Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 12/28/2002 4:58:34 PM EST
[img]http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/weapons/phal-blk1b.gif[/img] You have got to love this thing! [url]http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/weapons/wep-phal.html[/url] Ben.
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 5:05:41 PM EST
What bothers me is that until a few years ago, they were unable to engage small surface craft right near the ship. After the Gulf War they added in a retrofit to allow engagement of more than cruise missiles and low flying aircraft, but I don't think all the systems have been retrofit yet.
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 5:09:58 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 5:16:45 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 5:19:10 PM EST
I've got a couple mounted on my roof. My neighbors have stopped talking to me and never visit anymore. Haven't gotten a package from UPS in weeks. USPC40 [img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=476[/img] [url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url] [img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=469[/img]
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 5:21:53 PM EST
Thats one of the coolest things ever. Im not sure how accurately it was portrayed but I saw one in (I think) Sum of All Fears. My only question is...since it fires at around 3000 rpm and only holds around 1000-1300 rounds...how is it reloaded? It is automated?
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 7:17:25 PM EST
I have one on my Chevy Geo to dissuade people from tailgating or cutting me off.
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 7:28:30 PM EST
Nice! I wonder what kind of actuators they have to move the barrel around...
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 7:31:58 PM EST
... I'm having problem with mine overheating when running HEI rounds
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 7:36:41 PM EST
I'll take a dozen! Because I need a couple for spares. [frag]
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 8:18:36 PM EST
My roommate ordered a set of tech manuals in 1988 for the Phalanx and got them. He had a thing for this weapons system. Noone seemed to wonder why a submariner on the SSN 696 would need these manuals. We figured the Russians already had a set anyways, and they were on the list for getting revisions.
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 8:42:14 PM EST
since it fires at around 3000 rpm and only holds around 1000-1300 rounds...how is it reloaded?
View Quote
Not sure reloading is much of a priority with a last-ditch defense weapon like this. Either it gets the job done, or it won't much matter anyway. 1000 rounds is still 20 seconds of sustained fire, BTW. Considering that the average threat probably isn't going to be engaged for more than a few seconds, that amount of ammo still constitutes more successful shoot-outs than the average ship crew would probably like to see in their entire lifetimes...
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 9:23:42 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/28/2002 9:24:29 PM EST by mattja]
Its mission was always to be able to take out anti-ship missiles like the exocet, so one would think cruise missiles would be an easy target because they are slower (I think they are slower, right?) It's obviously seen a lot of upgrades since I worked for General Dynamics, the prime contractor for CIWS, back in the early 80's. I used to watch them assemble the things in the production building in Pomona, CA. They are larger than they look. At least 12', maybe even 15' tall. They used to test the targeting and tracking system near where I worked in the engineering research building. Anyway, if you stand next to that damn thing when it's tracking, the sound of it moving the gun and turret is so ominous, it sends shivers down your spine. It even sounds dangerous, if you can believe that. I always feel uneasy walking in front of it while the engineers tested it. It's so big and scary. he he AFAIK, it was designed to shoot 20mm depleted uranium rounds from the start, which was pretty high tech in those days. It's pretty cool. I saw classified films of Navy tests in SoCal, and all I can say is it is some hardcore stuff. The cyclic rate is so high, all you hear is a tone. You can't hear the individual rounds. I have seen it portrayed in a couple of movies, the latest being "Sum of all Fears", and it is nothing like that in real life. The cyclic rate is much higher. And even back then it was taking out missiles with hardened nose cones (1" steel thick to get through the ship's armor plate), not just drones and crap like that. It's one mean machine.
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 9:33:24 PM EST
A Japanese warship operating with our battle group (Independence) shot down one of our A-6s with its CIWS while conducting a banner shoot in 1996. Despite the news report, one of the aircrew was rather seriously injured. He wore a Nomex balaclava while flying to protect his face from fire (kind of strange, he was the only guy I know who did that), but the mask allegedly snagged on the canopy as he ejected through it and tore his face pretty well. Based in Japan, we all knew of the complete ineptitude of the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Forces, including their surface and air units, so this mishap didn't surprise any of us. http://www.multipull.com/twacasefile/exercises.html Earlier in the year in the Pacific during the large (30,000 participants from 6 nations) RIMPAC 96 exercises, the destroyer JDS Yuugiri from the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force accidentally shot down an American A-6 during a gunnery exercise. According to the official RIMPAC press release, the A-6 "was towing a target drone - a missile about 5-feet long and a foot in diameter."(18) The JDS Yuuguri attempted to destroy the drone with its Phalanx gun system , which "automatically engages functions usually performed by separate, independent systems such as search, detection, threat evaluation, acquisition, track, firing, target destruction, kill assessment and cease fire " at up to 4500 rounds per minute.(19) Instead, the tow aircraft was hit and destroyed. The two crew members safely ejected and suffered no serious injuries. (20) The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force suspended all live firing until an examination of this accident was completed. The suspension of live firing did not extend to the other RIMPAC participants, the United States, Chile, Australia, Canada, and the Republic of Korea. (21) Later in RIMPAC, several of the participating ships would have cruise missiles launched at them. They were successfully tracked, engaged, and destroyed.
