Phalanx, ak-650. Q's.

[soma]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Delhi.html

Four multi-barrelled 30mm AK-630 Gatling guns, two on either beam, to shoot down incoming anti-ship missiles, at 3000 rounds per minute to 2.5 km. Fire control is provided by two MR-123-02 (NATO: Bass Tilt) directors at the H/I/J-band frequency incorporating EO sensors (including laser rangefinder attachments) along with a manual backup sight for each pair of guns. Each gun can throw up a defensive wall of lead at 5500 to 6000 rounds per minute out to about 2.5 to 5 km. Unlike Western CIWS like Phalanx or Goalkeeper, this is not a closed loop system.


---

What's a closed loop system. Thanks.

[bison]

a closed system loop means that it is fully automated, no user imput is required to engage threats.
in an open system, commands (which target to attack first) are given by the user.

[usa320]

much rather have the automated system- this way a missile dont hit your ship because the gun operator was dropping a deuce in the can.

[StealthMode]

What are the comparison specs of the CIWS?

If someone has this information can you put it in a format comparable to the information that soma has provided?

Im interested in a comment on the CIWS (Close in Weapons System) capabilities in it being the most effective defense for its role.

Is their Something better out there?

P.S. Some guys I know at Northrup Grumman LOVE the scene in the movie Sum of All Fears when the Russians attack the American carrier. Great scene of the CIWS to me, but not so much to them... :lol:

[GazB]

a closed system loop means that it is fully automated, no user imput is required to engage threats.
in an open system, commands (which target to attack first) are given by the user.

Actually it doesn't. Closed loop system means the system tracks the shells going out and the target coming in to greatly improve accuracy and kill probability.

The Phalanx fires 50 cal sized lumps of uranium at a rate or about 4,000 rpm that is effective out to about 1.8km. The Goalkeeper is more effective as it fires heavier 30mm calibre rounds at lower velocity but to greater effective range.

The rather old AK-630 systems are similar to the Goalkeeper, except the Soviets had a good understanding of Anti Ship missiles... being a rather prodigious user of such things that they fitted their ships with more than the one or two fitted in western practise. A vessel the size of the Slava was fitted with 8 for example.

Their current CIWS is the Palma. A development of the Kashtan with longer barrel guns and sophisticated aiming system. The Palma has two 30mm 6 barrel gatlings with a combined rate of fire of 10,000 rpm, at a muzzle velocity of 1,200mps (ie 1.2km per second) plus 8 Sosna SAMs.

Kashtans were fitted 4-6 on large ships and the Palma would be similarly heavily used too.

The Phalanx is being replaced by a missile, whereas the Russians are using both guns and missiles. I think the Russian approach makes more sense.

[soma]

Yeah it makes more sense, and depending on missles is rather stupid. Thanks for the explanations.

[soma]

Another question. I've read that Chinese tanks (t-90+) use lasers to jam enemy optics. Is this possible, and does the US have anything similiar? I certainly have never read on this feature before.

[StealthMode]

Talked to my friend at Newport News... he said they have takin the CIWS off the carriers. They are just using Sea Sparrow missles now.

I dont see the similarity of replacement in purpose. :bash:

They seem like slightly different defense forms... but they must know what they are doing. :roll:

[He219]

Talked to my friend at Newport News... he said they have takin the CIWS off the carriers. They are just using Sea Sparrow missles now.
Yep, for over a year now...

some background info:

http://www.news.navy.mil/management/photodb/thumbnails/thumb_031018-N-6325K-001.jpg

The MK 15 Phalanx Close-In Weapons System (CIWS - ****ounced "sea-whiz") is a fast-reaction, rapid-fire 20-millimeter gun system that provides US Navy ships with a terminal defense against anti-ship missiles that have penetrated other fleet defenses.

