“Only the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 saved”: a Houthi anti-ship missile overcame the Aegis system of a US Navy destroyer in the Red Sea

111
“Only the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 saved”: a Houthi anti-ship missile overcame the Aegis system of a US Navy destroyer in the Red Sea

The American media are commenting on the missile attack by Yemeni rebels on the American Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer USS Gravely. According to American journalists, citing the Navy command, “there were only a few moments left before the ship was hit.”

It became known that the Houthis fired a missile at an American warship located in the Red Sea. Moreover, this missile easily penetrated the so-called outer line of defense of the destroyer - the Aegis system. The anti-missile system was not fired from the ship at the attacking target.



As a result, for the first time since the start of the confrontation in the Red Sea, an American warship had to use the Phalanx CIWS Mk15. This is an anti-aircraft artillery complex - weapon close combat. It was with the help of the Felenx that the anti-ship missile, moving at a speed of up to Mach 2, was destroyed.

According to the latest data, at the time the target was destroyed, it was located at a distance of approximately 1100 m from the American warship.

American media:

Only the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 complex saved the Houthis from the missile

Accordingly, a purely technical conclusion arises that if the Yemeni rebels had used a faster anti-ship missile, the same Phalanx CIWS Mk15 would not have saved the US Navy warship from defeat. Against supersonic missiles capable of moving at speeds exceeding two speeds of sound, such a shipborne close combat installation is powerless. Whether such missiles could appear in the Yemeni arsenal is still an open question.
  • Wikipedia/Harald Hansen
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

111 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    3 February 2024 07: 45
    “Can such missiles appear in the Yemeni arsenal? while open" -

    ***
    -"Demand creates supply" ...
    ***
    1. +7
      4 February 2024 07: 23
      Demand creates supply

      Not only demand, but also geopolitics... We could also help the Yemeni rebels in the fight against American imperialism and could, for example, supply Iran with our outdated anti-ship missiles with the M3-5. Otherwise, the United States helps, helps the Banderlogs in Ukraine, but for some reason we cannot help the Yemeni rebels in their legitimate fight against imperialism...
  2. +27
    3 February 2024 07: 46
    Why do they always fire one or two missiles? Low in stock, saving? If we had fired about six drones and three missiles in pursuit, I think the result would have been different.
    1. +8
      3 February 2024 07: 57
      The owner does not allow launching more, otherwise God forbid someone will be drowned. And so everyone is “happy”, except for Israel - he is the last one.
      1. +8
        3 February 2024 08: 22
        The goal is not to drown everyone. The goal is to spoil the traffic (to enrich the English insurers). And to attack in a swarm - no missiles will be enough. It’s better to pull the cat by the tail for a long, long time.
        1. +5
          3 February 2024 08: 41
          Not only insurers, but also ship owners and fuel suppliers are enriched. The African region is a detour of 8 km.
          1. 0
            4 February 2024 06: 20
            Your golden words: Who is the leader in oil production? Monarchies of the Persian Gulf.
          2. 0
            4 February 2024 08: 33
            It's not just insurers who are getting rich

            Wealth!!!
        2. +3
          4 February 2024 11: 24
          Well, one boat could have been sunk. The stakes would immediately increase.
      2. +4
        3 February 2024 08: 58
        Quote: tralflot1832
        The owner does not allow launching more, otherwise God forbid someone will be drowned. And so everyone is “happy”, except for Israel - he is the last one.

        The owner in the person of the Persians? And what do they care, I’m not me, and the horse is not mine.
        1. +1
          3 February 2024 09: 08
          Alexey. Something I’m not very sure about is that the owners of the Houthis are only Persians. Are deliveries carried out only by sea to the Houthis, or not only by sea?
          1. +2
            3 February 2024 09: 18
            Quote: tralflot1832
            Alexey. Something I’m not very sure about is that the owners of the Houthis are only Persians. Are deliveries carried out only by sea to the Houthis, or not only by sea?

            To hell with the guys in their slippers and sheets. East is a delicate matter.))
            1. +6
              3 February 2024 09: 22
              It’s definitely something you can’t make out, but they’re shooting in the right direction.
              1. +3
                4 February 2024 03: 30
                Quote: tralflot1832
                It’s definitely something you can’t make out, but they’re shooting in the right direction.
                it's just a pity that "not in queues", from several types UAV (and units, at the same time !!), and missiles..!!! winked winked
  3. dFG
    -7
    3 February 2024 07: 47
    But the score is in their favor..... cruiser, a bunch of large landing craft and MRK / 0. When will we recoup? When will ships with crews start getting damaged???
    1. BAI
      +3
      3 February 2024 08: 06
      When will we recoup?

