Dongguan Standard Phalanx Trading Co., Ltd

It either needs to be drastically improved or replaced. Well firstly, even non-state actors have access to anti-ship missiles these days. An attack of even a relatively small number of subsonic anti-ship missiles say would be a problem for any ship especially support ships with no missiles , let alone supersonic or faster missiles.

I think they already exist or am I mistaken? More penny-pinching? Hoping it never comes to that? And utterly negligent. Ditto my previous comment. Phalanx has an atrocious effective range, just 1. At that range it could only take out 2 subsonic missiles at most. And even if it managed to shoot down 2 subsonic missiles, the missile fragments could still do damage to a ship.

The further away from a ship a missile is destroyed the better. There are better gun-based defences than Phalanx. And in any case, see my previous comment. How is having access to more ammo not a good thing? Are you sure about that?

Brickmania

Imagine this scenario: 9 Sus carrying 6 anti-ship missiles each fire all 54 missiles beyond the range of Aster A Type 45 fires all its 48 Asters and best case scenario it shoots down 48 anti-ship missiles of course there could always be leakers. In such a scenario it would make sense for the Phalanx to a be longer ranged and b have access to as much ammo as possible. The more layers of defence you have the better and the more missiles and ammo you have the better.

Why are we even debating this? Woah, hang on. Which mm shell are you referring to? Well 64 quad-packed CAMMs would be great.

Phalanx – Marshalling Our Forces to Keep Your Data Secure | SIX

Also the Iver Huitfeldts were constructed in blocks in Estonia and Lithuania and assembled in Denmark. That probably also contributed to the low overall cost. Nevertheless, the combination of cannon on Type 31 seems to represent a flexible solution. That aspect of the weapon fit for the intended project costs appears fairly balanced. All 3 cannons firing 3P programmable ammunition will be invaluable.

Wonder what the objection was? Looked at the French mm and arrived at Referring to my earlier submission, I still would not want to face 2x40mm handing me 10 shells a second or 1 plus a 57mm — 8. Why would coming over the bow reduce the rpm? The 40mm are mounted on the centreline in the bow and stern, not port and starboard. So they are! Must be too much relaxing.

Fair enough, just re-arrange the heavy metal quite liked my misconception, though.

One of the problems often overlooked in these comparisons other than guided munition options , is the ability of some of these guns to keep it up. Two ASHM incoming, your 57mm knocks out one, then goes on holiday. Throw some money at Leonardo for a mm Volcano version? Quite impressed with the 40mm though. If you were to fit one to an OPV, 40mm definitely. If only they would swap out the 57mm on the T31 for basically anything, 76mm or better.

Considering that the Type 31 is likely to operate in the Persian Gulf escorting commercial vessels, I agree about adding a 76mm gun, especially since the VULCANO round would be good against fast attack craft. The Type 31 could also do with an Oerlikon Millennium Gun. And anti-ship missiles that double as land attack missiles.

And short-ranged Griffin missiles to take out fast attack craft. And DS30Ms. And the Krait Defence System.

Write a review

Phalanx is getting old now, dont get me wrong the mount and sensors are great but the M61 is the limiting factor. For naval work against modern threats its now too short ranged. Looking at the figures only 3 type 45s have a full phalanx compliment…. Aster missiles are great but being Radar guided they would be of little use in areas where close proximity to terrain and for the sake of the Arguement 3m22s Tsirkons plasma stealth means Infra red sensors are more valuable.

This is exactly to same issue the RN had in the Falklands where the Radar guided weapons were useless in San Carlos and they were forced to use SeaCat. Phalanx block 1b is very helpful in these envoiroments. Physics works both ways. Friction and ablation degrade the sensors ability to see the target. Funnily enough these issues get left out of any discussions….

The plasma Stealth as you rightly stated blinds any potential guidance system apart from Inertial guidance for land attack. I used Tsirkon in my comment if it was as fully capable as Tussia claims as a worst case scenario. Even then its essentially unguided at the end so any manouvers would render a miss.

Not strictly true.

• IBM builds biggest phalanx of Linux computers for Shell.
• Minor faction;
• Phalanx Trading System.
• Fungal foraging behaviour and hyphal space exploration in micro-structured Soil Chips?
• trading options fees.

Plasma can be tuned to a particular frequency, so it can either block out that portion of RF or let it through. So in the real sense plasma stealth could work.

1. Futures Trading - Tesseract Trading.
2. forex patterns and probabilities trading strategies for trending and range-bound markets pdf.
3. Welcome to Scribd!?
4. Last ditch defence – the Phalanx close-in weapon system in focus | Navy Lookout.
5. Minor faction - Phalanx Empire League [INARA]!

As you mentioned if it is using a plasma shield it will be lighting up the sky visually as well as thermally so it can be tracked and targeted without radar. The other issue with plasma is maintaining it around the body or at least the nose of the missile. How is it initiated, then maintained and for how long? RIM missiles are very very pricy. Sea Ceptor will be around the same price, for a vastly more capable missile, with at least twice the range, higher speed, better seeker and a shorter minimum engagement range….

It has to be some of the most memorable days in Iraq post gulf war 2 based at Balad. One was near the Green bean coffee shop. I can attest to the system working on numerous occasions, taking out both rockets and mortars. The system even took out mm shells fired from an artillery pierce hidden in a garage nearby in Ishaqi to the North. Funny thing got a bit blase towards the end, being typical Brits, we stayed and enjoyed our coffees, whilst the Yanks dove for the shelters.

Add some LMM cannisters to the existing 30mm mounts as well and it would add up to a significant boost in defensive firepower for a relatively small investment. Whilst to pricy for all ships to use…. The argument that the Type 45s will protect them fails to consider the Carriers escorts being sunk, the Type 45 has serious deficiencies in ASuW and ASW that can and will be exploited.

The Type 26 frigates will be stretched to protect 2 carriers plus any RFA ships from Sibs as well as protecting the Type 45, the Type 31 has yet to to have steel cut. Submarines handle land attack and ASuW. For comparison, a Burke handles pretty much all of the above, although generally speaking not as well as each of the specialised assets we have. Personally, I think that all RN escorts should carry ASMs, and to be fair to them they normally fit Harpoon launchers when they go into hotter zones like the Starit of Hormuz.

Phalanx™ Close in Weapon System (CIWS)

But I think, on balance, that a QE carrier with 2 No. T45 and 2 No. Ticonderoga, 3 No. Burke on average. So additional escorts would be provided by our allies to boost the protection offered. We would not be in a bad position with them providing support. Type 45 not having deficiencies because its not it mission….

In combat the Enemy will use this against you. A Sub will definately take shots at killing 1 of 6 Air Defence ships because in the Type 45s case it has little ASW capabilities, it also cost an absolute fortune and because in Combined Arms ops it will make an enemy air forces job a lot easier.