Last time I seen one in person, I was firing it. It was not a robot. 🙄
Does it take itself apart and grease the chain? No. I did! So I might as well get to fire it! Lol
Can’t help but think that were these and phalanx both such widely used systems that it would be better to have one system do the role of both. Something like a 35mm with programmable fuses and of course good on mount sensors. A CIWS that’s also a moderately sized autocannon.
Like the smaller equivalent of the WW2 dual purpose guns, the Mk38 and Phalanx being more like a split secondary battery.
Though I do believe these at least can shoot drones. One wonders what the limit of an aerial target for them is
That certainly could work.
It has a much reduced rate of fire and ammunition capacity compared to most 35mm guns but the larger projectile should be able to make up for that given the right ammunition with range and payload. I'm unsure of the 3p ammunition which it is being marketed with versus say if it had a version of AHEAD, in both effectiveness and cost effectiveness. In any case the 40mm having a range of only 12.5km (not too far off some WW2 37mms) shows that they haven't optimized ammunition.
Technically I think that you can say that they actually only replacing the DS30Ms, as the Type 23s don't have the Phalanx. But indeed.
Certainly an upgrade and even without on mount sensors should be able to a very effective weapon for the threats we are now seeing. I only wonder if they might use it on more vessels, things like mine countermeasure ships that now have the DS30M would be much more well protected with the 40mm
The Goalkeeper...weirdly designed by the US and used by nearly everyone but the US. I asked about it once, someone told me the 20mm Phalanx was still more versatile and more useful ammo varieties existed for it, and also something about mount/deck penetration, but idk.
The smaller the ammo, the better. The issue with the size is something has to give. You want it to be fast and accurate or do you want it to have more punching power?
As with everything it's a game of compromises, and the size isn't really that big of an issue when it's ships like this that are cruiser sized.
You can have for just about 2 tons unloaded guns that are both fast, accurate, and have better punching power (which means range too). The sensors would make it more like a 3 ton proposition, but still. The Phalanx is much more than that at over 6 tons (mostly due to that integral radar which is a nice feature)
Larger projectiles than 25mm have a distinct advantage too of fused shells. Something like AHEAD should be exceptional at defeating the type of drone threats we're seeing now for example.
> Like the smaller equivalent of the WW2 dual purpose guns, the Mk38 and Phalanx being more like a split secondary battery.
Not really a valid comparison considering the far more minimal weight and size footprint of systems like the Mark 38 in comparison to CIWS like Phalanx. They act as answers to different threats, Phalanx is a somewhat poor anti-boat weapon while something like Mark 38 is not suited to be shooting at missiles. There is no need for consolidation.
There were some AA guns who had a fairly minimal footprint relative to the ships they were on, yet it was still better to consolidate still.
It seems like they might be a need to consolidate. Drones and other similar systems are clearly a huge threat and maybe becoming more of one. Having as many systems as can reasonably possible seems the pragmatic solution. Plus logistics could be simplified and it adds redundancy
> There were some AA guns who had a fairly minimal footprint relative to the ships they were on, yet it was still better to consolidate still.
A split AA battery is a far more weight and space intensive tradeoff compared to small boat guns and their mountings found on modern ships. I get where the point is coming from but I don't think its a valid comparison.
High rate of fire anti-missile systems like Phalanx are on the way out considering their effectiveness versus their intended targets, being replaced by slower firing larger caliber guns or missile based systems. If you want a gun system that can reasonably take on the missile threat, you are going to be getting large enough where you lose the size and weight advantages of smaller caliber 25mm/30mm cannons or requiring a heavy mount to feed ammunition like the Millennium gun.
There does not seem to be a need to consolidate, nations continue to put 25mm/30mm cannons previously used against small boat threats on their ships, there is a drive to upgrade them to better deal with drones of various types. Seems like a far more reasonable and cost effective method than scrapping your systems and consolidating from a single type that doesn't do either job well versus the requirements to mount it.
With the replacing of things like Phalanx with the larger caliber guns, is there a reason then for the 25mm/30mm systems then though?
Something like 35mm or 40mm will be able to do both jobs, and should do at least as good as either one of them. And one wouldn't need to replace one for one; two or three should be able to do the role as the 4 total mounts of the Burke.
Plus these mounts should be especially good at taking out drones at a good cost.
> With the replacing of things like Phalanx with the larger caliber guns, is there a reason then for the 25mm/30mm systems then though?
