Goalkeeper, RAM, Phalanx, Meroka...

[g4lly]

2 à 4 kilomètres plus loin ...

A moins qu'ils ne soient munis d'un système d'auto-destruction, comme les obus OSPEI du canon du Rafale.

Les tirs semble très haut en site souvent ... on doit être dans le haut de la fourchette.

Pour les munition par ici ... http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2006garm/thursday/dillard2.pdf les deux munition sont équipé d'un mécanisme d'auto destrcution apres ~5se donc normalement encore en vol - sauf en cas de tir fichant -

[FATac]

Merci pour la Doc, G4lly.

Autodestruction après 1900m ou 2300 m  de vol, selon la munition.

[Berkut]

Ca empêchera pas le passant de se manger un rideau de shrapnel dans les 2/3km autour de la zone de tir. Vaut mieux que les canons restent pointés dans la direction des ennies :lol:

[Serge]

plaisanterie mise à part, je vois pas l'interet de penetrateurs au tungstène pour ce types d'armes, les avions et les missiles anti navires ne seront jamais surblindés au point de necessité un alliage à perforer du MBT ....une bonne tête chemisée en acier chromé et c'est bon non ??

Il y a deux phases dans la réaction d'un CIWS.

La première vise à dégrader les propiétés de l'assaillant. On tire de l'éclat pour lui faire perdre son guidage, son aérodynamisme... A grande distance, mieux vaut générer de l'éclat du fait de la dispersion des obus (surtout avec des canons rotatifs) pour toucher un "point". Si le missile n'est pas détruit ou tombé à l'eau dans cette première phase, il y a un autre problème:

même si l'éléctronique du missile est détruit, si le moteur est stoppé.... Tant que la charge est entière, il y a danger. Ce qui reste va frapper la coque donc il faut casser la charge. Comme la distance est moindre, le canon passe en obus pérfo pour rompre la charge avant impact. Si elle ne détonne pas, au moins, il a une chance pour qu'elle soit réduite.

En résumé: au début de l'explo; sur les derniers mètres, du tungstène.

Tous les CIWS, ne fonctionnent pas ainsi car il faut une double alimentation. C'était le cas du "super-forty" de Oto-Breda.

D'ailleur, où en sont les italiens?

[falcon7x]

salut à tous,

en relisant les pages précédentes, je me posais la question de savoir quelle serait l'efficacité du nouveau 40mm à munitions téléscopées dans une tourelle du genre celle du Millenium. Certains en ont parlé rapidement sur le forum mais je ne retrouve pas de discussions autour de la cadence de tir du 40mm...

cette dernière est relativement faible (en usage terrestre) me semble t-il (autour de 200 cps/mn)... Peut-elle être augmentée pour un rôle CIWS ???

La capacité d'emport de l'obus et la portée de l'arme serait un sacré atout...d'autant que l'ensemble serait fortement teinté en bleu/blanc/rouge !

A +

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

Tu aurais des liens vers ce nouveau 40mm justement?

Je m'intéresse à la question également, mais je n'ai pas trop de sources ou de références concernant l'artillerie terrestre.

[falcon7x]

oh il n'y a rien de bien nouveau... je parlais du CTAI 40 mm franco-britannique qui entre dans la phase de rénovation du Warrior. je n'ai pas de liens mais google fera le reste...

La seule question qui me taraude l'esprit : est ce que le système de munitions téléscopées avec le système de chargement associé permet une augmentation de la cadence de tir ?

de plus, est ce que la faible cadence de tir envisagée du système est un réel problème vu la capacité de la munition ?

[Philippe Top-Force]

Tu aurais des liens vers ce nouveau 40mm justement?

Je m'intéresse à la question également, mais je n'ai pas trop de sources ou de références concernant l'artillerie terrestre.

Tu as sur ce forum des personnes qualifiées pour t'en parler mon cher PD7, des noms  :lol: ! Rescator/Serge/Ato voir les biffins. =)

[pascal]

quel est l'intérêt d'une munition télescopée pour faire de l'anti-missile ?

