Brunei Corvettes

[dreamwarrior73]

GPS guided ammunition is effective against a static target. but against a moving target such as SSM that is really fast and continuously changes position? i doubt.

further more, SSM nowadays no longer flies in a straight flight pattern. some SSM does have zig-zagging or some kind of flight pattern. which make it really hard to shoot them down with few rounds.

the best defence against these SSM is to create a "curtain of lead" around the ship. which translated into throwing a really high number of rounds against the SSM.

this can be done either like CIWS systems such as Phalanx, AK-630 and Goalkeeper which has a really high cyclic rate.

or by guns systems that combine high cyclic rate with a high number of tungsten balls in each round like the 35mm Millenium Gun or Bofors 40mm Mk 3.

my choice would be the Bofors 40mm Mk 3 because in worst case scenario of the ship combat systems failure it can still be operated manually from inside the gun cupola.

 

[contedicavour]

GPS guided ammunition is effective against a static target. but against a moving target such as SSM that is really fast and continuously changes position? i doubt.

further more, SSM nowadays no longer flies in a straight flight pattern. some SSM does have zig-zagging or some kind of flight pattern. which make it really hard to shoot them down with few rounds.

the best defence against these SSM is to create a "curtain of lead" around the ship. which translated into throwing a really high number of rounds against the SSM.

this can be done either like CIWS systems such as Phalanx, AK-630 and Goalkeeper which has a really high cyclic rate.

or by guns systems that combine high cyclic rate with a high number of tungsten balls in each round like the 35mm Millenium Gun or Bofors 40mm Mk 3.

my choice would be the Bofors 40mm Mk 3 because in worst case scenario of the ship combat systems failure it can still be operated manually from inside the gun cupola.

"Curtain of lead" as you say is one option ; guided missiles or ammunition is the other. There is no "right" or "wrong" here, it's 2 philosophies that have both been tested and proven effective.
The Italian (via Aster 30s, then 15s, then 76/62 SR-vulcano) and French navies (Aster 30s, then 15s, then Mistral) prefer shooting less and guiding more what you're shooting. Worth noting, several other navies are moving away from traditional short range CIWS towards RAM (US and Germany for instance).
Our 76/62 SR guided ammunition have been tested via radio & GPS guidance so that they can almost turn 90° and follow an incoming SSM, by exploding close enough to it. Any incoming pattern the SSM may follow can be tracked by the ship's radar and transferred to the guided ammunition so that its path can be corrected.
If we doubted its efficiency, we would have included the existing Breda 25mm fast-firing cannons into CIWS system (they are fully automatic and linked to the Dardo illuminators), but we don't. Must be a sign of confidence no ?

cheers

 

[dreamwarrior73]

"Curtain of lead" as you say is one option ; guided missiles or ammunition is the other. There is no "right" or "wrong" here, it's 2 philosophies that have both been tested and proven effective.
The Italian (via Aster 30s, then 15s, then 76/62 SR-vulcano) and French navies (Aster 30s, then 15s, then Mistral) prefer shooting less and guiding more what you're shooting. Worth noting, several other navies are moving away from traditional short range CIWS towards RAM (US and Germany for instance).
Our 76/62 SR guided ammunition have been tested via radio & GPS guidance so that they can almost turn 90° and follow an incoming SSM, by exploding close enough to it. Any incoming pattern the SSM may follow can be tracked by the ship's radar and transferred to the guided ammunition so that its path can be corrected.
If we doubted its efficiency, we would have included the existing Breda 25mm fast-firing cannons into CIWS system (they are fully automatic and linked to the Dardo illuminators), but we don't. Must be a sign of confidence no ?

cheers

i do agree on the 2 different philosophies of shooting down SSM. but i don't agree on the statement that USN is moving away from the CIWS.

USN just gone one step beyond the CIWS concept. now USN is adopting the Close In Gun System (CIGS) concept. as being used in the DD(X) design.

i believe that USN practised both philosophies. USN used both Phalanx CIWS and RAM to shoot down SSM.

