Navy Lacks Plan to Defend Against `Sizzler' Missile (Update1)

Bloomberg | March 23, 2007 | Tony Capaccio

[Cicero]

Can you check this one to be sure I've complied with the rules for Bloomberg? Thanks.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

To defend against a Sizzler one must build a giant sneeze guard.

[Cicero]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=a5LkaU0wj714&refer=home

[kinoxi]

I was reading about this the other day. The Iranians need to be dealt with before they acquire these, if they haven't already.

[Cicero]

Putin has said he would provide Iran with defensive missiles. It's not clear whether this would be included, and also it's not clear what Putin now intends to do. But I agree we either need to act beforehand, or we need to find a defense for this threat, if possible.

It makes me think of the Falklands.

[Loud Mime]

"Second layer of the concept: submerged-launch, long-range, supersonic ASCMs. Although the ballistic-missile capability against ships lies a few years in the future, the PLA Navy is already receiving from Russia the wherewithal for the second major layer of the concept of being able to deter a U.S. intervention, or failing that, to have a means to confront approaching U.S. Navy forces. Eight new Kilo-class submarines are now being received from Russia with an important capability absent in the four Kilos the PLAN already possesses. These new quiet and capable diesel-electric Kilo-class submarines carry the Russian SS-N-27B Sizzler anti-ship cruise missile. This ASCM is launched while submerged and travels over 100 nautical miles to make a very low-altitude, evasive, supersonic attack intended to defeat the U.S. Aegis defense system."

Rear Adm. McVadon's testimony on this issue was a little over a year ago; but it's an eye opener.

[Citizen Tom Paine]

As I recall the Soviet Backfire bomber was specifically designed to attack US carrier battle groups. I believe, if a war goes nuclear, it will go nuclear at sea first in an attempt to get our carriers. However, one does not want to pi$$ off a carrier battle group.

[Keyga8tor]

Something doesn't add up here. Terminal phase (within 10nm) accelerates to mach 3 and is able to do defensive moves.....not at mach 3!

[Publius6961]

Charts prepared by the Navy for a February 2005 briefing for defense contractors said the Sizzler, which is also called the SS-N-27B, starts out flying at subsonic speeds. Within 10 nautical miles of its target, a rocket-propelled warhead separates and accelerates to three times the speed of sound, flying no more than 10 meters (33 feet) above sea level.

On final approach, the missile ``has the potential to perform very high defensive maneuvers,'' including sharp-angled dodges, the Office of Naval Intelligence said in a manual on worldwide maritime threats.

Am I the only one who sees the obvious? If Russia is so willing to sell them, why not just buy one and see what makes it tick?
Alternatively, have Israel get her hands on one, if we lack the resources or imagination to do so.

[D Rider]

Sorta, puts us back into a Nuclear response scenario. Take out a Carrier, and we take out a city.

[volunbeer]

I read this yesterday linked from Drudge. It is frightening and the lack of aggressive action to address this by the Navy is disappointing and puzzling.

Aircraft carriers are awesome weapons but I have always questioned their ability to survive a massive attack by skimmer missiles. The high closing speed attributed to these skimmers makes it much more likely one would slip through.

[Loud Mime]

city? Just one?

[ThunderStruck94]

Actually, it can. I was the Senior TAO on the JFK (CV-67....decom'd yesterday) on it's last deployment in 2004. We have the RAM defense system on our carriers, but it is a hard press to defeat the latest missiles in the ssn22, 25 and 27. Antimissile defense and ASW have been completely ignored in Naval Warfare the past 5-7 years.

[Al Simmons]

"Something doesn't add up here. Terminal phase (within 10nm) accelerates to mach 3 and is able to do defensive moves.....not at mach 3!"

At Mach 3 it wouldn't need to, would it? There is one thing that makes me a bit skeptical; I am sure that the Russkies have 'overhyped' the capabilities of this weapon in order to sell it. While it is apparently a threat, whether its as deadly a threat as claimed is gonna be unknown until its used - all the more reason to get a defensive system in place. No one has threatened our carriers since the Kamikazis of 1944-45, and this would be a nasty development indeed. Iran would think twice because they know we would pulverize them if they attacked us with this weapon, but China is another story...hard to believe that we would ever go to war with China given how intertwined our economies have become, and the Chinese aren't exactly known as reckless gamblers...but...they do aim to supplant us as the dominant power in the Eastern Pacific eventually...

[michaelt]

After reading yesterday's post about this missile, I did a quick Google search, and in the first page of results, I found various stories that described this Sizzler missile either as subsonic (and looking much like a Tomahawk), supersonic, or subsonic with a supersonic terminal phase. And we're talking about reputable sites, such as Jane's, with varying information.

I hope the Navy has a better idea of what it's up against than this.

[driftdiver]

"Aircraft carriers are awesome weapons but I have always questioned their ability to survive a massive attack by skimmer missiles."

I think its a bunch of hype designed to instill fear in us and inflate the egos of those abroad. Its probably also designed to sell these things regardless of whether they actually work.

[D Rider]

city? Just one?

Well... for a first offense. Remember the Weeniecrats control congress.

[Loud Mime]

put them in the first city?

[hamboy]

The Sizzler missle is only subsonic!

See http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/navalmissile/3m54.asp

In 2005~06, the PLA Navy (PLAN) received six improved Project 636M (Kilo class) diesel-electric submarines which are fitted with the advanced ‘Club’ anti-ship weapon complex designed by Russian Novator Bureau. The system features the 3M-54E (NATO codename: SS-N-27 Sizzler) subsonic anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) with a maximum range of 220~300km. The ‘Club’ weapon system is available in two versions: the surface-ship-based Club-N and the submarine-based Club-S, both of which employs unified combat assets – two types of anti-ship cruise missiles and a type of ballistic anti-submarine missile.

The ‘Club’ weapon system includes a number of different variant missiles including the anti-ship variants 3M-54 and 3M-54E1, and the anti-submarine variant 91RE1. It is still not clear which variant the PLAN is operating on its Project 636M Kilo class submarines. The 3M-54E1 is a 300km-range subsonic anti-ship cruise variant similar to the U.S. Tomahawk. The 3M-54E variant with a shorter range is based on the subsonic stage of the 3M-54E1 but use a rocket-propelled second stage which is released 20~60km from the target. This second stage then accelerates to Mach 3 to defeat ship defences. Both missiles in the ‘Club’ weapon complex use a common active radar guidance system and both fly a low-altitude sea-skimming mission profile. The missile is launched from the torpedo tubes of the submarine.

SPECIFICATIONS

	3M-54E	3M-54TE	3M-54E1	3M-54TE1	91RE1	91RE2
Length (m)	8.220	8.916	6,200	8,916	8,000	6,500
Diameter (m)	0.533	0.645	0.533	0.645	0.533	0.533
Weight (kg)	2,300	1,951	1,780	1,505	2,050	1,300
Warhead (kg)	200	200	400	400	76	76
Range (km)	220	220	300	275	50	40
Max speed (Mach)	0.6~0.8; (terminal 3)	0.6~0.8	0.6~0.8	0.6~0.8	0.6~0.8	0.6~0.8
Guidance	Inertial + active radar				Inertial
Flight profile	Low altitude sea-skimming				Ballistic

This page was last updated 27 April 2006