against a drug cartel’s maritime operations since the deployment of additional U.S. warships to the Caribbean region, further underscoring the need for effective maritime patrol and strike platforms.

As Newsweek’s Ryan Chang noted in his coverage of the LRASM integration, China now has the world’s largest navy by size, with more than 370 ships and submarines. These forces bolster Beijing’s efforts to expand its presence in the Western Pacific and to establish a direct counterforce capability to the United States in the region. In response, the United States has deployed land-based anti-ship missiles in the Pacific and continues to build capabilities using American anti-ship weapons against surface and land targets.

In this context, the P-8A Poseidon, designed for anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, and intelligence-gathering (ISR) missions, remains a key asset. The US Navy regularly deploys the aircraft for patrols and joint exercises in strategic locations such as the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, where tensions with China remain high, but also deploys the Poseidon in the Western Atlantic and the Caribbean, where it monitors drug trafficking routes and Venezuelan naval activity.

The addition of LRASM, along with the Increment 3 Block 2 upgrade and Multi-Purpose Pod, will significantly enhance Poseidon’s ability to counter surface threats in both theaters. This ensures that the aircraft can not only track surface targets, but also engage enemy ships at greater ranges, enhancing U.S. and allied capabilities against both China’s growing naval power in the Indo-Pacific and emerging threats in the Western Hemisphere.

The P-8A Poseidon basic patrol aviation (BPA) complex was accepted into service by the US Navy in 2013. It was created as part of the MMA (Multimission Maritime Aircraft) program to replace the P-3C Orion. In order to reduce the time and cost of research and development (R&D), the P-8A Poseidon was created on the basis of the Boeing 737 civilian airliner, which met the requirements for flight performance. The onboard equipment and weapons were based on systems improved as part of the P-3C Orion modernization program. A longer endurance (up to 10 hours) and a flight range of 4 nautical miles (500 km) were achieved by installing five additional tanks in the fuselage. In addition, the aircraft is equipped with an in-flight refueling system. The lower tail section of the P-8A aircraft contains an internal weapons bay, which contains six beam holders for suspension of aircraft weapons (AWS) with a total load of up to 300 kg, rotary ten-shot and pneumatic four-shot devices for dropping RGAB. External weapons suspension units are located on the wing consoles with two pylons on each and in the forward lower part of the fuselage. Two fuselage BRU-8 pylons and four similar underwing ones are designed for a load of up to 5 pounds (670 kg) each.

The P-8A Poseidon aircraft can be armed with up to 10 AGM-84L Harpoon Block II missiles, AGM-84K SLAM-ER ATA air-to-surface missiles (up to four missiles), small-sized 324 mm torpedoes - Mk 46, Mk 50, Mk 54, depth charges and sea mines. In addition, the range of weapons used includes JDAM guided air bombs and JSOW guided air cassettes. After upgrading under the Increment 3 Block 2 program, the P-8A Poseidon will be able to carry up to six AGM-158C LRASM missiles on external mounts after testing is completed. The missile has a range of more than 200 nautical miles (370 km), according to a statement from a Lockheed Martin spokesman. The launch weight of the missile is 2 pounds (760 kg). The missile's CEP is 1 feet 250 inches (9 m).

These same suspension units (BRU-32 launch pylons) can carry not only the anti-ship AGM-158C LRASM, but also other modifications of this missile – long-range cruise missiles designed to strike ground targets AGM-158B with a flight range of up to 1 km or even more advanced AGM-000D with a flight range of up to 158 km. That is, in essence, the P-1A Poseidon UAV aircraft turns into a strategic missile carrier.

I wouldn't be surprised if, over time, when we finally see Raytheon's newest strategic nuclear cruise missile, the AGM-181A LRSO, it turns out that its launch pylons, locks, and SRs are identical to those of the AGM-158 JASSM. Another, and not the first, obvious violation of the START-3 Treaty.
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    14 September 2025 04: 33
    The ASW and reconnaissance aircraft is gradually turning into a full-fledged carrier of long-range cruise missiles. Well, maybe such a concept has a right to exist, considering that the mattress carriers have almost two hundred R-8. Why should they stand idle?
    1. +4
      14 September 2025 09: 53
      Quote: Orso
      Well, maybe such a concept has a right to exist, considering that the mattress makers have almost two hundred R-8. Why should they stand idle?

