Military Review

C-RAM: a dangerous competitor of the Russian "Pantsirya" from the USA

88
C-RAM "Centurion" is a ground version of the famous American naval anti-aircraft complex Mark 15 Phalanx CIWS. The complex is a kind of analogue of the Russian ZRPK "Armor" and is designed to protect quartered army units, military bases, as well as places of deployment of air defense systems and missile defense systems of a large radius of action from air attack weapons.


The six-barrel 20-mm gun M61А1 has two modes of shooting: 4000 and 6000 rounds per minute. However, for a ground modification of the complex, its rate of fire was reduced to 2000 shots / min. At the same time, C-RAM "Centurion" is equipped with high-explosive fragmentation projectiles for greater damage efficiency.

C-RAM "Centurion" is fully automated. The radar complex captures targets, and the computer calculates the most dangerous of them, after which it “leads” them until the moment of destruction.

88 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. figwam
    figwam 15 March 2018 09: 57
    +15
    What kind of competitor is it, there are no missiles.
    1. Artek
      Artek 15 March 2018 10: 30
      +14
      As Shipunov said, his eternal memory is "... and this electricity still needs to be found to promote the trunks"
      Everything is right, except for this small-caliber system and ammunition, you need to carry a powerful generator, turbo or diesel, and even a fuel supply to it, in short it is a whole armored train. Our Shilka or Tunguska systems also have a turbogenerator, but of course not so powerful and accordingly, not so stupid, and not so big.
      In addition, our systems lay the programmed dispersion of a volley in order to increase the area of ​​damage, but the pin_dosnyakers fidget with a pointed needle at the target. This is all for a beautiful picture, and the efficiency is tenth.
      Still, swearing at the end there is disgusting.
      1. JD1979
        JD1979 15 March 2018 12: 12
        +4
        And he didn’t say where to get energy for pickup drives? or radar work? Or do they work for us too? The storyteller ... Which does not detract from his role in creating artillery weapons for the ground forces and aviation, but at sea there are now problems in this area because of him.
        1. Artek
          Artek 15 March 2018 12: 15
          +3
          Quote: JD1979
          And he didn’t say where to get energy for pickup drives? or radar work? Or do they work for us too? The storyteller ... Which does not detract from his role in creating artillery weapons for the ground forces and aviation, but at sea there are now problems in this area because of him.


          Like before there were no problems. What kind of problems, gunpowder gunpowder at sea?
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 15 March 2018 13: 16
            +3
            Quote: Artek
            Like before there were no problems. What kind of problems, gunpowder gunpowder at sea?

            That is, the meaning of what you wrote, you did not understand from the sow at all. Does your Radar work on complexes like Kashtan (Dirk) from powder gases? or is it still from electricity? and what is the difficulty then to power the barrel block electric motor?
            "... and this electricity for the promotion of trunks still needs to be found"
            1. Artek
              Artek 15 March 2018 14: 11
              +4
              Quote: JD1979
              Quote: Artek
              Like before there were no problems. What kind of problems, gunpowder gunpowder at sea?

              That is, the meaning of what you wrote, you did not understand from the sow at all. Does your Radar work on complexes like Kashtan (Dirk) from powder gases? or is it still from electricity? and what is the difficulty then to power the barrel block electric motor?
              "... and this electricity for the promotion of trunks still needs to be found"


              I’m uncle and wrote that the turbogenerator on Shipunov’s guns for radars is smaller and eats less, and less because the consumption is less due to the electric drive of the guns. Have you seen it or not? Why problems with Shipunov’s guns? So blurted out?
              1. tchoni
                tchoni 16 March 2018 08: 48
                +1
                Quote: Artek
                I was an uncle and wrote that the turbogenerator on Shipunov’s guns for radars is smaller and eats less, but less because the consumption is less due to the electric drive of the guns.