      Never. Ukraine does not have such a fleet to recoup.
      1. +5
        3 February 2024 09: 01
        Quote: BAI
        Never. Ukraine does not have such a fleet to recoup.

        Even more surprising. A country without a fleet is a nightmare for the Black Sea Fleet in its tail and mane
        1. -12
          3 February 2024 09: 10
          It’s your brains that are causing nightmares about Ukraine, not the Black Sea Fleet.
          1. +2
            3 February 2024 12: 31
            Quote: tralflot1832
            It’s your brains that are causing nightmares about Ukraine, not the Black Sea Fleet.

            Did I say something wrong? Or were there no such facts? Well, if you don’t know, then first find out where the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet “Moscow” is now? If you say that he stands at the pier or plows the seas, then I will address your post about brains back in your direction.
            1. 0
              3 February 2024 12: 54
              And read my other post, what does Ukraine have to do with it?
            2. -2
              4 February 2024 08: 18
              Quote: Gritsa
              Where is the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet "Moscow" now?

              Where is the flagship of the Ukrainian Black Sea Fleet? So that the Russians don’t drown, they drown themselves! wassat
            3. +1
              4 February 2024 10: 12
              Quote: Gritsa
              Where is the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet "Moscow" now?

              The flagship of the Ukrainian fleet "Hetman Sahaidachny" was sunk by its crew in Nikolaev. He didn't even resist.
        2. +6
          3 February 2024 12: 53
          As far as I look at the information, and I live not too far from Sevastopol, a little over an hour’s drive, the overwhelming majority of missiles and UAVs are intercepted and what’s surprising is that. what do we sometimes miss?
        3. -2
          4 February 2024 10: 07
          The old Soviet troughs are a nightmare, in which even the connection between the bridge and the engine room is analog, using lamps and Soviet transistors....
      2. +1
        3 February 2024 09: 07
        Quote: BAI
        When will we recoup?

        Never. Ukraine does not have such a fleet to recoup.

        No, two minesweepers are hanging out like two roses in small Britain. Now maybe two destroyers will be given as a gift... on loan.))
      3. +6
        3 February 2024 10: 11
        What does Ukraine have to do with it?
        We need to make up for it before the main beneficiary.
    2. +5
      3 February 2024 09: 12
      Quote: dfg
      When will we recoup? When will ships with crews start getting damaged???

      The former Ukrainian SSR does not have a single warship. Ours sank everything. We need critical damage in the ports of Odessa, Ochakov, Izmail, Nikolaev. In the Verkhovna Rada of Bandera, in the residence of the President of Svidoukrain. With fatal consequences for their inhabitants.
      1. -1
        3 February 2024 11: 44
        “The former Ukrainian SSR does not have a single warship. Ours sank everything” ///
        ----
        The Black Sea Fleet was also reduced to a minimum. And moved to Novorossiysk.
        The missile boat Ivanovets recently was not helped by cannons and machine guns.
        Although he really fired heroically - until the last.
        1. 0
          3 February 2024 12: 57
          Go to Sevastopol, there are ships there, you can see them visually, ray Soi - Tel Aviv I think there is, and it’s just a stone’s throw away. Moreover, there are two booms in Severnaya Bay, there are in smaller bays like Yuzhnaya, although it is only 2,5 in length, XNUMX km, so it’s not small, it just gets lost against the backdrop of the North. And if you drive around the surrounding area, and even in Sevastopol itself you can see air defense systems, of course I won’t say where.
          1. +3
            3 February 2024 18: 05
            There is no need to travel anywhere today - there are high-quality satellite images.
            They show how many ships (and which ones) are in Sevastopol, how many are in Novorossiysk,
            how many in Feodossia.
    3. -4
      3 February 2024 12: 52
      Yeah, it’s not just that they don’t have a cruiser. but even MRK, and a bunch of BDK, these are 2 pieces. Now about the cruiser, on VO there is a clear article with photographs that they did not sink the cruiser, but it drowned itself, because there are no traces of an anti-ship missile hit and the cruiser would most likely have withstood 2 anti-ship missiles, as evidence a photo of an American destroyer is presented, two large ones holes.
      1. +3
        3 February 2024 12: 59
        Quote: Alexander Salenko
        on VO there is a clear article with photographs that they did not sink the cruiser, but it drowned itself, because there are no traces of being hit by anti-ship missiles and 2 anti-ship missiles

