Whilst I can see the value of having 25mm mounts on the MFU's, The good old 50 cal is still an effective weapon, even more so when it is mounted on the sabilized day/night sighted Mini T.

 

The reality it is unlikey they would be used against "Armoured bomb boats". If we where being attack by somthing like that, Well thats what the the ships main gun is for.

 

Any bombing would likely be from wooden dhows, jet skis and rubber dingys against which the 50cal would be very effective. Yes the 50 cal would be unlikey to sink the Dhows but it would kill the personnel within it and would probably set it on fire because the RAN uses a mixture of armour piercing, tracer and insindiary rounds. The jet skis and dingys would'nt stand a chance. 

This link has some good data on the subject! http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emwink.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" alt="" />

h**p://web.nps.navy.mil/~brutzman/InternationalMaritimeProtectionSymposium2005/speakers/SuttonDarren/20051214%20Sutton%20-%20DSTO.ppt#444,18, Weapon Study

 

Id have to disagree and say they are serious.... my guess!! is there are a number of new systems (technology) in the pipeline that will be some very serious hard defence against these threats.

 .50cal have a variety of uses....and are always handy!!!

 However in IMHO the best asymmetric!!!! http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emsmiled.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" alt="" />  defence against these types of threats and particularly non state actors that may conduct them is in our region " soft war" prevention of cause...

 Assisting maritime governance/ restocking fishing grounds/ protecting the maritime environment/ education of the effects of rubbish and waste into the ocean etc!!!http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emwink.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" alt="" />

firstly, sorry about the multiple thread entries. when i sent it i got back an apparent error message, lucky i stopped when i did.

 

 thank you for your quick replies. very informative, and im somewhat more encouraged. i'll refer myself to your info link.

 

that said, i am am kinda bewildered that for a relatively cheap and far more effective weapons system there isnt a 20mm autocannon ciws onboard. i mean we are talking about a vital insurance policy for a Frigate!!! in this current threat climate how much more relevence do you need? i think this issue needs far more attention. cheers.

Other than the fascination with the US-designed 20mm Phalanx, and a few stray designs using French GIAT (now Nexter) cannon, there really is no widescale interest anymore in shipborne guns of 20mm (the Phalanx probably only holding on because of its high rate of fire and ammo commonality with every current US fighter aircraft, and anyone who bought them).

There is also a unique system from Spain called Meroka, that uses a cluster of 12 barrels arranged in 2 rows of 6, tightly packd together (love to see that loading mechanism) to achieve a rate of fire of 1440rpm (so suggesteth the Mighty Wiki),

which could easily be achieved by simply mounting two Rheinmetall Rh202s side by side (1000rpm/barrel). It may be that the Meroka creates a more effective shot pattern down range...?

 

It seems there's a jump then from manual and RWS 12.7mm guns to 25mm guns, also either free-mounted/pintles like the early US Mk38s, or the latest RWS.

(To date though, there appears to be no gatling-type 12.7mm or 25mm CIWS/AA types on ships, although back around 1990 there was a GECal system tested, a 6-barrel 12.7mm (when General Electric still had production rights on the guns), intended for use on ships a tad too small to accomodate Phalanx's bulk.)

 

If you want really impressive single barrel ship gunnery, query the MLG27, a system designed around the BK27 revolver cannon (will only be surpassed if France creates a similar RWS using the Rafale's 30mm M791 gun, a 7-chamber revolver that can muster burst rates of 2500rpm from a single barrel, but the shorter-cased ammunition isn't as powerful as the NATO-standard 30x173 we all know and love from the Avenger GAU-8 cannon and Bushmaster MK44 30mm guns) .

 

Years ago, the British tried developing a 25mm revolver gun using ADEN guns (30mm) as a design base, only to have the program end because of technical issues here and there (feed chute angles for the Britsh Harrier's gun pods being one reason).

Pity, because it too would've made for an interesting high rate of fire ship gun, especially ideal for these new RWS.

Back in the day (1980s) there were a few CIWS in development hoping to use that 25mm gun, namely a 4-gun system called either Sea Draken or Sea Zenith (can't remember exactly which, not any good web info, either), and a three-gun system under consideration called Trident (there is a Sea Zenith apparently in use by Turkey, perhaps with Mauser cannon?).

One of the Trident concepts , with the guns laid out in a pyramidal one-on-top, two-on-bottom arrangement, had a dual feed system to the top gun, with the intent it would be equipped with a lower rate of fire selectable to be used by itself against surface targets, with all three guns firing at high rate (~1800rpm/barrel?) for anti-missile and AA work (or, all 3 could be fired at surface, also).

 

Next up (not counting the 27mm MLG27), 30mm guns are even more popular (more interest might be attracted in 25mm by the future users of the F-35, which will have a 4-barrel 25mm gun, but until then...).

30mm types can be seen in the big CIWS like the Goalkeeper, Kashtan, and AK-630, and in single barrel mounts that fire Mauser guns as fast as 800rpm, or the latest USN Mk46 mount using a Bushmaster MK44 gun firing at the relatively low 200rpm (suggestions the gun itself can go to 400rpm on a "high" configuration setting, although that doesn't mean the USN purchased that option).