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 9:39:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/28/2002 10:16:47 PM EST by Lumpy196]
The portable version, the [b]M163[/b]. Based on the M113 APC. Used in the anti-personnel role in Vietnam and as a counter-sniper weapon by the Israelis in Bierut [:D]: [img]http://photos.ar15.com/WS_Content/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=3130[/img] [img]http://photos.ar15.com/WS_Content/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=3131[/img]
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 9:40:02 PM EST
GoalTender is neater. IIRC, it uses 30mm shells..... On the Exocet missile. The one which "killed" the H.M.S. Sheffield during the Fawkland Islands incident, [b]DID NOT DETONATE[/b]. Its fuel cell caused a fire which burned the aluminum vessel's hull down to the water-line. Many of the seriously injured British sailors were wearing "anti-flash" undersuits, which melted and fused into their flesh..... Scott
Link Posted: 12/28/2002 9:42:24 PM EST
Specs from the Navy web site: Weight: 12,500 pounds (5,625 kg) - Later models: 13,600 pounds (6,120 kg) Range: Classified Gun Type: M-61A1 Gatling Type of Fire: 3,000 rounds per minute - Later models: 4,500 rounds/min (starting 1988 production, Pneumatic Gun Drive) Magazine Capacity: 989 rounds - Later models: 1,550 rounds Caliber: 20mm Ammunition: Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS), Depleted Uranium sub-caliber penetrator. Penetrator changed to Tungsten 1988. Block 1B will incorporate the new Enhanced Lethality Cartridge with a heavier penetrator. Sensors: Self-contained search and track radar with integrated FLIR
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 12:46:22 AM EST
Do you remember.........couple years back......the Navy forgot to unload before entering Pearl Harbor. Yup, it went off.............
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 2:59:22 AM EST
Originally Posted By DScottHewitt: GoalTender is neater. IIRC, it uses 30mm shells..... On the Exocet missile. The one which "killed" the H.M.S. Sheffield during the Fawkland Islands incident, [b]DID NOT DETONATE[/b]. Its fuel cell caused a fire which burned the aluminum vessel's hull down to the water-line. Many of the seriously injured British sailors were wearing "anti-flash" undersuits, which melted and fused into their flesh..... Scott
View Quote
It's called Goalkeeper. It is a Dutch machine that uses a 30mm cannon. We tested it in the late '80s and found it to be wanting in some respects. Way too heavy for us to refit many of our ships with.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 3:34:55 AM EST
I bet our guys in the pacific would have loved to have one of those R2D2's for kamikazes.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 7:35:18 AM EST
Originally Posted By LWilde:
Originally Posted By DScottHewitt: GoalTender is neater. IIRC, it uses 30mm shells..... On the Exocet missile. The one which "killed" the H.M.S. Sheffield during the Fawkland Islands incident, [b]DID NOT DETONATE[/b]. Its fuel cell caused a fire which burned the aluminum vessel's hull down to the water-line. Many of the seriously injured British sailors were wearing "anti-flash" undersuits, which melted and fused into their flesh..... Scott
View Quote
It's called Goalkeeper. It is a Dutch machine that uses a 30mm cannon. We tested it in the late '80s and found it to be wanting in some respects. Way too heavy for us to refit many of our ships with.
View Quote
That's why my Goggle search failed last night..... Scott [:D]
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 8:22:30 AM EST
I was there the day we did the rollout for the DIVAD, a replacement for the M163. It was pretty cool, but General Dynamics lost to Ford I think, and in the end the entire project was cancelled. I think our's has twin 35mm canons while Ford's had 40mm canons. My best friend's stepdad was project manager for that thing at the Cucamonga, CA office of General Dynamics.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 8:25:11 AM EST
It's a [b]Sea Whiz[/b]!