                You uncle studied poorly. For the drive of the barrel block of this gun is an engine the size of a starter in a passenger car. those. something about a kilowatt, or even less. The gun works on time - a minute, two overs. For more, there is simply not enough ammunition. What significant energy consumption are we talking about? The drive to turn the turret at the shell is a 5 kilowatt engine. And it doesn’t work for a minute ... Even the rotation drive of the radar antenna of the survey radar is half a kilogram. And this crap is spinning constantly. I still am silent for the lighting, the radar itself, which does not hesitate to grab a dozen kilowatts at a constant .... But on the carapace there are two of them: a review and a target highlight. So with energy savings on the gun’s drive, you can go with the woods at an extra step and take old Shipunov with you. Moreover, the automation of his guns did not do without eoelectricity.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. kan123
                    kan123 20 March 2018 11: 29
                    +1
                    They talked about this popularly on TV. When they began to create their own six-barreled gun, they chose between electricity and mechanics. The designer is still alive - his gun has surpassed analogues - they put a “metal cutting” on the ships - because when he approached the problem, he figured out that he needed a powerful generator for an electric drive. There is an electrician - an entire cabinet that needs to be powered - yes. It was a mistake of the Americans - electric drive. Our designer created a machine, based on these eternal principles of Russian reliability of automatic machines, - in fact, American colleagues were fucked up in all poses.
                2. Okolotochny
                  Okolotochny 19 March 2018 12: 47
                  +1
                  You, aunt, first invent the tenth of what Shipunov invented.
                3. kan123
                  kan123 20 March 2018 11: 52
                  0
                  connect the computer to radars, to the wind, to humidity - it will shoot three shells, for sure. Unfinished system for today. It is necessary to connect a computer. The computer just gets the target in the codes, these bullets pour in there, from the gun, it’s adjusted for the wind, then yes - three shells will go. And thrashing en masse - with an overabundance of ammunition - is the seventies. - in half a second the computer will process all the data, send it where necessary - to the point that is on its map. The RFP anchor is just a point on planet Earth where a machine gun, an automatic machine shoots, it is a point adjusted for wind, weather, pitching - it is unchanged - the projectile should meet the target, like a warrant officer with a woman on Sevastopol, the beach. Not earlier than later. We actually didn’t get to know the computer — the programmers will be sitting in the ship, they will not run around the decks — they will be wearing glasses — this is the future of the war. And the concept of the 70s - which came from WWII - is a massive solution to the problem - supposedly it raised a thousand planes, 10 returned to the base - the enemy was defeated, - this is not the topic - to fight with cannon fodder, especially military pilots - the computer will do all this - calculate the trajectory - point to destroy. A computer is a box bolted to the same metal cutting machine - the programmer sits in a protected room, on the bridge - he corrects the technique. A rocket flies - an interception point - there comes a turn. The mass of ammunition, the tip "through the eyepiece" - already the last century. The programmer writes codes - which ultimately means the point where shells fly. I strongly doubt that they will get the first time, but we must strive for this, otherwise we have no future. Difference sovr. b.d. , it's like the difference between the eye of a soldier and a computer - which stupidly sends projectiles to this point. The sailors just drink, relax - because there is a point — the positioning of the ship, the missile flying toward it — there is a point where the rocket connects with the shot from the ship — this point is calculated by the computer — it sends shells there — but, not in thousands, but in tens — it leads several goals - destroys them one after another. Not a single code has yet been written for guns - the military do not trust computers - neither in the USA nor in the Russian Federation. They are afraid of something - you have to try, what are you afraid of - this is an extremely important topic, and extremely sensitive. You should choose the path of non-violence - to torture equipment, to fill ships with millions of shells - it helps little in modern times. in
      2. Firework
        Firework 15 March 2018 12: 36
        0
        and you’re right ..... such an ammunition waste
      3. aws4
        aws4 15 March 2018 18: 45
        +1
        I heard that in the exercises, our 30 on the tunguska showed poor results for small targets ... they smeared so I had to finish off with missiles ...
        1. kan123
          kan123 20 March 2018 12: 21
          0
          few priests were planted in military vehicles - otherwise everyone would be beaten. Well, what do you want - the human factor - nerves, a shaft of rockets flies - from s - a soldier seeks to jump out of the car. Let him run - the tribunal will judge - it is necessary to make sure that the shooter transfers everything to the computer, escapes to the bushes, and the equipment already automatically accompanies and destroys everything. I don’t understand - what did you want - living people are sitting in cars, destroying targets. In general, it is not clear how a draftee can shoot it down - a helicopter, shoot down, or a rocket - you just need not to settle down - sit in this car, aim. Do you have enough nerves? Everyone will run away from this machine - because they are the first target, for helicopter pilots - missiles, the first missiles fly into air defense. Nobody wants to die - all living people. As a result, the part remains without cover - yes, they will then give zvizdyule to povoshnikami - and those who are so fucked - they are glad that they remained alive. And the computer - fucked - he is dying, always ready. And the fact that you pissed during the raid - you will bring down one helicopter, they will remember you, 10 helicopters will fly in, take revenge. Therefore, short-range air defense does not shoot at all - because they know that all the pilots will gather, and will think how to kill you. You will become the target of the whole part. Normal perspective? Therefore, it is necessary to transfer all the air defense to computer codes - where you just leave the equipment in the field - it shoots everything. Yes my goddess - on Tunguska you can fasten the server - there is a lot of space. Here comes the raid of aircraft and axes - the programmer set the program, jumped out, sits in a ravine, and this fool shoots back. Herself. This is what we should strive for - a person will always betray - computers, never. The computer will die, (fuse) and complete the task. And people will be alive, and there will be complete peace and prosperity. Everyone will thump and rejoice, and there will come universal happiness and other friendliness.
      4. serezhasoldatow
        serezhasoldatow 16 March 2018 21: 38
        0
        small-caliber systems.
        1. kan123
          kan123 20 March 2018 13: 41
          0
          199 mm, the sight through the comp - that is, an uncle in Washington directs. My zero turned off - a hundred mm. they have a gun on a truck, a military plane. I respect the Americans - they lick their ass, God - Gundyaev didn’t order - I’ll shoot on occasion, a couple of these fat people - but alas, my health is not good - I strongly doubt that I have a future at all. Local airborne troops - they respect me - they see someone else, commander, who will lead them - and where to lead them? Only to the slaughterhouse. Create moves - they will simply crawl out, shoot back and crawl out into the holes. Who needs such a war? This is our dirty black soil, just the perfect plot - I am leading the Airborne Forces into battle. Yes, you go to x .. They see me as a captain - but I, a naval officer - I was kicked out of school - a couple of rounds were stolen there. Stop getting smart - but how. Save yours - for these fat, sleeping Airborne Forces, I will protect their interests - fraternal bonds. I love them. I am not telling people what they should experience - just when the war starts - these people will come together. And they consider me a hero, some kind of cap. We are like madness - me and the Airborne Forces. Found fools. But themes, weapons of our army, are closer to me than psychology. Our army is invincible a priori. Otherwise, there is no sense in them - I want to connect all aviation and page reserve rates to a single computer. system - break everyone - all the armies of the world. How am I going to do this? Parts will be guarded by programmers who will write codes - not a single code has yet been written for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation ........... Vryatli I can help - this is my fanatical principle - to transfer the army to artillery, morphlot, airborne forces, on electronics. Under the project - a trillion - this is my fanatical goal of life. I understood this by working out the behavior patterns of the troops, under different conditions — their weaknesses, their merits .. When I die, I want to have defenders, cleaners — but not suckers in the Russian Federation — armah.
    2. svp67
      svp67 15 March 2018 10: 38
      +2
      Quote: figvam
      What kind of competitor is it, there are no missiles.

