Thanks Thanks:  52
Likes Likes:  143
Dislikes Dislikes:  1
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 201 to 213 of 213

Thread: Naval weaponry

  1. #201
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,552
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Maybe after it is actually operational anywhere
    Maybe when they sell it on in 30 years time we can pick it up!
    Time for another break I think......

  2. #202
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by spider View Post
    Where do the empty shells go...couldn't see any being ejected?
    Most naval weapon ( gun ) systems are designed to have shell case recovery systems, especially those 12.7mm and above. The weapon arrangements aboard our vessels is well documented and listed. They range from 7.62mm LMG, 12.7mm HMG, 20mm CRAA aboard all ships, and 57mm (1 ship) 76mm (7 ships) . The 20mm is not as popular with navies now other than in CIWS systems, mid range out to 4km is suited to weapons such as 27mm and 30mm using RWS mounts. The 12.7mm can backup the latter especially in twin mounts to increase stopping power. Decent gun systems need a DARDO configuration with guided ammunition or else provide a missile system.

  3. #203
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like

    Naval Ship Defence

    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Most naval weapon ( gun ) systems are designed to have shell case recovery systems, especially those 12.7mm and above. The weapon arrangements aboard our vessels is well documented and listed. They range from 7.62mm LMG, 12.7mm HMG, 20mm CRAA aboard all ships, and 57mm (1 ship) 76mm (7 ships) . The 20mm is not as popular with navies now other than in CIWS systems, mid range out to 4km is suited to weapons such as 27mm and 30mm using RWS mounts. The 12.7mm can backup the latter especially in twin mounts to increase stopping power. Decent gun systems need a DARDO configuration with guided ammunition or else provide a missile system.
    Ships in hot or challenged areas need to defend themselves by adequate response within inner ranges from 5km inwards. The principle threats are from air coupled with missile launches and attacks by fast surface craft. Ships so threatened need either a suitable range of anti multi threat missiles or a smart gunnery system which can cover all three functions and additionally allow for shore bombardment with extended range munitions. The popular 76mm system currently in use has features which cover all these aspects at costs around 2m USD per ship with additional costs for ammo and outer area detection radar for first contact. The gun has an integrated beam riding radar to deal with missile and aircraft. The ship would also have a decoy system as a first response. The pundits say that the Decoy system coupled with the smart gunnery system and ammunition is a cheaper option than missile systems.

  4. #204
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    583
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Ships in hot or challenged areas need to defend themselves by adequate response within inner ranges from 5km inwards. The principle threats are from air coupled with missile launches and attacks by fast surface craft. Ships so threatened need either a suitable range of anti multi threat missiles or a smart gunnery system which can cover all three functions and additionally allow for shore bombardment with extended range munitions. The popular 76mm system currently in use has features which cover all these aspects at costs around 2m USD per ship with additional costs for ammo and outer area detection radar for first contact. The gun has an integrated beam riding radar to deal with missile and aircraft. The ship would also have a decoy system as a first response. The pundits say that the Decoy system coupled with the smart gunnery system and ammunition is a cheaper option than missile systems.
    Although I agree with many of the above points the first thing that needs to be fitted is a decent sensor suite and Combat Management System, There needs to be an active sensor such as a modern AESA radar which is coupled with an EO sensors and some ESM. Time is essential, a typical ASM like a Harpoon or Exocet will travel at around 240m/s, this gives around 60 seconds before the ship would be hit. In this 60 seconds, the threat has to be detected, interrogated, identified, classified and then engaged. That more time you can win the better as the best weapon system is useless unless it has time to be used. Remember any incoming ASM must be destroyed at least 500m from the vessel to have a good chance of avoiding debris causing damage which can be worse than if the missile had hit.

  5. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  6. #205
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Although I agree with many of the above points the first thing that needs to be fitted is a decent sensor suite and Combat Management System, There needs to be an active sensor such as a modern AESA radar which is coupled with an EO sensors and some ESM. Time is essential, a typical ASM like a Harpoon or Exocet will travel at around 240m/s, this gives around 60 seconds before the ship would be hit. In this 60 seconds, the threat has to be detected, interrogated, identified, classified and then engaged. That more time you can win the better as the best weapon system is useless unless it has time to be used. Remember any incoming ASM must be destroyed at least 500m from the vessel to have a good chance of avoiding debris causing damage which can be worse than if the missile had hit.
    Absolutely sensors are critical. A missile launched at 240m/s with 60 secs flight time will have been fired 14.4km away, hopefully the A/C would have been tracked and even engaged by time of launch. In gunnery terms 60 secs is a LOT of ammunition.

  7. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
  8. #206
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    583
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Absolutely sensors are critical. A missile launched at 240m/s with 60 secs flight time will have been fired 14.4km away, hopefully the A/C would have been tracked and even engaged by time of launch. In gunnery terms 60 secs is a LOT of ammunition.
    I would be more worried about a land launched weapon, or one launched from a vessel close inshore. Given the radar clutter of the land background these are difficult to detect and that will only happen if the ship is already at action stations. Remember not all modern ASM need a target lock before launch, they only need an approximate direction and distance, so can be fired OTH.

    A Phalanx has a effective range between 500m and 3500m, so about 12 seconds to fire, a 35mm Millennium gun pushes this out to 5000m and 19 seconds.

