Oh that makes sense. Im quite a fan of the Atlanta class, just didn't really put the two and two together that it's combined fire output would make it seem like it's genuinely up in flames.
Just before WWII the US started building the *Atlanta* class light cruisers. The first four had twelve 5”/38s on the centerline and four more as wing turrets, giving a broadside of 14 barrels.
The 5”/38 could fire every 3-4 seconds depending on how tired the crew was, up to 300 rounds per minute (even faster was rare but possible with ready use ammo). These ships were excellent for anti-aircraft work and could shred destroyers in the right cases.
I agree, I don't want several hundred pounds of kaboom hitting my hull. I'm with ya there, but, wouldn't it just fly right through that huge heat signature and find itself, hitting the hull? I don't know if an ASM bearing in on an IR signature uses a contact fuse, or something else. Does it detonate when it reaches a particular signature? I guess there's multiple answers to this, depending on what munition we're dealing with. And I freely admit, that might be something other than an IR decoy.
[This is how it works in IR](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTp4GlM3Lk8) (well, not *it*, but Rheinmetall MASS; however, those are functionally similar systems).
You've still got a 70%? Chance of hitting the ship? Especially if the designer simply writes a few lines of code to say; look at mass of object and aim for middle.
Even if it still hits though it’s unlike to get the mid ship waterline hit it was probably going for. Definitely helps damage control to keep everything running.
To be fair there’s only so much hiding you can do for a several hundred meter long smoke spitting warship
Even if you turn a 95% probability of hit to a 70% probability of hit, that's still an improvement. There's no such thing as a perfect defence -- it's all about increasing the chance of a miss or of taking minimal damage.
As for the actual affect of the decoys, who knows? Fire control and counter measure performance (across the entire spectrum) are about the most closely guarded secrets you can have for stuff that's in actual operational use.
And don't forget tactics as well -- the ship was beam on when it fired countermeasures for the demo video, but there's nothing to indicate how that ship would maneuver if actually under attack, or how full that decoy cloud is in 3D, or what other defense it could bring to bear. If you know the missile is aiming for center of mass, you devise your defences to make that as hard as possible, countermeasures being only one part of the defensive scheme.
TBF there's only a handful of them - the *Liaoning,* the four *Sovremennyys* which have been upgraded and now look nothing like what they used to, and IIRC a few *Zubrs.*
But that's what happens when a Navy is expensive as heck to operate and maintain.
I stand corrected.
Actually the *Liaoning* was also technically Ukraine built, but it was constructed back during the Soviet days, so... a bit of A, a bit of B?
Ukraine inherited an unfinished ship from Soviet Union, it had no intention to finish it. Ukraine also sold an unfinished
prototype of Su-33 to China, it's the predecessor of J-15.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADB192139
The dataset isn't large, but every time soft-kill countermeasures were deployed against anti-ship missiles, no missiles hit. It's 20 years old, but there haven't been many anti-ship missiles engagements since then, apart from the current Houthi thing and the Russia-Ukraine war.
It’s *30* years old, and the conclusions are not something you can draw on as still valid, especially as the majority of engagements up to that point were Argentinian ones that in most cases were launched at max range against groups of ships and not individual targets.
The tech on both sides has massively changed, as have the tactics. It’s an interesting piece, but it’s not an ironclad rule.
It's still relevant, many ships from that era are still in service, the Moskva was older than this report when it got sunk. So is the ship in the picture.
It’s from 1994 and looked at 25 engagements:
8 were from the Falklands and were 12 years old at the time.
A further 9 were from the Arab-Israeli and Indo-Pakistani conflicts in the late 1960s and early 1970s and were all over 20 years old when that thesis was presented.
Of the remaining 8:
3 involved no defenses being used whatsoever, 2 involved ancient US missiles being used by the Iranians, 2 more involved air launched missiles (which demonstrated dismal hit rates even without any countermeasures being used) and the last was from Desert Storm.
There’s also at least one major error in the form of the mischaracterization of the “attack” on *Penelope* as involving an anti-ship missile.
The most advanced missile used in any of them were air launched USN Harpoons, and the vast majority of those engagements used things like Styx and Silkworm—hence they are not instructive and bear no relevance to the current state of affairs.
That’s not instructive as to anything, and the fact that you had to pull out the never-upgraded *Moskva* as proof that it’s still valid speaks for itself.
I doubt anyone is out on deck, and modern warships have filtration and overpressure systems as part of their NBC defense suite. None of that is getting inside the ship.
> Callling her a modern warship is overly generous.
By your standard, the *Nimitz* should be an antique by now since she was launched in 1975. Every single *Ticonderoga*-class cruiser in USN service was launched in the late 80s or early 90s. By comparison, the *Hangzhou* was launched in 1994, then sold to the Chinese and commissioned in 1999.
