Project P15B Visakhapatnam class destroyer

[Bleh]

Right now in GE vikram at 2 places. Karwar as well as kochi.

How is that possible?...............

 

[Shashwat]

The image of karwar is from 2017 - At kochi he must have gotten an old image of got confused with IAC1.

You compare a Private Enterprise in Japan that operates for Profit to a Govt Owned PSU in India that operates to provide continuing employment to its workforce. You have the answer to your doubts

Even if you consider the global avg of 4-5y we are still overshooting by double. P15B should have been inducted if not for the gun and engine fiasco. No wonder our planning is shoddy. The main premise of inducting P15B was lower time of delivery because the design is not radically changed but that didn't come to fruition.

As far as your other statement, I have already debated and its nonsensical to debate on it further.

 

[Vishwamitra]

Tardy progress overall. Indian shipbuilders sucks in planning and execution - Japan delivered its destroyer in 2 years 2 frigging years for a destroyer ours is 10y. Visakhapatnam has already consumed 5y since launch.

View attachment 33732 View attachment 33733

This entireclass is hopelessly underarmed

 

[Bleh]

This entireclass is hopelessly underarmed

How so?.......................

 

[Armand2REP]

How so?.......................

Probably because the Barak 8 is a shit missile. With a top speed of only Mach 2 it is easy to evade.

 

[Bleh]

Probably because the Barak 8 is a shit missile. With a top speed of only Mach 2 it is easy to evade.

You called it "hopelessly underarmed" for that?!

Also wouldn't Barak-8 turn much harder & much faster than the aircraft due to 5 times the G-limit?
Many older Mach4-5 capable BVRs have low kill probably...

 

[tarunraju]

How is that possible?...............

Different map dates............................

 

[vampyrbladez]

Probably because the Barak 8 is a shit missile. With a top speed of only Mach 2 it is easy to evade.

By Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 30th Dec 15

In a giant capability boost for the Indian Navy, a naval warship today test-fired a new missile that can shoot down incoming aerial threats --- such as aircraft and missiles --- whilst they are still 70 kilometres away.

A defence ministry press release today stated: “Adding a quantum jump in its air defence capability, INS Kolkata, Indian Navy’s state of art, indigenous stealth destroyer, successfully test fired the Long Range Surface to Air Missile (LR-SAM). Two missiles were fired on 29th and 30th of December on high-speed targets, during naval exercises being undertaken in the Arabian Sea.”

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) and India’s Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) have jointly developed the LR-SAM. The Israelis call this cutting-edge missile system the Barak-8, while India calls it the LR-SAM.

In earlier days, ship-to-ship battles were fought with heavy-calibre guns, requiring warships to come within gun range of each other. Once a shell was fired from a gun, there was no way of intercepting it in mid-flight.

Guns have now been replaced with long-range, anti-ship missiles, which are fired from submarines, ships or aircraft up to 150 kilometres away. Many of these, such as the US-made Harpoon II, are extremely accurate, with sensors on the missile homing it unerringly onto its target. They have a key vulnerability, though. Since a missile is bigger and much slower that a gun shell, it can be detected at long ranges with radar, and then shot down in mid-flight with another missile.

The LR-SAM detects and shoots down incoming missiles and aircraft with a reliability that is said to exceed 95 per cent. DRDO sources say there will be further tests to verify that the missile has been integrated properly onto INS Kolkata.

Mechanics of engagement

To engage an incoming missile or aircraft at the maximum possible range, INS Kolkata’s on-board radar --- called the MF-STAR (multi-function surveillance, tracking and acquisition radar) --- can detect it while it is still 200 kilometres away.

After detecting the target in the recent tests, the MF-STAR began tracking it, communicating its key parameters --- distance, altitude, direction and velocity --- to INS Kolkata’s command centre in real time.

Meanwhile the LR-SAM interceptor, located in a vertical canister on the warship’s deck, began its pre-launch checks. Simultaneously, the LR-SAM’s command system was generating engagement scenarios, calculating the exact point where the outgoing missile would impact and destroy the incoming target.