The gun subsystem employs a gatling gun consisting of a rotating cluster of six barrels. The gatling gun fires a 20mm subcaliber sabot projectile using a heavy-metal (either tungsten or depleted uranium) 15mm penetrator surrounded by a plastic sabot and a light-weight metal pusher. The gatling gun fires 20mm ammunition at either 3,000 or 4,500 rounds-per-minute with a burst length of continuous, 60, or 100 rounds.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/mk-15.htm


RIM-7 Sea Sparrow Missile (http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/rim-7.htm)
http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/seasparo.jpg


RIM-116 RAM Rolling Airframe Missile (http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/ram.htm)
http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/97ram.jpg
http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/ram-anim.gif


Big E Sailors Run Point Defense in Combat Systems (http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=11253)

Release Date: 12/30/2003 12:02:00 PM
By Journalist 2nd Class Fletcher Gibson, USS Enterprise Public Affairs

ABOARD USS ENTERPRISE, At Sea (NNS) -- Defending USS Enterprise (CVN 65) from enemy attacks falls to the fire controlmen of Combat Systems (CS)department’s CS-7 division, manning the ship’s defensive weaponry: the Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) and the NATO Sea Sparrow surface missile system (NSSMS).

USS Enterprise (CVN 65) is a ship of war. On deployment in the dangerous waters of the 5th Fleet, the carrier launches a variety of aircraft to fulfill missions ranging from surveillance to air superiority to ground attacks. As the strike group flagship, Big E serves as the central command point for vessels serving with it. All of this makes the carrier an inviting target for enemy attacks.

An aircraft carrier is almost never without the protective company of the other ships in its strike group. While those ships normally provide cover for Enterprise, there are times when Big E finds herself alone. While transiting choke points like the Strait of Hormuz or when circumstances call for Enterprise to go too fast for other ships to keep up, the ship has to depend on its own point-defense weapons to protect it against attacks. Fire Controlman 3rd Class Sean Cook, a CIWS technician, puts it in more familiar terms.

“If the picket ships are the defensive line, we’re like the safety,” he said. “If a missile gets past us, it scores. Our job is to keep them from scoring.”

The first step to stopping an inbound missile is to spot it coming in. To this effect, the ship’s defensive weapons have their own, dedicated radar system: the SPS-48E. The only true 3-D fire control radar on the ship, the SPS-48E determines distance, bearing and altitude, allowing weapons mounts to share relative targeting data. The radar can detect incoming targets beyond 200 miles, giving the targeting computers ample time to calculate an intercept point.

The ship can also communicate with other, more distant radar systems to increase the detection range of inbound threats. The radar of an accompanying ship or distant E-2C Hawkeye can allow the fire controlmen to detect targets well over the horizon. Targets can also be acquired by visual means through a camera mounted on the NATO Sea Sparrow radar director, or even a lookout scanning the area with binoculars.

Once the target is spotted, either by radar or visually, it’s up to the Tactical Action Officer (TAO) in the Combat Direction Center to determine if it’s hostile or not. Depending on the speed of the target, an incoming object can be anywhere from 20 minutes to 20 seconds away, so decisions have to be made quickly. The TAO uses political and tactical intelligence to help decide if an object is a threat.

“If it’s inbound at high speeds and not responding to a query, we’re probably going to lock onto it,” said Fire Controlman 2nd Class (SW) Jeremy Buchter, an NSSMS technician.

The Sea Sparrow is the ship’s first line of defense against an incoming threat. Designed to intercept targets up to nine miles out, it has a greater range than the CIWS. Although the operator can launch more than one missile at a target to guarantee a hit, Sea Sparrow is capable of destroying a target with just one hit, while the CIWS depends on a “wall of bullets” to destroy its targets.

Anything that gets past the Sea Sparrow comes under fire from the CIWS. These radar-guided, automatic gun weapon systems kick in automatically if anything comes within their range. They track incoming missiles with their individually mounted radar and can hit targets up to 2,000 yards away. Like the Sea Sparrow, the CIWS fire controls are manned 24 hours a day, although the weapon can also fire automatically.

“CIWS can be fired manually,” said Cook, “but we prefer automatic to reduce human error.”

When active, CIWS will target and fire on any inbound object that comes in range. It doesn’t recognize friend or foe and could even target an aircraft landing on Enterprise if not monitored by a fire controlman.

“It’s like a blind pit bull,” said Cook. “It requires a lot of situational awareness.”

Training to fire CIWS and Sea Sparrow doesn’t always involve live fire. While they will occasionally test-fire their weapons to keep them working, the danger of sending out live ordnance makes it a second-best option. Instead, most training is done by computer simulation. In addition to being safer and more cost effective than live-fire exercises, computer simulations allow the fire controlmen to work under conditions that better simulate what they’d encounter in real situations, like radar jamming from the enemy.

