Videos of various Close In Weapons Systems

[AlmightyTallest]

Hey guys,

after doing some research on the Phalanx systems, I invariably come across other information that's pretty interesting or just plain fun to watch.

So below you'll find some informative videos, some from the origional manufacturer showcasing their point defense systems that help protect your valuable ships in CMANO. Feel free to add other videos you find of these systems.

Enjoy!

1. Here's some facinating info about the Russian Kashtan-M system, showcasing many test firings and even giving various engagement ranges versus aircraft and anti-ship missiles with both the missile and gun parts of the system.

I was surprised the expected range for the 30mm cannon was only 2km against sea skimming missiles, but the video shows a wide dispersion of the rounds which helps explain that closer range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgrhPsV_2II#t=135

2. AK-630M, again from Russia with some interesting test footage, ranges are listed higher than Kashtan, but doesn't distinguish between aircraft and missile threats like the Kashtan video, dispersion also high as seen by the tracers in the video though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3w5NFMddXw

Another interesting thing is that these Russian systems don't seem to be meant to work against supersonic anti-ship missiles, at least the gun part of the system, as the expected threat was really subsonic Tomahawk TASM's and Harpoons during the Cold War.

3. What's better than one 30mm cannon for point defence? How about two combined together for double the rate of fire, plus more cool factor. It's the Russian AK-630M-2 Duet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrp5V84Xu_k

A news feature showcasing the various 30mm gun systems of the Kashtan and AK-630, and Duet, notice the barrel wobble and thin barrels in the first 20 seconds of video which increases dispersion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHk7yUzHCWI&list=PLABB1FA249A256108

4. The Goalkeeper, nothing like using a GAU-8A from the A-10 to defend your ship.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGrJnxdDbO8

5. Turkish Sea Zenith, 4 25mm cannon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odNEjt610ns

6. Chinese Type 730, looks very much like the Goalkeeper.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzY9imZC7ic

7. Phalanx. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4hA8IqSC58&index=8&list=FLUbMa9kEYoLP3_Zlc2nzVPA

[DeltaIV]

Thank you, very interesting. [8D]

[Gunner98]

The Russian Kashtan-M system looks very similar in concept and possibly design to the SA-19 -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska-M1

I wonder if it is the same family of AD weapons?

B

[AlmightyTallest]

The missiles in Kashtan-M are the same in some instances to the Tunguska.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashtan_CIWS

The missiles used in the Kashtan are the 9M311 missiles, which is also used on the 9K22 Tunguska. The 9M311 is a SACLOS guided missile, however, it is steered automatically by the command module.

You can see this in the video, the square targeting symbol around the target plane or missile.

[AlmightyTallest]

In September 1994 the U.S. Navy was able to check out the performance of the AK-630 CIWS on the East German USNS Hiddensee, with was a Tarantul-1 Corvette.



The photo above is of the USNS Hiddensee AK-630

Here's the 7 minute unclassified video of the tests of the CIWS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_0AB42_1g0

Average dispersion was 10.3 milliradians, and the system was locked down for the test, indicating that if it was in a flexible configuration the dispersion could be higher. This points to drastically limiting effectiveness as range increases. It also explains why larger Russian ships used multiple AK-630's in pairs to increase the amount of lead that could be slung at the incoming threat.

For reference I think 1 milliradians is 3.6 inches at 100 yards, or 3 feet at l,000 yards.

That huge muzzle blast is also bad for TV and Thermal optical tracking systems, as it could blind those systems from seeing the threat.

[NakedWeasel]

Well, when it comes to throwing a large volume of high explosive projectiles downrange, it does what it's told. Do the fuses from the rounds work, and does the explosive charge result in a successful kill is still in question. But the real elephant in the room, completely ignored by the video was, how effective is the detection and tracking radar for the weapon system versus a modern sea skimmer? How effective is that radar versus low observable, low-radar and IR cross-section weapons like JSOW, JASSM, LRASM and NSM/JSM? How susceptible is the system to OECM? How effective is the mount servos at tracking a high velocity, high maneuverability, small-diameter target, performing a diving terminal attack? Questions, questions...

[AlmightyTallest]

I know what you mean, those are some of the same questions I had. The end of the video mentioned more tests with other Russian CIWS systems, and I'd love to find those if they are available.

I was surprised at the amount of dispersion. Subsonic sea skimmers can make more abrupt maneuvers than a supersonic one, and are harder to detect via IR systems in general.

[Rudd]

Thanks for sharing research and videos, very interesting info.

[AlmightyTallest]

No problem Rudd, glad you guys enjoyed it, I had fun finding the info.

[Gunner98]

For reference I think 1 milliradians is 3.6 inches at 100 yards, or 3 feet at l,000 yards.