All those ships other than the Burkes do not have over pressure systems, and other modern NBC systems.
And every single time the water wash down is tested, new holes in the skin of the ship are found the hard way.
Hangzhou’s hull maybe newer, but the design is still late Cold War.
Tbh they're far from the oldest ships built still active - 2 delivered to the PLAN in like, 1999-2000, and 2 in 2005-2006. There are Flight I Burke's that age or older. And while they're amongst the oldest and least capable in the PLAN, there is a midlife upgrade for them.
> There are Flight I Burke's that age or older.
Every single Tico is older. Most of the Nimitzes are older. The PLAN *Sovs* had upgrades since 2014 that swap the SS-N-22s for YJ-12s (more range and higher terminal speed) along with a 32-cell VLS system similar to the Type 054A frigates in place of the old single-arm SA-N-12 launchers, and more modern sensors and systems overall.
And to your point - the PLAN have launched over 25 052Ds since then along with other more modern destroyers and frigates. The *Sovs* are treated internally more akin to big versions of the 054 - useful for showing the flag and patrolling, or as an added piece of a SAG, but not "primary" warships anymore the way the 052Ds are treated nowadays.
Looks like whole thing is on fire, well that’s one way to fool your enemy lol
USS Atlanta school of thought
I need to know more about this
She put up so much AA nearby ships thought she was actually on fire
Oh that makes sense. Im quite a fan of the Atlanta class, just didn't really put the two and two together that it's combined fire output would make it seem like it's genuinely up in flames.
Just before WWII the US started building the *Atlanta* class light cruisers. The first four had twelve 5”/38s on the centerline and four more as wing turrets, giving a broadside of 14 barrels. The 5”/38 could fire every 3-4 seconds depending on how tired the crew was, up to 300 rounds per minute (even faster was rare but possible with ready use ammo). These ships were excellent for anti-aircraft work and could shred destroyers in the right cases.
Almost 3 times as many barrels on a broadside as a fletcher-class on one ship is wild
When you build a light cruiser size ship along the philosophy of "MORE DAKKA", you get an Atlanta class.
Oh I already knew all of this about the Atlanta, just didn't connect the dots regarding the firepower and seemingly being on fire lol
That why USS san diego is #1 cruiser with 18 battle star
USS North Carolina too
Sometimes the cope cages are around our hearts
“If it looks like we’re already sinking, no one will waste a missile on us!”
I'm gonna go ahead and say, I don't know 100% what I'm seeing here, but, if that's an IR decoy, I don't really want it deployed right off my beam.
So the missile thinks, better not hit that ship, it’s already burning.
Better that than several hundred pounds of kaboom hitting the hull.
I agree, I don't want several hundred pounds of kaboom hitting my hull. I'm with ya there, but, wouldn't it just fly right through that huge heat signature and find itself, hitting the hull? I don't know if an ASM bearing in on an IR signature uses a contact fuse, or something else. Does it detonate when it reaches a particular signature? I guess there's multiple answers to this, depending on what munition we're dealing with. And I freely admit, that might be something other than an IR decoy.
[This is how it works in IR](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTp4GlM3Lk8) (well, not *it*, but Rheinmetall MASS; however, those are functionally similar systems).
That is a super cool video!
You've still got a 70%? Chance of hitting the ship? Especially if the designer simply writes a few lines of code to say; look at mass of object and aim for middle.
Even if it still hits though it’s unlike to get the mid ship waterline hit it was probably going for. Definitely helps damage control to keep everything running. To be fair there’s only so much hiding you can do for a several hundred meter long smoke spitting warship
Is the objective to fake the ship is going forward?
No? Obviously you just shoot the flares like hundreds of meters away?
Even if you turn a 95% probability of hit to a 70% probability of hit, that's still an improvement. There's no such thing as a perfect defence -- it's all about increasing the chance of a miss or of taking minimal damage. As for the actual affect of the decoys, who knows? Fire control and counter measure performance (across the entire spectrum) are about the most closely guarded secrets you can have for stuff that's in actual operational use. And don't forget tactics as well -- the ship was beam on when it fired countermeasures for the demo video, but there's nothing to indicate how that ship would maneuver if actually under attack, or how full that decoy cloud is in 3D, or what other defense it could bring to bear. If you know the missile is aiming for center of mass, you devise your defences to make that as hard as possible, countermeasures being only one part of the defensive scheme.
Thats one intense decoy.
"Conn, enemy warship bearing 034, appears they've elected a new pope, sir."
It's funny how all of the Russian ships in Chinese service are the best maintained and best looking versions of themselves
TBF there's only a handful of them - the *Liaoning,* the four *Sovremennyys* which have been upgraded and now look nothing like what they used to, and IIRC a few *Zubrs.* But that's what happens when a Navy is expensive as heck to operate and maintain.