 

[contedicavour]

i do agree on the 2 different philosophies of shooting down SSM. but i don't agree on the statement that USN is moving away from the CIWS.

USN just gone one step beyond the CIWS concept. now USN is adopting the Close In Gun System (CIGS) concept. as being used in the DD(X) design.

i believe that USN practised both philosophies. USN used both Phalanx CIWS and RAM to shoot down SSM.

Fair point I would like to discuss further : if we leave aside for the moment the DDG-1000 project (which is still a bit in standby), I see most USN ships equipped with RAM, though most also have Phalanx. The LCS ships building as we speak though have only RAM (and the 57mm gun, but that one is more general purpose, not anti-missile). What does that say about the USN intentions in CIWS ? My reading of this is that for the moment (DDG-1000 project aside) the USN is moving away from Phalanx towards RAM.

cheers

 

[dreamwarrior73]

Fair point I would like to discuss further : if we leave aside for the moment the DDG-1000 project (which is still a bit in standby), I see most USN ships equipped with RAM, though most also have Phalanx. The LCS ships building as we speak though have only RAM (and the 57mm gun, but that one is more general purpose, not anti-missile). What does that say about the USN intentions in CIWS ? My reading of this is that for the moment (DDG-1000 project aside) the USN is moving away from Phalanx towards RAM.

cheers

to back up your statement, could you list down the classes of USN ships that are using Phalanx and RAM?

do you agree that the Arleight Burke DDG is the major USN combat vessel? does it equip with Phalanx or RAM? what does the latest newly built Arleigh Burke equipped with?

 

[contedicavour]

to back up your statement, could you list down the classes of USN ships that are using Phalanx and RAM?

do you agree that the Arleight Burke DDG is the major USN combat vessel? does it equip with Phalanx or RAM? what does the latest newly built Arleigh Burke equipped with?

My pleasure

The lateset Burke Flight IIA, as mentioned in www.navy.mil , do not carry Phalanx. ESSMs from Mk41 Mod7 provide close in defence against missiles. There are 2 25mm guns, but they are not inteded as anti-missile CIWS.

The other example I have in mind is the new San Antonio LPD class : RAM yes, Phalanx no. Again, there are 30mm guns, but by no means CIWS guns.

Wasp and Tarawa LHA/LHDs carry both RAM and Phalanx.

LCS carries RAM only.

cheers

 

[dreamwarrior73]

the DDG-1000, which was supposed to be the new class of USN DDG is not equipped with RAM for close-in defense but instead it is equipped with Bofors 57mm Mk 3.

like i said earlier, the USN has not ditched CIWS kind of systems just yet. but instead they have upgraded to CIGS.

 

[contedicavour]

the DDG-1000, which was supposed to be the new class of USN DDG is not equipped with RAM for close-in defense but instead it is equipped with Bofors 57mm Mk 3.

like i said earlier, the USN has not ditched CIWS kind of systems just yet. but instead they have upgraded to CIGS.

DDG-1000 is far from being fleet standard for the moment... while Burke is. The latest Burke use ESSM and SM2, fullstop.
I do see your point however, though for me these big-caliber guns, CIGS as you say, are no longer traditional CIWS (compared with Goalkeepers or Phalanx). Please notice I don't have anything against these "cigs" as my country's navy has gone on this track for a while already with our 76/62SR guided ammo Vulcano.

cheers

 

[renjer]

i couldn't agree with you more. to me it would be really good for the RMN to have these ships as the reasons you stated. RMN should allocate fund to procure these ships if they are selling at bargain price. these ships can boost the number of capital ships in RMN fleet almost overnight versus building the PV which takes years.

if you asked me. i would say do both buy these ships and proceed building the PV. as buying these ships is a short term solution in addressing the issue of shortage of capital ships in the fleet. whilst building the PV is a long term solution.

Mod edit: Watch your own insults mate. I'll keep an eye on him... Cheers. AD.

