Тёмный

Here's Why the UK Navy's Bofors Naval Gun Combination is Superior to the Phalanx CIWS in Any Case 

The World of Military
Подписаться 70 тыс.
Просмотров 73 тыс.
50% 1

The Royal Navy's Type 31 general-purpose frigate will be outfitted with two gun types new to its service. Each ship will be outfitted with sophisticated multipurpose gun systems, such as a Bofors 57 Mark 3 medium-calibre gun, and two Bofors 40 Mark 4 small-calibre guns.
The combination of these two weapons would be very useful against aircraft, missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, small boat swarms, and enemy boats.
By delivering heavier shells further away from the ship, the double Bofors gun is superior to Phalanx CIWS in any case.

Наука

Опубликовано:

 

29 июн 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 131   
@ronmaximilian6953
@ronmaximilian6953 24 дня назад
The Type 31E /Arrowhead 140 is based in the Danish Iver Huitfeldt-class air defense frigate, which has two 76mm canon in tbe feont ans a Millenium 35mm CIWS in the rear.
@jiwoonmixx8466
@jiwoonmixx8466 24 дня назад
Merah Putih Class Frigrate of Indonesia (Redesign AH140) will use 2 CIWS (front and back) Gokdeniz 35 mm double barrel with atom super brust
@alan-sk7ky
@alan-sk7ky 25 дней назад
I bet it's already nicknamed 'The Dalek'
@moodogco
@moodogco 25 дней назад
Yh they've already said the type 31 will be from the start for close in support using the laser dragon fire system like the type 26 will be & the type 45 will get it fitted at the same time when they go in for refit to install the extra vls systems etc
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 24 дня назад
In 1906, HMS Dreadnought was commissioned. For nearly 40 years afterwards. Experts claimed that big guns and heavy armor, were the premier combat force, at sea. During WW-II these experts were proven wrong. Today the experts on naval warfare are in a similar position. Technology and operational parameters have changed. A ship capable of destroying satellites in space. Could be seriously damaged by a 50,000 dollar drone. That's a problem.
@alltat
@alltat 24 дня назад
Sunk by drone boats, even. Ukraine has repeatedly shown how dangerous drone boats can be when deployed in groups by experienced operators. They're more accurate than torpedoes, so you can ram a boat into a hole made by a previous boat.
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 23 дня назад
@@alltat What ever works! One wouldn't think that would be effective. Still, a swarm of fast moving suicide drones. For a ship designed to be in a very different operating environment. Most Russian navy ships are designed to confront US Navy ships and aircraft.
@tigerland4328
@tigerland4328 3 дня назад
​​​@@alltat The weapons configuration on the type 31 does seem to suggest the Royal navy are putting more emphasis on defence against both drone boats and UAVs rather than the more traditional torpedos. the 57mm and the 40mm can be used against both air and surface targets. While the type 31s main defence against torpedo attack will be a towed array passive decoy system with countermeasure launches (sea sentor)
@wolves201
@wolves201 22 часа назад
Wonder if they’ll install the versions which have no reload magazine.
@bradleyanderson4315
@bradleyanderson4315 25 дней назад
They should add Martlet missile launchers to the 40mm guns.
@squirepraggerstope3591
@squirepraggerstope3591 25 дней назад
Has that yet been done with a 40mm Bofors installation? Iirc, it was a combo tested with a 30mm Bushmaster one but I don't know about the option you suggest.
@hotdog9262
@hotdog9262 24 дня назад
got to say the italian twin bofors 40mm seemed effective, though just looking at videos
@sergarlantyrell7847
@sergarlantyrell7847 24 дня назад
To what extent? The 57mm gun is just as capable against small boats, it even has a longer range. Martlet is great for really lightweight platforms which can't mount a naval gun, like helicopters, UAVs or naval drones, but I don't see what the benefit would be here.