I believe your math is close: In metric 1 Mill = 1 Meter @ 1000 Meters

Converting any tighter than you have would make my head hurt [;)]

It seems that the designers had a sort of Shot-gun approach as opposed to the Goalkeeper or Phalanx which I believe are much tighter. Advantage of tighter grouping is ammo conservation but you need everything spot on to actually hit. The 'Spray & Pray' approach might just be the better option under combat conditions, as long as you bring bucket loads of ammo with you...[:D]



B

[NakedWeasel]

I believe your math is close: In metric 1 Mill = 1 Meter @ 1000 Meters

Converting any tighter than you have would make my head hurt [;)]

It seems that the designers had a sort of Shot-gun approach as opposed to the Goalkeeper or Phalanx which I believe are much tighter. Advantage of tighter grouping is ammo conservation but you need everything spot on to actually hit. The 'Spray & Pray' approach might just be the better option under combat conditions, as long as you bring bucket loads of ammo with you...[:D]

One of the reasons why the Phalanx was more accurate may be due to the DU ammo that was loaded. That's what we loaded the CIWs with back in my day. The ammo itself probably did not make the gun more accurate, but a single DU round impacting your average sea skimmer would cause it all kinds of disaster.

[thewood1]

Were those missiles armored enough that there was a huge difference between a DU round impacting and military steel or tungsten.

[NakedWeasel]

I don't know why the Navy chose DU for shooting down missiles, although the enormous size of some of the Russian ASMs might obviate the need for a penetrator round like DU. It should also be noted that DU possesses incendiary qualities in addition to being able to penetrate armor. Considering the combined velocities of the projectile and a supersonic missile, the total effect against a light target like a missile would have to be enormously devastating.

All this said, it is my understanding that the USN no longer loads DU rounds into the CIWs.

[Gunner98]

Were those missiles armored enough that there was a huge difference between a DU round impacting and military steel or tungsten

I doubt it. I suspect that to get the ranges and flight profiles needed there is simply a think skin on those things. The DU is probably an attempt to get higher Muzzle velocity, not sure in this application.

The tighter accuracy and probably the DU or at least tungsten, are of good use in the latest use of these systems (both Phalanx and Goalkeeper), knocking down incoming mortar and ballistic rocket rounds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgpQBZF2sZQ



B

[AlmightyTallest]

The DU is probably an attempt to get higher Muzzle velocity, not sure in this application.

The tighter accuracy and probably the DU or at least tungsten, are of good use in the latest use of these systems (both Phalanx and Goalkeeper), knocking down incoming mortar and ballistic rocket rounds.

I can actually answer some of these questions for you guys.

For the use of DU or today Tungsten in the 20mm Phalanx, with the main threat being a Supersonic AShCM, the idea is that a oncoming penetrating round will pass through much of the missile, without breaking it into many high speed pieces. This is important, the main consideration with Phalanx was that engaging such a fast target at insufficient ranges would still put the targeted ship at risk because of the high energy of the leftover pieces of cruise missile if it broke apart. The Tungsten penetrator in the Block 1B is sub caliber, and higher velocity for shipboard use to help extend range.

If you have high velocity tungsten penetrating round that passes lengthwise through the cruise missiles systems, a single round could hit the ASM's radar, avionics, flight control systems, warhead, engine, etc. making it unflyable in one large piece which was preferable to breaking it up and having the pieces hit you.

For the C-RAM system as the video Gunner98 shows, these rounds aren't the same as those used on ships, they are HE and HEI, with a self destruct at a certain range to limit danger to personnel on the ground. These are used to break up the smaller incoming mortar and other artillery rounds while defending a base.

Advantage of tighter grouping is ammo conservation but you need everything spot on to actually hit.

Ammo conservation is one thing, but having your rounds tighter at close range and scatter at a further range allows you to engage at longer ranges. If my Phalanx 1B has 0.8 mil dispersion, and I'm firing at an anti-ship missile that's only 14" wide it gives me a better chance of hitting it further out, if my other systems are working to make the rounds connect.

Contrast that with an AK-630 with 10.3 mils dispersion trying to hit a harpoon missile at 530+ miles per hour that's only 13.5" frontal cross section.

My head hurts, but what is the dispersion at 1,000 meters with a weapon that is 10.3 mils?


Another video, this was an actual insurgent attack on a US base, three of the C-RAM's go into action shooting down multiple incoming rounds, the gentleman waking everyone up and screaming for HE is attempting to get the on base batteries ready to counter the threat, warning for strong language.

The alarm sound is from the radar's detecting an incoming threat and warning people to take cover and stay clear of the CIWS. It has saved lives in actual use.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XceGKHATcYE


Another one, no warning when the Phalanx went active, at 11 or 12 seconds in, the quick flash near the center of the screen is the destroyed round.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lY1NErClX1g

British friends watching the Cram take on a few incoming rounds. I know they laugh when they see these go off, but it makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck knowing what it means.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRpDdGMpgBI