How reliable are CIWS?
What's the fastest and smallest missile you can hit with one of these things?
>>29091650
Aircraft carrier bro here. They're shit. Ive seen tests where they have trouble hitting a slow flying target plane
The Phalanx Close-in Weapons System has a stunning record of killing 2 USN personnel, injuring 6, damaging friendly ships, destroying friendly aircraft and performing zero actual enemy engagements.
That should tell you how effective they are. Fucking garbage.
>>29091699
To be fair, there is that part about zero actual engagements. They've never preformed in actual combat. And the C-RAM system, which is basically a land based Phalanx had about a 65% chance to intercept any given projectile, which isn't that bad all things considered.
>>29091724
>Get shelled by artillery
>Take cover so shrapnel won't hit you
>C-RAM turns it into airburst
>>29091724
They're good against mortars, I suppose.
That said, they're very much the last line of defense for after the fighters and 3 layers of missile defenses have failed.
>>29091739
>Engineering crew high-fiving for getting 10 out of 20 shells in some office building
>youre laying in a foxhole with shrapnel up your ass
>>29091739
>missles/arty fired at other ship in fleet
>their phalanx fires
>misses all of them
>you take a 20mm round to the gut
>3 planes on the carrier are now inoperable
>ship firing phalanx sinks
>>29091650
>Phalanx CIWS max range: classified
>google "20x102mm max effective range"
>5,000 yards
welp, good joby navy.
>>29091650
Phalanx is garbage. SeaRAM should be much better.
>>29091724
Gonna need a source on that.
>>29091815
When i was in th Navy, we liked the ASSRAMS more.
>>29091751
>I have shrapnel up my ass instead of me and everyone around me getting vaporized by the 10 shells C-RAM stopped
>Fuck those engineers, they should've let me and all my friends die.
>>29091868
What are... jokes?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+a+joke
>>29091868
Unless Pk is 1, your work is never finished.
t. engineer
>>29091868
Oh cpl anon, all your friends did die, 2 closest to you by shrapnel, the rwst by the arty we missed
>>29091898
>Say something fucking retarded
> "I w-wus joking b-bro"
>>29091969
>going along with previous anons greentext joke to hopefully allow others on this board a light chuckle
>some asshole goes full storm nigger and says to himself "no fun allowed" and proceeds to fuck up in ways never before imaginable.
>>29091868
Let me get autistic as well.
>Artillery is not that accurate
>Discounting thermobaric rounds, shrapnel is the killer
>You're not going to die if you're in cover, barring a direct hit
>>29091650
>reliable
There is a reason why these are known as "Captain! It Won't Shoot!"
>What's the fastest and smallest missile you can hit with one of these things?
Saturn V - while clearing the tower.
How does the Russian version compare?
seems a littel beefed up
>>29091988
>what is airbursting arty
You do know these fuses are timed right? Further more I'd rather test my luck with 10/20 rounds being exploded super prematurely rather than all 20 of them hitting as intended.
>>29092007
Glorious pantsir thread begins now
>>29091868
More like
>Fuck those generals who have us live in fucking tents rather than appropriate fortifications
But who gives a shit huh
>>29092213
>what is airbursting arty
Far rarer than ordinary, useless against a dug-in foe.
>>29091996
Kek
>>29091868
well maybe us engineers weren't given enough funding to improve the accuracy of the system.
Or your generals think 50% hit rate is acceptable.
>>29092007
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SFN3lnWeEI
p c00l
Why don't they experiment with sensor fused ammunition. Like Oerlikon?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEEKjvfVnAg
>>29091816
I'm sorry that you never heard of google.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/cram.htm
>>29091812
SHUT UP THAT"S CLASSIFIED YOU SNOWDEN FUCKHEAD
>>29091739
Kill radius of a 155mm is about 50 meters and casualty radius is 100 m. Similar numbers for medium mortars. Which means if the intercept is above 100 meters (and that's pretty much guaranteed) your "airburst" isn't going to be much more than a rain of BB's. And the shell probably isn't going to detonate, anyway, since the 20 mm going through it shattered the shell from the outside, which is going to make a really crappy shrapnel pattern.
Thanks for answering, navyfriends.
Second question: how does sea swell affect the accuracy of these guns (or that of any modern 5" gun mount, for that matter).
>>29091812
It's probably less than that. The classified field is hiding that we can't predict where any given shell is going with enough accuracy to have a decent chance of hitting a high speed missile with a minimal cross section at beyond about 2000 yards.
>>29091724
>Sea-RAM
>Rolling Airframe Missile mated with CWIS fcs
>C-RAM
>Ground based old school dakka CWIS
My god is this confusing.
>>29092835
my guess is eventually they'll be melded into S-RAM, a combined gun/missile system a la Palash/Palma
>>29092793
>classified
There are 3 reasons why something is classified:
first and foremost that someone high up made a big big and career damaging mistake
secondly that something just does not work
thirdly that it works, in which case the device would not have been shown in any pictures.
Conclusion: CIWS is a feel-good gizmo that does not work in other ways than to provide the crew with a misplaced hope of safety and protection. At this enormous rate of fire it also makes very good business for a contractor somewhere.
>>29092776
Minimally. It affects it, but not to the degree where it'll ever be responsible for rendering a weapon ineffective, particularly with how large modern ships are.
ITT: a bunch of anons who don't realize that CIWS is the last of over a dozen hard and soft kill systems protecting a CSG, and by far the least effective. It's like an onion, and the onion starts at 240km. CIWS is only responsible for the last 1.5% of the entire engagement envelope.