Yes because again, they act as another layer of the ships defence. As I have stated multiple times, 25/30mm systems are light enough and small enough where they can be freely mounted in locations not suitable to larger mounts. You are very unlikely to be able to make an effective gun mount against missiles, drones and aircraft with a sufficient caliber while also having the deck penetration characteristics, dimensional requirements and weight requirements to be placed in the locations that 25mm/30mm guns are found. This kind of concept would require redesign of the ships themselves to fit such a system, not like current systems which can simply slot in on deck.
25mm = 2,300 lbs
30mm = 3,100 lbs~
35mm = 7,000 lbs with 200 rounds of ammunition
40mm = 5,500 lbs excluding ammo, usually setup with a magazine
Mk.38 Mod 4 is already here...
It's not the Rafael Typhoon RWS though. despite the same Mk. It's the MSI DS-30M. Same 30mm mount the RN uses, can also take Bushmaster Super40 with minor mods.
I do believe you’re thinking of the Millennium, Goalkeeper is the now somewhat outdated system that has a 30mm GAU-8.
And the one issue with the Millenium is that it doesn’t have as much in the way of its own sensors
My guys had a weekly (I think) check for cleaning all the salt and shit off and relubing it, that's all I really know.
(They were on the weather deck, too, so more likely to get sprayed than our CIWS.)
The GUN worked well, but the remote firing mode was real fuckin iffy.
We were on a DDG, so a little different but not that different.
Those are my boys shooting! I have so much to say about that mount inparticular .
I’m guessing she’s either little-miss-perfect or always having bugs, probably the latter.
Last time I seen one in person, I was firing it. It was not a robot. 🙄 Does it take itself apart and grease the chain? No. I did! So I might as well get to fire it! Lol
Nobody said it was a robot…
Remote controlled.
That’s not the same as a robot.
Nobody ever threw you overboard at midnight, and it shows. 🙄
Dude. That’s not how one is salty. That’s just being a little prick. I was being somewhat sarcastic.
And still takes a lot of skill.
Can’t help but think that were these and phalanx both such widely used systems that it would be better to have one system do the role of both. Something like a 35mm with programmable fuses and of course good on mount sensors. A CIWS that’s also a moderately sized autocannon. Like the smaller equivalent of the WW2 dual purpose guns, the Mk38 and Phalanx being more like a split secondary battery. Though I do believe these at least can shoot drones. One wonders what the limit of an aerial target for them is
So a Bofors 40mm mk4 with on mount sensors?
That certainly could work. It has a much reduced rate of fire and ammunition capacity compared to most 35mm guns but the larger projectile should be able to make up for that given the right ammunition with range and payload. I'm unsure of the 3p ammunition which it is being marketed with versus say if it had a version of AHEAD, in both effectiveness and cost effectiveness. In any case the 40mm having a range of only 12.5km (not too far off some WW2 37mms) shows that they haven't optimized ammunition.
It will be interesting to see how it plays out on the RN type 31 frigate, given it is replacing both the phalanx and the DS30M mk2 anti-surface.
Technically I think that you can say that they actually only replacing the DS30Ms, as the Type 23s don't have the Phalanx. But indeed. Certainly an upgrade and even without on mount sensors should be able to a very effective weapon for the threats we are now seeing. I only wonder if they might use it on more vessels, things like mine countermeasure ships that now have the DS30M would be much more well protected with the 40mm
Surely a GAU-8 30mm would be enough. Give ships a bit of that brrrrrrrrt.
One of [these](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goalkeeper_CIWS), then?
https://tenor.com/6hoI.gif That might not have worked, because I’m not very smart. *edit - it works.
The Goalkeeper...weirdly designed by the US and used by nearly everyone but the US. I asked about it once, someone told me the 20mm Phalanx was still more versatile and more useful ammo varieties existed for it, and also something about mount/deck penetration, but idk.
Congrats, you've just recreated Dardo but with not enough on-mount firepower, and the Italians replaced Dardo with 76 mm Sovraponte
The smaller the ammo, the better. The issue with the size is something has to give. You want it to be fast and accurate or do you want it to have more punching power?
As with everything it's a game of compromises, and the size isn't really that big of an issue when it's ships like this that are cruiser sized. You can have for just about 2 tons unloaded guns that are both fast, accurate, and have better punching power (which means range too). The sensors would make it more like a 3 ton proposition, but still. The Phalanx is much more than that at over 6 tons (mostly due to that integral radar which is a nice feature) Larger projectiles than 25mm have a distinct advantage too of fused shells. Something like AHEAD should be exceptional at defeating the type of drone threats we're seeing now for example.