As INS Kolkata’s weapons officer gave the launch command, the interceptor roared out of its canister, engulfing the deck in a ball of fire. At the designated height, it switched to level flight, gained supersonic speed, and streaked towards the incoming target, guided by the MF-STAR over a data link.

About five-to-seven kilometres short of the target, a seeker on the interceptor’s nose switched on, locking it onto the target. To accelerate the interceptor, which was by now merely coasting, the dual-pulse motor fired for a second time. This increased the interceptor’s velocity up to Mach 5-7, enabling it to manoeuvre sharply in tandem with the target’s evasive zigzags.

A few metres from the target, the interceptor’s proximity fuse detonated its 23-kilo high-explosive warhead, disrupting it and preventing it from reaching the Kolkata.

The DRDO termed the test a success, although the “high-speed targets” that the LR-SAM shot down were significantly slower than the actual threats it must counter. Simulated targets travel at 500-550 kilometres per hour (kmph), while the Harpoon anti-ship missile comes in at about 865 kmph; and the Exocet missile at 1,150 kmph.

LR-SAM origins

During the Kargil conflict of 1999, when the navy was preparing for war, the admirals realised to their dismay that they had no counter to the Pakistan Navy’s Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The bigger and more sophisticated Indian warships, some costing half a billion dollars, were vulnerable to being sunk by the Harpoon, which costs less than $2 million. New Delhi approached Tel Aviv for an emergency procurement of the Barak anti-missile missile, which tided over that crisis.

Pleased with the Barak, New Delhi and Tel Aviv agreed in January 2006 to develop a 70-kilometre version of the Barak to counter anti-ship missiles of the future. Given the navy’s “blue water” ambition to control wide swathes of the Indian Ocean, a destroyer or frigate equipped with the LR-SAM would not just protect itself; but also create a protected “air defence bubble” for smaller warships in the flotilla.

India allocated Rs 2,606 crore to this project, which includes Rs 1,700 crore for fitting three Kolkata-class destroyers with the LR-SAM. The Israeli Navy made an equal commitment, undertaking to fit the Barak-8 on its three Sa’ar corvettes.

The work share was divided, with 30 per cent going to the DRDO, which was charged with developing the LR-SAM’s solid-fuel, two-pulse propulsion motors. Israeli company, Rafael, has developed the rest of the interceptor missile. IAI has built the rest of the systems, including the sophisticated MF-STAR radar.

The delay in the LR-SAM of three-to-four years has been caused mainly by the DRDO’s difficulties in building the sophisticated two-pulse motor. Eventually, it succeeded in developing a stable propellant for this purpose.

The way ahead

After the LR-SAM is integrated on all three Kolkata-class destroyers (Project 15-A); it will be built for another four Project 15-B destroyers being constructed in Mazagon Dock Ltd, Mumbai (MDL); and seven frigates that will begin construction in MDL and Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers, Kolkata (GRSE). The LR-SAM will also be installed on INS Vikrant, the indigenous aircraft carrier being built in Kochi. It is almost certain that several more warships would be equipped with the LR-SAM.

The manufacturing supply chain that is now emerging includes several private sector companies, such as Godrej & Boyce, and SEC. The LR-SAM system will be integrated at state-owned Bharat Dynamics Ltd. DRDO officials say that indigenising numerous sub-systems will bring down the cost of the system.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2015/12/lr-sam-operationalised-indian-navy.html

 

[Bleh]

The DRDO termed the test a success, although the “high-speed targets” that the LR-SAM shot down were significantly slower than the actual threats it must counter. Simulated targets travel at 500-550 kilometres per hour (kmph), while the Harpoon anti-ship missile comes in at about 865 kmph; and the Exocet missile at 1,150 kmph.

Ok... This is the most important part. We need keep working until we've been able to intercept bogeys incoming at Mach1 atleast.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Ok... This is the most important part. We need keep working until we've been able to intercept bogeys incoming at Mach1 atleast.

