What is the max tonnage ship the HAS-250 could sink with its 200kg warhead in your opinion?
That a hell of a question, bluebro. The only thing I can use to make an even close, educated guess is to compare it to a similar missile that we know a lot about such as the Exocet. The Exocet is roughly the same size judging by the weight of the two missiles and not necessarily their length.
Exocet:
| Mass | 780 kilograms (1,720 lb) |
|---|
| Length | 6 meters (19 ft 8 in) |
|---|
| Diameter | 34.8 centimeters (1 ft 1.7 in) |
|---|
| Warhead | 165 kilograms (364 lb) |
|---|
Operational
range | 70-200 kilometers (120 mi; 110 nmi) |
|---|
| Flight altitude | Sea-skimming |
|---|
HAS-250:
Mass 1,200 kilograms
Length 5,400 mm or 5.4 meters (17 ft 7 in)
Diameter 43.5 centimeters (1 ft 4 in)
Warhead 200 kilograms (441 lbs)
Operational
range 250 kilometers ( 155 mi; 134 nmi)
Flight altitude 3km / 5-10m sea skimming
So if you look at all those most important numbers to compare, the HAS-250 is pretty damn close to the Exocet and as a matter of fact, it's slightly smaller and a bit lighter and smaller only by very small differences yet. the warhead on the HAS-250 is significantly higher and more powerful, almost a quarter the percentage more despite its size difference.
Then when we take history to compare even more, the Exocet took out the HMS Sheffield without the warhead detonating! The missile impacted a critical part of the ship and started a fire that was incontrollable and ended up sinking the ship 4 days later. One can only deduce that had the warhead detonated, the ship would've most likely (with a very high probability) sunk in under 1 hour.
That said, the Sheffield was a type 2 guided missile destroyer of the mid 70s into the 80s so taking the ship's build and construction into account, I would think that today's ships are probably either as equal or better in not only build quality, but in fire suppression, better bulkhead separation design for quick and automated isolation and locking etc.
So if we take displacement (or tonnage as you mentioned), the HMS Sheffield was 4,820 tones. If a single Exocet took out the Sheffield without even a detonation and it sank 4 days later in heavy seas after a fire raged in it that they couldn't put out, then I would think an HAS-250, taking into account some of the comparisons I listed above with a 1/4 percentage larger warhead, barely slower than the Exocet at .8 mach but still pretty fast, sea skimming would've ripped the Sheffield in half and sunk it in under an hour.
So at 5,000 tones, I would say it's probably capable of taking out a ship up to 7,500 tones if it impact the right spot of the hull right near the water level. Fire and damage is too excessive, ship starts to break down and if it hits anywhere near stored munitions or VLS SAMs etc., sionara. That's the max tonnage I would give it.
Also, someone on another forum said that the missile with the coaxial rotors could be a loitering munition similar to the Israeli spike firefly
When I suggested it belonged to a UAV/UCAV, I had completely missed the fact that they labeled it on a page that actually said "Munitions." And so my guess is completely out of the loop entirely and your loitering munition is a much more realistic one.