@st1nk1n
@st1nk1n 17 дней назад
It is called the Royal Navy, not UK Navy
@MrSummerblade
@MrSummerblade 17 дней назад
Haha, nomenclature of UK forces totally baffles foreigners, especially Americans. What’s betting he calls the British Army, the ‘Royal Army’ 😂😂😂
@st1nk1n
@st1nk1n 17 дней назад
@@MrSummerblade Casts doubt on their other info
@waltertomashefsky2682
@waltertomashefsky2682 25 дней назад
That Mk III gun in the opening sequence reminds me an awful lot of the Daleks from Dr Who. Exterminate, exterminate, exterminate!
@couespursuit7350
@couespursuit7350 25 дней назад
Not enough guns. Boat swarm to port, flying drone swarm to starboard and a couple of either up the wazzu and boat goes out of action.
@markmaher4548
@markmaher4548 22 дня назад
Except there's a 40mm variant fwd & aft aswell as the main 57mm gun.
@couespursuit7350
@couespursuit7350 22 дня назад
@@markmaher4548 Ohhh WOW, did not realize, a whole 3 guns. Well bring on the 3 dozen swarm.
@matso3856
@matso3856 14 дней назад
@@couespursuit7350 That shouldnt be a problem with these 3 weapon systems , if you trippel that however ..
@flyingdutchman7757
@flyingdutchman7757 25 дней назад
Bofors 40mm was (and still is) a very successful system that’s in use in a wide variety of roles by military forces all over the world. Reliable, accurate, and provides a lot of firepower in a relatively compact package. The 40mm will take out any enemy vehicle up to a main battle tank, and will likely severely damage most of those. With high-explosive shells, an effective anti-troop weapon as well.
@matso3856
@matso3856 14 дней назад
You also have the "bigger brother" of the 57 mm if the 40 mill for some reason wouldnt cut it.
@jonathanhenson9091
@jonathanhenson9091 25 дней назад
Phalanx is a fairly cheap self contained system but it's range is pretty short it would take out the missile but the debris could still inflict some damage
@sergarlantyrell7847
@sergarlantyrell7847 24 дня назад
Hence why they're switich to a gun with longer range.
@ghansu
@ghansu 24 дня назад
Phalanx dont use programmable fuses so it need direct hits on a target.
@nickmoore385
@nickmoore385 25 дней назад
Navies are really bricking themselves after seeing the Ukrainian drone ships at work.
@verdebusterAP
@verdebusterAP 25 дней назад
I can see the appeal of 40mm and 57mm Its very easy to make programmable 40mm and 57mm rounds as well equip them with data link so when fired against missile, they know exactly when to detonate Making it less spray and pray and more 1 shot 1 kill. Additionally you can equip it with multiple magazines allow the gun switch between ammo types for various targets But I would keep the 57mm but trade the 40mm for the Germany 35mm
@hotdog9262
@hotdog9262 24 дня назад
the older twin 40mm breda looked effective. huge ammo(400+ and 700+) and firepower potential
@Lemurion287
@Lemurion287 25 дней назад
When speaking of gun calibers you use the singular "millimeter," not the plural "millimeters." It's a 57 millimeter gun, not a 57 millimeters gun.
@migueltraviesa2987
@migueltraviesa2987 24 дня назад
I think it is because “ milimiter”, although is a sustantive, it really acts as an adjetive It is just like saying “four star hotel”: here, “star” play an adjetive role so it most be singular
@redherring6154
@redherring6154 20 дней назад
*MILLIMETRE
@matso3856
@matso3856 14 дней назад
@@redherring6154 Do you happen to know why its changed from meter to metre ? I am curious
@redherring6154
@redherring6154 14 дней назад
@@matso3856 no idea mate and now even questioning my own spelling
@kevinhunkin6364
@kevinhunkin6364 15 дней назад
They missed out the most important ammunition, “madfires” and “ALaMO” which are continually guided during their flight time making them extremely effective
@williamzk9083
@williamzk9083 12 дней назад
Yes, the Italians use DART guided ammunition on their 76.2 mm gun which is guided, the United States has Mad fires FOR THE 57 MM gun which is not only guided but have their own seeker. It remains to be seen whether 40 mm guns will get a guided round or even 35.. The Smaller calibre of the gun the higher the fire rate which gives more opportunities for a hit at the sacrifice of range. I believe the technology that made this possible was the laser ring gyro but I’m pretty sure pendulous gyros are now used.