Navy Secretly Tests 'Iron Dome for Ships'

Barak 8 missile was successful in intercepting a missile that imitated the Yakhont anti-ship cruise missile.

The Israel Navy has conducted a successful secret test of the Barak 8 missile, which is designed to defend ships from the much-vaunted Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles, reports Channel 2.

The Yakhont missiles are one of the greatest threats to the Navy's vessels, mostly because of their potential use by Syria and Hezbollah. The missile flies at a very high speed – almost the speed of sound – from the moment it is launched.

The test was carried out with the cooperation of an Italian firm, which provided a missile that imitated the Yakhont and similar missiles. The Barak 8, which is not unlike the well-known Iron Dome anti-missile system, succeeded in intercepting it.

Sources in the defense establishment told Channel 2 that the Yakhont missiles also threaten Israeli gas drilling platforms stationed in Israeli “economic waters.” During the Second Lebanon War, a similar missile struck the INS Hanit, killing four soldiers.

Nine months ago it was reported that Hezbollah successfully smuggled the anti-ship missiles from Syria into Lebanon. A senior US source estimated at the time that 12 missiles had been smuggled in by Hezbollah, but also said that the terror militia probably still lacks some parts that are necessary to make them operational.

An alleged Israeli airstrike on a warehouse in Syria on July 5, 2013, was reportedly meant to destroy Yakhont missiles that were stored there, but did not destroy them all.

The Syrian rebels reported that explosions had rocked several army ammunition depots in the western Syrian province of Latakia, possibly after they were targeted with rockets.

Qassem Saadeddine, a spokesman for the Free Syrian Army's Supreme Military Council, later said that the rebels' intelligence network had identified newly supplied Yakhont missiles being stored in the depots that were hit.

He added that “foreign forces” had destroyed the missiles in Latakia, hinting that Israel may have been behind the attack.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/186093

 

[binayak95]

Probably because the Barak 8 is a shit missile. With a top speed of only Mach 2 it is easy to evade.

the Barak 8 is perhaps the only AD missile designed from scratch to intercept supersonic CMs (such as the Brahmos, wink wink) - it is far from shit - I'd rate it in the same league as Aster series.

 

[Gessler]

This entireclass is hopelessly underarmed

Underarmed? Not at all - with 16 BrahMos it's got twice the offensive anti-surface firepower of typical destroyers in its class (7-8000T).

More like under-defended. The Barak-8 is a great missile, many people are unaware of its features and why IN was so keen on it, knowing full well its abilities especially against fast missiles like Brahmos/Yakhont/YJ-12 etc.

But the number of 32 is too low to be frank. Granted, the P-15A/B are not exactly dedicated AAW destroyers, but with carriers to defend, we need ships that can deploy anywhere between 48-64 SAMs at least.

Hopefully this trend will change with the P-18/NGD.

 

[Armand2REP]

the Barak 8 is perhaps the only AD missile designed from scratch to intercept supersonic CMs (such as the Brahmos, wink wink) - it is far from shit - I'd rate it in the same league as Aster series.

How can it be designed from scratch to do it when it has never actually done it? The Aster series were designed to intercept them and have been certified against Coyote flying Mach 2.5 at 5m above sea level. As long as the missiles are headed for the ship carrying Barak 8 it shouldn't be a problem. The problem arises when it is miles away from the target which will always be the carrier. With a top speed of only Mach 2 it cannot intercept them in time nor can it keep up with fighters skirting the perimeter. P15 is designed to be an air defence escort for Vikramaditya and Vikrant but the only thing it can defend is itself while it carries such a slow missile.

@vampyrbladez To address the fake news replies...

A) Ajai Shill is a fool... it will never fly at Mach 7. It is only Mach 2 and well published to that fact.

B) Israel has no troops in Syria to recover a destroyed Yakhont in Syria, to ship it to Italy to make it into a secret drone and then have a secret test no one ever heard about. If it was certified against super sonic missiles I can guarantee you IAI would have a press release on it. Barak 8 is available for export.