The RMN/MOD/GOM choosing to proceed with the Meko 100 is proof of the weakness of your arguments. The Nakhodas are good ships but the RMN does not need them. Unfortunately, nothing you say can change this.

As I have said before, I would be happy to discuss this further with you in the RMN thread.

 

[dreamwarrior73]

DDG-1000 is far from being fleet standard for the moment... while Burke is. The latest Burke use ESSM and SM2, fullstop.
I do see your point however, though for me these big-caliber guns, CIGS as you say, are no longer traditional CIWS (compared with Goalkeepers or Phalanx). Please notice I don't have anything against these "cigs" as my country's navy has gone on this track for a while already with our 76/62SR guided ammo Vulcano.

cheers

1. USN uses both philosophies to shoot down SSMs. agree.

2. USN ditching the CIWS in preference of guided missiles to shoot down SSMs. disagree.

3. DDG-1000 is far from becoming the fleet standard. agree. but the point is in the future CIGS will become one of the USN defenses againts SSMs as reflected in the DDG-1000.

4. CIGS is just an evolution of the CIWS concept, "curtain of lead". it is not as same as the SR/Vulcano concept.

5. thus reinforcing the idea that USN will in the future uses both CIWS/CIGS and guided missiles to shoot down SSMs. :

 

[contedicavour]

1. USN uses both philosophies to shoot down SSMs. agree.

2. USN ditching the CIWS in preference of guided missiles to shoot down SSMs. disagree.

3. DDG-1000 is far from becoming the fleet standard. agree. but the point is in the future CIGS will become one of the USN defenses againts SSMs as reflected in the DDG-1000.

4. CIGS is just an evolution of the CIWS concept, "curtain of lead". it is not as same as the SR/Vulcano concept.

5. thus reinforcing the idea that USN will in the future uses both CIWS/CIGS and guided missiles to shoot down SSMs. :

Would you mind explaining why a Bofors spitting out 200 rounds would be more a curtain of lead than a Oto Melara shooting 120 heavier, guided rounds ? Come on... For me a curtain of lead is a Phalanx shooting 3,500 rounds a minute.
Besides, what sort of illuminator radars do these US "CIGS" guns have ?
Last but not least, tomorrow's USN will be made of latest Flight Burkes (no ciws or cigs), LCS (no ciws or cigs), San Antonio LPDs (RAM), ... so I'd more cautious here
Anyway we understand each other on this point, so let's focus more on guidance and characteristics of CIGS instead of playing ping pong on ciws yes or no :smash

cheers

 

[dreamwarrior73]

well, Bofors can spit out 220 rounds per minute and each round contains 8000 tungsten balls. thus Bofors has capability to create the "curtain of lead" to protect the ship against SSMs.

on the illuminator part, that i am not sure. i must dig deeper on this.

LCS does carry the Bofors 57mm Mk 3, which was designated by USN as CIGS.

i will get back to you on the illuminator OK?

 

[dreamwarrior73]

well, Bofors can spit out 220 rounds per minute and each round contains 8000 tungsten balls. thus Bofors has capability to create the "curtain of lead" to protect the ship against SSMs.

on the illuminator part, that i am not sure. i must dig deeper on this.

LCS does carry the Bofors 57mm Mk 3, which was designated by USN as CIGS.

i will get back to you on the illuminator OK?

p/s: some times discussion is like playing ping pong. you can expect others to agree on your point. hence respect each others points and agree to disagree. and move to next topic.

 

[Lucasnz]

well, Bofors can spit out 220 rounds per minute and each round contains 8000 tungsten balls. thus Bofors has capability to create the "curtain of lead" to protect the ship against SSMs.

on the illuminator part, that i am not sure. i must dig deeper on this.

LCS does carry the Bofors 57mm Mk 3, which was designated by USN as CIGS.

i will get back to you on the illuminator OK?

p/s: some times discussion is like playing ping pong. you can expect others to agree on your point. hence respect each others points and agree to disagree. and move to next topic.