      Produced as of May 2025 185 P-8 "Poseidon". Of these, the US Navy uses 128 P-8 aircraft. The rest were delivered to Australia, Great Britain, Norway, New Zealand, South Korea, Germany and Canada.
    2. +1
      15 September 2025 11: 43
      Quote: Orso
      The anti-submarine warfare and reconnaissance aircraft is gradually turning into a full-fledged carrier of long-range cruise missiles.

      LRASM is still an anti-ship missile. And anti-ship missiles have been suspended under patrolmen since the times of “Orions” and “Harpoons”.
    3. +2
      15 September 2025 13: 31
      and if we also remember the Rapid Dragon system... then the transporters turn into missile carriers
  2. 0
    14 September 2025 05: 08
    It is one thing to be just a scout and even a weapons spotter, but another thing to be a scout and a carrier of effective weapons against enemy ships. What should our ship commander do, especially in a threatening period, shoot down or not this miracle of military thought at a certain range of use of weapons by this aircraft? Another question, the R-8A is reflected on the radar mark as a civilian aircraft. Let's remember how the Korean Boeing was shot down in the Far East. And it was accompanied by an American reconnaissance aircraft that looked like a civilian aircraft. We should think about it. soldier
    1. +12
      14 September 2025 10: 11
      Quote: V.
      What should our ship commander do, especially in a period of threat, shoot down or not this miracle of military thought at a certain range of use of weapons by this aircraft?

      The "miracle of military thought" will be able to use LRASM anti-ship missiles from distances at which the commander of our warship has no means of fire to destroy this "miracle" in the air.

      The only exception is that the commander of the heavy aircraft carrier Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov may have on board the means to combat the P-8A Poseidon aircraft.

      But the Russian Navy leadership does not seem to be very interested in the Admiral Kuznetsov heavy aircraft carrier being re-commissioned into the Russian Navy after repairs.

      This can be said to be the traditional military-technical policy of the Russian Navy, the origins of which are lost somewhere in the 1840s of the XNUMXth century - to be technically unprepared for a clash with a strong enemy.

      Therefore, after the defeat of the Turkish squadron by the Russian Black Sea Fleet on November 18 (30), 1853 in the Battle of Sinop, the Russian Navy had no victories in naval battles (in some naval battles there were victories).
    2. +2
      14 September 2025 18: 55
      Quote: V.
      It's one thing to be just a scout or even a gunner...
      and another, the lack of new (modern) ASW aircraft in its fleet. There are few Tu-142s left, and there is no replacement for them today. In any case, a high-quality and effective new replacement. And modern trends say that nothing prevents new aircraft from being used for effective ASW for long-range anti-ship missiles (and land-based missiles!!). What conclusion suggests itself...?! winked
      For a systematic replacement of the Tu-142, it is necessary to look for a "platform" that will be able to carry not only modern systems for detecting enemy submarines (for ASW), but also the ability to carry 4-6 missiles of the "Caliber" or "Onyx" family on a suspension (not in spite of the implementation of ASW capabilities, and the implementation of ELINT) ... !!
      Which platform to choose (ability to stay in the patrol zone for a long time, and thrust-to-weight/carrying capacity...)? request The point here is in the competently set performance characteristics from the Ministry of Defense to aircraft manufacturers (engineers!!). It will be based on the Tu 214 (Tu-334), or MS-21 ... recourse
      1. +4
        14 September 2025 20: 03
        Greetings Vladimir! hi
        Quote: Vl Nemchinov
        The point here is in the competently set performance characteristics from the Ministry of Defense to aircraft manufacturers (engineers!!). It will be based on the Tu 214 (Tu-334), or MS-21 ...

        Well, the last two can be immediately excluded, they are not suitable for such purposes. But the Tu-214, and based on the Tu-214R with side-mounted side-view radar panels, could very well be and should be. However, this has already been discussed many times, but it seems that the only developer of such onboard radio-technical systems, the Vega company, simply cannot handle the projects that it has been assigned. And the rest have simply been destroyed by the "reformers".
        Quote: Vl Nemchinov
        the ability to carry 4-6 missiles of the Kalibr or Onyx family on a suspension (not contrary to the implementation of anti-submarine warfare capabilities and the implementation of ELINT)... !!