The only super sonic target drone made to simulate them is Coyote. If you tested it, it would either be that or an actual Brahmos.

 

[Armand2REP]

You called it "hopelessly underarmed" for that?!

Also wouldn't Barak-8 turn much harder & much faster than the aircraft due to 5 times the G-limit?
Many older Mach4-5 capable BVRs have low kill probably...

Vishwamitra was the one that you quoted. I am just figuring the major weakness of the armament that would make him say that. It certainly isn't carrying Brahmos but it is weak in the AD role.

With Barak 8's top speed of only Mach 2, an aircraft doesn't have to jink and roll to get away, it can simply turn away and outrun it until the missile runs out of gas.

 

[vampyrbladez]

How can it be designed from scratch to do it when it has never actually done it? The Aster series were designed to intercept them and have been certified against Coyote flying Mach 2.5 at 5m above sea level. As long as the missiles are headed for the ship carrying Barak 8 it shouldn't be a problem. The problem arises when it is miles away from the target which will always be the carrier. With a top speed of only Mach 2 it cannot intercept them in time nor can it keep up with fighters skirting the perimeter. P15 is designed to be an air defence escort for Vikramaditya and Vikrant but the only thing it can defend is itself while it carries such a slow missile.

@vampyrbladez To address the fake news replies...

A) Ajai Shill is a fool... it will never fly at Mach 7. It is only Mach 2 and well published to that fact.

B) Israel has no troops in Syria to recover a destroyed Yakhont in Syria, to ship it to Italy to make it into a secret drone and then have a secret test no one ever heard about. If it was certified against super sonic missiles I can guarantee you IAI would have a press release on it. Barak 8 is available for export.

The only super sonic target drone made to simulate them is Coyote. If you tested it, it would either be that or an actual Brahmos.

Must be the coyote then. But the terminal stage mechanism exists in Klub as well.
Shukla is fairly on the spot with missile tech. However pay no heed to his other news as he is a dalal.

 

[Armand2REP]

Must be the coyote then. But the terminal stage mechanism exists in Klub as well.
Shukla is fairly on the spot with missile tech. However pay no heed to his other news as he is a dalal.

How can it be Mach 7 when every source says Mach 2?

https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/naval-barak-8-surface-air-missiles/
https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/content/barak-8-versus-yakhont
http://www.military-today.com/missiles/mr_sam.htm
https://in.news.yahoo.com/barak-8-lrsam-missile-know-044053802.html
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/17135/Indo_Israeli_Barak_8_Missile_Test_Fired_in_India
https://defencelover.in/barak-8-antidote-brahmos/

ect... ect.

Ajai is a shill when it comes to Israel. His bias is so disgusting he will make things up.

 

[porky_kicker]

Probably because the Barak 8 is a shit missile. With a top speed of only Mach 2 it is easy to evade.

Where do you guys come up with all this wrong info ?

No need to tell me, anyways

The terminal ( endgame ) speed of LRSAM / MRSAM / BARAK 8 is mach 4 during the terminal stage when the 2 pulse is fired to enable almost 100% NEZ in the kinematic domain during dynamic maneuvers.

Incase you did not know the missile has a 2 pulse motor.

 

[asianobserve]

The best of the best multi-purpose naval missile of course is SM-6: anti-aircraft, anti supersonic anti-ship missiles, anti ballistic missile, with anti-ship and land attack capabilities.

And now it's about to get super sized!

Navy to Supersize its Ultra Versatile SM-6 Missile For Even Longer
Range And Higher Speed
The SM-6 is getting a way bigger rocket motor that will allow it to reach even farther than before and enemy ships may be its primary target.
BY TYLER ROGOWAYMARCH 20, 2019

USN

The Navy's SM-6 missile has become an all-star of multi-role capability and a shining example of how repackaging existing systems with some new tech can garner grand results. The missile can shoot down air-breathing threats like aircraft and cruise missiles, it can swat incoming ballistic missiles in the terminal phases of flight, it can attack sea targets, and it even has a latent land attack potential. It is also network enabled and can engage targets well beyond the sensor reach of its launch platform using telemetry data-linked from a third-party platform, like a jet fighter. It does all this over long ranges, reaching out over 150 miles from its vertical launch cell aboard American destroyers and cruisers. Now, according to 2020 budget request documents, this versatile missile is set to get upsized for considerably more range and speed, and that is a very big deal.