        There are no uncontrollable processes. Just like that, by themselves, cruisers don’t drown from boredom.
        We've already heard about the sailor's thrown cigarette butt...
        1. +3
          3 February 2024 13: 10
          Well, maybe sabotage. But for example, in Sevastopol there is a museum ship, Sharp-witted, I’ll even boast, I was accepted as a pioneer on it, but Kerch was supposed to become a museum, but it was so burnt out, it was scary to look at it, I saw it in the ship cemetery in Inkerman and saw it more than once before In addition, he is a regular participant in fleet day parades. So the story with Moscow does not surprise me; it was burning before.
        2. +1
          4 February 2024 00: 28
          It's unlikely to come from a cigarette butt, but the splashes of hydraulic oil still ignite. We saw that a 120 ton dump truck was burned...
        3. 0
          7 February 2024 12: 12
          You haven’t heard about the fire in Kuza in 2011 - when Marmaris was burning, the Turks offered everyone to evacuate, but they fought for survivability to the end.
      2. 0
        4 February 2024 18: 52
        Yes, about the Black Sea Fleet it would be more modest - or everything will go wrong, but we won’t disgrace the fleet! It looks like the horses at one time dug the sea for the Turks and not for themselves, and especially not for the Muscovites!
      3. 0
        4 February 2024 18: 59
        You're an eccentric boatswain and your jokes are stupid, but the torpedo missed you.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. -1
        6 February 2024 04: 50
        There are traces of an anti-ship missile hit. It pierced the body without exploding. When the engine was in full swing, open combustion of the afterburners began, which resulted in a massive fire and loss of power to the pumps. And since the exit was below the waterline, the cruiser took on a critical volume of water and sank. But the reason for everything initially is PCR
  4. +2
    3 February 2024 07: 50
    “there were only a few moments left before the ship was hit”
    It’s a shame that they still repelled the blow. Now the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 will be heard in all media, dulling attention to the Aegis system that missed the Houthi missile.
    1. AUL
      +12
      3 February 2024 09: 50
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Now the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 will be heard in all media, dulling attention to the Aegis system that missed the Houthi missile.

      Actually, Aegis itself is not a rocket or a cannon. This is the BIUS, combat information and control system. It receives information from warning points (for example, locators) about targets, processes this information, makes a decision on the use of one or another weapon and issues target designation and other control information for weapons - missiles, guns, fighters. Well, and much more. So she issued target designation (guidance) and a command to open fire to the Phalanx in automatic mode. After all, you don’t think that a missile flying at a speed of 2M was spotted by eye, and manually aimed by eye and shot at a distance of more than a kilometer from the ship?
      Journalists - what to take from them... request
      PS In the 70s I served on a system of similar purpose in air defense. But then it was a whole town underground.
      1. +4
        3 February 2024 10: 34
        Journalists - what to take from them...
        ...the cooks don’t care what’s in the forehead or what’s on the forehead...they said on TV that the elephant is weak, but the trunk is strong...and that’s all..and at least scratch the stake on the head
      2. 0
        3 February 2024 10: 44
        It’s just against the backdrop of the failures (to put it mildly) of the Black Sea Fleet, the local bosses need to mock something, so they’re having a blast
        1. +2
          3 February 2024 13: 00
          What are you, failures? The Black Sea Fleet is not only ships, but 3 brigades that are at the forefront, this is aviation that flies constantly, I hear, this is logistics, these are missile launches from ships, what are you talking about? A definite minus.
          1. +2
            4 February 2024 07: 38
            And I speak for the ships...we are now talking about them, and not about the Marines or coastal troops (I have no claims against them at all and cannot have any), and not about Naval Aviation. So it’s better to hold your horses yourself!
            I don’t care about your cons to be honest)
      3. +2
        5 February 2024 00: 54
        My slippers are laughing!!!!!
        Aegis gave the command to VulcanFlanks recourse ....
        And that there are no other systems on the ship besides the volcano??? crying
        Aegis simply made a fool of himself in this case!!!! belay Before Vulcan, the missiles should have fired at other systems that are 100% integrated with Aegis
        and Vulcan ....... he is his own radar and his own shooter
        And Vulcan worked great!!!!
        1. +1
          6 February 2024 23: 16
          Aegis was playing at WOT at this time. He had no time
  5. +6
    3 February 2024 07: 50
    Whether such missiles could appear in the Yemeni arsenal is still an open question.

    so we need to help, our ships lost in the Black Sea must be avenged, give the Houthis the appropriate weapons for a test drive
    1. +5
      3 February 2024 14: 58
      Quote: Graz
      give the Houthis the appropriate weapons for a test drive

      The Houthis are down and out!!! Not according to Feng Shui: we don’t support “terrorists” in slippers, we don’t even have contacts with them! But their patron bosses, whose proxies they are, absolutely need to supply (for free!!!) “five or six pieces” - they can’t eat more (c). Yes
      Moreover, these anti-ship missiles should be produced on a special order: without markings, with American "components (CAB), in a fiberglass (carbon fiber) stealth body. And launch it so that - LIKE A THUNDER OUT OF A CLEAR SKY! Preferably from under the side of a supertanker or container ship for 500 thousand etc. And yes, so that such an anti-ship missile launches without a slide. This is so that the Arly IR sensors do not detect it by the torch at the moment of launch... Then we’ll see: there’s a DAD!!! wassat
  6. +4
    3 February 2024 07: 51
    In order to turn on the “Flanks” you need extraordinary courage, the Americans don’t like it when it lives its own life. The Houthis are starting to check the air defense of the “Arly Burkov”, which means that the proposals from Burns for a truce in Gaza do not quite suit the Houthis. And this is the Houthis’ response to Yesterday's bravura report from the USA and England, four planes hit all the intended targets. The gentlemen must be taken at their word.
    1. +3
      3 February 2024 10: 04
      .Gentlemen should be taken at their word.
      ...and then Petka’s card immediately went wrong
  7. +2
    3 February 2024 07: 51
    Only the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 complex saved the Houthis from the missile

    It's a shame that it didn't reach its goal. We should have sent two.
  8. +3
    3 February 2024 07: 52
    The Houthis are becoming pros at coastal anti-ship missiles.
    With such dynamics of their thoughts (+ IRGC) - soon the US 5th Fleet will not be comfortable - not only in the Red Sea, but also... off some coasts of Africa.
    They will jostle at the pier in Bahrain, like the British.
  9. BAI
    +3
    3 February 2024 08: 03
    It was with the help of the Phalenx that the anti-ship missile, moving at a speed of up to Mach 2, was destroyed.

    If the Yemeni rebels had used a faster anti-ship missile, the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 would not have saved the US Navy warship from defeat. Against supersonic missiles capable of moving at speeds exceeding two speeds of sound, such a shipborne close combat installation is powerless.

    If this installation is powerless, then how did it shoot down the missile?
    Does the author read what he writes?
    1. +6
      3 February 2024 08: 09
      Quote: BAI
      If this installation is powerless, then how did it shoot down the missile?

      Read carefully.
      It was with the help of the Phalenx that the anti-ship missile moving at speeds up to Mach 2, was destroyed.


      Against supersonic missiles capable of travel at speeds exceeding two speeds of sound, such a ship's close-combat installation is powerless.
      1. BAI
        -3
        3 February 2024 08: 12
        Why waste time on trifles - 2 swings. You can immediately, with a guarantee - it is powerless against hypersound.
        And against a conventional artillery shell too
        1. +4
          3 February 2024 09: 51
          Quote: BAI
          You can immediately, with a guarantee - it is powerless against hypersound.

          And what? You wrote that there is a contradiction in the article, I pointed out that there is none.
    2. +3
      3 February 2024 08: 11
      And what is wrong? The missile had up to 2 swings; if it had been more than two, it would not have been shot down. Like Russian in white.
    3. +1
      3 February 2024 10: 24
      Does the author read what he writes?
      ..and the author writes everything correctly..if you read carefully, the meaning is this...according to the reflectors, the rocket was moving at a speed of 2 M, but the author, on the contrary, claims that if it had moved at that speed, it would not have been reflected....with On the one hand, this is exactly what would have happened, because it happened with the Stark missile launcher, when Stark received two subsonic Exocets on board... on the other hand, the Phalanx has quite dense fire and the speed of the target if it is noticed is not a priority... well, maybe if it's not hypersound
      1. +7
        3 February 2024 15: 18
        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
        on the other hand, the Phalanx has quite dense fire and the speed of the target if it is noticed is not a priority... well, unless it is hypersonic

        Much depends on what kind of rocket is this. Our legendary P-120 had armor and a semi-armor-piercing warhead, and also had decent speed. Our anti-aircraft gunners really didn’t like her!
        So, our AK-630M “lawnmower” drove it in a cloud of continuous explosions of 30mm shells (and on American spray guns!). P-120 was on fire! - but it flew!!! Then it did cross the course of the Kyiv order, for which we received a “banana” - it is believed that the missile hit the “target”. But the ships could not reach it with a cleaner (the Kinzhal air defense system) - the parameter was more than 2 km on the bow. Yes... there is something to remember for the needs of the day.
        AHA.
        1. 0
          3 February 2024 15: 27
          Yes... there is something to remember for the needs of the day.
          ...well, it is doubtful that the barefoot ones have Malachite P-120 or even Amethyst P-70, and even more so from the category P-35, P-500, and even more so P-700 granite and Mosquito...they only have clones of subsonic P-15 termites...it’s possible that there are also subsonic Exocets from the Persians...but the main thing is the widespread use...and it’s beautiful, it’s not there...the only thing that remains a fact...the possibility of defeating warships in ancient times is very great
          1. 0
            3 February 2024 15: 47
            Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
            They only have clones of subsonic P-15 termites... perhaps they also have subsonic Exocets from the Persians.

            We do not know the complete (objective) truth. We rely on the article, which says - supersonic, but less than 2 M. Therefore, P-15/40, Exocets are no longer needed - subsonic. Maybe the Persians slipped the thread on the sly or bought it from whales. Although there is not much of this goodness there either.
            Why didn't Aegis work? that's the million dollar question! Many blame the radar:
            The SPY-1 radar operates in the decimeter range, and they reflect very well from the water, which creates a flurry of interference from their own signals. In view of this, Aegis has problems with the detection of low-flying targets (RCC).
            When the sea state is 3-5, this becomes a problem. And our anti-ship missiles have already dropped to 3-5 m above the wave crest. Moreover, in the final section (20 km before the board) they switch to supersonic (third stage 3M54 - up to 3 M!!!)
            Therefore, it is logical to make an assumption: the anti-ship missile is low-flying, sea level 3-4, SM-2 could intercept it, because altitude range --0,15 - 15 km. Well, if only the anti-ship missile went to 50 m, it didn’t do a hill, it was shot almost point-blank (but this is unlikely).
            IMHO.
            1. +1
              3 February 2024 16: 41
              We rely on the article, which says - supersonic,
              ...in the article we rely only on the words of the defenders, much like in the joke
              -Comrade Inspector, how do you determine the speed of a traffic violator without a radar?
              - but just a daragoy... if he doesn’t violate it, then he goes, zhiiiiiiiiii, and if he violates it, then he goes... zhik
              so here too... Yemen did not have advanced anti-ship missile weapons, they only had P-15 termite, back in the 90s they published about this, saying that Yemen in the Strait of Mandeb was doing a disgrace in the form of a threat to anti-ship missiles... and these were anti-ship missiles from Iran, Chinese clones of the P-15... so in reality they are P-15... subsonic... and you know what kind of eyes fear has
              1. 0
                3 February 2024 18: 45
                Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                they say de Emen in the Strait of Mandeb is a disgrace in the form of a threat to anti-ship missiles... and these were anti-ship missiles from Iran, Chinese clones of the P-15... so in reality it is the P-15... subsonic... and you know the eyes of fear which

                Apparently this is the case. Because foreign media believe that the Kartney EM was fired upon by the Noor anti-ship missile
                Noor is an Iranian-made anti-ship cruise missile. Technically, it is a copy of the Chinese C-802. The missile is equipped with a semi-armor-piercing warhead weighing 155 kg and is capable of hitting targets at a distance of 120 km, while developing a speed of up to Mach 0,9.
                1. +1
                  3 February 2024 18: 57
                  EM Kartney was fired upon by Noor anti-ship missiles
                  ...well, it’s already like tea leaves...but the fact that the Chinese clone of the Soviet anti-ship missile system...don’t go to grandma here...so if you talk about the fact that Iran already has a clone of the Soviet submarine missile VA- 111 we should wait for new unexpected people... the Persians are already quite angry... expect trouble
  10. +2
    3 February 2024 08: 11
    I wonder what they shot? And this is without overloading or disrupting the air defense.
    1. 0
      7 February 2024 11: 00
      Quote: tatarin1972
      I wonder what they shot? And this is without overloading or disrupting the air defense.

      So there was probably only one destroyer, and not on a warrant. In a standard aug there are several destroyers, a cruiser and a submarine
      1. 0
        7 February 2024 17: 07
        I wanted to ask what the Houthis fired at. What was the speed of the target that their vaunted Aegis was subject to?
  11. +1
    3 February 2024 08: 18
    ...The anti-missile system was not fired from the ship at the attacking target...
    Where did these fired missiles hit then? By sea? By the Moon?
    1. -1
      3 February 2024 09: 05
      Quote: Cat Alexandrovich
      The anti-missile system was not fired from the ship at the attacking target...
      Where did these fired missiles hit then? By sea? By the Moon?

      The point is that the Aegis missiles were not fired from the ship towards the attacking Houthi missile. Apparently, the system did not have time to react. If there were several of them or from different directions, they would now be playing a memorial service for Burke.
      1. AUL
        +1
        3 February 2024 10: 10
        Quote: Gritsa
        The point is that the Aegis missiles were not fired from the ship towards the attacking Houthi missile. Apparently, the system did not have time to react.

        That is, the electronic system did not have time to react, but the people had time to react, make a decision, aim (manually!) the gun, open fire and hit at a distance of 1100 m? Imagine this situation dynamically in real time. Supermen, Batman and Spider-men! fellow
        1. +1
          3 February 2024 10: 52
          it means the phalanx is sitting on another system or there was a human operator on duty constantly, anything can happen
          1. AUL
            +2
            3 February 2024 10: 56
            Quote: Graz
            it means the phalanx is sitting on another system or there was a human operator on duty constantly, anything can happen

            Well, you can, of course, invent anything you want when you don’t want to admit the obvious. My grandson (the youngest) also lashes out like this. lol
            1. -1
              3 February 2024 11: 00
              play these children's games without me for now
              1. AUL
                +1
                3 February 2024 11: 00
                Quote: Graz
                play these children's games without me for now

                laughing
        2. +3
          3 February 2024 11: 47
          Aegis is a missile defense information system.
          She gives the command what to shoot: rockets or cannons.
        3. -5
          3 February 2024 12: 35
          Quote from AUL
          That is, the electronic system did not have time to react, but the people had time to react, make a decision, aim (manually!) the gun, open fire and hit at a distance of 1100 m? Imagine this situation dynamically in real time. Supermen, Batman and Spider-men!

          I don’t know how the Aegis system differs from the Phalanx in terms of identifying a target and working on it. But the fact remains - Aegis did not work. As for the response, that was my guess, nothing more. There are a lot of nuances there.
          1. AUL
            +1
            3 February 2024 12: 38
            Quote: Gritsa
            But the fact remains - Aegis did not work.

            Why do you consider this a fact?
        4. +2
          3 February 2024 12: 37
          Vryatli was guided by a person, the automation worked, the target was taken for tracking, and when it entered the action zone, it was destroyed. A person will not have time to react to a fast-flying target
          1. AUL
            +2
            3 February 2024 12: 40
            Quote: tatarin1972
            Vryatli was guided by a person, the automation worked, the target was taken for tracking, and when it entered the action zone, it was destroyed.

            And this is one of the functions of Aegis!
            1. +3
              3 February 2024 12: 45
              This is the function of any air defense system: detect, select, escort, destroy. Air defense of ships is also divided by range, the question is why they didn’t work on the target at long and medium distances.
  12. +2
    3 February 2024 08: 34
    if Yemeni rebels used a faster anti-ship missile

    That would be if someone had the fortitude to sell it to them, but the epic heroes are now older and kinder.
    1. +1
      3 February 2024 10: 00
      And what is known about the downed missile is written by the Houthi anti-ship missiles as if they were making them themselves.
      1. 0
        3 February 2024 11: 32
        It is known for sure that it is not ours, otherwise the stench would be to high heaven.
  13. 0
    3 February 2024 10: 08
    This is a very dangerous “bell” for the mattress fleet. If in place of the Houthi product, from waste products of the body and sticks, there had been serious anti-ship missiles, the result could have been completely different. What is the problem? Did the equipment fail or the l/s?
  14. 9PA
    0
    3 February 2024 10: 12
    Quote: rotmistr60
    “there were only a few moments left before the ship was hit”
    It’s a shame that they still repelled the blow. Now the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 will be heard in all media, dulling attention to the Aegis system that missed the Houthi missile.

    Is Aegis a ship's air defense system or is it an element of a global missile defense system?
    1. +2
      3 February 2024 10: 26
      Quote: 9PA
      Is Aegis a ship's air defense system or is it an element of a global missile defense system?

      Both. In the first case, it is the basis of air defense; in the second, it is one of the cells (components) of the missile defense system.
    2. 0
      7 February 2024 10: 56
      Quote: 9PA
      Quote: rotmistr60
      “there were only a few moments left before the ship was hit”
      It’s a shame that they still repelled the blow. Now the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 will be heard in all media, dulling attention to the Aegis system that missed the Houthi missile.

      Is Aegis a ship's air defense system or is it an element of a global missile defense system?

      All systems about the USA are connected into a single unit. The destroyer can issue target designation, or it can receive it and shoot down an ICBM if there is a corresponding missile in the cell
  15. 0
    3 February 2024 12: 21
    if the Yemeni rebels had used a faster anti-ship missile, the warship would not have been saved
    - what kind of nonsense?!... and Mach 2 is enough, considering that the bulk of the missiles are sub-sonic.
    at the time the target was destroyed, it was located at a distance of approximately 1100 m from the American warship
    - the ship was fantastically lucky. Apparently the rocket was small and hit the high frequency.
  16. +4
    3 February 2024 13: 10
    WHY THE HELL IS RUSSIA NOT HELPING ARM THE HOUTHIS, THE IRAQI MILITIA, AND HAMAS??? The US and NATO are currently openly killing Russians on Russian soil by the hands of their Ukronazi proxies. Why not return the favor? Does this make sense? Russia is NOT "avoiding World War III" by this timid and passive behavior - rather, she is making World War III MORE LIKELY.
    1. +1
      4 February 2024 01: 33
      Because Russian government is cowards and traitors.
  17. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      4 February 2024 01: 29
      Voices in the head of the author of the article
  18. 0
    4 February 2024 00: 34
    They can, they should, but they won’t appear. The hardness of the eggs matters. Red lines should not turn brown.
  19. -1
    4 February 2024 01: 29
    As always, the source is as reliable as a Swiss watch.

    It's strange that they didn't write a sequel:
    Then the Su-24 appeared with the Khibiny electronic warfare station. Blinded the destroyer and disabled all electronics on the ship. And then the whole team wrote a letter of resignation.
  20. 0
    4 February 2024 01: 34
    Ugh.... Stupid amers. Our valiant Black Sea fleet would show how to shoot down missiles.
  21. 0
    4 February 2024 02: 04
    This suggests a purely technical conclusion that if the Yemeni rebels had used a faster anti-ship missile, the same Phalanx CIWS Mk15 would not have saved the US Navy warship from defeat.

    The author himself did not understand what he wrote. From the fact that the complex shot down a missile up to 2M does not suggest the conclusion that it cannot shoot down a missile at a speed greater than 2M. Moreover, he shoots down targets at a speed of more than 2M.
    The Block 1B Phalanx Surface Mode (PSUM) modification (1999) allows you to destroy at extremely low altitudes small-sized high-speed maneuvering air targets, as well as helicopters in hovering mode.... Tests of the Mk15 Phalanx Block 1B were carried out on board the US Navy guided missile frigate FFG- 36 Underwood and were completed in August 1999. ...On March 12, 2002, representatives of the Raytheon Corporation and the US Navy announced the successful testing of the modernized Phalanx Block 1B ZAK, during which the complex hit a low-flying supersonic target missile flying at a speed of more than 2M (over 680 m/s).
  22. 0
    4 February 2024 02: 09
    Well, no one said that Aegis has a 100% probability of destroying the target. Moreover, if the ship was 1
  23. +2
    4 February 2024 02: 18
    According to American journalists, citing the Navy command, “there were only a few moments left before the ship was hit.”

    Americans write a little differently
    The cruise missile launched by the Houthis into the Red Sea on Tuesday evening flew within a mile of the American destroyerbefore being shot down, four U.S. officials told CNN, the closest the Houthis have ever come to a U.S. warship.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/31/politics/us-warship-close-call-houthi-missile/index.html
  24. +2
    4 February 2024 02: 19
    Quote: rotmistr60
    “there were only a few moments left before the ship was hit”
    It’s a shame that they still repelled the blow. Now the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 will be heard in all media, dulling attention to the Aegis system that missed the Houthi missile.

    What exactly is the annoyance? People and equipment worked competently. Everyone is alive, the ship is intact. You need to learn from professionals, and not pierce their tires with an awl because of hatred
  25. +2
    4 February 2024 04: 01
    I think that Comrade Stalin would approve of helping the brotherly people of Yemen in the fight against American imperialism and would provide the freedom fighters with the necessary missiles.
  26. +1
    4 February 2024 11: 24
    This means you need to launch 3 missiles simultaneously
  27. 0
    4 February 2024 11: 55
    “Only the Phalanx CIWS Mk15 saved”: a Houthi anti-ship missile overcame the Aegis system of a US Navy destroyer in the Red Sea
    This speaks to the effectiveness of the system, which the AK630, unfortunately, cannot hold a candle to. Will we have something similar - a radar + a cannon mount? If you believe the person who does not crawl out of the “box”, then everything is going our way - the grass is greener, more houses are being built than in the USSR, and in general we have overtaken Geyropa... Hmmm. Russia has never had such storytellers. And most importantly, he tells everyone with whom he communicates that everything is wonderful. Cynicism is off the charts. That’s why the gang behaves this way because there is no demand! And most likely it won't. We can be clever here as much as we want, until a new “Lenin” or “Stalin” appears - nothing will change! The head of the huckster at the head of Russia will always remain a huckster, no matter what populist maxims he voices, and this is the worst thing. I know what I'm talking about, but not here. sad
    1. +3
      4 February 2024 18: 11
      ZRAK "Dirk", "Kashtan", "Pantsir-M". But unfortunately, none of this existed either in Moscow or in Ivanovets, as well as in the modern BIUS. The result, as they say, is obvious.
      On ships, in light of recent events, we need a BIUS with an OLS with a thermal imager and a 360-degree view, and not a sailor-hero behind the DShK.
    2. 0
      5 February 2024 01: 14
      The AK-630 is not an anti-aircraft system, it is simply an artillery mount that is multi-purpose on ships.
      Valkan Flanks is ZAK.
      It’s as if we don’t have ZAKs... we have PAPERS
      Although there is a version of Palma without missiles
      We made different models of ZRAKs: Kashatn, Kortik, Palma... but they have a serious disadvantage - they are heavy.
  28. +1
    4 February 2024 13: 22
    And I was already hoping that the destroyer had a berth
  29. 0
    4 February 2024 13: 48
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    And I was already hoping that the destroyer had a berth

    It is unlikely. In order for it to work, some people need to clasp their balls in their fists and supply the Houthis, who are almost directly fighting the hegemon, with at least a “Ball” in a container design, however, this will be enough to send the coalition fleet, if not to the bottom, then to the points basing exactly. Once again I will sharpen the question - to solve these problems, Faberge must have steel ones. sad
  30. 0
    4 February 2024 18: 19
    Quote: Garris199
    ZRAK "Dirk", "Kashtan", "Pantsir-M". But unfortunately, none of this existed either in Moscow or in Ivanovets, as well as in the modern BIUS. The result, as they say, is obvious.
    On ships, in light of recent events, we need a BIUS with an OLS with a thermal imager and a 360-degree view, and not a sailor-hero behind the DShK.

    This is what I am talking about, allegorically, I hope you understand. hi
  31. +2
    4 February 2024 22: 17
    Moreover, to be precise, American sites report that the missile was intercepted at a distance of 1 mile, not 1100 meters. If we talk about a nautical mile, then it is 1852 meters, and this is a big difference.
  32. 0
    4 February 2024 23: 54
    If there were at least two missiles, and from different directions, then the result would be different...
  33. kig
    0
    5 February 2024 05: 20
    There may be many reasons why the last line of defense had to be used. Most likely there is some kind of malfunction. Or this: the local press has long been making noise that URO destroyers are using high-tech missiles worth millions of dollars to fight off drones costing 5000 USD. What if we are working on a new defense strategy?
  34. 0
    7 February 2024 10: 48
    Phalanx was able to do it. But Moscow was not.
    1. 0
      10 February 2024 20: 26
      Phalanx did. because the target was single

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"