en.rian.ru — BrahMos is designed to destroy surface targets flying at an altitude as low as 10 meters (30 feet) and at a speed of Mach 2.8, with a maximum range of 290 km (about 180 miles) utilizing multiple tragectories. It can be launched from air, land, or sea. It is effectively immune to electronic countermeasures and all existing missile defenses.
Jun 28, 2006 View in Crawl 4
aidenagJun 29, 2006
The exocet the french made is still the one to fear.. im sure all the Brits on here know what im talkin about after the Falklands war.... french sold those things to just about everyone for the right price.. this definatly looks nasty, but much deadlier A/S weapons are already deployed worldwide..
nuttyavatarJun 29, 2006
DEPLOY sounds scary and can mean a lot to the world in a bad way!
artifezJun 29, 2006
Deuterium fluoride lasers FTW!
obkenobiJun 30, 2006Submitter
Try knocking down 100 of these flying at your carrier group from multiple trajectories at mach 2.8. You're going to shoot yourself in the foot with your own laser trying to hit them.The number isn't an exaggeration. If it came down to attacking a carrier group, they'd launch everything they had. China (and reportedly Iran) already has Sunburn missiles which are nearly as good as the BrahMos, they will be getting BrahMos equivalents next.
jimdangerJun 30, 2006
It's not just our CIWS. We have many SM2s modified to fit the role of missile countermeasures. The sunburn for instance. This missile nicknamed the AEGIS Killer hones in on the target's Furuno radar (J band?) as it's primary homing system. We have SM2's that launch and similar to the chaff theory, send large bursts of the same type of radar frequency to detonate the weapon. I'm not too worried about this threat. Also to the comment about us not displaying our military power. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean other countries do. They have their own intelligence agencies, and we've been known in the past to leake just the right intel.
roguetrooperrJun 30, 2006
With regard to Phalanx and Goalkeeper, I've worked on both as an engineer in the UK RN and they both have advantages and disadvantages. Goalkeeper has its magazine below decks and is somewhat larger than phalanx's and is much better protected than the upper deck magazine of Phalanx. However Goalkeeper fires 30mm sabots as opposed to 20mm on Phalanx so reloading requires more effort. Performance is about the same, even when taking into account the higher fire rate of Goalkeeper. Reliability wise, I would say that Goalkeeper is slightly easier to maintain and more reliable than Phalanx which leads me to suggest that overall that Goalkeeper is the better system
masteryodaJul 6, 2006
They are also working on a surface to surface version like the Tomahawk.