The SM-6 was originally designed to leverage existing components, most notably the airframe of the SM-2ER Block IV Standard Missile and the seeker from an AIM-120C AMRAAM air-to-air missile. It has quickly evolved to be more potent and flexible since its introduction into service in 2013. Now, the latest SM-6 derivative is slated to shed its legacy airframe, one which doesn't take advantage of the full diameter of the launch cells in the Navy's Mk41 vertical launch systems, and be redesigned with a 21 inch diameter motor that will substantially increase the type's range and speed.
This same approach was taken with the SM-3 anti-ballistic missile interceptor, which is used for mid-course intercepts of ballistic missile threats. That missile also evolved from the SM-2ER Block IV, but as a joint U.S.-Japan weapons program venture. The SM-3 Block IIA is a redesigned variant that uses a 21 inch motor for increased range, higher speed, and thus greatly improved capability overall. Part of the redesign also included decreasing the size and reconfiguring the missile's tail fins, and drastically decreasing the size of the airframe strakes, so that it can still fit its wider diameter frame into the confines Mk41 cell.

MDA

RAYTHEON
SM-3 Block IIA's wider and less cluttered airframe.

We had proposed that the SM-3 Block IIA's redesign be carried over to the SM-6 in a past article of ours, which now seems to be the case according to the Pentagon's proposed 2020 budget. Known as the SM-6 Block IB, the initiative looks to spend hundreds of millions of dollars over next four years to develop the more capable missile. The line-item description, posted below, makes special note of the fact that the program will leverage existing missile technology and will result in an SM-6 with increased range. It will use a 21 inch diameter motor like the SM-3 Block IIA and will leverage internal components from the SM-6 Block IA. This will likely leave the upper seeker-warhead section of the missile the same diameter that it currently is, with the larger 21 inch motor attached below. As such, it will have a "necked-down" rifle bullet like appearance.

The documents state the SM-6 Block IB is planned to make it through its primary development by 2024.

By the end of this development process, the Navy will have all of its DDG-1000 Zumwalt class destroyers operational, ships which could really use such a versatile weapon for multiple applications and especially to overcome its radar/combat suite's deficiencies. Equipping the stealthy ships with SM-6 would also vibe with the Navy's revamped vision for them.


The first FFG(X) frigates will also be delivered. The FFG(X)s aren't officially slated to receive the SM-6 at this time, but such a versatile weapon could give the small surface combatants immense reach and a heavy punch. This is also when the Navy will be introducing its first Flight III Arleigh Burkeclass destroyers—the latest in the class of multi-role surface combatants that the SM-6 was primarily designed for.


The Navy's new drone ship initiative—which will include vessels equipped with Mk 41 vertical launch systems—will be well underway by then, as well. They represent what is really the most exciting aspect of the SM-6, and especially a longer-range version of it. It's a networked-enabled weapon that can use third party targeting—such as that from aircraft, ships, satellites, and land-based sensors—to engage enemies over very long distances.


In other words, it doesn't really matter what the launch platform is, or to some degree where it is, in order to be employed successfully. For instance, if a Super Hornet's air-to-air missile stores run dry, an SM-6 could be launched from a ship a hundred miles away at an aerial target that is in the shadow of the ship's radar horizon or even beyond its detection range as a whole. It would use the Super Hornet's targeting data to get within range on its own active radar seeker. Once it is locked on organically, the target has a very low chance of survival.

LOCKHEED MARTIN
Remote launch and engagement using an SM-6 guided by third party sensors—an F-35—has already been tested successfully using the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) networking concept.