      But they say that not only planes, UAVs and missiles, but also mortar mines are capable of intercepting, but our "Shell" cannot, even missiles
      1. figwam
        figwam 15 March 2018 10: 46
        +4
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: figvam
        What kind of competitor is it, there are no missiles.

        But they say that not only planes, UAVs and missiles, but also mortar mines are capable of intercepting, but our "Shell" cannot, even missiles

        You can declare anything, imagine if there will be several mines, he will not have enough ammunition or the trunks will melt, I'm not talking about the Grad volley.
        1. svp67
          svp67 15 March 2018 10: 52
          +2
          Quote: figvam
          You can declare anything, imagine if there will be several mines, he will not have enough ammunition or the trunks will melt, I'm not talking about the Grad volley.

          This system is included in the perimeter of field camp protection, where the Grad volley is not expected, but the arrival of single missiles and the shelling of single mortars - YES
          1. figwam
            figwam 15 March 2018 10: 59
            +5
            Quote: svp67

            This system is included in the perimeter of field camp protection, where the Grad volley is not expected, but the arrival of single missiles and the shelling of single mortars - YES

            Exactly, this is a heavy, stationary, slow-moving system which is not possible to use in battle, unlike the Shell, which can fire on the move. Therefore, I say that this is not a competitor.
            1. Anton Yu
              Anton Yu 15 March 2018 20: 40
              +2
              Write everything correctly, not even all complexes are located on Oshkosh M977 HEMTT machines.
      2. Anton Yu
        Anton Yu 15 March 2018 20: 37
        +2
        The abbreviation C-RAM is decrypted quite simply: Counter Rocket, Artillery and Mortars, i.e. against NURS, artillery shells and mortar rounds.
    3. CHARM
      CHARM 15 March 2018 19: 23
      +3
      The complex is a kind of analogue of the Russian ZRPK "Shell"