@kevinhunkin6364
@kevinhunkin6364 12 дней назад
@@williamzk9083 it’s interesting that the ALaMO is 40mm with a spacer so it will fit the 57mm these can replace the ciwis with a much more versatile weapon
@robertwalker1742
@robertwalker1742 24 дня назад
Think bigger main gun at least a 75mm.
@rodpope7838
@rodpope7838 25 дней назад
Cannot understand why either of these guns were not considered for the Arafura class opv's. Sadly the decision by the RAN to short change them in every area means that they will never serve in the RAN in the OPV role and will more than likely be handed to Border Force.
@jammiedodger7040
@jammiedodger7040 25 дней назад
BAE should start making new military guns again.
@old_stoat
@old_stoat 25 дней назад
BAE Bofors..they bought it.
@jammiedodger7040
@jammiedodger7040 24 дня назад
@@old_stoat They don’t actually make military guns though BAE also consists of Royal Ordinate one of the most famous gun companies in the world.
@sergarlantyrell7847
@sergarlantyrell7847 24 дня назад
They should buy CTA international. Maybe come up with some more applications for their cased telescoped ammo.
@jammiedodger7040
@jammiedodger7040 24 дня назад
@@sergarlantyrell7847 BAE already owns 50% but it’s not actually based in Britain. You mean like a new 120mm or even a 110mm or even a 160mm would be interesting to see but really we need the facilities in Britain if that was to ever going to happen.
@sergarlantyrell7847
@sergarlantyrell7847 24 дня назад
@@jammiedodger7040 Actually, I meant more guns to share the 40mm CT round, like a revolver cannon to be used as a longer range CIWS. But yes, eventually other calibres too.
@HJJ135
@HJJ135 25 дней назад
Even tho UK spent decades developing the CTA 40mm together with France. I guess the CTA is just too expensive.
@jimfrazier8611
@jimfrazier8611 24 дня назад
CTA is designed for small vehicles, not warships, which have plenty of room for less-complicated gun systems.
@sergarlantyrell7847
@sergarlantyrell7847 24 дня назад
@@jimfrazier8611 Yes, the 40CT is super compact, closer to a typical 30mm gun... Which as you said, not a lot of use on a ship. But it sacrifices in other respects, not just complexity, like it has a lower rate of fire & less range.
@heinedenmark
@heinedenmark 24 дня назад
It's not made in a maritime version, as far as I know.
@SeanSoraghan
@SeanSoraghan 23 дня назад
​@jimfrazier8611 Theres a naval version of the cta40
@jimfrazier8611
@jimfrazier8611 23 дня назад
@@SeanSoraghan But why would you use it on a full-size warship? It'd be great on a small patrol boat, where size, weight, and short recoil travel might be issues, but ships have room for more powerful weapons.
@MostlyPennyCat
@MostlyPennyCat 10 дней назад
Bofors 57mm mk3: 220 rpm Bofors 40mm mk4: 300 rpm 😳 And they still have about a 10km range. And they fire bofors 3P
@kevingallen1678
@kevingallen1678 25 дней назад
Who made the FOI request?
@spitfire12able
@spitfire12able 25 дней назад
hmm 57mm does seem big enough for a main calibre deck gun, should be more like 105mm or 120mm
@vincefont4765
@vincefont4765 25 дней назад
105mm and 120mm aren't used by any country in the world as a naval calibre. Larger calibre guns are not used for engaging large naval vessels anymore and are a very risky method of shore bombardment. The Type 31's shouldn't ever be used for shore bombardment, so the 57mm is perfectly good for the jobs it's intended to do (as would the Leonardo 76mm). The new US Navy frigate is going to be fitted with exactly the same gun, so they seem to have reached the same conclusion.
@verdebusterAP
@verdebusterAP 25 дней назад
This modern warfare not WW2 During WW2, ships had no less than 127mm cannons but advances in modern warfare you dont need big guns anymore
@andyleighton6969
@andyleighton6969 25 дней назад
Those big guns have been replaced by missiles. The Type 31 will have a 32 cell VLS capable of carrying anything up to cruise missiles.
@TypicalBritishperson4972
@TypicalBritishperson4972 25 дней назад
@@vincefont4765I disagree, I think type 31 should be used for shore bombardment as it means we don’t have to bring a type 26 down and in that case we could use a 127mm gun on it
@kaf83
@kaf83 25 дней назад
@@vincefont4765 Every US destroyer has the Mark 45 5inch (127mm) gun. Lots of other navy's using it too and building new ships to use it. The Mark 45 is still the preferred gun for surface warfare. A lot of research and work has been done to extend its range and accuracy.
@petter5721
@petter5721 15 дней назад
Stőd Bofors, bli kanon 🍺
@cesaravegah3787
@cesaravegah3787 23 дня назад
I dont know if it can be called superior, Phalanx already have saved a few warships of potentially letal missile attacks while the Bophors as far as I know is yet to be tested on that function.
@andrewinskip504
@andrewinskip504 23 дня назад
Really I thought Phallanx kills were mainly friendly fire. It is the inspiration for moms attack robots in futrama that just end up shooting each other.
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 25 дней назад
For a growing variety of reasons. Mostly missile armed ships, are fast becoming obsolete. Missiles have their advantages. Until they are used up, or are not practical to use, on all threats. Like a missile designed to hit supersonic missiles and aircraft. Against a small inexpensive drone, flying or otherwise. As Moskva demonstrated, a large load of high tech missiles can easily become an equally spectacular fire at sea. Rather bad, for the health and welfare of the crew. A variety of weapons are needed. Guns don't have the range of missiles, but they don't need to. Energy weapons are new and exciting, until you realize how much fuel it takes to power them. So, energy weapons won't be too practical, until fusion powered ships are available.
@oloflarsson7629
@oloflarsson7629 24 дня назад
The Moscow also showed that a ship with a large array of gun based CIWS-systems can easily become an equally spectacular fire at sea. It wasn't just the three missile systems (1xSA-N-6 and 2xSA-N-4) that failed on the Moscow. It was also the 130mm dual purpose gun and the six 30mm CIWS-systems. The lesson from the Moscow is that a air defence systems with radars and/or FCS that doesn't work, doesn't work, no matter if it's a missile or gun based system.
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 24 дня назад
@@oloflarsson7629 offline combat systems systems accomplish nothing. Moskva's crew had settled into a routine of nothing much happens. The reaction time was too short. Radar sets were also likely offline. Old ship, poorly maintained and a crew composed of conscripts who were not well motivated. On and on, and on.
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 24 дня назад
@@oloflarsson7629 There are too many unanswered questions? When or if the ship detected the missiles. State of material readiness. Crew's readiness to defend the ship. Finally the ship's guns were too big in case of the 130 mm. Guns like those in this video were not aboard.
@edkrach8891
@edkrach8891 25 дней назад
The RN should've went with RAM or Phalanx for close-in defense.
@TypicalBritishperson4972
@TypicalBritishperson4972 25 дней назад
They do use phalanx
@paulhill1665
@paulhill1665 25 дней назад
Sea ram and rhe RM116 is not used by the RN, cost is one major reason, the RM 116 cost some $900,000 per missile, phalanx is very short range
@zhufortheimpaler4041
@zhufortheimpaler4041 20 дней назад
@@paulhill1665 SeaRAM has a greater interception range. And you can replace Phalanx with SeaSnake 27mm revolver cannon. Greater range, programmable air burst ammunition etc and immediate full burst RPM unlike with a gatling gun.
