LOSAT on a tracked vehicle.

[trose213]

I wonder how effective the CKEM would be against a ship. Could probably get a mission kill.

Not really. The rod would just go right through, and the body woudl damage maybe one compartment? There's a reason ship killing missiles tend to have big warheads. There's a lot of ship, and it tends to be blast hardened.

Was more thinking if it hit the mast or bridge.

 

[Yellow Palace]

I wonder how effective the CKEM would be against a ship. Could probably get a mission kill.

Not really. The rod would just go right through, and the body woudl damage maybe one compartment? There's a reason ship killing missiles tend to have big warheads. There's a lot of ship, and it tends to be blast hardened.

Was more thinking if it hit the mast or bridge.

Ships aren't tanks. If you hit a tank, you're guaranteed to hit something that will kill the tank. Most places you can hit a ship won't kill it. Quite a few will just annoy it. To deal with ships, you need to hit them in lots of places - which means a large fragmentation warhead, or lots of small weapons.

Any vaguely well-designed warship avoids single points of failure as far as possible, making anti-tank weapons very poor ship killers.

 

[bobbymike]

Unless you could have a pop-up manoeuvre where the hole through the ship breached below the waterline? That would put a hole though the vertical decks and out the bottom.

 

[Yellow Palace]

Unless you could have a pop-up manoeuvre where the hole through the ship breached below the waterline? That would put a hole though the vertical decks and out the bottom.

Still challlenging, most anti-armour weapons would only create a small hole (by ship standards) that would be restricted to a single watertight compartment and which would respond well to damage control measures. Something with the kinetics of LOSAT itself might be interesting, but shaping the trajectory would be challenging. Even then, I'm doubtful.

The warhead of a serious anti-ship missile is designed to send substantial fragments perpendicular to the missile's trajectory, in order to destroy watertight compartmentation, and to start fires. A kinetic energy penetrator won't do either.

 

[trose213]

I wonder how effective the CKEM would be against a ship. Could probably get a mission kill.

Not really. The rod would just go right through, and the body woudl damage maybe one compartment? There's a reason ship killing missiles tend to have big warheads. There's a lot of ship, and it tends to be blast hardened.

Was more thinking if it hit the mast or bridge.

Ships aren't tanks. If you hit a tank, you're guaranteed to hit something that will kill the tank. Most places you can hit a ship won't kill it. Quite a few will just annoy it. To deal with ships, you need to hit them in lots of places - which means a large fragmentation warhead, or lots of small weapons.

Any vaguely well-designed warship avoids single points of failure as far as possible, making anti-tank weapons very poor ship killers.

I'd think a direct hit to VLS cells from a CKEM would take a lot of mission capability away from a ship

 

[sferrin]

I'd think a direct hit to VLS cells from a CKEM would take a lot of mission capability away from a ship

You'd have to go through the structure of the ship before you got to the bank of cell modules. You might take some of them out but I'd think it unlikely you'd take out the entire bank of 64 cells. Personally I'd shoot for the Aegis arrays and bridge. LOSAT could probably punch through the entire structure up there and, if you were lined up correctly, take out two arrays with one shot.

 

[trose213]

I'd think a direct hit to VLS cells from a CKEM would take a lot of mission capability away from a ship

You'd have to go through the structure of the ship before you got to the bank of cell modules. You might take some of them out but I'd think it unlikely you'd take out the entire bank of 64 cells. Personally I'd shoot for the Aegis arrays and bridge. LOSAT could probably punch through the entire structure up there and, if you were lined up correctly, take out two arrays with one shot.

That's what I thought, too.

I wonder how effective the CKEM would be against a ship. Could probably get a mission kill.

Not really. The rod would just go right through, and the body woudl damage maybe one compartment? There's a reason ship killing missiles tend to have big warheads. There's a lot of ship, and it tends to be blast hardened.

Was more thinking if it hit the mast or bridge.

I figure a 20km range is decent in a coastal artillery role or it could be longer with a booster.

 

[AN/AWW-14(V)]

https://flic.kr/p/2ii719f

 

[AN/AWW-14(V)]

unpublished video came to light

 

[jsport]

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2006/garm/wednesday/palmer.pdf

 

[Ronny]

LOSAT penetration apparently not as good as I expected it

 

[Scott Kenny]

Still challlenging, most anti-armour weapons would only create a small hole (by ship standards) that would be restricted to a single watertight compartment and which would respond well to damage control measures. Something with the kinetics of LOSAT itself might be interesting, but shaping the trajectory would be challenging. Even then, I'm doubtful.

The warhead of a serious anti-ship missile is designed to send substantial fragments perpendicular to the missile's trajectory, in order to destroy watertight compartmentation, and to start fires. A kinetic energy penetrator won't do either.

The flooding training we did in the USN dealt with directly plugging holes in the hull as large as 8" in diameter.

Anything bigger than that, you temporarily write off that compartment and prevent the flooding from spreading. Then you can fix it later when people aren't shooting at you.

 

[Bruno Anthony]

LOSAT penetration apparently not as good as I expected it

A greater L/D ratio would’ve countered that perhaps.
CKEM would’ve been faster but I’m not sure by how much. Also I don’t know if the video conveys the impact of the greater mass of the missile.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

I've got to also wonder if any detailed analysis of Relikt ERA and it's performance is available in the public sphere. By now the specifics and performance of Kontakt-5 is probably pretty well understood but that doesn't mean Relikt is. I'd presume Western nations have received examples of Relikt cassettes recovered from Ukraine, but I doubt much information from the examination of it has leaked to the public despite whatever poor choices War Thunder addicts make with classified information.

But assuming how the 120mm M829 series has continually been upgraded to remain relevant against new armor I'd have to assume the penetrator within LOSAT could too.

 

[sferrin]

Those are just educated guesses.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I think the biggest downside to LOSAT is the pretty long minimum range needed to get that penetrator up to speed.

 

[bobbymike]

“The projected operational CKEM is expected to have at least an effective range of 400-8000 m (440-8750 yds), and the weapon system will be able to attack multiple targets within a few seconds.”
——————
From the link I’m assuming LOSAT would have similar min range of 400m. How many tank on tank or APC v. APC, etc. are inside 400m?

Lockheed Martin CKEM

 

[Scott Kenny]

How many tank on tank or APC v. APC, etc. are inside 400m?

Depends on terrain.

Bocage hedgerows or cities, basically all antivehicle shots are within 400m. Some forests will also be that close.

Russian steppes or Middle Eastern deserts, things are going very wrong if you're within 400m of the targets.