Armoured glass and ballistic panelling on ships

[STURM]

Very curious as to how many navies actually install armoured glass on their ship bridges and ballistic kevlar panelling in vital areas such as the magazines, hangar, etc. One navy that I know of which has fitted it's ships with ballistic panelling is the South African navy which installed locally made ballistic protection on it's Meko frigates. Whilst most or all newly built combatants these days come with damage control facilities/fire suppression and water tight compartments as standard, I'm not sure about armoured glass and ballistic kevlar panelling for protection against
assymetric threats.

Come to think of it, are the cupolas on modern guns as as the 76mm Super Rapid and 57mm Bofors M2, armoured or they just made of composite materials/fibre glass or non-armoured steel?

 

[spoz]

Very curious as to how many navies actually install armoured glass on their ship bridges and ballistic kevlar panelling in vital areas such as the magazines, hangar, etc. One navy that I know of which has fitted it's ships with ballistic panelling is the South African navy which installed locally made ballistic protection on it's Meko frigates. Whilst most or all newly built combatants these days come with damage control facilities/fire suppression and water tight compartments as standard, I'm not sure about armoured glass and ballistic kevlar panelling for protection against
assymetric threats.

Come to think of it, are the cupolas on modern guns as as the 76mm Super Rapid and 57mm Bofors M2, armoured or they just made of composite materials/fibre glass or non-armoured steel?

ALL combatants have had full DC capability including watertight subdivision for about a 150 years.....; effectively, since it became possible with the change from wood to iron and then steel construction. The quality of it has varied; and one must always balance the demands of damage limitation and control against the demands of personnel living in and fighting the ships.

Ballistic protection is fitted in many modern ships. Where and how much are issues not normally discussed in public.

The gun shields of modern guns, especially when the gun design does not require personnel permanently on the mount, are often made of fibreglass. The barbette and trunking (where that is applicable) sometimes have armour but usually only have fire protection.

The glass in the bridge windows is normally only proof against the sea (which actually requires them to be pretty strong), although there are some applications where they may be armoured

 

[gf0012-aust]

Very curious as to how many navies actually install armoured glass on their ship bridges and ballistic kevlar panelling in vital areas such as the magazines, hangar, etc. One navy that I know of which has fitted it's ships with ballistic panelling is the South African navy which installed locally made ballistic protection on it's Meko frigates. Whilst most or all newly built combatants these days come with damage control facilities/fire suppression and water tight compartments as standard, I'm not sure about armoured glass and ballistic kevlar panelling for protection against assymetric threats.

the person to speak to would be Wookie. He was involved with a group that was offering to armour up citadels on skimmers. It was offered up to the AWD consortia early on.

I've had some dealings with an australian company that was providing armoured glass for bridges on some vessels

for obvious reasons, vessel types can't be discussed.

 

[riksavage]

the person to speak to would be Wookie. He was involved with a group that was offering to armour up citadels on skimmers. It was offered up to the AWD consortia early on.

I've had some dealings with an australian company that was providing armoured glass for bridges on some vessels

for obvious reasons, vessel types can't be discussed.

I can see the armouring of ships designed for the littoral environment becoming more of a priority. Recent air-cushion purchases by the UK were all armoured unlike the ones they replaced (including glass). Same goes for the larger RIB's being used in the Gulf, all fitted with ballistic panels, which you would hope would be at least B7 standard.

Qinetiq conducted a heap of computer modelling for the QE class looking at selected armouring vs design changes (separation of critical assets throughout the ship, built in redundancy etc.), driven by the need to cut costs. However at the end of the day I doubt there's much one could do to mitigate the impact against the superstructure of a Silk Worm, Harpoon,or Brahmos, the kinetic energy alone would be devastating.

In the littoral environment a Javelin, Spike or even RPG could cause severe damage to a modern warships ability to function, particularly if it smacked into the bridge.

 

[Bonza]

In the littoral environment a Javelin, Spike or even RPG could cause severe damage to a modern warships ability to function, particularly if it smacked into the bridge.

Er... are you sure about this? Sure, certain areas of the ship would be more vulnerable than others, but these are vessels built for war, after all. I'm not sure a modern destroyer or frigate would be much bothered by a man-portable missile in all but the most lucky of shots... even a small AShM like the Sea Skua has a warhead more than triple that of say, a Javelin missile.