        Well, you are giving it to me, "Kalibr" is a ship-based cruise missile not adapted for air launch, and "Onyx" is too heavy for such a carrier. It would be optimal to arm the Integrated Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft based on the Tu-214R with the following set of weapons:
        - 4-6 pcs. Kh-69 in the anti-ship missile version in the internal weapons compartment (possibly in a slightly enlarged form by increasing the length of the fuel tank to obtain a range of up to 800-1000 km).
        - PRLR\PKR X-59 - 4-6 pcs.,
        - small-sized torpedoes and depth charges, possibly with limited-power nuclear warheads.
        - RVV for self-defense against SAMs, RVVs and enemy aircraft.
        Due to the length of the Tu-214 fuselage, it is possible to make not one, but two weapons bays in it + 2-4 underwing pylons. And a multi-charge device for dropping new generation acoustic buoys.
        Hardware composition:
        - Side-scan AESA radar with range calculation for detecting both air and surface targets, as well as submarines moving along the water hump.
        - Green lidar, allowing detection of underwater objects at depths of up to 300 m.
        - magnetometer as an auxiliary tool.
        - A set of equipment and an antenna complex for conducting RTR.
        - equipment for secure satellite communications and navigation.
        - giving the onboard radar system the ability to provide target designation for its own missiles with AGSN to intercept SAMs, missiles and fighters attacking the aircraft.
        And of course, an increased supply of fuel on board + the ability to refuel in the air.

        This is the kind of ASW aircraft \\ Integrated Maritime Reconnaissance with the capabilities of a strike aircraft, capable of attacking and defending itself, that our Navy would very much like to have in service. The machine will be expensive and complex, but it is definitely worth it, and our Navy needs at least 50 of these machines, and optimally up to 100.
        But so far, "Vega" has managed to screw up all the tasks assigned to it. Having failed to modernize the Il-38 fleet, Tu-142 (if there was one), the creation of the A-100 AWACS aircraft and, as they say, the modernization of the Ka-27M anti-submarine helicopters was also not very successful, and not all of them have been modernized.
        Alas, but here, as in the times of the RYaV, the same people manage, make decisions and control the execution of the assignment as then. And in particular neglect are such specific areas as AWACS aircraft, ASW aircraft and helicopters and everything due to them. Here I am formulating the desired technical specifications for such aircraft for the umpteenth time... but everything is as if in a blank concrete wall. Either they do not accommodate, or there is sabotage. And the time has already been lost.

        And for now we can only look at such advanced and multifunctional anti-submarine aircraft as the US has and quietly envy them. For those who remember WHO we were 34 years ago, this is especially... sad.
  3. +2
    14 September 2025 11: 01
    6 anti-ship missiles in a salvo, and from a long-range missile carrier (in fact). Now the question is: which of our ships can "digest" this salvo? From a single aircraft, which can also be anywhere in the ocean.
    1. -1
      14 September 2025 13: 27
      In principle, any, provided that these low-visibility targets in WWI are detected in a timely manner. Starting from the corvettes of Project 20380, and even the small missile ships of Project "Karakurt" with the ZRPK "Pantsir". However, it is advisable to have two of the latter to reliably repel such an attack for a guaranteed repulse of such an attack from any angle. Even our old BPKs with their SAM "Kinzhal" are capable of repelling such an attack, but with a modernized radar system capable of reliably detecting targets in WWI in the contact layer. In principle, such missiles can be detected by a modernized Ka-27M anti-submarine helicopter with its side-looking radar at a distance of about 100 km.
      But this is with skillful and competent use. And in general we have few ships. And they are not built.
      And the plane really turns into a universal reconnaissance and strike complex. With elements of a long-range/strategic aviation plane. And we need our own analogue of this based on the Tu-214 like air.
      But the Ministry of Defense and the towers are NOT itching about this at all.
      They even just... scratch their heads slightly regarding the AWACS aircraft. With laziness and disdain.
      1. +2
        14 September 2025 20: 43
        Starting from corvettes of project 20380

