Best asian navy

IDonT said:

Mig, the SAM defence of the Sov's are nowhere near that of the Kongos

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Two Shtil surface-to-air missile systems are installed, each on the raised deck behind the two-barrelled 130mm guns. Shtil is the export name of the SA-N-7, NATO reporting name Gadfly. The system uses the ship's three dimensional circular scan radar for target tracking. Up to three missiles can be aimed simultaneously. The range is up to 25km against targets with speeds up to 830m/s. The ship carries 48 Shtil missiles.


A salvo of 8 Harpoons will overwhelm her defenses.

Click to expand...

Actually IDont, the latest Sov, 956EM actually can handle concentrated attack as you mentionned. I got a Kanwa article that stated it has 6 sensors with each being able to target 2 simultaneously. So, 12 targets can be engaged concurrently (I need to go home and check it out again, but I think that's what it said). Also, it has 2 kashtan CIWS.

The Sovremany class ships are not suited to air defence, but they do have a multiple tier defence.

First to engage a threat would be the previously mentioned Gadfly SAM's at ~20-25km's. They can only fire two missiles at a time, but assuming they are automatically reloaded, they could probably fire a fair few a minute.

Secondly the four 5.1 inch guns would engage the target, at around ~12km's depending on the targets altitude.

Finally the 4 X 30mm gattling guns would engage the target at ~2-3km's. Although I believe they only have two directors.

Then there is chaff and ECM...

a couple of corrections there. the sovremenny features the sa-n-7, which is the grizzly.
the four 130mm AK-130-MR-184 guns only fire 20-35 rounds a minute, unlike the chinese compact 100mm, which can fire 90 rounds per minute. thus, the sovs gun is unsuited for air defence(unless the commander gets REALLY lucky)
the 4 aks are corect, although the new sovs have two kashtan

20-35 rounds per minute is fine, when using air burst shells with accurate radar guidance.

Anti-aircraft cruisers in WWII were fitted with guns as large as 5.5 inch with lesser rates of fire and were successful.

Anti-aircraft cruisers in WWII were fitted with guns as large as 5.5 inch with lesser rates of fire and were successful.

Click to expand...

??? and they had jet attakcers and sea-skimming missiles to throw against them back then?

Sovromenyes has decent AA cover that was sufficinent to their role and they shouldn't be compared to those big AA/ASW ships that west refers destroyers from purely traditional reasons. Soviet naval terminology and thinking varied considerably from those of the west

Gollevainen said:

??? and they had jet attakcers and sea-skimming missiles to throw against them back then?

Click to expand...

What an ignorant thing to say.

Of course the didn't - but then they did have to deal with multiple sub-sonic aircraft.

Yimmy said:

What an ignorant thing to say.

Of course the didn't - but then they did have to deal with multiple sub-sonic aircraft.

Click to expand...

Those same systems have difficulty in stopping a sub-sonic Kamikaze from ramming the ship. Most of the Kamikaze were shot down by CAP, only around 5% got through and look how much damage they caused.

I was using the WWII ship examples to make a point that heavy artillery is a valid tier of air defence.

If you would rather I backed up my point with a more recent example, I shall. In the Falklands conflict, a British frigate destroyed an Exocet anti-ship missile with a 4.5inch gun. The frigate only had the one tube, compared to four on the Sovremany, while the 4.5inch gun has a rate of fire of 25 rounds per minute only.

artillery WERE a valid tier of defence. even the falklands war was 25 years ago, and i dont think any 5.5in gun could handle a brahmos, or any of the latest supersoni sea skimming missles.

todays missles even dive to the waterline, making it impossible to hit with a gun. and they fly say...4 times as fast as ww2 propellpr planes.

Yimmy said:

What an ignorant thing to say.

Of course the didn't - but then they did have to deal with multiple sub-sonic aircraft.

Click to expand...

how stupid of you Yimmy it was the bofors 40mm that brought down most of the aircraft

the american 5 incher was also NOT sucessful

for your info the sovs 130mm was design to attack beach heads and support landings not aginst aircraft

the british 4.5 also failed aginst argentian skyhawk even when they are armed with primitive weapons