Looks like they already do it.

You cannot view this attachment.

Looks like a better fit than a Phalanx on a truck

Quote from: Hobbes on May 01, 2024, 07:24:16 AMoh, it's less than that. Closer to 10 than 30 seconds, and that may even apply to shipboard installations. At least one CIWS has no ammo feed from outside. The system has to be able to slew at high rates, and feeding ammo from the stationary part of the gun to the swiveling part is difficult, so the turret contains the ammo supply.

Thanks for that Harro. I did think 30 seconds might be a bit generous, but then thought "surely not".

So it's basically a "one shot" weapon in reality ? I'm afraid my 20th Century brain struggles to understand the usefulness of these things, but I suppose if that "one shot" is as near a guaranteed kill as possible then I suppose it's then "fingers crossed" and hope the logistics train isn't that far behind.

Quote from: NARSES2 on May 02, 2024, 01:55:06 AM

Quote from: Hobbes on May 01, 2024, 07:24:16 AMoh, it's less than that. Closer to 10 than 30 seconds, and that may even apply to shipboard installations. At least one CIWS has no ammo feed from outside. The system has to be able to slew at high rates, and feeding ammo from the stationary part of the gun to the swiveling part is difficult, so the turret contains the ammo supply.

Thanks for that Harro. I did think 30 seconds might be a bit generous, but then thought "surely not".

So it's basically a "one shot" weapon in reality ? I'm afraid my 20th Century brain struggles to understand the usefulness of these things, but I suppose if that "one shot" is as near a guaranteed kill as possible then I suppose it's then "fingers crossed" and hope the logistics train isn't that far behind.

It's more, what we termed in M60 LMG school, as "spray and pray".  But if there is sufficient lead sent downrange, the odds of a kill go up.  And as for the logistics train?  These truck-mountes systems are usually set up in fixed fortifications or positions, so the logistics train is right there.

Quote from: NARSES2 on May 02, 2024, 01:55:06 AM

Quote from: Hobbes on May 01, 2024, 07:24:16 AMoh, it's less than that. Closer to 10 than 30 seconds, and that may even apply to shipboard installations. At least one CIWS has no ammo feed from outside. The system has to be able to slew at high rates, and feeding ammo from the stationary part of the gun to the swiveling part is difficult, so the turret contains the ammo supply.

Thanks for that Harro. I did think 30 seconds might be a bit generous, but then thought "surely not".

So it's basically a "one shot" weapon in reality ? I'm afraid my 20th Century brain struggles to understand the usefulness of these things, but I suppose if that "one shot" is as near a guaranteed kill as possible then I suppose it's then "fingers crossed" and hope the logistics train isn't that far behind.

Chris these weapon systems are alot more versatile than ya might think.
With the tracking and targeting radar these guns have ..they can of course engage missiles but also artillery rounds also and because of the speed these things can track and engage a target they can engage quite a few at once ..drones are perfect targets for these weapons.
They can also engage targets moving from 1 mph up to 2000mph with the appropriate set-up.
This is nothing new with this ability of radar controlled AA weapons being able to do this since the early 90s ..one of Bofors 40mm systems can hit targets moving at 2500mph and that only fired in 10rd bursts at the time.
The US Phalanx can put 45rds in the air per second with is rate of fire ..the Chinese one ,58 rds per second of 30mm.
The US Phalanx weapons system carries 1550 rds of 20mm in its magazine..this Chinese one is a 30mm and holds between 1000 and 1220 rds depending on set up .
The rate of fire is restrained on the Phalanx guns to conserve ammo so instead of 6000 rpm the Phalanx fires at 4500 rpm ..the Chinese one doesn't seem to have that issue which in their case is a problem as they fire 5,800 rounds/minute (Type 730)
10,000 rounds/minute (Type 1130)....which is stupid as I don't believe their radars are anywhere as good as they lead you to think they are .
With only 1220 rds in the tank the 730 will empty its self very quickly.
It is one the other hand extremely cool to see these fire 

Like the A-10, IIRC, these guns only fire 10-20 rounds or so at a time. Think instead of a rifle trying to hit the target its more like a shotgun blast.

