Harpoon vs Exocet
-
hello. i was wondering which one is a better SSM..
from what I read so far(correct me if i'm wrong), one of the main differences in these 2 models of ssm is that the harpoon has a pop up maneuver in its terminal stage of flight whereas the exocet does not..
the RGM-84A harpoon travels at 855km/h if i'm not wrong, which is around mach 0.7, and has a range of around 120km..it has a guidance system and flight profile of sea-skimming cruise with mid-course guidance monitored by radar altimeter, active seeker radar terminal homing, and carries a 221 kg semi-penetrating warhead.
The MM-40 Exocet has a speed of mach 0.9, and a range of around 65km, its a sea skimmer, guided by an ESD ADAC X-band monopulse active radar, but does not have a pop up maneover, leading to.. i quote "Otherwise, however, Exocets had a very low PK - especially if the target had any kind of advance warnings or even the slightest means of self-defence. In other cases, it is known that several Excoets have flown over ships laying low in the water (due to their load, or others, which had a hold in the middle of the hull) - without exploding! " from http://www.acig.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=882&forum=5&18
In the Falkland war, HMS Sheffield was hit by a single Exocet amidships. The warhead likely did not explode, but the fires could not be stopped even with the aid of other ships. This was probably because of the fact that the Exocet had a solid fuel engine, and contained its own oxidiser, hence the fires on it could not be put out easily.. the harpoon however, utilizes a conventional air breathing engine and hence uses kerosene instead..
btw has the harpoon ever been used in conflict before?
also there are the newer Harpoon block 2 and mm40 exocet block 2/3..anyone have the specifications on these?
wad abt RSN's delta frigates.. are they going to be armed with harpoon block 2? wad abt malaysias next 4 frigates? -
Exocet has a outstanding record of hitting it's target! In 1986 Iran and Iraq war,a exocet fire from a Mirage F-1 of Iraq air force hit a patrolling US frigate with radar on accidentally.The US crew did not detect the missile and 17 sailor die from that incident! The ship was badly damaged.
-
Frankly, I have not read any stories about Harpoon ASMs sinking naval vessels. If you do have an article or two, mind giving me a link? I'm sure the US would have used it in the two gulf wars right? Hehe thanks.
But I think the Exocet's worth is proven beyond doubt, the most starking example being in the Falklands War of 1982, where Exocet ASMs launched from Argentine Super Etenards sank several British warships (like the HMS Sheffield, as mentioned above) and seriously jeapordized the UK Task Force sent there.
Which brings me to my question : Can the Harpoon, like the Exocet, be launched from fighter craft?
Pity RSN doesn't equip Exocets on its ships, still using only the Boeing Harpoon. Sigh. -
Yes... Harpoons are successfully mounted on our Fokker aircraft. Have a picture taken during Changi Naval Base open hse.. in one of the naval vessels have a picture of 2 vipers flanking a fokker with Harpoon mounted on starboard side belly. I took a shot of it using mi hp. Will try to post it up if i can.Originally posted by Merkava MK4:Frankly, I have not read any stories about Harpoon ASMs sinking naval vessels. If you do have an article or two, mind giving me a link? I'm sure the US would have used it in the two gulf wars right? Hehe thanks.
But I think the Exocet's worth is proven beyond doubt, the most starking example being in the Falklands War of 1982, where Exocet ASMs launched from Argentine Super Etenards sank several British warships (like the HMS Sheffield, as mentioned above) and seriously jeapordized the UK Task Force sent there.
Which brings me to my question : Can the Harpoon, like the Exocet, be launched from fighter craft?
Pity RSN doesn't equip Exocets on its ships, still using only the Boeing Harpoon. Sigh. -
Harpoons can be mounted on aircraft, as Moonstriker has said, our Fokker 50s have the capability, as well as F-16C/Ds. I've taken the pic Moonstriker was talking about on my digicam, will see if I can post a pic
Other aircraft capable of carrying Harpoons are F-18s and A-6 Intruders
The Harpoon has been used successfully in combat, the USN sank several Libyan corvettes in a series of actions in the 80s, and a least one of these was sunk by a Harpoon and another by a Harpoon/CBU combi. -
Moskit the aircraft carrier killer.
source: www.globalsecurity.com
The NATO designation SS-N-22 ‘Sunburn’ is believed to be designated P270 Moskit, the air-breathing variant of the naval missile 3M80 (the designation 3M80 apparently referring to the Mach 3 speed of 1980 weapons). It may have been designed originally to enhance the effectiveness of Missile Cutter Brigades (that is, units of missile-equipped FACs) and Destroyer Brigades hitherto dependent upon the Malachit or SS-N-9 ‘Siren’. It is used on "Sovremennyy" destroyers (eight missiles on each) and on "Tarantul [Tarantula] III patrol ships (four missiles on each). A high supersonic speed was specified to reduce the target’s time to deploy self-defense weapons, indeed the weapon was designed specifically to strike ships with the Aegis command and weapon control system and the SM-2 surface-to-air missile.
The Moskit (3M80) is a ramjet-powered missile with a slim forward body and ovoid nose, and a fatter rear half with four divided air intakes. There are four clipped delta platform wings and four smaller tail surfaces of similar shape organized in cruciform configuration around the fuselage. All the wings and tail surfaces are folded when the missile is in the launcher. Internally the radar seeker is in the nose with the guidance system, batteries and radio altimeter in the remainder of the front compartment, and the 300 kg semi-armor-piercing warhead immediately behind. A fuel tank, presumably with a kerosene-type fuel, occupies the area to the leading edges of the wing and the area almost to the rear edges is occupied by the ramjet. Much of the rear of the missile is occupied by a solid propellant booster through which runs the ramjet nozzle. Actuators are to be found below the tail surfaces.
Fuselage - body of revolution with the ogival form of nose section and the X-shaped wing arrangement and tail assembly. Wing and tail assembly folding, made from the material OTYA and OTYA-Y, longerons - from VKL -3. Four off-axis inlets and air ducts are located on the housing. Front fairing with the radio-transparent spinner (three-layered fairing from the fiberglass fabric scan -3 on the connecting material K -9-70). Skin and intermediate collection it is made from VT -5, tank compartment - made of the stainless steel, longerons - from VKL -3, fairing - from the fiberglass fabric T -10 on connecting K -9-70. Air ducts of welded construction - from the material OTYA-Y, OTYA.
The 3M82 "Mosquito" missiles have the fastest flying speed among all antiship missiles in today's world. It reaches Mach 3 at a high altitude and its maximum low-altitude speed is M2.2, triple the speed of the American Harpoon. The missile takes only 2 minutes to cover its full range and manufacturers state that 1-2 missiles could incapacitate a destroyer while 1-5 missiles could sink a 20000 ton merchantman. An extended range missile, 9M80E is now available.
When slower missiles, like the French Exocet are used, the maximum theoretical response time for the defending ship is 150-120 seconds. This provides time to launch countermeasures and employ jamming before deploying "hard" defense tactics such as launching missiles and using quick-firing artillery. But the 3M82 "Mosquito" missiles are extremely fast and give the defending side a maximum theoretical response time of merely 25-30 seconds, rendering it extremely difficult employ jamming and countermeasures, let alone fire missiles and quick-firing artillery.
The air-launched version, officially called ASM-MMS and apparently also Kh-4, is intended specially for Su-27K (Su-33) carrier-based fighter aircraft. It was for the first time shown to the CIS leaders in February 1992 in Machulishche and then to the public in August 1992 at the Moscow Air Show in Zhukovskiy. The missile is propelled by a dual (rocket-jet) engine operating by the same principle as the Kh-31 engine. The missile, suspended under the aircraft, has a folding wing. The missile is guided by an autopilot during the initial fight stage, with possible correction by the aircraft pilot, and by active radar during the final flight stage. -
They used CBU against ships? was there a reason for that or did they just use CBU cuz they had nothing else to use?Originally posted by Viper52:The Harpoon has been used successfully in combat, the USN sank several Libyan corvettes in a series of actions in the 80s, and a least one of these was sunk by a Harpoon and another by a Harpoon/CBU combi. -
any reason for you saying that? is there any advantage of using the exocet over the harpoon besides the fact that it was battle tested before?Originally posted by Merkava MK4:Frankly, I have not read any stories about Harpoon ASMs sinking naval vessels. If you do have an article or two, mind giving me a link? I'm sure the US would have used it in the two gulf wars right? Hehe thanks.