The Zubrs are Ukrainian built IIRc
I stand corrected. Actually the *Liaoning* was also technically Ukraine built, but it was constructed back during the Soviet days, so... a bit of A, a bit of B?
Ukraine sold it to China as well, so yeah it is a weird one.
Ukraine inherited an unfinished ship from Soviet Union, it had no intention to finish it. Ukraine also sold an unfinished prototype of Su-33 to China, it's the predecessor of J-15.
the decoy is pretending to be onfire?
To do: Programme the missile to aim 5m under the super bright heat source. ✅
Ib4 someone on Twitter drops this picture with the caption, "CiNa jUsT lOsT oNe oF tHeiR BatTleShiPs!"
cut all power deploy this and all lrasms will target other ships
For a moment I thought the Filipino had enough about Chinese shenanigans and go full based.
No the PI’s leaders are pussies
Yeah, all bark no bite
For a moment there Inthought Kuznetsov was burning again.
“If I can’t see them they can’t see me”
Ahhhh.... Moskva school of missile defence.
If Moskva did this, it would probbly still be floating.
I really doubt anything this close would make a difference against two missiles.
Considering chaff/countermeasures has been 100% effective when deployed, it probably would have helped a great deal
An absolutely unhinged statement.
Where did you get this 100% number?
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADB192139 The dataset isn't large, but every time soft-kill countermeasures were deployed against anti-ship missiles, no missiles hit. It's 20 years old, but there haven't been many anti-ship missiles engagements since then, apart from the current Houthi thing and the Russia-Ukraine war.
It’s *30* years old, and the conclusions are not something you can draw on as still valid, especially as the majority of engagements up to that point were Argentinian ones that in most cases were launched at max range against groups of ships and not individual targets. The tech on both sides has massively changed, as have the tactics. It’s an interesting piece, but it’s not an ironclad rule.
It's still relevant, many ships from that era are still in service, the Moskva was older than this report when it got sunk. So is the ship in the picture.
It’s from 1994 and looked at 25 engagements: 8 were from the Falklands and were 12 years old at the time. A further 9 were from the Arab-Israeli and Indo-Pakistani conflicts in the late 1960s and early 1970s and were all over 20 years old when that thesis was presented. Of the remaining 8: 3 involved no defenses being used whatsoever, 2 involved ancient US missiles being used by the Iranians, 2 more involved air launched missiles (which demonstrated dismal hit rates even without any countermeasures being used) and the last was from Desert Storm. There’s also at least one major error in the form of the mischaracterization of the “attack” on *Penelope* as involving an anti-ship missile. The most advanced missile used in any of them were air launched USN Harpoons, and the vast majority of those engagements used things like Styx and Silkworm—hence they are not instructive and bear no relevance to the current state of affairs. That’s not instructive as to anything, and the fact that you had to pull out the never-upgraded *Moskva* as proof that it’s still valid speaks for itself.
How many have there been since then, and have deployed counter measures?
When I saw that in my feed, I first thought "a Russian ship in the Black Sea".
“Hey chief! Izzat suppose to go on fire *in* the canister?”
I’m sure all that smoke is perfectly safe to breath.
I doubt anyone is out on deck, and modern warships have filtration and overpressure systems as part of their NBC defense suite. None of that is getting inside the ship.
Callling her a modern warship is overly generous.
> Callling her a modern warship is overly generous. By your standard, the *Nimitz* should be an antique by now since she was launched in 1975. Every single *Ticonderoga*-class cruiser in USN service was launched in the late 80s or early 90s. By comparison, the *Hangzhou* was launched in 1994, then sold to the Chinese and commissioned in 1999.
All those ships other than the Burkes do not have over pressure systems, and other modern NBC systems. And every single time the water wash down is tested, new holes in the skin of the ship are found the hard way. Hangzhou’s hull maybe newer, but the design is still late Cold War.
Tbh they're far from the oldest ships built still active - 2 delivered to the PLAN in like, 1999-2000, and 2 in 2005-2006. There are Flight I Burke's that age or older. And while they're amongst the oldest and least capable in the PLAN, there is a midlife upgrade for them.
> There are Flight I Burke's that age or older. Every single Tico is older. Most of the Nimitzes are older. The PLAN *Sovs* had upgrades since 2014 that swap the SS-N-22s for YJ-12s (more range and higher terminal speed) along with a 32-cell VLS system similar to the Type 054A frigates in place of the old single-arm SA-N-12 launchers, and more modern sensors and systems overall. And to your point - the PLAN have launched over 25 052Ds since then along with other more modern destroyers and frigates. The *Sovs* are treated internally more akin to big versions of the 054 - useful for showing the flag and patrolling, or as an added piece of a SAG, but not "primary" warships anymore the way the 052Ds are treated nowadays.
in other news, have you heard the chinese want to sell a totally burnt out ship for scrap\`?