“You can never train live-fire like that,” said Buchter.

The fire controlmen running the CIWS and Sea Sparrow do more than just point and shoot. Their jobs also include all the maintenance and repair of their systems. Since their weapons include everything from advanced electronics for the radars to basic plumbing for the cooling systems, their training has to cover a number of job fields.

“The learning curve is constant,” said Buchter. “There’s always more to learn. And once you’ve learned all you can about your system, you go learn somebody else’s.”

All of the training and maintaining is done with the hope that they’ll never have to fire their weapons. But if Enterprise should be targeted where its picket ships can’t protect it, the fire controlmen will be at their systems to make sure the enemy doesn’t score.

What GazB was writing about:

http://www.milparade.com/1997/24/0441.jpg
PALMA (http://www.milparade.com/1997/24/044.htm)

http://www.milparade.com/1999/36/0381.jpg

Kashtan missile-gun system installed on the newest Russian nuclear-powered missile cruiser, Pyotr Veliky. The system can engage air targets in any weather at an altitude of up to 4 km and a range of up to 8 km, while operating in automatic mode. The missile component of the system is represented by a two-stage solid-propellant missile, while the artillery component comprises two superhigh firing rate six-barrel guns. Their total rate of fire is 10,000 to 12,000 rounds per minute. They are capable of engaging cruise missiles at a range of 300 to 500 m.

http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNRussian_30mm-54_ak-630_Kortic_Neustrashimy_pic.jpg
30 mm Kortic (http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNRussian_30mm-54_ak-630.htm) mounting on Neustrashimy

http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNRussian_30mm-54_ak-630_Roy_pic.jpg
AK-630M1-2

http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNRussian_30mm-54_ak-630_pic.jpg
3 cm/65 (1.2") AK-630

[GazB]

Yeah it makes more sense, and depending on missles is rather stupid. Thanks for the explanations.

Depending only on guns or on missiles is a little silly. Each system has advantages and limitations. Modern large calibre guns with proximity fuzes can be quite effective at medium range against subsonic anti ship missiles. Each gun type has a role, and guns and missiles and ship borne aircraft form layers of defence. The close in weapon systems are the last line and as such are a desperate thing. Even if they hit the target there is a chance that a fast flying target might hit the ship anyway. They might be used for secondary purposes like warning shots or chewing up small boats, but I think replacing them is a mistake.

For a carrier however your primary defence is the escorts you have with you and your aircraft (and of course subs). As such losing CIWS is not exactly critical as long as you have a good team of other assets.

I think a 30mm calibre Phalanx like weapon would compliment RAM and Sparrow but it seems that they have chosen to go a different path.

For use against modern supersonic Anti ship missiles you need to engage the target at long range... ie well over the 1.8km range of the phalanx. The Russian solution is to use missiles and guns. The American solution is to use missiles only. I think the Russian system is more versatile and flexible and probably more capable. They also mount rather more CIWS systems on their vessels by weight than any other navy. Perhaps this is because they field so many different types of supersonic Anti ship missiles.


Another question. I've read that Chinese tanks (t-90+) use lasers to jam enemy optics. Is this possible, and does the US have anything similiar? I certainly have never read on this feature before.

I have heard from several sources that this is correct. A laser beam is used in a fan shape and a sensor detects reflections from optics. The angles to the reflections are recorded and a much more powerful focused beam is directed at the reflecting targets with the intent to damage the optics... if you are looking at a type 90+ I would reccomend against using binoculars... (Note T- series tanks are Russian, while Chinese and Japanese tanks are more often described as "Type-xx")
The Russians and Americans have similar systems for anti sniper use. One early Soviet system used a pyrotechnic charge to flash and the reflections were identified immediately, though I hear that the current system uses a fan shaped laser beam due to its longer effective range at detecting optics... since copied by the Chinese.

Nice pics BTW He219

[James]

Most USN surface ships still have the CIWS. Carriers never go anywhere alone. Even though a carrier might not have a CIWS anymore, there are a number of frigates/destroyers/cruisers nearby that can help protect the carrier.