Not saying such a weapon couldn't do any damage, but I would have thought the damage control procedures and systems in place on a modern warship could deal with it pretty easily.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Er... are you sure about this? Sure, certain areas of the ship would be more vulnerable than others, but these are vessels built for war, after all. I'm not sure a modern destroyer or frigate would be much bothered by a man-portable missile in all but the most lucky of shots... even a small AShM like the Sea Skua has a warhead more than triple that of say, a Javelin missile.

Not saying such a weapon couldn't do any damage, but I would have thought the damage control procedures and systems in place on a modern warship could deal with it pretty easily.

My daughter was doing a SECDET job in the Arabian sea and they were attacked by pirates. One of them fired off an RPG. It went through a porthole, through 2 wardrooms and took the fingers off a crewman on the way through. thankfully it didn't go off

the main issue is if it hits something vital on the way in... eg comms bucket etc...

you're right though on lucky, on warships in ugly space there is an approach zone, get past those alert layers and things are likely to go off

 

[riksavage]

Er... are you sure about this? Sure, certain areas of the ship would be more vulnerable than others, but these are vessels built for war, after all. I'm not sure a modern destroyer or frigate would be much bothered by a man-portable missile in all but the most lucky of shots... even a small AShM like the Sea Skua has a warhead more than triple that of say, a Javelin missile.

Not saying such a weapon couldn't do any damage, but I would have thought the damage control procedures and systems in place on a modern warship could deal with it pretty easily.

There's a good description covering the RM 84mm CG attack against the hull and sniper fire directed against the bridge of the Guerrico in the 1982 conflict, near the bottom of the page. The vessel was forced to withdraw under extreme duress

South Georgia

Photo of vessel for reference

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Guerrico-1980s.jpg

 

[Waylander]

An RPG-7 needs to be very lucky indeed but I imagine a larger ATGM is indeed a threat. IIRC Norway uses Hellfires in the coastal defence role as well as on small FACs and isn't Finland using the Spike for the same role?

There should be lots of things on a modern warship which are very vulnerable. Comms, Radar, SAM-launcher, bridge crew,...

With a man in the loop one can also target special points on a ship as long as the missile comes through the defense layers.

The same can be said about modern SPHs.
If a ship gets close enough to the shore and the enemy has some capable SPHs with well trained crews it could get ugly for the ship.

Even well targeted airbursts or DPICMs should ruin the day of a warship as lots of vital stuff gets shredded.

With modern ammunition like Vulcano (IR-seeker) a lonely ship could very fast reach a point were it, defence systems are overhelmed by an enemy artillery battery and is in a huge danger of dying a fast an violent death.

 

[gf0012-aust]

With modern ammunition like Vulcano (IR-seeker) a lonely ship could very fast reach a point were it, defence systems are overhelmed by an enemy artillery battery and is in a huge danger of dying a fast an violent death.

exactly, you only need a mobility kill to remove it from effective participation.. hence burst ammo etc....

 

[Bonza]

That's really interesting, thanks all for the information and the links. Bloody good showing by the Royal Marines there Rik...

I've got no doubt modern artillery could make a huge impression with the proper ammunition, but underestimated the effectiveness of smaller warheads. Cheers again.

My daughter was doing a SECDET job in the Arabian sea and they were attacked by pirates. One of them fired off an RPG. It went through a porthole, through 2 wardrooms and took the fingers off a crewman on the way through. thankfully it didn't go off

the main issue is if it hits something vital on the way in... eg comms bucket etc...

you're right though on lucky, on warships in ugly space there is an approach zone, get past those alert layers and things are likely to go off

Your daughter sounds like she gets up to nearly as much mischief as you mate! Very interesting but must have been a hell of a thing to see. Glad to hear the warhead fizzled...

 

[riksavage]

exactly, you only need a mobility kill to remove it from effective participation.. hence burst ammo etc....

Imagine what damage a sniper pair could do with a .50 Barrett/Rufus round combination. Difficult to detect, but with the anti-material capability to cause major damage. A ship transiting through a choke point such as the Suez canal could have its critical surveillance/detection systems damaged to a level where it would be forced to return to home port.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Imagine what damage a sniper pair could do with a .50 Barrett/Rufus round combination. Difficult to detect, but with the anti-material capability to cause major damage. A ship transiting through a choke point such as the Suez canal could have its critical surveillance/detection systems damaged to a level where it would be forced to return to home port.

A gunner trained on a RAMICs system (much harder targets) would do some serious mobility damage to a bridge and comms hut area