Shipbucket

battleship lover, more bullets is not always better. if you fire 100 bullets and one hits, or one bullet fired and one hits.......
I think there is also something wrong with your size comparision of the bullets. phalanx round: 0.263 kg. 57mm round: 6.1 to 6.5 kg.
effectively, this means:
- 57mm: 220*6.1 = 1342 kg/min
- phalanx: 4500* 0,263 = 1183,5 kg/min.
note that the larger bullets of the 57mm are also more effective against targets (for example, explosive or scatter ammo)
the phalanx is effective in the range of 1490m. the bofors is effective in the range of 8500m. so, the bofors can fire 5.7 times as long at an target as the phalanx.

now, onto the zumwalt. I will ask you first. name me any destroyer with armour build after WW2. you will find that there are literally none with anything considered armour.
also, anything but small arms fire can penetrate through steel plating such as found on destroyers. including missiles. since these were developed is the strategy: don't get hit!

the zumwalts hull shape is indeed worse in bad weather then that of burkes and spruances. I dislike it too, and I do think that this will be the only ship class using the hull shape, as I doubt it will be succesful. however, it does not mean it cannot go out in bad weather, it does only mean it might be less comfortable and may not be able to go out in as bad weather as other destroyers could, or should go in it at an lower speed then other destroyers would.

as last remark I would add that saying you yourself kicked someones but is not the best thing to do if you want to be respected. I also think you would not be the one to decide, and even if you are, then you are wrong.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

yes I'm 15 years old

okay jeez im trying to make a point. The person said that the 57 mm stealth gun only needed the general direction so I put it into a analogy so he could understand

I hope you don't think the Bofors 57mm round is the same as the FN 5.7x28mm carbine round.... (that's the photo you posted of the round next to the American $0.25 piece...)

Also - don't get upset when people prove you wrong. You said something dumb on the internet... expect to get jumped on.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

hahahah, you are just talking bullshit.


yes Phalanx shot faster, but the 56mm:

lets do some math:

Phalanx: 4500 rounds/m. all a single bullet that doesn't explode! and if they do it's just an close proximity detonation where the blast from the ammo is intended to knock a missile out of possession.

-56 mm with "scatter" ammo: 220 rounds/m. every shells explode up in small metal balls at high velocity (500 to 1000 small metal balls, depending on how mush explosive the shell have). that gives us 220 * 500 to 1000 = 110000 to 220000 small metal balls that create a wall of metal in a range up to 8500 meters. in the time a missile need to get close to the ship, the Bofors have fired almost 300000-500000 small metal balls covering the entire area like an swarm of mosquito!.
- then you have the blast from the shell it self.
- then you have the ability to fire the gun without help of radar and electronic optics.

- 56 mm with High explosive. well to say it this way. if an missile is closer then 5-10 meter to the shell. god night mr. missile. compared to Phalanx close proximity...
- High altitude fighter jet at long range.... 8500 meter....

- Phalanx: 4500 rounds/m with a range up to 1490m. giving it an approx capability to fire 6-10000 rounds in the time the missile needs to get close.
- Range: 1490 against Bofors: 8500 (we in Norway like to use an 76mm, slower but more small metal balls in air when using "scatter" ammo.
- Phalanx against ordinary missiles, okay since phalanx radar can manage to get an radar look on the missile. but when it come to an sea-skimming, stealth missile that also jam any radar around... well first the Phalanx can't see the missile, second it will be jamed so the radar and it's brain is blind, thus it can fire. The bofors, if they see an small blimp on the radar, from an ship launching the missile 4000 km away, and getting jamed. the crew need only to just point the gun in the general direction and create an big wall of metal that the missile will fly into and get damage.

I can even referrer to the commander on that Zumwalt, saying that Zumwalt have an different sea capability, and are not as good as the Burks to handle waves from a different direction, the same as Burks are not as good in handling waves from a different direction. as the Commander said to an magazine, we can outperform the Burks in bad weather, but we have to drive different.

but to compare Zumwalt to an Burk is like comparing an catamaran to an single hull fast boat, and start to complain about how the catamaran handle waves in from front. when we all know an catamaran best ability is to handle waves in an 60 degrees direction to the bow and not head on as an single hull can do.


15 years old, well first:

- be older. like 26 year or more.
- have been in the navy.
- live on one of the worst coastline in the world, in the most extreme weather situation. like for example North Norway. where ships must be special designed to handle extreme weather like storm and -50 or more. Thus an Norwegian frigate are designed to be fully operational and still have the same stability with 300 tons of ice on the deck. We have often visit by US naval ships. but if the weather is badder than so and so winter time, they go to port, while we Norwegian will still be at see and have live fire exercise!
- get smarter.
- have engineering background.
- study naval ship technology for 15 years.
- don't be an prat.
- and don't provoke the mighty Viking. (it would just get ugly.



oh and don't com here say that US Navy can eat Norway for lunch:

- well yes they can, but they would do it at dinner time. more daylight... something you need here in Norway where we have under water rocks for every 50 meters or so.
- aircraft carrier with there ships. well we in Norway have something called an Ula class submarine, armed with 16 torpedoes each. They have been to USA to play in US-naval games. and it ends up every time with an single Ula class submarine sink the aircraft carrier and it's escort.... every single time. and in Norwegian water an Ula class out perform any large nuclear 30+knots submarine, even when the Norwegian do only 25+ knots


if you want to get butt kicked... well say halo to my Finish friend some gladly like to have some fun as thank for the help during the finish-sovjet (well fun and fun..) war... mr. golly the admin. so either behave. or just listen to us people with a lot more experience than you.

so this one is for you. thanks for the laughter. now, I need to go kill an bear, because I got hungry after this...

Also you may never be sure if a phalanx or Bofors works against missiles or aircraft. You will never know how it will work until actual combat. To add on then destroyers are basically metal shields for bigger warships, what a stupid idea. Any way I don't know much of naval helicopters and I want to put on a heli pad.

oh BTW. to show the difference between an phalanx and a 56 mm, it's like showing the difference between a rifle and a shotgun. now get back to school, or I will come over ther in 5 years and order McCheese with fries and coke.

while heuhen is not entirely correct, keep in mind that an phalanx also only points in the general direction. the high rate of fire and spread of an phalanx gives it the same effect, on a shorter range.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

note that the first iteration of the bofors 57mm guns went on board around 1950. the base of the current turret is 1966. since then it has seen combat, and it works.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

The Phalanx and the Bofors have been tested in several situation and work just fine for what they are designed to do. Phalanx as the weapon that send a burst of led in close range, and the bofors sending out big shell up to 8.5 km and detonating and create an a 5m radius wall of led. and can keep doing it to ground zero.

For helicopters. look on other ship for solution. and helicopter pad on an Naval ship is smaller than on commercial ships. they have also an system that can pull down the helicopter to the deck when they land.

For Hangar for helicopter, it's best to have the hangar on deck. thus you don't have the problem with lift's that suddenly stop working in a bad time.

yup just like "ace..." say. similar effect, where one can start doing it at longer range than the other. it's better to have 30 seconds to defend than 5 seconds.

Oh. note most of the numbers I us in the calculation is taken out of the air. while the amount of led in an skater ammo, I just used an number I had in head from an bigger shell and just reduced the number accordingly...