Close in Weapons System (CIWS)

[Ex-Dragoon]

Ok my question is, could we not make a system that combines both the 20mm Vulcan (I like what the Block 1B brings to the table for anti FIAC) and RAM. Thoughts?

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

I'm pretty sure that the USN LHA's or LHD's have both....Tarawa and Wasp-class if I recall accurately. 

RAM gets integrated into the ship'd defensive suite, while Phalanx operates as a standalone.

I don't think anyone has yet put Sea-RAM and Phalanx on the same platform yet....


Matthew.   

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The Wasp and Tarawa do indeed have both but I am referring to having a common mount for both weapons so only one operator (or the ships systems) would need to control it if needed.

 

[TAS278]

I not sure if the upgrades have made it out to the ship but most of the time the only control is the on/off swtich....


Then kisten to chainsaw noise for 60seconds. I am sure they could easily add a Whoosh noise too.

 

[NCS_Eng]

It is certainly possible to slave a RAM launcher to the CIWS mount. Therefor it will make use of the same optics, search and track radar, and rely on control signals from the CIWS computer. The system is designed for that funtionality.

Its a cost and capabilities issues however. Dollars can be better spent elsewhere.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

But could you have both the 20mm and the missiles? Something like a quasi Russian style abortion?

 

[George Wallace]

But could you have both the 20mm and the missiles? Something like a quasi Russian style abortion?

Why not?  Land systems have been mounted on naval platforms all the time (just different designations).

Try the 2S6 turret for an example, and rename it N-2-S-6 and you are good to go.

 

[NCS_Eng]

But could you have both the 20mm and the missiles? Something like a quasi Russian style abortion?

Sorry I wasn't clear, you can certainly have both missiles and guns. The RAM launcher is on a separate mount (without any control systems) and slaved to the CIWS mount.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Thanks for the clarification NCS_Eng, next question. If you can slave the RAM to the CIWS, would it be possible to put the RAM forward then to cover that arc in the even the 57 or 76mm are unavailable?

 

[TAS278]

There are many platforms that run this system. You can do whatever fits your agenda It works. Is it completely neccesary? Not really. I really don't see any reason to upgrade. If anything though a better CWIS would have a much better impact.

 

[NCS_Eng]

Thanks for the clarification NCS_Eng, next question. If you can slave the RAM to the CIWS, would it be possible to put the RAM forward then to cover that arc in the even the 57 or 76mm are unavailable?

Keep in mind that the RAM system can only fire on what it "sees" and in this case, its eyes are located on the CIWS mount. So it would do no good to cover the forward arc of the ship if it can only prosecute targets aft.

Now if we are talking about integrating this hypothetical RAM system with the rest of the ships combat suite, that's a different and much trickier question (and far more expensive in hypothetical bucks).

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Personally I hope we stick with Block 1B, I like what it can do for us vs the small boat threat, I have yet to see anything that says RAM has the same capability.

 

[NavyShooter]

CIWS:

RAM:

Now, look at the front of the CIWS again, and see if there's not a little bit of space to each side of the magazine drum.  What if you took, say, a 2-pack of missiles and slipped one the right side (left side as you see it facing you in the picture) of the drum, in a vertical column?  I'm pretty sure they'd fit.  The CIWS should be able to handle the increased weight, and it'd add a heck of a capability, without increasing the platform size.

Thoughts?

Issues?

NS

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Would 4 missiles add a lot to capability?

 

[NavyShooter]

I don't know, truly I don't know much about the RAM system. 

That said, if a bolt-on missile pack could be integrated with the existing system, and give you some extra capability without a great increase in cost, weight, etc, then why not?  I mean, there's not really enoug space on a CPF to drop another CIWS base, is there?  So adding a partial capability to an existing mount might be more practical than trying to fit an entire new mount at some undecided location?

NS

 

[Neill McKay]

Would 4 missiles add a lot to capability?

[not a naval weapons type]Might it be feasible to reload such a mounting between targets?[/not a naval weapons type]

 

[NCRCrow]

Kashtan Air Defence Gun/Missile System

CADS-N-1

 

[NavyShooter]

Having a couple of missiles on the mount would add a bit to the engagement range (I think the RAM has a bigger range than the CIWS gun) as for reloading, well, reloading the CIWS is a pain.  Depending on the crew you have doing it (and how many to move the ammo boxes) it can be done in about a half hour...excluding the time to get the man aloft done.

Probably much quicker to reload the RAM's, just slide a new missile into the tube, and make the connections?

NS

 

[NCS_Eng]

Having a couple of missiles on the mount would add a bit to the engagement range (I think the RAM has a bigger range than the CIWS gun) as for reloading, well, reloading the CIWS is a pain.  Depending on the crew you have doing it (and how many to move the ammo boxes) it can be done in about a half hour...excluding the time to get the man aloft done.

Probably much quicker to reload the RAM's, just slide a new missile into the tube, and make the connections?

