Posted on 07/30/2013 4:47:17 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Israeli navy seeks to counter Russian ship-killer
Israel's navy is installing the Barak-8 air-defense missile system aboard its combat vessels to protect them against Syria's new supersonic Russian-built Yakhont anti-ship missiles which the Jewish state views as a potent threat to its long-held naval supremacy in the eastern Mediterranean.
HAIFA, Israel, July 30 (UPI) -- Israel's navy is installing the Barak-8 air-defense missile system aboard its combat vessels to protect against Syria's new supersonic Russian-built Yakhont anti-ship missiles, which the Jewish state views as a potent threat to its long-held naval supremacy in the eastern Mediterranean.
The medium-range Barak-8 was developed by state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries and India's Defense Research and Development Organization.
India signed a $1.1 billion contract with IAI's Missile and Space Division in November 2009 to acquire the land-based and seaborne Baraks.
The navy's procurement of the Barak-8 was put off for years because the system's development was not completed until 2010. The missile has an operational range of 45 miles.
It can engage multiple targets simultaneously, even in a multi-weapon saturation attack, and intercept missiles as close as 500 yards.
The Barak-8, effective against anti-ship missiles, supersonic cruise missiles, manned aircraft and drones, is integrated with the ELM-2248 MF-STAR shipborne phased array radar system built by IAI subsidiary Elta.
Israel's Rafael Advanced Defense Systems produces the interceptor missiles.
The Israeli media reports that the Barak-8 is expected to be operational aboard the navy's three Haifa-built Sa'ar-5 missile ships within the next 3-4 months.
These are the navy's largest surface warships. It's not clear whether its eight Saar-4.5 and two Saar-4 corvettes will also be equipped with the Barak-8 system.
The Russians began delivering the Yakhonts to Syria in December 2011 under 2007 contract valued at $300 million.
Moscow provided the Syrian regime with two Bastion coastal missile systems, comprising 18 mobile launchers and an estimated 72 of the missiles that have a maximum speed of Mach 2, twice the speed of sound, a range of 187 miles and carry a warhead containing 440 pounds of high explosives.
The deliveries took place amid Syria's civil war, with disparate rebel forces seeking to overthrow President Bashar Assad, a key ally of Russia and Iran.
The provision of such weapons to the Damascus regime was widely seen as a Russian warning to the United States and Israel not to interfere in the Syrian conflict.
Since then, Israel has mounted at least three airstrikes against targets inside Syria, in each case linked to Syrian transfers of advanced weapons systems to its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah, a major foe of Israel.
On July 5, the Syrian naval base at Latakia on the Mediterranean coast, where the shore-based Yakhonts reportedly were, was hit by a series of explosions.
There's been considerable speculation they were the result of an Israeli air raid, or possibly even a cruise missile strike launched from one of the Israeli navy's German-built Dolphin submarines, to neutralize the Yakhont threat.
The Russians have a naval base at Tartus, Syria's other main port, south of Latakia.
A major Israeli concern is the Syrians will seek to transfer some of the P-800s to Hezbollah, which has engaged the Israeli navy before with anti-ship missiles.
In the opening days of the monthlong 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel, the Iranian proxy nearly sank an Israeli corvette, the Hanit, off the Lebanese coast near Beirut with a Chinese-designed C-802 missile. Five crewmen were killed.
In recent months, the Syrian regime is reported to have transferred Russian-built SA-17 surface-to-air missiles, which could challenge Israel's undisputed air supremacy over Lebanon, and Fatah 110 surface-to-surface missiles that can hit pretty much any part of Israel.
It's these shipments the Israeli air force has been striking.
Deliveries of the Barak-8 to India are expected to be completed by 2017. They will equip three Project 15A Kolkata-class guided missiles destroyers built at India's Mazagon shipyard.
The Indian air force plans to re-equip nine air-defense squadrons with the new missile.
The prime contractor for the program is India's DRDO, with IAI's Missile and Space Division acting as leading subcontractor.
Read more: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2013/07/30/Israeli-navy-seeks-to-counter-Russian-ship-killer/UPI-58031375203101/#ixzz2aZkEFjnP
Oh goody. An arms race.
Will be workplaces, if nothing else...
I seriously doubt the effectiveness of a weapon named Barak.
Its a good name, it screws up anything it touches.
How well are US Navy ships protected from ship killing missiles? This is scary.
Oh, yeah? Well, our Barack 0 can destroy America!
