http://tass.com/defense/900185 So Russians are still in the

guns might be... cheaper?

There really isn't much advantage to autocannon-based CIWS over missiles. Missiles are super-accurate and out-range guns by miles, and with the advent of active guidence, more than 1 missile can be fired at a single target at once.

So, no. Guns are old and gay, despite what vatniks will tell you.

File: image%3A1846.jpg (2MB, 2000x1320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1320px

you really have no idea what you are talking about, do you

>>31382590
because a gun will fucking tear shit to shreds if missiles or lasers (which there is only one of, and it's american) fail for whatever reason

not even vatnik, how retarded are you to say that gun-based ship defense wouldn't be a good idea? are you the same faggot who says it would be better to field every soldier with rockets?

>>31382590
>Tunguska
>Pantsir
>Kashtan
>Palash
>Solely gun based
Come on now, not many countries have laser based CIWS and gun CIWS is perfectly dependable, also the Soviets had laser tech in the 70s.

File: sejong_the_great_class_l14[1].jpg (214KB, 1024x732px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1024x732px

>>31382590

There is nothing wrong with gun based CIWS in concept. However, the Phalanx system that the US for some reason insists on using is near useless because of its pathetic range. There are other systems out there that offer far superior range and stopping power against missiles and surface targets: Goalkeeper, Millennium, Kashtan, Dardo, 57mm Bofors, etc. Why the US keeps using Phalanx despite having so many better options available is simply baffling.

However, Rim-116 is probably the best CIWS right now and for the foreseeable future. I don't see anything wrong with having an additional gun system as a back-up though. Look at this Korean destroyer. It has a front-facing Rim-116 RAM launcher with 21 missiles and in the rear you can see a 30mm Goalkeeper CIWS.

>>31383048
Agreed, the phalanx system was never really updated, (except for software updates). The US is moving towards the Rolling Airframe missile now, because it's more reliable and has a higher probability of a kill. Also, Goalkeeper isn't as good. Phalanx has a longer range.>>31382590

>>31382590
The T-14 Armata can literally defeat incoming missiles with it's main gun. The Russians are light years ahead of us.

>>31382590
You're a fucking idiot you shit cunt.

A. You're conveniently ignoring the missiles present on just about every Russian CIWS system, Kashtan, Kortik, Palash, Pantsir, etc.

B. Gun based CIWS is still big in the West, Phalanx is ever growing and the 76mm Strales is France's CIWS

Australia will also utilise Phalanx on the Hobart class and fit them to the Canberra class LHDs.

File: 96k6 pantsir-s1 (1).jpg (310KB, 1200x795px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 1200x795px

>>31382590
>Pantsir
>Gun based
Get the fuck out.

>>31383208
>Goalkeeper isn't as good. Phalanx has a longer range.

False, Goalkeeper has a longer range and much more stopping power with the 7 barrel 30 mm gun

>>31383208
>>31383048
how's the laser coming along? last I check they were actually happy about it.

File: 1474254789641.jpg (49KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x640px

>>31382590
>Australia
>first world nation

File: 1474098380064.jpg (127KB, 1023x673px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1023x673px

>>31384216
>america
>first world nation

>>31384159
Wow. How does Russian koolaid taste?

>>31384271
Russia could defeat both NATO and the EU with their T-14 Armatas alone. It can literally defeat other tank rounds automatically, even if the enemy tank is only a couple of meters away. It can destroy enemy tanks from over 10,000 meters and can shoot-down aircraft. It's powerful engine means that it can travel faster and better over terrain than any other tank in the world, hell it would overrun NATO before they could even respond! It can even drive under water like a submarine, NATO would honestly never see it coming. It's literally industructible, and the crew can engage multiple targets at once with the highly advanced turret and optics, which can easily be replaced within like 5 minutes if it gets hit, which is almost impossible anyway. Because the computer systems are so advanced and easy to use, it only takes 15 minutes to fully train a crew to use the tank. Lastly, the T-14 is super easy to maintain and nothing ever needs to be repaired or replaced cause Russia makes their stuff strong and reliable, unlike Western junk.

Don't mess with Russia.

>>31383048
>>31383208
The entire point of phalax is a completely self contained system with a very, very small footprint. All it needs is what amounts to a socket to plug into, thats it.

Ship loses main power? No problem.

Ship loses radar? No problem.

Other systems are fully integrated into the ships systems and fully rely upon them.

>>31384216
>abbos
Lel

>>31383048
>However, the Phalanx system that the US for some reason insists on using is near useless because of its pathetic range.

To add to my post above, 3500m is not terrible compared to 5000m for the 630, 4000 for DARDO, etc, especially considering the inherent limitations to a self contained plug and play CIWS.

Why does the export versions (Palma) have missiles while domestic versions (Palash) don't? I know the missile problems of Palash but why is it not affecting Palma? Also why are they still using Duet for Buyans when they say it weighs the same as Palash? Also when is Ghibka with Verba?

If I recall, they were thinking of putting small Redut bins (for Morfey) into Kashtan slots since the Kashtan + resupply machinery below it is hueg. What happened?

>>31384405
Looks like just a clusterfuck of R&D. First they wanted to integrate it with Redut, then the country collapsed and they did;t have money, then Kashtan was selling and performing so good they made Palma, but the projects were already fitted for Palash and so on.

>>31384271
retard