The missile is semi-active homing on the radar echo from the target, illuminated by ship's radar. So the enemy ship must be visible above horizon. The smaller (and lower) the enemy ship is, the less distance from which it would be visible.
The original em fuse sensed the water so was a no go for a sea skimmer. For the Mod 0 to Mod 2 missiles it was inhibiting if doing a surface attack. The Mod 3 fixed this problem by replacing it with an IR fuse.
Jane's will tell you the masthead height. Which IIRC is close enough to the radar horizon for government work.
Exactly. As long as at least some part of the ship is above horizon, there is a reflection for SARH seeker to work with. Of course, the common problem in targeting the mast tops is that missile might aim too high & miss the hull - but sea-skimmer Sea Dart, moving at constant altitude, would not have such problem.
And this, theoretically, should also fix the point of impact in case of radiation homing device, as you suggested.
Exactly. Assuming, of course, that the target isn't so low, that the missile overshoot it. Albeit a terminal glide-dive at pre-set angle could be programmed in that case, at least for SARH version (triggered by the strength of echo reaching a specific level as a crude range measure).
Cue Peter Sellers’ Fu Manchu: “Haven’t I seen you somewhere before?”
Are you sure that Shelldyne is pyrophoric? This document (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD0703691.pdf) shows that Shelldyne is harder to ignite than JP4.
Proximity-fused expanding rod warheads also help with this problem, if one is employing a surface-to-air missile as a surface-to-surface weapon. Makes a right mess of a small warship, as the Turkish destroyer MUAVENET could have told you.
Yes, I’m suggesting replacing the Mod 3 inertial/terminal SARH with inertial active terminal radar homing. The Meteor homing head is just about the right size to fit without significantly changing the Sea Darts basic architecture.
Hm, it would require much more portruging nose cone, to give seeker greater scanning arc. On the other hand, in modern times such modernization would likely be much less problematic than anything like it in 1970s.
So, Sea Dart had a tactical BMD capability? Which radar systems were being used?
The more I learn about the Sea Dart, the more I wonder whether, much like the practically immortal Standard, it could have lasted a lot longer than it did. Clearly the latent potential was there.
I believe it absolutely could have, but only if the UK actually spent money on it.
True, but coherent planning was never among the strongest points of post-war RN.
For Sea Dart? Clearly a nuclear required. The continious-rod warhead was completely unsuitable for anti-ballistic defense, too slow-reacting and too narrow area of effect.
Yep. Wouldn't be easy, but at least potentially doable. The power would need to be boosted a bit; the W72 configuration (0,6 kiloton) would likely be close to required for anti-ballistic defense.
Yep. The only thing that would likely fit would be a atrillery-class warhead, from nuclear shell - and those things were rather inefficient and costly to produce. Some adaptation of W48 nuclear shell might fit, but I'm not sure about fitting in the length limitation.
There are nukes that will fit in that volume. Something akin to a US W33 8" nuclear artillery shell, for example.
W33 is oralloy-based; it's far too costly to seriously consider. Also, it is too long to fit in available space.
Thank you for the data, I suspect something like that, considering how many efforts were put into choosing the exact warhead type for Seaslug!
The problem with such small devices is that they were generally highly fuel-inefficient. Britain could hardly afford to waste plutonium on small inefficient nukes.
combined response
Can't use oralloy, can't use plutonium.
More efficient designs, that did not require orally or as much plutonium.