        As far as I remember, the ability of the 20380 specifically to fight low-flying targets here (on VO) was greatly questioned (article about the Gremyashchy's firing several years ago). And it won't be too easy for other ships either, if LRASM has the declared level of stealth.
        1. 0
          14 September 2025 21: 18
          The question is not about "simplicity", but about fundamental and functional ability.
          The first corvettes of project 20380 had a radar complex based on the Furke from the Pantsir-S1, which is not a naval one at all. Since then, a much more advanced radar complex for the Pantsir-ME has appeared, which is installed on the Karakurts, and 6 modules are installed on the Nakhimov cruiser. And the Karakurt with the Pantsir-ME has already more than once and very successfully hit the Scalp and Storm-Shadow cruisers during combined raids. And these cruisers roughly correspond to the parameters of the American cruiser, and even slightly less than it. And since the aforementioned Karakurt also destroyed the BEK with its artillery, which means it saw, the Pantsir-ME has no problems in detecting low-flying targets in the contact layer and hitting them.
          But now on the corvettes of project 20380 another, much more advanced radar system is installed - "Zaslon". Which is much more powerful, has 4 canvases (however, like the radar system on the "Karakurt"), and the SAMs of the SAM "Redut" have AGSN (unlike the SAM "Pantsir" with radio command guidance). Therefore, the quality and capabilities of the corvettes' ship-based SAM system are higher than those of the small missile ships, which coped with similar cruise missiles very confidently. In a real combat situation, and not at the training ground.
          My previous military specialization was as an officer in the combat control of an air defense unit. I understand what I am writing about, and I keep an eye on naval air defense systems, it is my professional interest. Therefore, I will repeat - modern Karakurt small missile ships with Pantsir-ME, Project 20380 corvettes with Zaslon radar systems, modernized Project 1155 large anti-submarine ships with new radar systems, Project 22350 frigates with Poliment-Redut naval air defense systems, and especially the Admiral Nakhimov nuclear-powered missile cruiser, can handle such targets quite well, especially with 4-6 cruise missiles in a salvo. Accidents, malfunctions at the wrong moment, and human factors are not excluded. But I am talking about the capabilities of technology, proven by practice.
          The difficulty of such targets is that if the ship relies only on its radar, then the detection range of such targets will be about 25-30 km for it, and for a corvette and MRU even 15-20 km, which leaves about a minute for a reaction +-, or even less. But for early detection, it is possible to use the modernized Ka-27M, which is capable of seeing such targets at a range of 70-80 km, or even all 100 km, which will win several minutes to prepare to repel the attack. But for this, the helicopter must be in the air with the side-view radar turned on.
          I wrote it in such detail on purpose so that it would be clear that air defense is a complex thing, but quite comprehensible.
          1. +1
            15 September 2025 08: 41
            And the Karakurt with the Pantsir-ME has already more than once and very successfully hit the Scalp and Storm-Shadow cruise missiles during combined raids.

            Yes, but there was no talk of a raid on the ship itself, but simply of missiles, so to speak, flying past. This is very different.
            And since the above-mentioned "Karakurt" also destroyed the BEK with its artillery

            I suspect that in this case the guidance was carried out via the optical channel. For a relatively slow BEK it will do, for an anti-ship missile - well, I don't know.
            But now, another, much more advanced radar system, "Zaslon", is being installed on the corvettes of Project 20380.

            Which was also very harshly criticized on VO. Precisely in the context of the fight against NLC.
            But for early detection, it is possible to use modernized Ka-27M

            The question is how to know when these Ka-27Ms should take off and from what direction they should track targets. A helicopter cannot conduct continuous surveillance for several hours (like an AWACS aircraft).
            1. 0
              15 September 2025 10: 05
              Quote: Kalmar
              Yes, but there was no talk of a raid on the ship itself, but simply of missiles, so to speak, flying past. This is very different.

              These are similar things. And the missiles are similar. If you mean that the frontal projection gives the lowest EPR, then at such distances (15-30 km) it does not work - everyone is visible.
              Quote: Kalmar
              I suspect that in this case the guidance was carried out via the optical channel. For a relatively slow BEK it will do, for an anti-ship missile - well, I don't know.

              Guidance is probably yes, but detection. It's not about the target's speed, but about the difficulty of detecting it in the contact layer and against the background of the water surface. In this regard, the "Pantsir-ME" is in perfect order.
              Quote: Kalmar
              The corvettes of project 20380 are equipped with another, much more advanced radar system - "Zaslon"
              Which was also very harshly criticized on VO. Precisely in the context of the fight against NLC.

              And again, it is not so. "Zaslon" was criticized for its cosmic price tag, and for the relatively long period of time it took to get it right. And "Poliment" was criticized for detecting the NLC in the contact layer, and this was during its protracted refinements and at the time of its adoption into service without firing at the NLC in the contact layer. But after those debates and passions, the magnificent "Pantsir-ME" appeared, which sees everything. What can we say about the radars that already existed at that time, whose software and operating modes were simply calibrated.
              Quote: Kalmar
              The question is how to know when these Ka-27Ms should take off and from what direction they should track targets. A helicopter cannot conduct continuous surveillance for several hours (like an AWACS aircraft).