@robertopiedimonte2078
@robertopiedimonte2078 23 дня назад
to me, just to me, 30mm munition with an airburst fuze and API indeed a mix of three different rounds: two HE but one with impact fuze and the other with the airburst fuze, closing with API as third one, so even a single feeding gun can fire a short 9 rounds burst with 3 of each kind (more then 20 burst with 200 rounds ready to fire) are the easy and cheap solution for hardened surface drones, suicide boat or pirates, flying drones up to 2 nautical miles. You must only select a 30mm mount with good optics and stabilization! I'm considering price of mount, price of ammunition, easy installation on board, weight. Phalanx 1b have same range and capabilities about, but is heavier (even if it could be just on board), fire a much bigger amount of rounds per burst which are way more expensive, so live it for missile only! Again to me, Leonardo 76mm gun is better (have a look to sinkex exercise) because offer not to expensive Dart antimissile round and the similar Vulcano round a 20 nautical miles as antiship or land support capable. Italian Navy was the first to believe in 40mm caliber as anti-missiles last ditch gun capable of destroying them at about 2 nautical miles from the ship instead of less then 1 of first Phalanx, but are decades it shifted on 76mm as much better solution! One last question: why a logistical nightmare duplicating rounds? It's not easier have all three 57mm guns. No penetrating deck variant of Leonardo 76mm gun can fire just over half minute cause it have 72 rounds ready to fire. I think is a clever choice the normal one not for 85 rounds capabilities but because it could be reloaded from inside the ship. It make no difference on large ships as the modern one. Same funny "lie" as the lighter BAE 127mm gun at 20 ton instead of 34 of Leonardo 127mm LW (lightweight 😁) on 10.000 ton ships!!! 14 ton difference on 10.000 ton!?! While depending on barrel position the italian one can fire from 28 to 32 rounds per minute and reloaded accordingly with an automated Ammunition Handling System, the american one can fire the whole 20 rounds ready to fire it have and then 10 rounds. I believe it's clear how much US Navy think a gun is important (because they are "the navy" and have planes and missiles for everyone!)
@matso3856
@matso3856 14 дней назад
Elevation , 40 mm has better elevation
@robertopiedimonte2078
@robertopiedimonte2078 14 дней назад
@@matso3856 How could I not notice that it doesn't reach the canonical 85 degrees of elevation 🤦🏻‍♂️ Thank you
@CornelStefan-geani
@CornelStefan-geani 5 дней назад
155 MLRS
@williamzk9083
@williamzk9083 12 дней назад
After 40 years, someone comes up with something better than phalanx?
@valerianocuomo996
@valerianocuomo996 14 дней назад
The Italians have been making this choice for the CISW for years. The rotary barrels have a range of only 2500 meters. But also compared to the RIM 120 RAM: 900K DOLLARS for a single missile. The Vulcano Projectiles 10 times less... and from the results against the HOUTIs, WHERE the RIM 120 missiles on the German frigate misfired. and the rotating barrels hit the target only a few meters from the American ship. WE ITALIANS ARE THE LEARNERS OF GIULIO CESARE..THE COUNTRY OF MODERN SPECIAL FORCES, THE COUNTRY OF FINCANTIERI, LEONARDO, BERETTA, BENELLI (THE RIFLE USED FOR THE T. REX AND THE TERMINARS), OF THE SUPERCAR S, 😅
@williamzk9083
@williamzk9083 12 дней назад
@@valerianocuomo996 Italy is dying. You can’t continue with a fertility rate of only 1.22 children per woman and such bad border security
@valerianocuomo996
@valerianocuomo996 11 дней назад
@@williamzk9083 what the fuck does this have to do with my message? And then Europe doesn't have children either: 1.20 Italian or 1.30 European fertility doesn't change much.
@Fulcrum205
@Fulcrum205 День назад
You lost to Ford at Le Mans
@gowdsake7103
@gowdsake7103 23 дня назад
Really ? 2 40 and a 57 mm gun thats cost cutting to the extreme ok ISH for defence but what about offense maybe we will write a stiff note and ask them to move close without shooting back please
@magecraft2
@magecraft2 25 дней назад
Not sure why they do not just have a Phalanx as well, afterall it is a fairly self contained system.
@whylie74
@whylie74 25 дней назад
probably going to fit the Dragonfire laser system insted.
@deanwood1338
@deanwood1338 25 дней назад
They may add one when going to a higher threat environment
@jammiedodger7040
@jammiedodger7040 25 дней назад
I believe they’re still a thing on the Type 26.
@magecraft2
@magecraft2 25 дней назад
I suspect it is just down to money 💰 considering threat these ship's may face seems to be shortsighted.