But I think the Exocet's worth is proven beyond doubt, the most starking example being in the Falklands War of 1982, where Exocet ASMs launched from Argentine Super Etenards sank several British warships (like the HMS Sheffield, as mentioned above) and seriously jeapordized the UK Task Force sent there.
Which brings me to my question : Can the Harpoon, like the Exocet, be launched from fighter craft?
Pity RSN doesn't equip Exocets on its ships, still using only the Boeing Harpoon. Sigh. -
SS-N-22 sunburn is too big for our RSN ship even the new frigate cannot take it. Can only fit on our endurance class LSD,hahaha! But Endurance class is a logistic ship not a attack ship.
-
SS-N-22 sunburn is too big for our RSN ship even the new frigate cannot take it. Can only fit on our endurance class LSD,hahaha! But Endurance class is a logistic ship not a attack ship.
-
Mebbe we shud get some for emergency ground deployment around kusu and sister island,Originally posted by zenden9:SS-N-22 sunburn is too big for our RSN ship even the new frigate cannot take it. Can only fit on our endurance class LSD,hahaha! But Endurance class is a logistic ship not a attack ship.
get some for air deployments also.
btw another warhead option for the 'sunburn' is also nuclear, thats why it's an aircraft carrier killer -
sunburns and crowded SLOCs don't go well together.....supersonic streakers have a very high chance of killing a civillian vessels, so until the RSN sees the need to have such a missile for open water engagements, i don't think we'll be seeing supersonic missiles anytime...Originally posted by zenden9:SS-N-22 sunburn is too big for our RSN ship even the new frigate cannot take it. Can only fit on our endurance class LSD,hahaha! But Endurance class is a logistic ship not a attack ship.
-
Sad... I personally like the SS-N-22 Sunburn. Practically unstoppable and it is so big that even if the warhead fails to explode, it will leave such a massive hole in the target.
-
i don't think the SS-N-22 can be air launched..can it?Originally posted by paulho:Mebbe we shud get some for emergency ground deployment around kusu and sister island,
get some for air deployments also.
btw another warhead option for the 'sunburn' is also nuclear, thats why it's an aircraft carrier killer -
A CBU would presumably be more effective since small gunboats are more difficult to hit with conventional iron bombs. The more bomblets, the higher the probability of hit.Originally posted by sgFish:They used CBU against ships? was there a reason for that or did they just use CBU cuz they had nothing else to use?
The lack of large explosives on the bomblets are negated by the gunboat's small size and light armour. -
How about the monster SSN-19 Shipwreck? Better than these 2?
-
Well,why do you wanna destroy a perfectly good Aircraft carrier or vessel?When you can capture it?Why dun use limpet mines against it man?
-
Capture a ship with 5000+ men aboard that is escorted by at least 6-8 FFGs, DDGs and CGs....yeah that'd be do-ableOriginally posted by SpecOps87:Well,why do you wanna destroy a perfectly good Aircraft carrier or vessel?When you can capture it?Why dun use limpet mines against it man?
-
Haha... You are forgetting the 70 over planes, both fighters and transports plus the helicopters carried by both the carrier and the other escort ships.Originally posted by Viper52:Capture a ship with 5000+ men aboard that is escorted by at least 6-8 FFGs, DDGs and CGs....yeah that'd be do-able -
Why don't we get a flying frigate and fire this monster? Hahahaha..
Lun Kranoplan
Firing off some 3M80 anti-shipping cruise missiles which is also called SS-N-19
-
Hehe.. no. Just wanted to see RSN using it lar.Originally posted by sgFish:any reason for you saying that? is there any advantage of using the exocet over the harpoon besides the fact that it was battle tested before?
But the fact that it is battle-proven is a very valid reason already ba..
Don't think RSN would be getting Exocets anytime soon anyway. They will still equip their vessels with the Harpoon ASMs for commonality's sake. It would be logistically easier to equip and maintain one standardized type of ASM aboard our ships. -
Wow.. what the hell is that monster? Huyo.. looks solid man. Looks exactly like the way the Russians like their toys to be.. Big, chunky and nasty.Originally posted by zenden9:Why don't we get a flying frigate and fire this monster? Hahahaha..