      And where is the missile system in this complex? This is the same as saying that the BMP is an analogue of the tank.
      1. Navigator Basov
        Navigator Basov 16 March 2018 21: 11
        0
        An analogue in scope in layered air defense - close cover. That is why it is written that it is a kind of analogue, and not generally directly analogue-analogue. The presence of missile weapons (not equipment) is far from the main criterion.
        Yes, you can say that the BMP is a kind of analogue of the tank, with some assumptions and the BMP, and the tank are armored fighting vehicles, and they have an important similarity: they are designed to conduct combat on the front line, BMPs are designed to work together with tanks, Unlike many other combat vehicles. You do not know how to find fault with the text wassat
      2. Dreamboat
        Dreamboat 17 March 2018 20: 37
        +1
        This is not an analogue of the Shell, but the AK-630!
        Well, or Tunguska, if you take purely ground-based systems.
    4. tchoni
      tchoni 16 March 2018 08: 32
      0
      [quote = fi [quote = figvam] What kind of competitor is this, there are no missiles. [/ quote]
      Competitor, but with a different ideology. If our shell is built around a lesion system, then this system is built around a tracking system. An accurate, powerful gun that has the ability, unlike the shell, and metal cutters, to carry out a LONG-TERM SIGHTING FIRE. This concept in the pluses counts very high efficiency when working for small targets in the near field, but much less versatility compared to the same shell.
      1. serezhasoldatow
        serezhasoldatow 16 March 2018 21: 40
        +2
        I saw only a salute, I did not observe a defeat. Maybe I didn’t look there?
    5. sub307
      sub307 16 March 2018 11: 30
      +1
      An interesting gizmo and it seems not a "competitor" at all ....
      "Russian" Shell "will become a hypersonic weapon
      It is supposed to install hypersonic weapons on the Russian anti-aircraft missile and cannon system "Shell". Thanks to new missiles, the target range can triple. "
  2. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 15 March 2018 10: 01
    +1
    The “six-barreled sound” is always mesmerizing, be it the Phalanx or the AK-630 ...
  3. ded100
    ded100 15 March 2018 10: 02
    +2
    The armor is more serious somehow! laughing
    1. Dreamboat
      Dreamboat 17 March 2018 20: 52
      +1
      The carapace is a universal system, and it is highly specific. As part of the ship's air defense (for which it was created), it only supplements missile systems. And the Shell is an independent system.
  4. Skay
    Skay 15 March 2018 10: 03
    +4
    When they started to shell the PR, I saw a video of how he couldn’t shoot down a small target from cannons. In short, he carried her rocket. This is a reflection on the subject of a purely machine-gun air defense system of near radius.
  5. dog breeder
    dog breeder 15 March 2018 10: 08
    +3
    Beautifully used ... profanity. And about the competition, this video is hard to judge.
  6. JD1979
    JD1979 15 March 2018 10: 25
    +2
    The M61A1 has masterpiece trunks, which allowed for a completely different ideology in the approach to hitting targets. In fact, the sniper accuracy of the barrel and precise aiming drives make it possible to accurately send the projectile to the target. In our complexes, because of the shitty accuracy of the tables, they went along the path of increasing the mass of the volley and additional displacement of the barrels in the packet at a slight angle, due to which a certain “fan” of shells flies out of the packet, forming in front of the target a kind of cloud into which the latter should fly, but the probability is far from absolute.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 15 March 2018 10: 37
      +2
      Quote: JD1979
      In our complexes, because of the shitty accuracy of the tables, they went along the path of increasing the mass of the volley and additional displacement of the barrels in the packet at a slight angle, due to which a certain “fan” of shells flies out of the packet, forming in front of the target a kind of cloud into which the latter should fly, but the probability is far from absolute.

      there is such a thing ... the "scatter" is big with us .. but nevertheless the thing is dangerous. (there is still a “Kalash" singing along .. that it doesn’t matter at all at such a distance with accuracy ...
      1. JD1979
        JD1979 15 March 2018 11: 44
        +2
        Shooting mode, a 1-second burst (by ear) of 200 shells .... 13 or 14 bursts, lost count. Consumption - ***** st. The percentage of hits for a non-standard target .... minuscule, and this is for a fixed huge target. RCC at supersonic and maneuvering down ... This is the last chance weapon with an effective distance of up to 1 km, and even less real - 500-600 meters. So the thing is more dangerous for the defending ship with its uselessness. And there are no other systems ... but there are none, and there is no technology for manufacturing precise trunks, for our "ingenious" designers decided that this was not necessary, because it would be expensive, and it would do that. Well, yes, only a ship will come out more expensive in any case, this is not counting the lives of people. And so, yes it’s a beautiful sight. Only the same AK-176 could handle it faster and more efficiently and there wouldn’t be such a frantic consumption of shells.
      2. Romka47
        Romka47 15 March 2018 14: 35
        +4
        So in the fan, the whole thing is, as I understand it.
        1. Dreamboat
          Dreamboat 17 March 2018 20: 47
          +2
          The logic in this and our systems is different: we have a fan of shells that hit a target with a direct hit, and Americans have remote-shot shells, which are more effective against light and slow quadrocopters, but do not necessarily hit artillery shells and missiles that are “resistant” to fragments, especially that this method is more demanding on the accuracy of determining the distance (for a high-speed small-sized target,
    2. Observer2014
      Observer2014 15 March 2018 10: 45
      +9
      JD1979
      The M61A1 has masterpiece trunks, which allowed for a completely different ideology in the approach to hitting targets. In fact, the sniper accuracy of the barrel and precise aiming drives make it possible to accurately send the projectile to the target.
      And if there are two or three goals at once from different sides? And from the side of the booth at least one will go repeat This garbage is M61A1. A huge expensive garbage. Yes and aiming firing from it beyond 3 km is not possible. It is useless to compare it with the "Shell". The only thing that needs to be "Shell" is a shell with remote detonation. And there will be everything that flies. Khan swarm. Although the plane at an altitude of 15 km.
      1. JD1979
        JD1979 15 March 2018 11: 56
        +1
        and if on the AK-630 there will be two or three at once from different sides? Does he have trunks bent in different directions? The huge expensive garbage on the ship is a self-contained autonomous complex, unlike the AK-630, whose equipment is scattered around the ship, where is the same antenna post? Where is the electronic equipment? how much does it all hang along with kilometers of cables? What doesn’t look so rosy anymore? And the cherry on the cake is the target guidance algorithm, taking into account the corrections for the location of the antenna post and the barrel block in different places on the same axis ...
        You, in order to get rid of rainbow-colored wet dreams, find a video of attempts to shoot down a drone with fire from shell cannons .... everything by, I had to finish off with a rocket. And this is for a slow-moving target, the cross-sectional area of ​​the missile reaching the target is comparable to a small drone, only the speeds are not comparable. So dream on.
        1. Observer2014
          Observer2014 15 March 2018 12: 08
          +4
          JD1979a if on the AK-630
          two or three at once will be from different sides? Does he have trunks bent in different directions?
          No, that's why there are several of them on ships.
          You, in order to get rid of rainbow-colored wet dreams, find a video of trying to shoot down a drone with fire from shell cannons .... everything by, I had to finish off with a rocket
          And so? I saw for a long time. That's why I write
          The only thing that needs to be "Shell" is a shell with remote detonation.
          And all this with garbage M61A1 in the role of anti-aircraft guns up to 3 km. Directly personification of the entire military concept of the USA and Russia. By the way, how do you think this swarm should shoot down? Pull chtoli with trunks. At the top there is a night video with the work of this garbage. And the time of approach and the radius of the defeat of this American anti-aircraft guns are seconds.
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 15 March 2018 12: 35
            +1
            [
            Quote: Observer2014
            No, that's why there are several of them on ships.