@GerManBearPig
@GerManBearPig 21 день назад
Because it's pretty much useless against anything coming at you fast - the effective range is like 1-2 km. That's why the USA is going towards short range rolling airframe AA missiles on most of their ships nowadays
@JohnnyNorfolk
@JohnnyNorfolk 25 дней назад
Not enough guns for full combat. You must not have just high tech
@ghansu
@ghansu 24 дня назад
If in modern days you get your ship so close to other ship that you need to use guns you have screwed badly. Those are for shooting down missiles, drones, small vessels and aircraft. Not sinking a ship.
@dennisnguyen8105
@dennisnguyen8105 25 дней назад
The reality of modern combat is that a capital ship would need all of them. 57mm, 40mm, Phalanx, and RIM 116. It would also need EW/Laser/Maser for soft kills. Line of sight defense should prioritized direct energy over bullets and missiles. The challenge for the UK Navy is you don't have the money. The problem with my US Navy is we waste billions on junk the MIC foist upon us.
@jimfrazier8611
@jimfrazier8611 25 дней назад
The US used the same 57mm Bofors on their Littoral Combat Ships, which they have since found unsuitable for combat. Too easy to armor against for anything heavier than a speedboat.
@MrBandholm
@MrBandholm 25 дней назад
I have seen nowhere said the 57mm was "unsuitable" for combat... Are you sure, you are not talking about the ship, more than the gunsystem? Because that would make a great deal more sense. As for the "easy to armor" point... It is not a gunsystem that is meant to sink ships, and never has been. Where you have gotten that idea, I am not sure, but it is a gun meant for defence of the ship, more than a offensive weapon. Part of the critique of the choice of the 57mm is that a 76mm is suitable for gun support of groud troops, but to actually use guns to sink ships, one would need a 100mm or larger, to do it somewhat fast... However given that anti-ship missiles are a thing, what is the point?
@paulwarman6682
@paulwarman6682 25 дней назад
The ship is unsuitable not the gun system.
@oloflarsson7629
@oloflarsson7629 24 дня назад
The issue with LCS is not the gun, it's the actual ships that are horrible executions or a moronic concept. And do note that the 57mm is not intended for use against ships. It's intended for use against boats, missiles, helos and so on. For engaging ships, surface combattants use missiles. The LCS was hovever not equipped with any meaningful weaponry (or sensors) for such a large ship. And there is not a single ship in service, that is easy to armour against a 57mm.
@jimfrazier8611
@jimfrazier8611 24 дня назад
@@oloflarsson7629 All well and good until your missile magazines run dry. It is a good close in weapon, against small unarmored target, but then so is the Phalanx.
@MrBandholm
@MrBandholm 24 дня назад
@@jimfrazier8611 Phalanx is not that good anymore to be honest. It lacks range against the prime targets (fast missiles) and it is less effective against drones/boats/planes/heli due to range and the need to make a direct hit. A 57mm or 40mm can hit close by, and take out the target, and at greater range. Not that the Phalax wouldn't be fine to bring along, it is just not as effecient as it was a decade ago.
@haakonsteinsvaag
@haakonsteinsvaag 25 дней назад
Why are the ships named Type XX? What happened to giving ship classes proper names like Leander Class? Are Royal Navy afraid of pissing off Gen.Z?
@garyyoung3179
@garyyoung3179 25 дней назад
They have both names. The Leanders were the Type12i (improved). The Type 31 is known as the Inspiration Class. Generally, the 'Class' name is taken from the lead ship or a designated theme e.g. the Type 23 Duke Class or the Type 26 City Class. In this case, the ships are being named after famous Inspirational RN vessels from the past. HMS Active, Bulldog, Formidable, Venturer and Campbeltown. 0
@waynebelshaw7961
@waynebelshaw7961 4 дня назад
Big mistake have both
@Magyarmeister
@Magyarmeister 23 дня назад
It will make a nice new reef. Hi tech fish home.
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 25 дней назад
Not bad at all. As usual the Royal Navy has it's act together. These weapons should be added to US Navy ships. Where ever space is available. Especially to the CVNs I would still like to see a 40 mm bofors gatling gun. Similar to Phalanx, but with a lot more range, and striking power. Both gun mounts have the advantage of being light weight.