Israel's navy is installing the Barak-8 air-defense missile system aboard its combat vessels to protect them against Syria's new supersonic Russian-built Yakhont anti-ship missiles... The medium-range Barak-8 was developed by state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries and India's Defense Research and Development Organization. India signed a $1.1 billion contract with IAI's Missile and Space Division in November 2009 to acquire the land-based and seaborne Baraks... The missile has an operational range of 45 miles... can engage multiple targets simultaneously, even in a multi-weapon saturation attack, and intercept missiles as close as 500 yards... is integrated with the ELM-2248 MF-STAR shipborne phased array radar system built by IAI subsidiary Elta.
Additionally, in most cases the USN operates a good distance from shore, meaning that for an enemy to engage them with a cruise missile (most of which, due to export restrictions, are limited to a certain range) they would have to get some form of plane/ship/sub to head out to meet them. Finally, most countries that would actually use those weapons do not have many of them. This means, unless the US decides to go engage Russia or China, which will never happen, the threat of saturation attacks from multiple vectors is simply not going to happen.
Thus, the US Navy ships are very well protected. It is not really that scary.
That is not to say there is no threat. The missiles are quite effective, very fast, and the amount of time between detection and impact for a missile that just went supersonic and is jinking is very very small (which is why AEW&C planes are VERY important). Additionally, gun-type CIWS systems are simply not effective anymore against such missiles. They would probably not even hit, and even if they did the supersonic debris would still enable a soft kill of the ship. Also, the missiles move so fast that even with explosives the ship is dead ...explosives simply just make a kill more certain. Against a solitary ship those things are killers. Absolutely.
It is just that you will not find USN ships, in a real situation, chugging along solo when the potential foe is known to have supersonic ASCMs.
(....totally ignoring the mission profile of the Littoral Combat Ships. I suspect the LCS will be the first USN ship going forward to be sunk. It's mission profile gets it closer to shore than most other ships, it doesn't have a good offensive suite, and its defensive suite is simply not up to standard for certain types of threats .....)
That’s pretty amazing and reassuring and I really appreciate your response, spetznaz. Thank you very much.
I hope we have new weapons systems in the works and their implementation isn’t hurt by future budget cuts.
Thanks again!
Spetznaz, Sukhoi
There is a long held view in India that the publicly stated range of the Brahmos is just to stay within the parameters of the MTCR, but the actual range may be close to double that.
As a co-developer of a missile, would the MTCR restrictions still apply?
There are already several very well protected Israeli boats against the Yakhont anti-ship missile: the Dolpin-class submarines.
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-Israeli-submarine-strike-hit-Syrian-arms-depot-319756
The first batch of these missiles isn’t a thread any more to Israeli Navy.
Now, I really have no way of knowing whether or not the MTCR requirements have been applied to the letter. One would have to have clearance with the Indians and/or the Russians, and even then I doubt they would be willing to divulge that information.
With that said, I can obviously speculate. :) In my opinion, it would be really foolish for, say, the Pakistanis or the Indians to believe that the range of the BrahMos is what the Indians/Russians claim. I would bet that the actual range is longer than claimed, and may infact be usably longer than claimed. There are certain limitations though, such as the size of the missile and the fuel used that can be used to estimate maximum range, but I would be truly surprised if it was within the limits of the MTCR. Especially considering that the Indians co-developed the originally Russian missile.
It would also be advisable for possible targets of these missiles to recall the 1971 Operation Trident, where the Indian navy managed to pull off one of the most amazing naval operations in world history (and one that doesn't get its due in the international media). They pulled off an operation that was supposed to be, literally, impossible. For one the msisile boats used did not have sufficient range to get to target ...so the Indians simply had some ships tow the missile boats to where their range would suffice. Additionally, the Indian ships managed to use their anti-ship cruise missiles to attack Pakistani ships, as well as Pakistani land targets (the first use of ASCMs in the area, and the first use of ASCMs as land attack cruise missiles). Absolutely crippled the Pakistanis by taking out around 50% of their oil, taking out a lot of their ammunition (including attacking an American ship that was taking ammo to the Pakistanis), and absolutely crushing the morale in Pakistan.
Thus, I would be very sceptical that the range of the BrahMos has been limited to 300KM. I would bet that the actual range is more than that. Personally ...I would add almost another 200KM to that figure. :)
In my opinion, it would be really foolish for, say, the Pakistanis or the Indians
should have been:
In my opinion, it would be really foolish for, say, the Pakistanis or the CHINESE
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.