            Yeah. as many as ONE thing, maximum two. on the ships of the last years of construction, and where there are two, the shelling sectors are not that they do not even overlap 180 degrees ... So everything will be, and 2 and 3 or maybe more targets for one installation.
            Quote: Observer2014
            And all this with garbage M61A1 in the role of anti-aircraft guns up to 3 km. Directly personification of the entire military concept of the USA and Russia. By the way, how do you think this swarm should shoot down? Pull chtoli with trunks. At the top there is a night video with the work of this garbage. And the time of approach and the radius of the defeat of this American anti-aircraft guns are seconds.

            MVAHAHahahaa ..... damn I want the same grass ..... For starters, the advertising range of our trunks is 4 km, the same profanity. The real range of work on RCC is up to 1000m what we have, what they have. What do you think that the operating mode of our marine ZAKs 200-200-200-on-melt-to-end-hopper from a good life is taken? Or do we have seconds longer? ROY .... Damn this is a masterpiece! But how do you think our system swallows down? and what is ROY? And how does the guidance system capture the swarm? maybe all the same a separate goal in the "swarm"? Something I have never read about the possibility of capturing a "spherical horse."
            1. serezhasoldatow
              serezhasoldatow 16 March 2018 21: 47
              0
              Do you work at Shcheglovsky Val? Experiencing the "Shell"? Are you exploiting it in the troops? If not, do not carry nonsense, which is easier to carry than a log. Guns GSh amers still a very long time ...
              1. Dreamboat
                Dreamboat 17 March 2018 21: 08
                +2
                They made fun ... Americans fanned PR, and someone believes. Super trunks ensure the accuracy of the first shell, and then it will spit like the AKashechka. And as a ship system, I am focused on the fight against large anti-ship missiles only through installation on the platform I began to struggle with shells and mortar mines.
          2. Goodvin55
            Goodvin55 April 13 2018 09: 44
            0
            The AK-630 as a whole is not a very successful gun, we tried to correct the situation by creating the “Roy” and “Duet” sparks, but it was not possible to solve the problem of unsatisfactory extinction until the end. In general, the Broadsword even in a complete set without missiles is much more effective than 2 AK-630s. Due to own SU. The "dagger" in its first performance is also unsuccessful, it could not shoot through targets that were not shot down by its own missiles, not to mention the dimensions and weight of the complex itself. As a result, they planned to abandon him and put the "Dagger" + AK-630, which is clearly seen from the sketches of promising ships of the late 80's.
      2. Mih1974
        Mih1974 15 March 2018 21: 59
        +3
        And let's make it simpler - and if there is a “slight inaccuracy” in the calculations of the meeting point between the target and the shells, and the speeds of both the shells and the “target” are huge, then the “over-accurate” shot will be “extremely accurate” and will miss only half a meter (let's say ) and in a second the “target” will turn the guarded object into a pile of smoking ruins. good
        Whereas setting up a “cloud” of shells increases the chances of destroying the “target” even with problems with calculations, “delaying the passage of the signal," and even time to shoot. good
        In general, the phrase “allows a sniper shot” to “targets” flying at super sonic speed is not applicable. negative To these idiots read that a sniper (almost) never shoots at a running target.
    3. figwam
      figwam 15 March 2018 12: 51
      +2
      Quote: JD1979
      The M61A1 has masterpiece trunks,

      What does the trunks have to do with it)))? They have a stationary system, on poles eliminating buildup during recoil. That's the whole trick.
      1. JD1979
        JD1979 15 March 2018 12: 57
        0
        Quote: figvam
        What does the trunks have to do with it)))?

