[andriy_koval]

> Controlling and securing shipping routes has been a fundamental function of a navy

this function is outdated since u-boat appearance, and now cruise missiles and drones. More important modern function of navy is projecting power.

[baq]

Submarines can be hunted (and are) and drones and cruise missiles can be shot down. These things are what navies are supposed to do nowadays. US Navy in particular has not read the memo for about 20 years.

[andriy_koval]

the question how efficiently they can be hunted, if ROI is that high.

[baq]

my best guess is any information on the topic is... classified

[nradov]

The basic information about surface warship specifications isn't classified. We know how many interceptor missiles they can carry. Standard doctrine is to fire at least two interceptors at each incoming threat in order to increase the probability of a kill. And empirically these defensive systems work very well, but ships in action empty their magazines quickly and then are out of action until they can return to a friendly base to rearm. At some point there just aren't enough hulls and missiles to sustain the effort.

[fc417fc802]

They've actually been pretty open about the expense and difficulty for a long time. At least since the Iraq war if not earlier.

Japan made public that one of the motivations for continuing rail gun research is defending naval vessels against saturation attacks.

[andriy_koval]

Most powerful navy "failed its mission", as well as Russian navy received heavy casualties, so we have enough public information that modern drones and missiles are highly effective.