              For a single ship this is a problem, but for a group of ships on which such helicopters are needed, it is quite possible to organize a shift duty of one helicopter in the air to monitor WWI. And this radar on the Ka-27M has a circular view, not a sectoral one.
              I am not talking about the fact that our fleet ships are guaranteed to be protected from such cruise missiles, but about the possibility, capability and high probability of repelling such a salvo (4-6 cruise missiles) by our new ships with modern air defense systems. These air defense systems were designed specifically for such targets.
              And in that criticism of "Zaslon", especially its price and the oddities with the contractor, I myself took part, along with Klimov, Timokhin and other respected authors and forum members. But the indisputable fact is that "Karakurt" with "Pantsir-ME" confidently intercepts cruise missiles of this class and degree of stealth. And its radar is weaker, appeared later and had less time to fine-tune and adjust for detecting targets in the contact layer. But for it this is more difficult than all - it has MM or "extreme-centimeter" range and its pulses are strongly absorbed by water vapor molecules and water suspension. With much less power than "Poliment" and "Zaslon". But it sees everything perfectly.
              But any air defense system, even the most advanced one, can be overloaded. Human factors and radar malfunctions at the time of such a threat are also not excluded.
              1. +1
                15 September 2025 16: 22
                These are similar things

                Similar, but not identical. If a swarm of missiles is flying past, you can shoot both on a collision course and on a chase course. If you are unlucky enough to shoot something down - no problem, the next SAM in the chain will figure it out (in extreme cases - no). Plus, the same Storm Shadows fly along a combined trajectory, there is a chance to intercept a missile in the middle section, when it flies relatively high.
                When the ship itself is the object of attack, when missiles fly directly at it from different sides, the evening suddenly ceases to be languid.
                In this regard, everything is in perfect order with the Pantsir-ME.

                I remember they wrote about the Pantsir radar that it really doesn't like atmospheric precipitation and other small interference in the air. The disadvantages of the millimeter range.

                Quote: bayard
                "Zaslon" was criticized for its cosmic price tag

                No, there were also a lot of questions about the ability to guide SAMs to low-flying targets, as I recall.
                Quote: bayard
                for a group of ships on which such helicopters are needed, it is worth organizing a shift duty of one helicopter in the air to control WWI, a task that is quite feasible

                It turns out that helicopters will have to be completely relieved of other tasks (antisubmarine warfare, emergency rescue operations, etc.) and used only for radar surveillance. Well, I don't know...
                Quote: bayard
                But the fact is indisputable that the Karakurt with the Pantsir-ME confidently intercepts cruise missiles of this class and level of stealth.

                Personally, I have not come across statistics that would allow us to speak about a confident interception. Yes, it seems that a certain number of missiles were shot down, but the percentage of the total number of cruise missiles that potentially fell into the Karakurts' zones of responsibility is unknown. 20380, represented by Mercury, as far as I know, was not noticed for such interceptions at all.
                1. 0
                  15 September 2025 19: 19
                  Quote: Kalmar
                  When the ship itself is the object of attack, when missiles fly directly at it from different sides, the evening suddenly ceases to be languid.

                  This is called a "star raid", but for an all-aspect radar system with 4 MFRLS canvases, this situation is less complicated than when all these cruise missiles attack from one angle and overload the capabilities of one canvas. It turns out that the 4 canvases of the Poliment radar system have 16 firing channels, but if they attack from one angle, then only 4. Exactly the same is true for the Karakurt - each canvas has 3 radar channels and one optical. But you will have to very actively turn the module to fire SAMs in different directions.
                  Quote: Kalmar
                  I remember they wrote about the Pantsir radar that it really doesn't like atmospheric precipitation and other small interference in the air. The disadvantages of the millimeter range.