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 9:08:32 AM EST
In 1979 I was working on the Mk-15 Close In Weapons System (CIWS), aka the Phalanx at the GD plant in Pomona. I even taught a course in it once. The genesis of the Phalanx system was the threat to the Fleet posed by anti-ship cruise missiles like the Exocet. CIWS is a last ditch defense system. The system is designed to protect own ship. It is not an area defense weapon. In the air defense modes it will not engage any target that does not pose a direct threat to own ship. This means it won’t fire at crossing targets. The radar system uses two antennae, a multi-faced planar array that rotates at 60rpm and a nodding, truncated parabola that is vertically polarized for tracking. This scheme of two separate antennae permits the system to search and track multiple targets simultaneously. The search antenna is mounted in the top of the R2D2 dome and the tracking antenna is mounted below it. The gun computer is used for both radars. The automatic engagement goes something like this: The search radar detects a potential target as it appears on the horizon as a sea-skimmer or perhaps as a diving missile launched from an aircraft. After a couple of target returns, the computer has enough data to compute the course, speed and closest point of approach (CPA) of the target to own ship. If the inbound threat meets the engagement criteria it is passed to the track system and the search program continues to search for more threats. As soon as the tracking radar locks on and the target is being tracked, the gun will then open fire in time to have the bullet stream meet the target at maximum range. When the gun begins firing, the track radar program tracks the outgoing bullet stream and provides feedback info to the computer to steer the bullet stream onto the target. Think of yourself trying to shoot down a moth with your garden hose. Your eyes, brain and hose are analogous to the radar, computer and gun. The gun is a modified six barrel M61 20mm cannon. The ammo uses a sub-caliber round with a plastic sabot. The round has a very sharp point and flies at very high speed to permit the sharp bullet point to dig into the target, even at sharp grazing angles. The ammo was depleted uranium as described but the Navy is now using a new penetrator because of the risks inherent with DU. The reason for the penetrator rather than HE ammo is simple. There are three vital areas of vulnerability in a cruise missile: Electronics/guidance section, fuel, and warhead. During the development of the CIWS, modeling indicated we would need a certain number of hits in one or more of these locations in the enemy missile to achieve a kill. Now what is a kill? Well…obviously if we hit the warhead or fuel and cause a high order detonation…game over, we win. On the other hand, maybe we just saw the wings off…or smash the hell out of the electronics inside…then what? The computer engagement software was written to recognize that IF an inbound threat being shot at by our CISWS deviated from its course (Due to damage?) to an extent that a maneuver requiring a certain number of Gs was needed for that enemy missile to re-engage our ship…then that was a kill and a cease fire command was immediately sent to the gun. The gun is electrically spun and the ammo is electrically fired. The primers are zapped with 300 volts as they cycle into the firing position. Only one barrel fires at a time. As the gun spins, it picks up ammo from the linked belt and the empties are simply kept in the belt as it cycles back into the magazine. The magazine is the big round container under the gun. It holds 1500 rounds or about 20 seconds of firing. The magazine has within it a continuous helical track within which the linked bullets ride. There is a loading chute at the front of the magazine. To load the gun, you cart the ammo cans up to the mount, remove the linked ammo from the can and hook it up in the loading chute. There is a power drive handle on the magazine which the operator pulls and the drive motor pulls the linked belt into the magazine. You just keep linking up successive belts until the magazine is full. As you load fresh ammo in, the old empties and any misfires/duds are being pushed out the back. Pretty ingenious system. And yes…the ammo cans are too heavy for some of the crew…and the guns must be reloaded during battle. There have been several accidents over the last 20 years or so involving CIWS including at least one fatality…but for the most it is a safe system IF the safety regulations are followed to the letter. In one funny incident, a ship accidentally fired on USS New Jersey with CIWS. I can’t remember if that is where the fatality occurred and if so, I apologize profusely to any here who might take offense…none intended…but as I remember, the 20mm rounds didn’t do to much damage to the battleship! The big device on the end of the barrels is a sort of barrel clamp, designed to reduce shot dispersal. The cage structure near the rear of the barrels serves the same purpose. The system did not have that originally. It is a relatively late ORDALT. The system in the picture is a Block 1B system. This system has a surface and helo engagement capability. In order to engage small craft and helos the system must be manually controlled by an operator. This new system includes an electro-optic and Infrared (EO/IR) system with TV screens on an operator’s console. You can see the TV camera and the IR camera on the mount in the picture. This system also has a manual burst system, permitting the operator to fire either 100 or 300 rounds at a time. CIWS is a pretty good system. Getting a bit long in the tooth…but with constant upgrades, it stays out there on the cutting edge.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 9:20:43 AM EST
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 9:46:37 AM EST
GoalKeeper: [img]http://klu.tigerteam-security.net/images/Goalkeeper.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.mod.uk/img/business/%5B(1050)-22-08-2000%5D04-picture-goalkeeper.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/data/%5B(1622)-11-01-2002%5Dg2.jpg[/img] IIRC, the Goalkeeper uses the same round as the anti-tank gun on the A-10..... Scott
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 10:22:50 AM EST
Originally Posted By Blackbird_Pilot: Thats one of the coolest things ever. Im not sure how accurately it was portrayed but I saw one in (I think) Sum of All Fears. My only question is...since it fires at around 3000 rpm and only holds around 1000-1300 rounds...how is it reloaded? It is automated?