        And for starters, read the characteristics of these barrels)))) we do not have every sniper rifle has such accuracy. that’s the trick?
        1. figwam
          figwam 15 March 2018 13: 12
          +2
          Quote: JD1979
          And for starters, read the characteristics of these barrels)))) we do not have every sniper rifle has such accuracy. that’s the trick?

          These Yankees will write you any "paper" characteristics, and you will believe it. Everything is decided by a frantic rate of fire which allows you to hit the target.
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 15 March 2018 13: 37
            0
            Quote: figvam
            Everything is decided by a frantic rate of fire which allows you to hit the target.

            Hand face.
            1. zulusuluz
              zulusuluz 15 March 2018 19: 25
              +4
              The sniper barrel has heating in the region of 10 rounds per minute, and therefore does not bend. And here on 6 trunks 2000 ... Or 6 rounds per second on the barrel!
              What kind of "sniper" shooting are we talking about?
              1. faridg7
                faridg7 16 March 2018 19: 01
                +3
                Quote: zulusuluz
                What kind of "sniper" shooting are we talking about?

                Yes, the main thing there is to believe and pray for a six-barrel. They were told sniper barrels, and they would tear everyone apart for that. How's it about dew?
      2. Goodvin55
        Goodvin55 April 13 2018 09: 46
        0
        Nothing prevents to hang the shell, it is the same stationary, does not work on the go.
  7. Engineer
    Engineer 15 March 2018 10: 49
    +4
    A purely cannon complex can be called a "dangerous competitor" to the missile-cannon complex with a big stretch. Here, even Shilka is more appropriate.
    1. aleksanderfomin0789
      aleksanderfomin0789 15 March 2018 11: 54
      0
      shilka is more appropriate YES YES it still stops the tank on the go and then the nonsense that differs from the PCT is a radar and a computer
  8. alex-cn
    alex-cn 15 March 2018 11: 47
    +1
    The system was developed in the late 70s. It’s clear that the electronics are updated, but it’s clearly far from the shell
    1. igor67
      igor67 15 March 2018 18: 12
      +1
      Quote: alex-cn
      The system was developed in the late 70s. It’s clear that the electronics are updated, but it’s clearly far from the shell

      sort of like she, in the museum, shot about three weeks ago
      1. Dedall
        Dedall 16 March 2018 21: 55
        +1
        Sorry for the stupidity, but this is not the "Volcano" in the photo? Yes, it was created in the 70s, but the Phalanx later. The “Volcano” did not show itself during the Falklands. A "phalanx", as they wrote, due to increased automation, reduced the reaction time to 1 second. In short, they created a robot gun.
  9. Micfoster
    Micfoster 15 March 2018 12: 04
    0
    The guide for shells is open and with large holes. And how will she act on pollution resistance?
  10. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman 15 March 2018 12: 35
    +1
    I see the dangerous competitor Shilke, but not the Shell. Rate of fire in this case is not an indicator.
    1. Conserp
      Conserp 20 March 2018 11: 18
      0
      "Shilke" carried on a trailer.
  11. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman 15 March 2018 12: 45
    0
    Quote: JD1979
    And he didn’t say where to get energy for pickup drives? or radar work? Or do they work for us too? The storyteller ... Which does not detract from his role in creating artillery weapons for the ground forces and aviation, but at sea there are now problems in this area because of him.


    Feels like the army is not a foot, no, no! And if he accidentally passed, then only through the dining room! I repeat! R / st on the armored train ... On many combat platforms there are auxiliary engines so that fuel and engine life are not fired on the spot. Often, this is a gas turbine of small power, but quite resourceful for an electric generator!
    1. JD1979
      JD1979 15 March 2018 12: 59
      0
      Quote: sib.ataman
      Feels like the army is not a foot, no, no! And if he accidentally passed, then only through the dining room! I repeat! R / st on the armored train ... On many combat platforms there are auxiliary engines so that fuel and engine life are not fired on the spot. Often, this is a gas turbine of small power, but quite resourceful for an electric generator!