 

But single barrel 20mm types just don't seem to generate much interest anymore, despite how successful (or just generally famous?) the 20mm Oerlikon may have been for a long time.

A pity, really, because against a lot of smaller targets, the ability to select HE over AP types is something the lighter 12.7mm just doesn't offer (perhaps because in some instances even a small HE detonation is more attention-getting than the hole-punching caused by 50-cal ammo?).

Depending on the 20mm gun and ammunition, greater ranges could also be achieved over 12.7mm, and at rates the 12.7mm can't achieve in the standard M2 Browning configuration, but only as the M3P variant (query Avenger air defense: Stingers and this MG on a Humvee chassis, plus numerous aircraft mounts and installations).

Anyone know of any navies using M3Ps from ships?

If the guns could be kept cool enough, a modern day quad-50 (like that WW2 mount), using M3Ps, could be devastating at close ranges (>4000rpm).

But a gun mounting of that size could just as easily be replaced by autocannon mounts firing explosive shells a greater distance: even if the single larger cannon had a lower rate of fire, the extra range (and shell destructive capability) can be

it's the issue of warhead mix and effectiveness that counts no matter what calibre.

it's also the marriage between the sensor and the shooter.

you just can't look at "x" gun in isolation. 

it should be obvious from reading my contributions that im not an expert.

i thought it was very telling that the USN elected to use the cannon system to destroy the pirate boat. why, cos its far more effective, every round is a devestating strike and would clearly have made short work of the task. the USN also litter the decks with single and twin pintle mounted .50s -as the last line of defence.

 

to rely on (albeit sometimes well sighted) .50s as your area defence weapon i think is abit gamely. the main gun has a limited field of fire and no doubt a restricted short range capability (how far they can lower the barrel anyway?).

 

sure the .50 is an aweome kit. great for shooting helicopters thru treelines or at firing points from an APC; but as your close area defence weapon by default for a frigate or other high value ship, come on?

Thruster:

 

A:

Phase 1 of SEA 1779 Ph 1 will provide a dual level ship self defence capability for HMA Ships Kanimbla, Manoora and Tobruk.

This capability will provide better defence against watercraft, land targets, helicopters and floating mines. The capability will consist of an integrated fire control system and Toplite electro-optical director system. The 25mm Bushmaster naval variant cannons are to be integrated to provide the cannon for the Typhoon system.

Source: DMO

 

B:

 

 NZ media reports that their navy is spending NZ$ 25 million to upgrade their Mk15 Phalanx 20mm gatling guns to deal with fast boats and helicopters, as well as incoming missiles. These Phalanx block 1B upgrades can be performed quickly, and do not require major modifications or down time.

 

C:

 
The Laser Area Defense System- provides a low-cost directed energy defense that negates rocket, artillery and fast threats by using the proven Phalanx infrastructure and a commercial laser.

 

ETC ETC ETC ( Since the attack on the USS Cole- it is logical that alot of thought has gone into these systems)

 

CIWS/ GUNS/BULLETS/MISSILES seem rather Typical for defence - Since you talk of Asymmetric Defence http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emsmileo.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" alt="" /> ,
I would rather here your ideas on that... defence of Naval assets by other means (i.e Not Guns and Bullets )

 

Mechanical/Kinetic

Bio/Chemical/ Environmental

Tactical/Strategy/ Psychological

 

 

Put simply, asymmetric threats or techniques are a version of not "fighting fair," which can include the use of surprise in all its operational and strategic dimensions and the use of weapons in ways unplanned and unconventional ways. Or one who strives to exploit weaknesses or who strives to circumvent superior military power by cunning, surprise, indirect approach, or ruthlessness. Not fighting fair also includes the prospect of an opponent designing a strategy that fundamentally alters the terrain on which a conflict is fought. 

- ive finally figured out how to quote; amazing!-

 

ive always regarded asymmetric acts as non'traditional', creative assaults using atypical methods. typically acts of terrorism [USS Cole] or 'imaginative' small unit actions  [RN boarding party capture or iranian gun boat provokations] that dont fall within established larger unit ops. eg: a sudden charging innoquous bomb boat i think is an asymmetric assault.

 

its always possible to be overwhelmed, i guess "15 boats" will do that, however its also more obvious. im not advocating a "mini tsunami", im saying getting ships area defence gunnery correct is a good place to start [yes thats guns and bullets]. if HMAS Something was assualted by a number of fast assault craft at close range, i think i'd want it defended by a 25mm cannon, where it takes about 3 rounds to devestate a boat, then move in short time to the next target; rather than a .50cal using 'half a box of ammo' per boat, which i guess may work? how many assault craft would that .50 engage in that short time? this is a frigate we are defending, how much does that cost, whats its loss impact to the nation? i'll take the 25mm option everytime, and so did the USN.

Sorry, that's BS.  They changed the ROEs for high threat areas.  That was the actual outcome of the debrief and review of the  USS Cole incident. The last time someone tried to engage a US skimmer it ended up getting whacked by the main gun - not some half arsed 25mm for a hail mary response.  USNI Proceedings discussed this some time ago.

In high threat areas there are other response options already in play.  If you've got high speed boats coming in to 25mm range of a blue water asset,  then someone has already ferked up.