So even if an FFG(X) doesn't have the radar capable or targeting threats at the ranges a SM-6 Block IB could reach, it could simply act as the remote launch platform if it is closest to the target and is equipped with the missile. The same can be said for pretty much any ship with a vertical launch system capable of firing the missile, such as a drone ship.


But here is the thing, by most indications, the SM-6 Block IB would be a multi-function missile like the Block IA, yet in some past documentation, the Block IB was highlighted as a long-range anti-ship ballistic missile, above all else. We don't have a range increase for the new missile design, but let's just throw out a number of 30 percent. That would take the missile's range up to roughly 200 miles, but that's based on an anti-air engagement. It would be longer in a surface-to-surface one. And this is a very conservative guess based on the reported basic range metric that we are told drastically undervalues the original SM-6's baseline capabilities. It could be as much as double the range under certain engagement profiles, we just don't know.

Being able to reach out and pummel ships with a high-speed ballistic missile from over 200 miles away would be an incrediblecapability to insert into the U.S. Navy's surface combatant force. Many potential enemy vessels are equipped to counter air-breathing threats, such as anti-ship cruise missiles and low-flying fighters—but not anti-ship ballistic missiles. Layering these weapons in with anti-ship cruise missiles, such as Block IV Tactical Tomahawks, Naval Strike Missiles (NSMs), and Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles (LRASM), and even the ever more lethal Harpoon anti-ship missile for shorter-ranged engagements, during an attack on a hostile flotilla would give even the most well equipped naval force a run for their money defending against it. Even AEGIS class destroyers and cruisers, at least up until very recently, can't execute the ballistic missile defense and anti-air mission at the same time.

USN
Hopefully, the SM-6 Block IB will also include its anti-air and localized ballistic missile defense functions as well, at least eventually. Maybe even the weapon's latent land attack capability will be more of a priority in the future considering the weapon's greater range. The line item in the budget seems to indicated that it will indeed be multi-role.

I think it's also time for the Pentagon to begin working on adapting the SM-6 for air-launch applications. It could become the long-range multi-purpose weapon of choice for the Navy and the Air Force. Not only could it take down enemy aircraft at hundreds of miles away—something the USAF is highly interested inout of necessity— but it could also blast ships and even incoming ballistic missiles at similarly long ranges with the help of being launched at altitude and high-speed.


The land attack potential is also key here. Not only could it hit fixed targets, but if the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile's(AARGM) multi-mode seeker was incorporated, it could go after key air defense components from very long ranges. An air-launched version could be carried by strategic bomber and medium-large fighter alike, from B-21 to the F/A-18E/F to the F-15. But having what amounts to a very long-range SEAD weapon forward deployed on ships would also be a big force multiplier for air components of an integrated combat force. And once again, it could use the geolocation data of threatening emitters sniffed up by aircraft like the F-35 for targeting at very long distances.

There is also the possibility that SM-6 could be adapted for submarine use. We have talked about this in the past, but we don't have any evidence that points to such a program existing beyond speculation.

Regardless, the SM-6 was already among the Navy's most promising and exciting weapons programs. Now that it is getting supersized to meet its maximum potential, its value will only become more undeniable and hopefully we will see it ported over onto multiple future naval platforms, and maybe even aerial ones, in the future.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...issile-for-even-longer-range-and-higher-speed

 

[vampyrbladez]

The best of the best multi-purpose naval missile of course is SM-6: anti-aircraft, anti supersonic anti-ship missiles, anti ballistic missile, with anti-ship and land attack capabilities.

And now it's about to get super sized!