      One feels a level of understanding of the subject of discussion at the level of orange varieties ...
  12. Nikita Yadrovsky
    Nikita Yadrovsky 15 March 2018 12: 59
    +4
    Here, experts' arguments in the comments are always more interesting than the article itself as a rule.
  13. chingachguc
    chingachguc 15 March 2018 13: 56
    +2
    Somewhere there is a photo of how they tried to shoot down an ancient anti-ship missile from the Volcanoes, which was supposed to represent the target in the exercises. So, the rocket got sick of going aside, and it flew right into the cruiser - and made a hole in it, since it didn’t explode, since there was no warhead))
    1. Mih1974
      Mih1974 15 March 2018 22: 11
      +1
      Yeah, gorgeous fot, I was even interestingly allowed to destroy the commander of the destroyer and air defense officers with vasilin or are they "dry"? repeat
      https://armyman.info/stati/40437-avarii-na-amerik
      anskom-flote.html you can see here (it was not possible to snatch)
  14. gromoboj
    gromoboj 15 March 2018 14: 06
    +3
    Again this R2D2, a rival of Shilka they made. Only in size 3 times more. They aren’t short of shells.
    1. chingachguc
      chingachguc 17 March 2018 01: 10
      0
      American "shilka" is
  15. alexnmv5
    alexnmv5 15 March 2018 17: 21
    +2
    Low mobility. This is up to the shell like to Kiev on the ass.
  16. Evgesha
    Evgesha 16 March 2018 06: 15
    +1
    Well hello everyone.
    I read the messages here and it became really funny ...
    A misunderstanding of the principles of guidance and calculation of targeting on ship ZAKs leads to truly masterpiece statements.
    And who mixes sea and land weapons ???
    It is absolutely necessary to be dunno so as not to understand that these weapons systems have different tasks in design.
  17. shinobi
    shinobi 16 March 2018 08: 59
    0
    What a freak, however.
  18. Slat808
    Slat808 16 March 2018 10: 35
    +1
    Competitor, say? What is the resource of work on targets in temporary reflection?
  19. vvvjak
    vvvjak 16 March 2018 11: 06
    +3
    It is not clear only why "x" need this thing. Scare the "barmaley" in Afghanistan? From single mines and RZSO shells, it can theoretically help. But against a salvo (even one "Cornflower") is useless. And the same “Caliber” will not be able to intercept physically.
    1. Dedall
      Dedall 16 March 2018 21: 58
      +1
      And what can you change the tip during a salvo? This is me because the trajectory of the falling mines is almost the same. At this time, the "stream" of shells will turn mines in any way.
      1. Conserp
        Conserp 20 March 2018 11: 24
        +1
        This is if the mines fly right into the memory. And you usually need to shoot down what flies to other places.
      2. vvvjak
        vvvjak 20 March 2018 12: 48
        +3
        Quote: Dedall
        And what can you change the tip during a salvo? This is me because the trajectory of the falling mines is almost the same. At this time, the "stream" of shells will turn mines in any way.