@mothmagic1
@mothmagic1 24 дня назад
The navy can afford to get its act together as it is allocated almost two thirds of the total defence budget.
@sergarlantyrell7847
@sergarlantyrell7847 24 дня назад
The closest anyone got is the Oerlikon RK 421. It fired a 42 x 348mm cartridge at 450 rpm. It was bought out by a British company and played around with under the project name 'Red Queen' before being dropped. It's just really difficult to get an action to move fast enough (thanks to the square-cube law and exponentially increasing mass) as you get to that sort of size cartridge.
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 24 дня назад
@@sergarlantyrell7847 Interesting I wonder what the largest practical gatling gun is? Physios have their limits, yet the question remains. What's the most effective response to the evolving combat environment at sea? What's clear is that today's ships need to evolve to deal with the changes in battle at sea.
@sergarlantyrell7847
@sergarlantyrell7847 24 дня назад
@@scottjackson5173 I don't know if any larger than 30mm though there are plenty of 35mm revolver cannons. I suspect you could make a 40mm rotary gun, but the fire rate wouldn't be what people would expect from that kind of gun, maybe more like 1,500-2,000 rpm and the spool up time would be bad too.
@scottjackson5173
@scottjackson5173 24 дня назад
@@sergarlantyrell7847 Much better than 400 to 500 rounds per minute. When a hypersonic missile is about to strike the ship. As for spool up, the barrel can be rotated, with the feed at idle, until the targeting solution is ready.
@rheonepomuceno5572
@rheonepomuceno5572 25 дней назад
Not accurate presentation....very confusing ...
@wozza77able
@wozza77able 25 дней назад
Sounds like a poor man’s CWIS
@MrBandholm
@MrBandholm 25 дней назад
It isn't, it is pretty good overall, and particular the range is important.
@pparker768
@pparker768 22 дня назад
Waste of money
@lewis7315
@lewis7315 25 дней назад
This gun is already obsolete. Point defense guns are a very limited last line of defense and are no match for hypersonic missiles. You need to shoot down the attacking aircraft a couple hundreds of miles away before it launches its missiles. The British lost ships in the Argentine Falklands war because of this lack of ability. Seems they have still learned nothing from very recent history.
@mattwright2964
@mattwright2964 25 дней назад
The type 31 has missiles for that and will be fitted with laser at later refit.
@oloflarsson7629
@oloflarsson7629 24 дня назад
The british didn't loose a single ship in the Falklands, because the lacked the capacity to destroy the non-existent threat from Argentine hypersonics. They lost ships, because they failed to shoot down subsonic AShM's and subsonic aircrafts, armed with unguided bombs and guns. And a missiles system designed to handle hypersonics, will not be suited for engaging the wast majority of targets, that is likely going to be subsonic AShM's, UAV's, USV's and so on. Just look at the US Navy in the Red Sea right now. They are failing to keep one of the worlds most important sea lanes open, not because of a lack of capacity in individual ships, sensors and missiles, but because they don't have enough ships, sensors and missiles with sufficient performance. Because using 5'000'000 dollar SM-6's, to shoot down swarmes of 10'000 dollar drones, simply doesn't cut it.
@thecurlew7403
@thecurlew7403 25 дней назад
Load of old toash propaganda 😅😅
@user-gv3no6cl5i
@user-gv3no6cl5i 3 дня назад
Why are you keeping Chinese advertisments. I believe this is a Chinese content as well
Далее
An in-depth look at the Type 26 frigate design
13:50
Просмотров 424 тыс.
СОБАКИ ГОЛОДАЮТ ИЗ-ЗА ЛЕРЫ 🥲
01:00
Базовый iPhone 16
00:38
Просмотров 317 тыс.
We Explored An Abandoned Fort off the Coast of Britain
23:34
The Bohdana: Ukraine's Secret Weapon of War
18:44
Просмотров 440 тыс.
Singapore’s Littoral Solution
4:12
Просмотров 45 тыс.
I Visited The Most *Overpowered US Navy Warship
16:34
Новодельный ноутбук Pocket386
1:16:17
Телефон-електрошокер
0:43
Просмотров 1,3 млн