Anyone knows if Aster can be used against ships like SM-2? And

>>28025633
Maybe. Doubt it would be all that effective. The SM-2 is already anemic against ships, and the Aster warhead is far smaller.

>>28025633
No, the Aster is a purpose designed Anti-air/Anti-balistic missile weapon (dependent on what type of Aster missile you are using). Meanwhile the SM-2 was designed from the start to combat both air and surface targets.

>>28026007

SM-2 is not that effective against ships really. Do we even know it's max range vs surface targets?

>>28026183
>Do we even know it's max range vs surface targets?
Line of sight from the fire control radar, around 20 km.

>>28026198

So it's actually much worse than CAMM missiles EU ships will be getting soon?

Kind of makes sense they never cared do make Aster capable of doing it then.

>>28026198
>>28026183
>The Standard can also be used against ships, either at line-of-sight range using its semi-active homing mode, or over the horizon using inertial guidance and terminal infrared homing.[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-67_Standard#RIM-67B_and_RIM-156_SM-2_Extended_Range
Which raises the question; how does AEGIS handle an OTH anti-ship engagement, anyways?

>>28027872
The Aegis combat system is made to be able to pass data from other platforms to the VLS and SM-2. If the ship's own sensors can't see it, it can shoot anything another ship it's linked with can see, or that can be seen by the ship's carried helicopter, or the battle group's AWACS aircraft.

File: AEGIS sensors and systems.jpg (28KB, 552x253px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 552x253px

>>28028651
CEC is a recent development (much newer than AEGIS itself), and I don't believe it's even implemented yet.

Anyways, I found out that the surface-search radar is mounted much higher than the SPY-1 (and the illuminators, for that matter), and thus has a farther radar horizon permitting detection at greater than 50 miles, which gets you most of the way there to Harpoon's maximum range, and probably the SM-2's (against surface targets, dense air and all) as well.

File: MBDA CAMM.jpg (103KB, 1942x1392px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1942x1392px

>>28025633

Nope. Aster is strictly A2A only. It's part of why the UK prefers CAMM for its short/medium range missile on most ships from now on, because CAMM can indeed target both. And because it's an active seeker, it can go right out on range (up to 60km, according to some reports).

Also because you can fit 4 CAMM in the space 1 Aster takes.

>>28028703

If the 25km CAMM can actually go to 60km I wonder how far the CAMM-ER can go.

>>28028709

It's probably not a massive 'max range' boost so much as ER will help it reach more distances with a higher kinetic ability left over.

CAMM is 25+ with a proven ability up to 60km.

CAMM-ER is 45+, so I'd estimate around 80km. Which is very respectable, but would have superior kinematics at all those ranges. (Which in many cases is far more important)