        Volley "Cornflower" in the prepared calculation of 100-120 rds. / Min. In the affected area 1 mine will be located for about 5 seconds. according to which C-RAM will release about 150 shells, but during this time another 9 shells will fly into the zone. In this case, the trajectories of all will be different (even due to natural scatter). Even sadder with RZSO missiles. The Grad package fires in 20 seconds. 40 shots. The missile will be in the affected area for 2 seconds. and flight paths are scattered even more.
  20. Jcdenton
    Jcdenton 16 March 2018 15: 14
    +3
    The loud title of the article is apparently taken over from the American media, in fact there is nothing common with our complex. The latest version of the Shell-SM has increased ranges: 1 - missile damage up to 40 km, 2 - detection up to 75 km, the ability to intercept ballistic missiles. I do not see this in the American version. IMHO, the Americans, seeing the effectiveness of the Shell in Syria, hastily gathered from an outdated by all standards ship-based complex (38 years in service with the Navy) do not understand that, laundered the money as always. Even the base of the tower has not been converted to a tractor, the bulky and heavy construction, these days with the development of electronics - is absolutely not justified. I would not even be surprised that the installations were taken from decommissioned ships and put on the chassis of an army tractor (they didn’t even repaint the complexes on video - IMHO there is no disguise — it catches the eye). They are not protected from air attacks at all, there are no anti-aircraft missiles. Efficiency? Excuse me where ... But it doesn’t need it, the Arabs do not have any planes .... Or that it will be necessary to put an anti-aircraft missile defense system nearby? IMHO - this is a shame for the entire US military-industrial complex system and the Americans themselves have shown this to us. Smart people will run to buy Armor, but politicians do not differ in mind ...
  21. Vladimir SHajkin
    Vladimir SHajkin 16 March 2018 23: 07
    +1
    You can call him a competitor with a stretch, the fact is that: -
    1. There are no missiles, but there is still a big difference between artillery, especially quick-fire and missiles.
    2. The dimensions of the entire C-Ram installation are much larger than our Carapace.
    3. Our Carapace can do all the “exercises” on the go, can it be C-Ram?
    4. With a range in height of 1470 meters, a competitor is also a problem for low-flying low-speed ones, but for supersonic or hyper ... just not low-speed ones, huh?
  22. HMR333
    HMR333 17 March 2018 14: 50
    0
    bullshit next is an analogue of shilka but not like not a shell! And the shilka is less overall and more aneurysm! this ship’s installation has a big minus, it is very dependent on electricity and is gluttonous and still doesn’t have missile weapons and we have such dimensions and the machine on which the power sources are! so the article is not about anything! even tth not indicated!
  23. Ilya_Nsk
    Ilya_Nsk 18 March 2018 11: 34
    0
    Volcano-Phalanx is a good system. Very heaped, with a revolutionary type of guidance - along the path своих shells, but in modern conditions is not very suitable precisely because of the caliber. Modern supersonic cruise missiles are in the radar's field of view for a very short time and have a protected warhead for breaking through a concrete wall / earthen rampart / side of the ship. Even with a partially damaged body, which is enough for a 20mm projectile, it is kinetically capable of causing a lot of harm. The 30mm cannon of the “shell” (AK-630 etc.) has twice the long range and the power of ammunition, which makes it possible to destroy the target. For the sea, they already have to build “Duets” (“Palms”, “Daggers”) to increase the density of fire in the entrance window.
    There are questions about this installation, as have to "swing" whole complex - ammunition, gun, radar - on board you need to carry a powerful generator. Solvable, of course. And yet - the vertical dimension is very large, I'm not sure that it can be transported by rail or by air without disassembling. Even tunnels for the “on their own” method will not all work. Even on a semi-trailer, it is high.
    1. Anton Yu
      Anton Yu 18 March 2018 13: 33
      0
      The shell on the basis of Kamaz also has stability problems with such a vertical dimension, but they still refuse to release them on the BAZ chassis.
  24. qwests
    qwests 19 March 2018 14: 32
    +1
    this is not a competitor, judging by the volume of cargo - this stationary post can be ....
  25. - = ANTRAX = -
    - = ANTRAX = - 19 March 2018 15: 47
    0
    In general, the concept is different.
  26. vicont444
    vicont444 19 March 2018 23: 30
    0
    agree, gentlemen, that ... "C-RAM" Centurion "is fully automatic.". That's cool. Me, and everyone who is interested in the question - our boys are guiding the Pantsir S air defense missiles to the target manually. Yes. It works. Enemies broke off in Hmeimim. Everything is perfect. Super. But, you see, automation, that's cool. Highly. We need it. .... Yes.
    1. Conserp
      Conserp 20 March 2018 11: 34
      +1
      Quote: vicont444
      our boys are guiding missiles of the Pantsir S air defense missile system to the target manually.


      The yellow jersey of the leader in the race for the most idiotic lies is yours.
  27. kan123
    kan123 20 March 2018 11: 03
    0
    The CCP (China) did a great job - like the "paper war" as the Russian Federation conducts, but they transported several divisions by electric trains, high-speed trains, trucks, large airplanes - they gathered the whole army, over a week, along the Amur borders. Then they carried out the same action, but "on paper" - against the United States. There is a naval war, it doesn’t work out in kind. The headquarters conducted an OS, and came to the conclusion that the US Army, with any superiority, is not capable of fighting. This is a very weak army - when it is a landing operation, they capture Iraq, Afghanistan - what the hell did they capture there - they sit in the basements, like they defeated all Arabs. The CCP has come to the conclusion that forecasting a war with the United States is a completely rotten topic, because a US soldier, where they removed even physical exercises, for the sake of feminism, is not capable of capturing anything. If the Russians are from the continent, then the war with them is unpredictable, then with the United States there is just a landing operation, it will end with the mass dismissal of these fat men. Another option is that they would defend their Tennessee, Texas - and in the attack, they will not fight. Since Texas has never been attacked - never, they will all be taken warm. Thoughts aloud, according to the results of the teachings of the Chinese. They won’t even get "Vietnam" there, and they won’t even have time to chew on it when the bd will move to the USA itself. What will happen to the attack on the Russian Federation - after the Chechens, Georgians, now Ukrainians - is unpredictable. The continent can give such a return that they, on their islands, will take care of their problems - only curtail these, like Merkel, the macron and its women. The continent belongs to the continents, and not for anything to profit from and nothing to blow. They are smart - they have enough small, not expensive hints. Like those that they have all the satellites - spies fall. All the headquarters for the capture of the Continent will be “blinded” - then they will start to think, but with ass, but with their heads - stop joking. "pulling a tiger by the tail" is a fun pastime, but patience is not eternal.
  28. Sands Careers General
    Sands Careers General 22 March 2018 07: 57
    +1
    A good thing is not called shame))
  29. Volganin
    Volganin 29 March 2018 11: 38
    0
    Strange article. If only in the sense that the cowardly countries would buy it instead of the Shell. Then a competitor) Everything else, excuse me ..
  30. Akser
    Akser 29 March 2018 11: 47
    0
    a good thing C-RAM will not be called!