Navy to Supersize its Ultra Versatile SM-6 Missile For Even Longer
Range And Higher Speed
The SM-6 is getting a way bigger rocket motor that will allow it to reach even farther than before and enemy ships may be its primary target.
BY TYLER ROGOWAYMARCH 20, 2019

USN

The Navy's SM-6 missile has become an all-star of multi-role capability and a shining example of how repackaging existing systems with some new tech can garner grand results. The missile can shoot down air-breathing threats like aircraft and cruise missiles, it can swat incoming ballistic missiles in the terminal phases of flight, it can attack sea targets, and it even has a latent land attack potential. It is also network enabled and can engage targets well beyond the sensor reach of its launch platform using telemetry data-linked from a third-party platform, like a jet fighter. It does all this over long ranges, reaching out over 150 miles from its vertical launch cell aboard American destroyers and cruisers. Now, according to 2020 budget request documents, this versatile missile is set to get upsized for considerably more range and speed, and that is a very big deal.

The SM-6 was originally designed to leverage existing components, most notably the airframe of the SM-2ER Block IV Standard Missile and the seeker from an AIM-120C AMRAAM air-to-air missile. It has quickly evolved to be more potent and flexible since its introduction into service in 2013. Now, the latest SM-6 derivative is slated to shed its legacy airframe, one which doesn't take advantage of the full diameter of the launch cells in the Navy's Mk41 vertical launch systems, and be redesigned with a 21 inch diameter motor that will substantially increase the type's range and speed.
This same approach was taken with the SM-3 anti-ballistic missile interceptor, which is used for mid-course intercepts of ballistic missile threats. That missile also evolved from the SM-2ER Block IV, but as a joint U.S.-Japan weapons program venture. The SM-3 Block IIA is a redesigned variant that uses a 21 inch motor for increased range, higher speed, and thus greatly improved capability overall. Part of the redesign also included decreasing the size and reconfiguring the missile's tail fins, and drastically decreasing the size of the airframe strakes, so that it can still fit its wider diameter frame into the confines Mk41 cell.

MDA

RAYTHEON
SM-3 Block IIA's wider and less cluttered airframe.

We had proposed that the SM-3 Block IIA's redesign be carried over to the SM-6 in a past article of ours, which now seems to be the case according to the Pentagon's proposed 2020 budget. Known as the SM-6 Block IB, the initiative looks to spend hundreds of millions of dollars over next four years to develop the more capable missile. The line-item description, posted below, makes special note of the fact that the program will leverage existing missile technology and will result in an SM-6 with increased range. It will use a 21 inch diameter motor like the SM-3 Block IIA and will leverage internal components from the SM-6 Block IA. This will likely leave the upper seeker-warhead section of the missile the same diameter that it currently is, with the larger 21 inch motor attached below. As such, it will have a "necked-down" rifle bullet like appearance.

The documents state the SM-6 Block IB is planned to make it through its primary development by 2024.

By the end of this development process, the Navy will have all of its DDG-1000 Zumwalt class destroyers operational, ships which could really use such a versatile weapon for multiple applications and especially to overcome its radar/combat suite's deficiencies. Equipping the stealthy ships with SM-6 would also vibe with the Navy's revamped vision for them.


The first FFG(X) frigates will also be delivered. The FFG(X)s aren't officially slated to receive the SM-6 at this time, but such a versatile weapon could give the small surface combatants immense reach and a heavy punch. This is also when the Navy will be introducing its first Flight III Arleigh Burkeclass destroyers—the latest in the class of multi-role surface combatants that the SM-6 was primarily designed for.


The Navy's new drone ship initiative—which will include vessels equipped with Mk 41 vertical launch systems—will be well underway by then, as well. They represent what is really the most exciting aspect of the SM-6, and especially a longer-range version of it. It's a networked-enabled weapon that can use third party targeting—such as that from aircraft, ships, satellites, and land-based sensors—to engage enemies over very long distances.


In other words, it doesn't really matter what the launch platform is, or to some degree where it is, in order to be employed successfully. For instance, if a Super Hornet's air-to-air missile stores run dry, an SM-6 could be launched from a ship a hundred miles away at an aerial target that is in the shadow of the ship's radar horizon or even beyond its detection range as a whole. It would use the Super Hornet's targeting data to get within range on its own active radar seeker. Once it is locked on organically, the target has a very low chance of survival.