View Quote
the rounds come in drums, about 1.5 feet in diameter and about 3.5 feet long, are painted white and have the number of rounds painted on the outside of the drum, usually 600. it only fires short burst at a target, puts one bullet in every square foot of a given area. awesome at night with tracers.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 11:15:28 AM EST
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 3:16:03 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 4:13:10 PM EST
The Block 1B CIWS (aka Sea Whiz, Phalanx, etc) hasn't made it to all ships yet, but I see more and more on the waterfront. We have it, and it is devestating! I have pics of a Block 1B vs a small boat, but I'm not going to post them. LWilde did a great job with the Mk15's history. As marvl posted they are pnuematically driven now. The rounds come in a 20mm ammo can like you can get at the local Army-Navy store. I haven't seen it shoot at night(that's a safety concern we want to make sure the range is clear of any small craft), so I won't comment on the tracers (although I don't think the CIWS uses tracer rounds). The move from DU rounds to the new round is due to the concern about heavy metal poisoning not because of radioactivity. F14Scott, IIRC the Japanese didn't use the same safety procedures that we do. They didn't "mark on top" the towing aircraft.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 4:18:30 PM EST
Originally Posted By dport: I haven't seen it shoot at night(that's a safety concern we want to make sure the range is clear of any small craft), so I won't comment on the tracers (although I don't think the CIWS uses tracer rounds).
View Quote
I was getting ready to type "Tracers would probably be pointless, anyway. Seeing as how it is radar aimed, automatically.", when I remembered that the Block 1B has manual aiming options against surface craft..... Scott
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 4:44:37 PM EST
Isn't the successor to the Phalanx supposed to be some derivative of that 1,000,000 rpm multibarreled developed by that...Australian?....guy a few years ago?
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 5:10:34 PM EST
Originally Posted By CaptainSanity: Isn't the successor to the Phalanx supposed to be some derivative of that 1,000,000 rpm multibarreled developed by that...Australian?....guy a few years ago?
View Quote
HellStorm, or something? (Idea originated by Howard F. Broyles in the late 1960s.) [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=158243&w=searchPop[/url] His system was called the Craigmari Weapon System. The idea involved calibers from basic infantry arms up to light grenade and HE projectiles. Used electric ignition to detonate the charges stacked in each barrel similar to a Roman Candle, starting with the front charge, of course. Had four barrels. Reloading would the main handicap at the time. (I used the idea in some of my science fiction writing, with quick-change "ammo packs" containing fresh charges in new barrel assemblies.) Imagine a 10MM or so system with 10x10 barrel matrix, each with 25 rounds. That would be [b]2500[/b] rounds per load..... Of course, in my stories, the future Marines using the system wear powered armor, taking the majority of the load of the weight..... Scott P.S. Look for my stories someday. I promise. Unless I get taken out first.....
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 5:20:43 PM EST
The family members of some forty deceased sailors in the USS Stark incident in the 1980's in the Persian Gulf would remind the Navy to KEEP THE PHALANX SYSTEM TURNED ON when in a battle zone. Those anti ship missles come in pretty fast.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 5:24:38 PM EST
Originally Posted By Lazyshooter: The family members of some forty deceased sailors in the USS Stark incident in the 1980's in the Persian Gulf would remind the Navy to KEEP THE PHALANX SYSTEM TURNED ON when in a battle zone. Those anti ship missles come in pretty fast.
View Quote
I agree that the Starke should have been fully prepped for attack. They got caught off-guard because the attacking vessel was not thought of as "enemy". (I personally reject the whole "We accidently spiked your vessel" defense.) Scott
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 5:49:03 PM EST
IIRC the STARK stood down their readiness condition and went to normal peacetime steaming in the middle of the Persian Gulf. Not the smartest of moves, but the crew will burn out if they don't get rest.
Link Posted: 12/29/2002 5:52:42 PM EST
Dude, the trick is to disguise them as satellite TV dishes. (The belt-fed variety.)
Originally Posted By USPC40: I've got a couple mounted on my roof. My neighbors have stopped talking to me and never visit anymore. Haven't gotten a package from UPS in weeks. USPC40
View Quote
Top Top