Yuan Class AIP & Kilo Submarine Thread


banjex

Junior Member
Registered Member
I've watched the Russian military for over 10 years now and I'm not sure they have the recon capabilities to actually target their missiles at such long ranges.
 

5unrise

Junior Member
Registered Member
I've watched the Russian military for over 10 years now and I'm not sure they have the recon capabilities to actually target their missiles at such long ranges.
Thats what I've been wondering as well. The Zircon has a reported range of 1000 km, but how do you guide the missile in the second half of the journey? Perhaps with some low frequency radar they may be able to detect very large targets at long range, and these would be without dedicated stealth designs, like an aircraft carrier. Surveillance satellites could also be an option.
 

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
We already talked about that. Liana satellite network. Even in the 1970s in the time of the Soviet Union they had the Legenda satellites.
The submarine gets a fix on the target(s) from the satellite and fires a cruise missile salvo. The cruise missiles fly at altitude close to the target(s), the lead missile spots the targets with a built-in radar, and communicates with the other missiles to assign them to the targets.
 

banjex

Junior Member
Registered Member
Then the question becomes whether they had a sufficient refresh rate which as we know requires many satellites to get down to under 15 minutes and even that is not nearly good enough for targeting at long range.
 

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
The Zircon cruise missile should take around 6 minutes to travel 1000 km.
How far away from the original position do you think a ship can travel in 6 minutes?
Even at 25 knots it can travel 4.6 km at best.
The missile can easily spot it at altitude with its built-in radar given the original fix.
 
Last edited:

banjex

Junior Member
Registered Member
Better hope your terminal guidance and terminal homing are top notch when it comes to ranges like that against moving targets.
 

Dante80

Junior Member
Registered Member
Then the question becomes whether they had a sufficient refresh rate which as we know requires many satellites to get down to under 15 minutes and even that is not nearly good enough for targeting at long range.
This article might come handy.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

We are getting off-topic though, this is not the thread for it.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Better hope your terminal guidance and terminal homing are top notch when it comes to ranges like that against moving targets.

We are talking about huge huge RCS targets, and there is a bunch of them. We are not talking about RCS figures for a fighter or bomber, which is like 10m2 to a 100m2. A 2000 ton frigate in 1978 would be 5000m2 alone. A medium sized tanker around 44000 tons would be around 16000. If you are supersonic --- and its the reason why these missiles need to be supersonic --- the target would not have moved much when the missile gets there. Metal ships, even in the face of sea clutter, makes magnificent radar reflections.

All that is during the Cold War where ships are blocky and full of large radar antennas. This is why modern warships now sought to reduce RCS as much as possible.

Another thing is that ships are very radio noisy. They emit all sorts of radio communications and radar waves all around, which can be detected and tracked passively, even over the horizon over large distances. Initial targeting via passive and even mid phase update via passive guidance is possible, both of which the Soviets also exploited. Today, this is why modern warships need LPI (low probability of intercept) in both communications and radar.

Sorry for getting a bit out of topic but it needs to be said.
 

Top