Western CIWS discussions (split from crazy huge CGN)

Plus SeaRAM, mounted on a Phalanx mount, has its own integrated radar (same as Phalanx) at the cost of rounds carried.

klagldsf wrote:

Plus SeaRAM, mounted on a Phalanx mount, has its own integrated radar (same as Phalanx) at the cost of rounds carried.

But then again, it's only intended for ships that don't have the sensors to guide the traditional 21 round launcher.
To me at least that indicates that the USN considers the original one superior.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

I was also under the impression SeaRAM was meant more as an export product. There's more than enough space/sensors power on virtually every US warship out there to mount the 21-rnd launcher, at the very least any hull that's going to stick around much longer.

acelanceloet wrote:

MitcheLL300 wrote:

Goalkeeper cant do 360 if it depents on guidance on board?

WTF you talking about?
Goalkeeper has its own aerial search and tracking radars.
When the ships radars are down exept data-handeling. And electricity. Then the goalkeeper can still be used!!!
Aswell the srboc(super-rapid-bloom-off-chaff).
Thats why it costs so much. And is so reliable.
It is the only ciws on earth that can auto track and search and kill. While the whole ships crew is DEAD!
(ofcourse it has to be activated before crew dies. And must be loaded otherwise the system is more dumb then a mouse)
This is what i have learned.

uhm mitch.... reread carefully.
"the phalanx can't provide 360 degrees cover, while the goalkeeper can"
now think what you just said.....

To come back on my promise to show him something about what he had to get on school.

Attachment:

acelancelut.png

It shows the different story's.
But Ace thinks he wrote about the Phalanx when he ment:
(of course this depends on other guidance systems on board, I am now only talking about the inbuild systems)

Not trying to make a fight, just want to show him what he didnt understand what i said through my mobile phoney.

Mitch

_________________
Fryssian AU with Lt.Maverick 114
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9802&p=193331#p193331
[ img ]

Embarked on: HNLMS Karel Doorman A833
To do list:
-Zeven Provincien class cruiser
-Joint support ship all sides
-F124 Sachsen class frigate
-F125 Baden-Württemberg class frigate
-Clemencau class aircraft carrier
-Zeven provincien class frigate
-Poolster class AOR
-Amsterdam class AOR
-Minas Gerais aircraft carrier

MitcheLL300 wrote:

acelanceloet wrote:

MitcheLL300 wrote:

uhm mitch.... reread carefully.
"the phalanx can't provide 360 degrees cover, while the goalkeeper can"
now think what you just said.....

To come back on my promise to show him something about what he had to get on school.

Attachment:

acelancelut.png

I already understood, but later in this thread even the intel about the phalanx is proven wrong (it was wrong info, I have to avoid wikipedia

)
it was you who didn't understood it, because it wasn't entirely clear how I wrote this,so there was no need for this post. that said: no fight, no problem, all ok again

_________________
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

Shipbucket

Who is online