  9. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  10. #207
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like

    States of Alert

    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    I would be more worried about a land launched weapon, or one launched from a vessel close inshore. Given the radar clutter of the land background these are difficult to detect and that will only happen if the ship is already at action stations. Remember not all modern ASM need a target lock before launch, they only need an approximate direction and distance, so can be fired OTH.

    A Phalanx has a effective range between 500m and 3500m, so about 12 seconds to fire, a 35mm Millennium gun pushes this out to 5000m and 19 seconds.
    Ships on patrol always have their relevant sensors closed up and searching, mostly passively. It's a zero sums game, if you haven't the outfit you shouldn't be there. Be ready and expect to be challenged. First response before maneuver is to launch a salvo of decoys and then follow with a response to incoming.

  11. #208
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    583
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thales together with the Indian company BEL have been developing the Pharos Multi Target Tracking Radar a Fire Control radar that can turn the Oto 76mm into a CIWS. From what I can tell it some modification to the gun, control system and dual feed system. It functions by providing a guide beam for the 76mm DART round.
    https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/pharo...tracking-radar

    This could be part of an upgrade for the P60s to give them better active protection. Of course a 2/3d search radar and CMS would need also to be part of the package. Not to be forgotten would also are the passive defences; ESM and decoys.

  12. Likes DeV, Dogwatch liked this post
  13. #209
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Thales together with the Indian company BEL have been developing the Pharos Multi Target Tracking Radar a Fire Control radar that can turn the Oto 76mm into a CIWS. From what I can tell it some modification to the gun, control system and dual feed system. It functions by providing a guide beam for the 76mm DART round.
    https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/pharo...tracking-radar

    This could be part of an upgrade for the P60s to give them better active protection. Of course a 2/3d search radar and CMS would need also to be part of the package. Not to be forgotten would also are the passive defences; ESM and decoys.
    The OTO 76mm that we have is probably two Marks behind the OTO Strales SR. The rate of fire of the two Super Rapido guns is 120 rounds pm.
    The gun capable of firing DART ammo ie the 76mm Strales SR also has a TX Antenna inserted in it's cupola. The question therefore is, can the old gun be redesigned to increase ROF to 120 pm. and can a TX Antenna be fitted and associated FCS's. Better we fit also at least one 30mm Auto on the Centerline for aft arcs.

  14. #210
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    583
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The OTO 76mm that we have is probably two Marks behind the OTO Strales SR. The rate of fire of the two Super Rapido guns is 120 rounds pm.
    The gun capable of firing DART ammo ie the 76mm Strales SR also has a TX Antenna inserted in it's cupola. The question therefore is, can the old gun be redesigned to increase ROF to 120 pm. and can a TX Antenna be fitted and associated FCS's. Better we fit also at least one 30mm Auto on the Centerline for aft arcs.
    The Pharos MTTR takes the place of the TX antenna on the Strales; the MTTR provides the beam for the DART round. As for the rate of fire of the "Compact" version is 85rpm. This is the same variant fitted to the Holland class OPV, which has been critised for a lack of CIWS and for which Thales sees as a potential user.
    Last edited by EUFighter; 26th August 2018 at 18:16.

  15. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  16. #211
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The Pharos MTTR takes the place of the TX antenna on the Strales; the MTTR provides the beam for the DART round. As for the rate of fire of the "Compact" version is 85rpm. This is the same variant fitted to the Holland class OPV, which has been critised for a lack of CIWS and for which Thales sees as a potential user.
    We must also remember that guided ammo needs an input for it's programmable fuse, so that programmer units are required in addition to KA band TX Antennae or equivalent. The question on adaption is one for OTO.

  17. #212
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    We must also remember that guided ammo needs an input for it's programmable fuse, so that programmer units are required in addition to KA band TX Antennae or equivalent. The question on adaption is one for OTO.
    We are halfway there. Just saw a promo on facebook of a PDF Technician working on an Auto 30mm gun with remote OpticElec FCS. We need two of these on each OPV instead of 20mm but with additional acquisition FCS for early lock on detection of targets beyond Optical ranges and scanning. The gun was on an armoured vehicle. Our guys could train and fire the weapon to get a feel of the system and add a layer of inhouse knowledge to deal with suppliers.

  18. Likes DeV liked this post
  19. #213
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,203
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    We are halfway there. Just saw a promo on facebook of a PDF Technician working on an Auto 30mm gun with remote OpticElec FCS. We need two of these on each OPV instead of 20mm but with additional acquisition FCS for early lock on detection of targets beyond Optical ranges and scanning. The gun was on an armoured vehicle. Our guys could train and fire the weapon to get a feel of the system and add a layer of inhouse knowledge to deal with suppliers.
    Just read a study by W.J. Bradford on single ship Air Defence effectiveness against attacks by Anti-ship capable Missiles-ASCM. The basic needs are detection with Earliest Warning-ESM and an adequate CIWS system. The key ship defence profile is 360deg coverage by having a gun system forward and aft, each with 270deg coverage, basically a two CIWS system. The ship also needs a controlled decoy system. There is considerable Defence capability up to a point where the ships effective response is overwhelmed by saturation. This is expected to occur in wave attacks by 4 or more ASCM's.
    It goes without saying that we must give our new ships adequate defence at both minimum and maximum ranges from rogue attacks while on deployment.

  20. Likes restless, morpheus liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Naval air ops no more?
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 303
    Last Post: 29th December 2015, 14:01
  2. Naval Wishlist(realistic)
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 10th April 2007, 23:54
  3. Naval team blows up World War Two mine
    By andy in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10th March 2005, 12:15

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •