Mayuresh wrote:Team, a newbie question again.
Why so most warships not have long range SAMs? I have been thinking a lot about the big ships in the high seas and the kind of equipment they need. Let us assume this scenario:
India has managed to fit the Brahmos on the Sukhoi. We send some of these (with appropriate escorts) to hit PNS Zulfiqar. The air arm goes within 300km of PNS Zulfiqar and launches the Brahmos missiles. At USD 3 million per unit, we send 5 missiles at the ship at the same time and they attack the ship from five different directions (Front, Aft, Port, Starboard and Top attack). The two CIWS Gatling guns (with a range of 3 km) surely cannot destroy 5 missiles coming from five different directions in 2 seconds (Assuming a Mach 1.5 terminal velocity for the Brahmos).
Ofcourse, we win in this scenario, but a similar thing could happen to our Rajput class or Delhi class if China manages to develop an air launched long range cruise missile and gift it to TSP.
I can think of a few reasons why your proposal has not happened till date. That doesn't mean it will not be implemented in the near future. Quite the contrary.
1) IRC, Almost all ships today have SAMs. Plus, many of the smaller ones do have CIWS as well. The fact is that there are limits to how much equipment and armament one can put on a ship, not in terms of weight limitations but space.
If you have a ship thats designed for a given purpose, it will require that amount of hardware, weaponry, sensors to perform that role. FOr eg, The Rajput, a destroyer will require cruise missiles and their radars, along with medium cal guns. The rest of the stuff is then added on to the empty spaces.
Note that we are still some distance from having an integrated sensor, ie a radar that can guide two or more weapon systems efficiently. Thus, most modern ships have a dedicated sensor for each weapon system. Add to that the Comm reqts and all else, and you see the mast getting quite crowded.
In this environment, putting an LRSAM will also require a pretty big surveillance radar, which we might not have space for.
2) In addition, given the threat perceptions, it is unlikely that the enemy would target smaller frigates and corvettes before dealing with carriers and destroyers. Hence, they get the most protection.
3) Even that might be insufficient per your scenario, but that is where the idea of threat assessment comes in. You cannot make your ship unsinkable without seriously degrading its fighting capabilities. Its a risk that needs to be taken, and a very carefully calculated one at that.
4) Another reason not to go in for the longer range SAMs till now was that there werent any good systems we could get our hands on. The LRSAMs at present weren't much more effective than the MRSAMs, since radar tech and missile tech were not at the level they are at the present. Thus, there was no incentive to upgrade. Its only now that we are getting true & potentially effective LRSAMs under development.
Another reason is that with LRSAMs, the minimum engagement range goes down. Thus, you lose a close-in, quick reaction system by placing the LRSAM in place of the MRSAM that you'd have put. Thus, its a liability, especially if your LRSAM isn't that good. Overall risk increases. Again, risk assessment comes into play.
5) Also do note that protection isn't limited to SAM systems and CIWS. There is always a lot more to missile defence, which includes the tactics, operating & evasive procedures of the ship, intelligence, etc. It has to do with staying out of sight. Only as the last resort, when the ship is detected and tracked and considered important enough to waste a missile or two on, does the role of the SAM come into play.
Answered your question??
besides does being big really help? I mean Gorkhas are small people but have turned to be fierce warriors.