The Bofors does have a higher rate of fire, but everything I've read says that to reload, the 57mm must go to the fore and aft position, once the ready use is expended. Thats a major disadvantage in the air defence role.

 

[dreamwarrior73]

The Bofors does have a higher rate of fire, but everything I've read says that to reload, the 57mm must go to the fore and aft position, once the ready use is expended. Thats a major disadvantage in the air defence role.

could you please eloborate more on the reloading procedure?

 

[Lucasnz]

could you please eloborate more on the reloading procedure?

From Bofors site

"Mean time to repair is less than 30 minutes. Low weight, minimal deck penetration and space required below deck allow the 57mm Mk 3 Naval Gun to be easily installed on any ship of 150 tons or more"

This would suggest (minimal deck pentration" that the traditional cuploa, assoicated with Naval Guns is missing.

Also in relation to reloading the followinghttp://www.tfd.chalmers.se/~m95perm/vapen/kanon/div/57mm_sak.html

which states...

"The hoist lifts the two-round clips to a receiver, that flips the clips to a rail mounted 20-round cassette. The gun elevates to 70° and the cassettes traverses to a position above the gun where they discharges the clips into the gun-magazine. The cassettes gets back and are filled again, then traverses in the opposite direction to dump their loads into each one intermediate 20-round cassette. When the traversing cassettes have been filled a third time there are 120 rounds on the mount and the gun is ready to fire. Bofors claims that this is sufficient to engage one or two surface targets and 4 SSM.
It takes 12 seconds for the gun to elevate to 70°, receive 40 rounds and drop to zero elevation again. Any even number of rounds can be transferred from the cassettes to the magazine.
As with the Mk 1 the hoists are fixed to the deck, and the gun-house have to come to zero train for reloading. The capacity of the hoists are 60 rounds per minute, each. But it is likely to take about three minutes to fill up the platform with 120 rounds."

There was an article in Naval Forces on naval guns of this calibre some time ago, but I don't think I have a reference any more.

Hope this helps. Note this is only from my reading on the issue and if someone has practical experience I would be more than happy to hear the finer details.

 

[dreamwarrior73]

Thanks Lucasnz for the info.

Now the next question is how many rounds are available in Super Rapid and how long would it take for reloading?

 

[Lucasnz]

Thanks Lucasnz for the info.

Now the next question is how many rounds are available in Super Rapid and how long would it take for reloading?

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNSweden_57-70_mk123.htm

The above website states the time to reload 120 rounds (being the ready use in the gun mount) 2 minutes.

I like the 76mm more and more, as it provides for sustained firing.

 

[Systems Adict]

...I know that this thread has been dead for a while, but some recent scuttlebutt I've heard seems to indicate that things are about to change.

Can ANYONE confirm that the Brunei Navy has finally accepted the ships & is ready to take them away...?

 

[sparta]

Brunei also has a wonderful patrol boat navy, bought by its oil wealth. Considering the nation's size, corvettes aren't needed unless a North Korea is one of her neighbors. Fortunately, Brunei's neighbors are Indonesia and Malaysia. As you noted, if Brunei had a sizeable navy of personnel, and a large city population of Singapore, I would think differently. But Brunei don't.

Since these are good corvettes, there are a number of nations which could buy them. A larger number of nations could buy them if there is a considerable discount. These corvettes would fit very well into the Brazilian navy. Like Malaysia, Brazil is attempting to build its industrial base too. But its my opinion a nation learns not by just building, you can learn as much breaking things down and putting them back together.

The worst navy in Latin America in my opinion working with obsolescent equipment is Uruaguay. These three corvettes would modernize their navy instantaneously.

being a person with family ties stemming from brunei you may be suprised in that I do not believe that they are too sophisticated the populace has a far high scholastic ability than australia per person, and yes the native populace is around 300 thou plus. although manning such platforms can be acheived. You must remember there are vast diffences between Nigeria and brunei, by placing them in the same basic you are only showing the narrow mind of the sterotypical.