Anti-aircraft artillery in the 21st century?

[stud40111]

Is anti-aircraft artillery still employed by any of the more advanced militaries in the world (e.g. U.S., Russia, China, France, UK, Germany, Israel, Turkey, etc.)?

Irrespective of the answer to the above, against what type of aircraft and in what kinds of situations is the use of anti-aircraft artillery in a 21st century conflict most effective?

Please excuse me if the question exposes just how much of a newbie I am but I would appreciate responses no less.

Thanks in advance.

 

[kato]

Is anti-aircraft artillery still employed by any of the more advanced militaries in the world (e.g. U.S., Russia, China, France, UK, Germany, Israel, Turkey, etc.)?

If we include C-RAM guns all of the above except the UK and France do. Those two haven't had any since the 70s.

 

[STURM]

Israel used to have 20m Vulcans mounted on M-113's, not sure when they were retired or if they are retired.

Irrespective of the answer to the above, against what type of aircraft and in what kinds of situations is the use of anti-aircraft artillery in a 21st century conflict most effective?

Munitions like the Contraves AHEAD round for the Oerlikon 35mm guns are reportedly very effective but comes with a huge price tag. Together with local fire control, passive target alerting and smart rounds, I think AA guns can still be very effective against low flying aircraft - fixed wing and rotary. The plus side is that AA shells unlike missiles can't be decoyed, the downside is that the radar and fire control of AA guns can be played with by airborne ECM and can be targetted by anti-radiation missiles.

 

[kato]

AHEAD isn't really all that costly. And no reason for it to be - it only consists of an aluminium shell, a couple identical tungsten pellets, a small explosive rod and a time fuze with electromagnetic setting.

 

[Feanor]

The Pantsyr-1S and 2S6 Tunguska are combined gun-missile systems used by the Russian army for point air defence.

 

[DarthAmerica]

I've seen R2D2 fired in anger before at incoming. BrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrIIIIP!!!!!

I wouldn't wanna fly into that!

-DA

 

[Feanor]

I've seen R2D2 fired in anger before at incoming. BrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrIIIIP!!!!!

I wouldn't wanna fly into that!

-DA

R2D2 like the ones on the X-Wings? Or is there something else I'm missing?

 

[Todjaeger]

R2D2 like the ones on the X-Wings? Or is there something else I'm missing?

Nickname for Phalanx I believe. Not sure whether it is just land-based Phalanx CIWS, or whether it also has USN usage as a nick.

-Cheers

 

[Feanor]

Nickname for Phalanx I believe. Not sure whether it is just land-based Phalanx CIWS, or whether it also has USN usage as a nick.

-Cheers

Well this is embarrassing... good to know. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Nickname for Phalanx I believe. Not sure whether it is just land-based Phalanx CIWS, or whether it also has USN usage as a nick.

-Cheers

That's what I'm referring to. I won't go into any specifics except to say AAA is alive, well, effective and flexible in application. In my estimation in the very near future AAA will include DEWs and that's going to be a real game changer! Unlimited payload and near instant killing power!

-DA

 

[My2Cents]

That's what I'm referring to. I won't go into any specifics except to say AAA is alive, well, effective and flexible in application. In my estimation in the very near future AAA will include DEWs and that's going to be a real game changer! Unlimited payload and near instant killing power!

It will certainly be interesting when all electric DEWs are fielded. The weapon itself will be expensive, but once set up the incremental cost per shot will be incredibly low. The perfect anti-artillery weapon for major powers.

 

[DarthAmerica]

It will certainly be interesting when all electric DEWs are fielded. The weapon itself will be expensive, but once set up the incremental cost per shot will be incredibly low. The perfect anti-artillery weapon for major powers.

I'm of the opinion that it will not cost as much as we think. Nothing really new is needed here. Only the technical challenges of integration.

-DA

 

[Tomte47]

Can some explain what "DEW" is ?
Google sent me to a car dealer when i tried it...

 

[Todjaeger]

Can some explain what "DEW" is ?
Google sent me to a car dealer when i tried it...

DEW can be an acronym for a few different things. Defensive Electronic Warfare for instance. In this particular case it is referring to Direct Energy Weapon.

-Cheers

 

[kato]

I wouldn't wanna fly into that!

Not really a problem to take apart a Phalanx C-RAM. Start firing S8 pods at 3.5 to 4 km to saturate it from outside its combat range, then drop a pair of Vikhr or a LGB on it. Hence why systems like MANTIS or OTOMATIC with DAVIDE with their 5+ km combat ranges are superior in that regard.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Not really a problem to take apart a Phalanx C-RAM. Start firing S8 pods at 3.5 to 4 km to saturate it from outside its combat range, then drop a pair of Vikhr or a LGB on it. Hence why systems like MANTIS or OTOMATIC with DAVIDE with their 5+ km combat ranges are superior in that regard.

Relying solely on Phalanx isn't really representative of how such a system would be encountered. It's a point defense layer weapon designed to deal with leakers.

-DA

 

[SpudmanWP]

If your 4km away from a ship that has an R2D2, I'd be worrying about what he was firing at me, not my rockets.... Hello Standard or ESSM missile inbound.

 

[kato]

It's a point defense layer weapon designed to deal with leakers.

Phalanx C-RAM, the land-based variant, isn't. It's a single-layer system owing to the fact that the US does not field any mid- or shortrange air-defense systems (except PAC-3, which won't be layered into a C-RAM environment).

 

[DarthAmerica]

Phalanx C-RAM, the land-based variant, isn't. It's a single-layer system owing to the fact that the US does not field any mid- or shortrange air-defense systems (except PAC-3, which won't be layered into a C-RAM environment).

That's not true. The DoD does field short ranged air defense systems and also emphasizes aircraft as part of the air defense network
which fits better into the expeditionary nature of US Military operations. Also don't forget the USN.

-DA

 

[Feanor]

That's not true. The DoD does field short ranged air defense systems and also emphasizes aircraft as part of the air defense network
which fits better into the expeditionary nature of US Military operations. Also don't forget the USN.

-DA

Other then the avengers and linebackers, which are MANPADS mounted on other chassis, what else did you have in mind? Lets say, what did you have in mind with range of over 10kms?