LOCKHEED MARTIN
Remote launch and engagement using an SM-6 guided by third party sensors—an F-35—has already been tested successfully using the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) networking concept.


So even if an FFG(X) doesn't have the radar capable or targeting threats at the ranges a SM-6 Block IB could reach, it could simply act as the remote launch platform if it is closest to the target and is equipped with the missile. The same can be said for pretty much any ship with a vertical launch system capable of firing the missile, such as a drone ship.


But here is the thing, by most indications, the SM-6 Block IB would be a multi-function missile like the Block IA, yet in some past documentation, the Block IB was highlighted as a long-range anti-ship ballistic missile, above all else. We don't have a range increase for the new missile design, but let's just throw out a number of 30 percent. That would take the missile's range up to roughly 200 miles, but that's based on an anti-air engagement. It would be longer in a surface-to-surface one. And this is a very conservative guess based on the reported basic range metric that we are told drastically undervalues the original SM-6's baseline capabilities. It could be as much as double the range under certain engagement profiles, we just don't know.

Being able to reach out and pummel ships with a high-speed ballistic missile from over 200 miles away would be an incrediblecapability to insert into the U.S. Navy's surface combatant force. Many potential enemy vessels are equipped to counter air-breathing threats, such as anti-ship cruise missiles and low-flying fighters—but not anti-ship ballistic missiles. Layering these weapons in with anti-ship cruise missiles, such as Block IV Tactical Tomahawks, Naval Strike Missiles (NSMs), and Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles (LRASM), and even the ever more lethal Harpoon anti-ship missile for shorter-ranged engagements, during an attack on a hostile flotilla would give even the most well equipped naval force a run for their money defending against it. Even AEGIS class destroyers and cruisers, at least up until very recently, can't execute the ballistic missile defense and anti-air mission at the same time.

USN
Hopefully, the SM-6 Block IB will also include its anti-air and localized ballistic missile defense functions as well, at least eventually. Maybe even the weapon's latent land attack capability will be more of a priority in the future considering the weapon's greater range. The line item in the budget seems to indicated that it will indeed be multi-role.

I think it's also time for the Pentagon to begin working on adapting the SM-6 for air-launch applications. It could become the long-range multi-purpose weapon of choice for the Navy and the Air Force. Not only could it take down enemy aircraft at hundreds of miles away—something the USAF is highly interested inout of necessity— but it could also blast ships and even incoming ballistic missiles at similarly long ranges with the help of being launched at altitude and high-speed.


The land attack potential is also key here. Not only could it hit fixed targets, but if the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile's(AARGM) multi-mode seeker was incorporated, it could go after key air defense components from very long ranges. An air-launched version could be carried by strategic bomber and medium-large fighter alike, from B-21 to the F/A-18E/F to the F-15. But having what amounts to a very long-range SEAD weapon forward deployed on ships would also be a big force multiplier for air components of an integrated combat force. And once again, it could use the geolocation data of threatening emitters sniffed up by aircraft like the F-35 for targeting at very long distances.

There is also the possibility that SM-6 could be adapted for submarine use. We have talked about this in the past, but we don't have any evidence that points to such a program existing beyond speculation.

Regardless, the SM-6 was already among the Navy's most promising and exciting weapons programs. Now that it is getting supersized to meet its maximum potential, its value will only become more undeniable and hopefully we will see it ported over onto multiple future naval platforms, and maybe even aerial ones, in the future.

Delete this post. OFF TOPIC!

Either start a new thread or delete this.

 

[Armand2REP]

Where do you guys come up with all this wrong info ?

No need to tell me, anyways

The terminal ( endgame ) speed of LRSAM / MRSAM / BARAK 8 is mach 4 during the terminal stage when the 2 pulse is fired to enable almost 100% NEZ in the kinematic domain during dynamic maneuvers.

Incase you did not know the missile has a 2 pulse motor.

The top speed is Mach 2, I just called the IAI marketing number to ask. It is no secret.