NS

Well, the listed engagement range of the RAM system (UNCLAS) is around 9km. This is farther out than the CIWS, but still quite close to the ship. The system works best when its installed an integrated into the rest of the combat suite. The missiles themselves are IR "Fire and Forget" so illumination is not required. They are directly designed to counter the extremely fast moving (Mach 2+) Russian sea skimmers that the traditional CIWS may have problems with. These Supersonic missiles run a great deal hotter than subsonic and thus can be tracked more easily with an IR system.

Simply adding two or four missiles to the existing mount poses more problems than you gain in tactical advantage. For one it would throw the weight balance off and require a redesign of the electrical drive motors. Furthermore (and more worrisome) is the fact that the drum above the M61 gun sub-system holds ~1500 rounds of 20mm ammunition, and now you are going to have 4 missiles venting hot exhaust gases near it?

The idea that the system can be hot reloaded can be rejected off hand as well, I can assure you that it is NOT as simple as loading a new missile in the canister and hooking it up.

I don't believe the Canadian Navy needs the added capability and augmented Pk that the RAM system provides (only my opinion), but if we did the most likely method of procurement would be the removal of the M61 gun system and the addition of a small RAM system in the space it occupied below the Radome. This is already done on other navies as sold as the "SeaRAM" system. Its not quite as effective has having a separate launcher system but its cheaper than intergrating the system in with the ships systems.

And yes, the Russians have been building crazy gun/missile combination weapon systems for years, trading off a less accurate search/tracking and control system for more ordinance downrange. It remains to be seen which method is more effective.

 

[a_majoor]

Some more modern CIWS systems coming on line. Upgrades to the Phalanx system are something that *we* might consider, given we use this already, while the gigantic Chinese CIWS system is interesting to contemplate (It is also interesting to consider the difference between the Chinese mounting it on a 4000 ton platform while Russian analysts claim it needs to be on a much larger [12,000 ton] platform). Of course the USN is busy working on a laser system to supplement or replace the CIWS....

http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/12/new-year-and-new-navy-gatling-guns-for.html

New year and new Navy gatling guns for USA and China
china, future, future weapons, navy, technology, united states, weapons
Facebook  Twitter  linkedin  google  Reddit
The Phalanx, or CIWS, is an area weapon engineered to use a high rate of fire and ammunition to blanket a given area, thus destroying or knocking threats out of the sky before they reach a ship. The Phalanx CIWS, which can fire up to 4,500 rounds per minute, has been protecting ship platforms for decades.

The U.S. is in the process of upgrading all their Phalanx systems to the Block 1B configuration. All Phalanx systems in use by the U.S. Navy are scheduled to be upgraded to Block 1B by FY 2015. The Block 1B incorporates a stabilized Forward-Looking Infra-Red (FLIR) sensor, an automatic acquisition video tracker, optimized gun barrels (OGB), and Enhanced Lethality Cartridges (ELC) for additional capabilities against asymmetric threats such as small maneuvering surface craft, slow-flying fixed and rotary-winged aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles. The FLIR sensor improves performance against anti-ship cruise missiles, while the OGB and ELC provide tighter dispersion and increased first hit range; the Mk 244 ELC is specifically designed to penetrate anti-ship missiles with a 44 percent heavier tungsten penetrator and an aluminum nose piece. Another system upgrade is the Phalanx 1B Baseline 2 radar to improve detection performance, increase reliability, and reduce maintenance. It also has a surface mode to track, detect, and destroy threats closer to the water's surface, increasing the ability to defend against fast-attack boats and low-flying missiles; the Baseline 2 radar upgrade is to be installed on all U.S. Navy Phalanx systems by FY 2019.



Raytheon Missile Systems Phalanx Block 1B close-in weapon system (CIWS) on board the Royal Navy Type 45 destroyer HMS Daring.
“The Phalanx 1B fires Mk 244 ammunition, the Enhanced Lethality Cartridge specifically designed to penetrate anti-ship cruise missiles,” said Al Steichen, Business Development, Raytheon Naval and Area Mission Defense.

The Mk 244 ammunition is engineered with a 48 percent heavier tungsten penetrator and an aluminum nose piece, according to information from General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical System.

Russian media has reported that China's latest indigenous Type 1130 close-in weapon system can fire 10,000 rounds per minute and destroy 90% of hypersonic missiles traveling at a speed four times the speed of sound.

The system, which is the third-generation of the close-in weapon system developed by China, was recently spotted being installed on a PLA Type 054A frigate.


China's 1130 close in weapon system



Compared to its seven-barreled Type 730 predecessor, the Type 1130's Gatling-type gun has the same 30 mm caliber but the number of barrels increased to 11. While the Type 730 has only one magazine which contains 250 rounds, the latest gun carries two magazines each containing 640 rounds. The design allows the gun to fire over 10,000 rounds per minute and raise its hit rate against missiles traveling at Mach 4 to 90%, according to the Russian media outlet cited.

Though the mammoth rotary cannon has been placed on a Type 054A frigate that only has around a 4,000-ton displacement, the Russian media claimed the system should be deployed on ships with a displacement over 12,000 tons due to its size and weight as well as the amount of electricity it consumes.