Quote from: NARSES2 on May 02, 2024, 01:55:06 AM

Quote from: Hobbes on May 01, 2024, 07:24:16 AMoh, it's less than that. Closer to 10 than 30 seconds, and that may even apply to shipboard installations. At least one CIWS has no ammo feed from outside. The system has to be able to slew at high rates, and feeding ammo from the stationary part of the gun to the swiveling part is difficult, so the turret contains the ammo supply.

Thanks for that Harro. I did think 30 seconds might be a bit generous, but then thought "surely not".

So it's basically a "one shot" weapon in reality ? I'm afraid my 20th Century brain struggles to understand the usefulness of these things, but I suppose if that "one shot" is as near a guaranteed kill as possible then I suppose it's then "fingers crossed" and hope the logistics train isn't that far behind.

They fire in short bursts, so one ammo load allows you to fire a few times (sorry, I'm not allowed to be more specific than that). The idea is that this is enough for one engagement, then it's time to reload.

Quote from: Hobbes on May 03, 2024, 03:10:50 AM

Quote from: NARSES2 on May 02, 2024, 01:55:06 AM

Quote from: Hobbes on May 01, 2024, 07:24:16 AMoh, it's less than that. Closer to 10 than 30 seconds, and that may even apply to shipboard installations. At least one CIWS has no ammo feed from outside. The system has to be able to slew at high rates, and feeding ammo from the stationary part of the gun to the swiveling part is difficult, so the turret contains the ammo supply.

Thanks for that Harro. I did think 30 seconds might be a bit generous, but then thought "surely not".

So it's basically a "one shot" weapon in reality ? I'm afraid my 20th Century brain struggles to understand the usefulness of these things, but I suppose if that "one shot" is as near a guaranteed kill as possible then I suppose it's then "fingers crossed" and hope the logistics train isn't that far behind.

They fire in short bursts, so one ammo load allows you to fire a few times (sorry, I'm not allowed to be more specific than that). The idea is that this is enough for one engagement, then it's time to reload.

Reload time?
Because while you're reloading that swarm of replicators your computer is shooting at has got closer...


I used to work for a bloke who was an ex-RN systems/IT technician type (not sure of his rank or the correct name for his speciality).  He had been awarded a medal which he never went into detail about but he did let slip once that it was awarded following an incident when the computers controlling the CIWS went down during a missile attack on his ship.  He got it going again in time for it to take out the incoming ordnance.  We asked him if he had turned it off and on again and he laughed and said "no, it was Windows.  I just hit Ctrl/Alt/Del and rebooted it...".

Thank you very much gentlemen for increasing my level of knowledge as far as these things are concerned   

Quote from: zenrat on May 03, 2024, 03:42:32 AMWe asked him if he had turned it off and on again and he laughed and said "no, it was Windows.  I just hit Ctrl/Alt/Del and rebooted it...".

Found myself doing the same thing the other day, that and swearing at the thing. 

Quote from: NARSES2 on May 03, 2024, 06:24:40 AM

Quote from: zenrat on May 03, 2024, 03:42:32 AMWe asked him if he had turned it off and on again and he laughed and said "no, it was Windows.  I just hit Ctrl/Alt/Del and rebooted it...".

Found myself doing the same thing the other day, that and swearing at the thing. 

An IT guy I worked with was ex RAF, I was surprised when he said very little was specialised and most systems  were Microsoft based.

TAKOM's latest ridiculous Napkinpanzer release.
You cannot view this attachment.

You cannot view this attachment.
Needs at least two more turrets in the stack.

That would make the basis of a good sci fi hover tank.

Quote from: zenrat on May 04, 2024, 05:27:18 AMThat would make the basis of a good sci fi hover tank.

'The Plow' from Hammers' Slammers?   

I think it would tip over.

Nothing ridiculous about that. I love this kind of kit.  More power to them. Anything is better than the endless, tedious stream of Tigers, Shermans, T-34s etc, etc.....! Definitely for me. Go nicely with my Modelcollect  Fist of War kits!