                  Well, to be honest, and literally, the range is not millimeter, but "extremely centimeter". But such a problem existed, that's why I specifically pointed out the difficulties of detection in the near-water layer, where the content of water vapor and suspended water/splashes is high. This effect was encountered when creating the radar for the long-range loitering interceptor Tu-128, it was necessary to redesign and change the radar range after testing in Arctic conditions. But this issue was solved with the Pantsir. And the Pantsir-ME radar is much more powerful and at such ranges it has fewer problems by definition than a land-based one. And also - for the highest quality detection and guidance of SAMs to them, the radar post should be located as low as possible ... and to detect these targets at the maximum possible range for a ship - as high as possible. Large ships are equipped with separate radars (on the Orlans, this is the Podkat radar), the Karakurt radar post is not very high anyway, but for frigate/destroyer class ships, this is a question. That is, separate radar posts are needed. If the ships have the Pantsir-ME BM, everything is greatly simplified, if not, it is necessary to work out signal processing algorithms with separation of interference and reflections from waves in the contact layer. That is, this problem can be solved, but it requires time and work on algorithms and adjustment of the SDC system. I do not know to what extent this problem has been solved for the Zaslon, and even if I knew, I would not say.

                  Quote: Kalmar

                  It turns out that helicopters will have to be completely relieved of other tasks (antisubmarine warfare, emergency rescue operations, etc.) and used only for radar surveillance. Well, I don't know...

                  These tasks can be combined in one flight. Of course, few KUG air wings can withstand constant duty, but it is quite possible to lift helicopters during a threatening period. This is a backup, not a duty means. But it is possible to provide a day or two of shift duty in the air. But this must be worked out in terms of combat interaction. And this became possible thanks to the capabilities of the new side-view radar. And they are very high.
                  Well, as for statistics and full reports on the work of ground and naval air defense in this conflict, we will not find out soon. I, with a certain amount of optimism, believe that if the issues for the newest Karakurt radar complex have been resolved so successfully, then the more powerful and previously created and more advanced Poliment and Zaslon radar complexes must also be fully combat-ready.
                  1. 0
                    16 September 2025 15: 31
                    Quote: bayard
                    The same is true for "Karakurt" - each canvas has 3 radar channels and one optical channel.

                    As far as I understand, the Mineral-M on the Karakurt is only responsible for detecting targets, and then the Pantsir's BM must turn in the right direction, lock on to the target with its radar, and fire at it. All this takes time, which will be short during a star raid.
                    Quote: bayard
                    It is entirely possible to raise helicopters during a period of threat

                    Perhaps, but how can this period be determined?
                    Quote: bayard
                    and as for statistics and full reports on the work of ground and naval air defense in this conflict, we will not know soon

                    It is a fact, but without these statistics, it is only possible to talk about the success of the air defense of the Karakurts and other ships in a very, very speculative manner.
                    Meanwhile, there is the experience of the vessel "Vasiliy Bekh", which, as they say, had on board "Tor-M2KM", quite capable (in theory) of intercepting two low-flying missiles. In fact, both hit the rescuer.
                    1. 0
                      16 September 2025 16: 15
                      Quote: Kalmar
                      As far as I understand, the Mineral-M on the Karakurt is only responsible for detecting targets, and then the Pantsir's BM must turn in the right direction, lock on to the target with its radar and fire.

                      On the Black Sea "Karakurt" (in its photo) on the wheelhouse there is a "pyramid with 4 canvases of the MFRLS (guidance) of the "Pantsir-ME" radar complex, so that guidance is possible from different angles simultaneously, but you will have to turn the module vigorously for launch. However, it can do this. And even on course with the SAM turn in flight (since the wheelhouse obscures the launch module at these angles). However, if necessary, you can turn the ship in the right direction. This is the final appearance of the "Karakurt" with "Pantsir-ME". And it is precisely this that has shown itself to be the best in repelling air attacks.

                      Quote: Kalmar
                      but how to determine this very period?

                      War at sea, like any war, is a complex undertaking. There is reconnaissance, including electronic warfare. Satellite, on ships, planes, UAVs, stationary posts. In my previous service, the GRU GS OSNAZ group always gave us advance information about takeoffs from potential enemy airfields of aircraft with the type name, tail number and pilot call sign. Not to mention civilian aircraft. Enemy reconnaissance aircraft have always been given special attention and, accordingly, control. Now, things may be a little worse, or perhaps not. But forewarned is forearmed.
                      Quote: Kalmar
                      Without these statistics, it is only possible to speculate about the success of the air defense of the Karakurts and other ships in a very, very speculative manner.

                      Well, I can judge the effectiveness of the land-based Pantsir from my own observations - it is very effective. Before my eyes, well, not by ear, a full salvo of an enemy Uragan was intercepted. All 14 missiles (two sighting missiles were intercepted a little earlier). Of these, 12 SAMs of the Uragan were shot down by one Pantsir, and the remaining two by the second. The anti-aircraft battle took place practically over my head, and I counted all the starts and explosions with detonations. Just like an old air defense specialist.
                      Quote: Kalmar
                      There is the experience of the vessel "Vasily Bekh", which, as they say, had on board "Tor-M2KM", quite capable (in theory) of intercepting two low-flying missiles. In fact, both hit the rescuer.