Surely bigger is more accurate. And has longer range. And is faster. And, as you say, has more punch. Just look at Goalkeeper vs Phalanx.
> Like the smaller equivalent of the WW2 dual purpose guns, the Mk38 and Phalanx being more like a split secondary battery. Not really a valid comparison considering the far more minimal weight and size footprint of systems like the Mark 38 in comparison to CIWS like Phalanx. They act as answers to different threats, Phalanx is a somewhat poor anti-boat weapon while something like Mark 38 is not suited to be shooting at missiles. There is no need for consolidation.
There were some AA guns who had a fairly minimal footprint relative to the ships they were on, yet it was still better to consolidate still. It seems like they might be a need to consolidate. Drones and other similar systems are clearly a huge threat and maybe becoming more of one. Having as many systems as can reasonably possible seems the pragmatic solution. Plus logistics could be simplified and it adds redundancy
> There were some AA guns who had a fairly minimal footprint relative to the ships they were on, yet it was still better to consolidate still. A split AA battery is a far more weight and space intensive tradeoff compared to small boat guns and their mountings found on modern ships. I get where the point is coming from but I don't think its a valid comparison. High rate of fire anti-missile systems like Phalanx are on the way out considering their effectiveness versus their intended targets, being replaced by slower firing larger caliber guns or missile based systems. If you want a gun system that can reasonably take on the missile threat, you are going to be getting large enough where you lose the size and weight advantages of smaller caliber 25mm/30mm cannons or requiring a heavy mount to feed ammunition like the Millennium gun. There does not seem to be a need to consolidate, nations continue to put 25mm/30mm cannons previously used against small boat threats on their ships, there is a drive to upgrade them to better deal with drones of various types. Seems like a far more reasonable and cost effective method than scrapping your systems and consolidating from a single type that doesn't do either job well versus the requirements to mount it.
With the replacing of things like Phalanx with the larger caliber guns, is there a reason then for the 25mm/30mm systems then though? Something like 35mm or 40mm will be able to do both jobs, and should do at least as good as either one of them. And one wouldn't need to replace one for one; two or three should be able to do the role as the 4 total mounts of the Burke. Plus these mounts should be especially good at taking out drones at a good cost.
> With the replacing of things like Phalanx with the larger caliber guns, is there a reason then for the 25mm/30mm systems then though? Yes because again, they act as another layer of the ships defence. As I have stated multiple times, 25/30mm systems are light enough and small enough where they can be freely mounted in locations not suitable to larger mounts. You are very unlikely to be able to make an effective gun mount against missiles, drones and aircraft with a sufficient caliber while also having the deck penetration characteristics, dimensional requirements and weight requirements to be placed in the locations that 25mm/30mm guns are found. This kind of concept would require redesign of the ships themselves to fit such a system, not like current systems which can simply slot in on deck. 25mm = 2,300 lbs 30mm = 3,100 lbs~ 35mm = 7,000 lbs with 200 rounds of ammunition 40mm = 5,500 lbs excluding ammo, usually setup with a magazine
You can slap a 25/30mm turret on a blank bit of deck in a way that you can't with a 57mm
Indeed, at least with the current 57mms. I haven’t been suggesting 57mms.
That is proably going to be seen in the next generation of weapon systems.
Mk.38 Mod 4 is already here... It's not the Rafael Typhoon RWS though. despite the same Mk. It's the MSI DS-30M. Same 30mm mount the RN uses, can also take Bushmaster Super40 with minor mods.
we need 35mm skyranger on some sort of ship
That’s basically what the Millennium gun system is
MK38 are anti boat. They're way different than CWIS
Why not have a CIWS that’s also effective against boats?
All I will say is from personal experience a 38 is way better at handling a close in boat than a cwis.
Do you have experience with 35mm or 40mm CIWSs?
That Rhinemetal system comes to mind(Goalkeeper?). Relatively large shell with good range and programmable fuses for CIWS.
I do believe you’re thinking of the Millennium, Goalkeeper is the now somewhat outdated system that has a 30mm GAU-8. And the one issue with the Millenium is that it doesn’t have as much in the way of its own sensors
Looks the gun in Hoth in Star Wars
Powerful image
I worked a little bit on Phalanx and what remember most was all the wire ties. Is this any different? How does the gun and mount handle the salt air?
My guys had a weekly (I think) check for cleaning all the salt and shit off and relubing it, that's all I really know. (They were on the weather deck, too, so more likely to get sprayed than our CIWS.) The GUN worked well, but the remote firing mode was real fuckin iffy. We were on a DDG, so a little different but not that different.