                      Judging by the footage of this rescuer's defeat, there was no "Thor" on the helipad. And if there was such a module on some ship, then most likely it was not active, which the enemy took advantage of. If such a case, but with another ship/vessel. The radar cannot operate continuously, therefore it is periodically switched off for regulatory purposes. The enemy could well take advantage of such a technical pause if he was conducting surveillance from aircraft or UAVs and conducting ELINT. And the enemy (NATO) conducts such surveillance almost continuously - from satellites, UAVs and reconnaissance aircraft.
                      Quote: Kalmar
                      Both hit the rescuer.

                      Is it a great honor or merit to sink a civilian ship?
                      Russia periodically/regularly sinks such ships in Ukrainian ports, and so far not a single one has repelled the attacks.
          2. 0
            15 September 2025 09: 31
            A helicopter can't be in the air all the time. Well, for a guaranteed defeat, you can send a couple of planes, the US has 125 of them, as they write here.
            And you can send it more than once :(
            1. +1
              15 September 2025 10: 10
              I understand that you are "Not_a_fighter". You could also come up with the idea that the SSGN "Ohio" would fire a full salvo of 150+ "Tomahawks" at our ship.
              I answered about the helicopter above.

              The original question was: "Will our ship/ships be able to repel a strike from 4-6 cruise missiles?" And I answered exactly this question.
              The plane is good, and the cruise missile is quite good.
              We DO NOT have this.
              1. +1
                15 September 2025 10: 36
                Yes, and another question. Usually, during a campaign, the ship is in the BG2 (Combat readiness 2) state, when a third of the crew is at combat posts, some combat posts are in the "open fire within 45 seconds" state, in this situation, is there a chance to fight off a sudden salvo of 6 anti-ship missiles?
                1. 0
                  15 September 2025 10: 55
                  All of the above ships have it.
                  By the way, the Karakurt has a turret with four MFRLS canvases, so it will beat out an all-aspect attack. But chance, human factor and system failure are never excluded. And all these ship-based SAMs are capable of firing/repelling an attack in automatic mode - without the participation of the crew.

                  There is no point in blaming such a threat on the US, their air defense is based on AWACS aircraft and AUG fighter aircraft. It is precisely against this type of target that this is the most rational means. So we need to rely on hypersonic anti-ship missiles, they will penetrate air defense orders much more reliably.
  4. -1
    14 September 2025 13: 40
    We have such a platform - Tu-214. No worse. When entering serial production of 7-10 aircraft per year from 2026, it is necessary to prepare an order for such a system. We cannot afford 100 aircraft, like the striped ones, and we do not need that many. 20-25 will be quite enough. The idea itself is bright, with a range of 6-8 thousand km, a speed of 850-900 km/h and a payload of 20-22 tons, when equipped with weapons and guidance and reconnaissance systems, such an aircraft is a formidable force. And on radars you can’t tell it apart from a passenger one.
    1. +4
      14 September 2025 15: 56
      Quote: Glagol1
      We have such a platform - Tu-214.

      We don't have a targeting system for the new anti-submarine aircraft, we don't have a modification of the Tu-214 for patrol aircraft, we don't have tankers based on the Il-96-400, even pilots are rare and their status in the Navy is very low and they have long been pushed out of command positions.
      If the management had scratched itself in the early 10s, but now we have a paper sketch against a serial enemy with the best system of information and logistical support
  5. -1
    15 September 2025 02: 42
    First photo of US Navy P-8A Poseidon with LRASM missile emerges
    Author, so what - should we be happy for them? Then your note has found its admirers - someone threw four pluses to this note. Where are our planes. similar to their Poseidons? This is what we need to write about and think about! sad
  6. 0
    15 September 2025 05: 25
    if the Yankee planes are in the air, there is almost no chance of getting them, they all need to be caught on the ground by agents using drones, mining the runways and shooting at their parking areas from long distances with firearms
  7. 0
    15 September 2025 16: 32
    First photo of US Navy P-8A Poseidon with LRASM missile emerges
    there is nothing to discuss here: they are reducing the time/distance for "making a decision" to attack...
    We have the same problems - the time for "coordination" needs to be reduced...