Le fast forty de chez OTO MELARA c'est 450 coups minute PAR TUBE soit 9/s d'une munition qui distille plusieurs dizaines de billes de tungstène avec des fusées de proximité de plus en plus performantes

[g4lly]

quel est l'intérêt d'une munition télescopée pour faire de l'anti-missile ?

Le fast forty de chez OTO MELARA c'est 450 coups minute PAR TUBE soit 9/s d'une munition qui distille plusieurs dizaines de billes de tungstène avec des fusées de proximité de plus en plus performantes

D'autant que pour le moment les prescripteurs que sont les USA abandonne le canon moyen calibre au profit de missile RAM et de canon de 57 ou 76, dans le role de la défense de point. Les gros obus sont plus rentable quand la munition monte en gamme, munition a flechette, fusée programmée, radio-piloté, voire carréement munition guidé. Le cout du guidage est le meme quelques soit le calibre, alors autant que l'auto-directeur semi actif soit disposé dans un gros pelot qui crache 4 kilos de fléchettes a 5km, que dans un micro truc qui porte a 1000m.

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

Tu as sur ce forum des personnes qualifiées pour t'en parler mon cher PD7, des noms  cheesy ! Rescator/Serge/Ato voir les biffins. smiley

Exact ;)

Je jette régulièrement un coup d'oeil sur la section Armée de Terre du forum :D

Mais je pensais qu'il parlait d'un "nouveau" 40mm, or je ne trouvais rien là-dessus.

D'autant que pour le moment les prescripteurs que sont les USA abandonne le canon moyen calibre au profit de missile RAM et de canon de 57 ou 76, dans le role de la défense de point. Les gros obus sont plus rentable quand la munition monte en gamme, munition a flechette, fusée programmée, radio-piloté, voire carréement munition guidé.

Tout à fait.

Il faut cependant préciser que 2 canons de petit calibre (30mm, upgradable en 40mm en cours de mission par l'équipage... :O) équipent le Surface Warfare Mission Pakage des LCS, et équipe également les LPD San Antonio, mais ils ont plus une vocation anti-surface que anti-missile.

[Philippe Top-Force]

Exact ;)

Je jette régulièrement un coup d'oeil sur la section Armée de Terre du forum :D

Mais je pensais qu'il parlait d'un "nouveau" 40mm, or je ne trouvais rien là-dessus.

Tout à fait.

Il faut cependant préciser que 2 canons de petit calibre (30mm, upgradable en 40mm en cours de mission par l'équipage... :O) équipent le Surface Warfare Mission Pakage des LCS, et équipe également les LPD San Antonio, mais ils ont plus une vocation anti-surface que anti-missile.

Le point de départ sur l'idée d'adapter pourquoi pas un CTAI 40 mm, vient de moi.J'avais fait remarquer à Mat/Bruno et à d'autres qui voulaient que l'on équipe pour la défense rapprochée de nos bâtiments, des systèmes canons multitubes type CIWS Goalkeeper 30 mm ou Millenium 35 mm.

Je leur disais puisqu'ils tenaient à avoir un système canon, autant voir si le programme CTAI 40 mm pourrait convenir puisqu'à partir du fait que la France a basé sa stratégie commerciale sur le tout missile et qu'elle en a doté sa marine et vendu à l'export, beaucoup de systèmes type Simbad/Mistral/Sadral/VL Mica, autant prendre ce que l'industrie française a.

Un Goalkeeper c'est 16M€, un canon 127/64 c'est 14M€, on n'a plus de canon 100 mm creusot loire à vendre, on s'équipe déjà italien, alors ce serait stupide d'essayer de prendre des Millenium/goalkeeper et tenter de vendre à l'export pour la défense rapprochée des VL Mica ou TETRA ou du Narwhal 20/25/30.Si nos bâtiments n'en étaient pas équipés.  ;)

[Philippe Top-Force]

Comme dit ici http://www.air-defense.net/forum/index.php/topic,1372.msg437968.html#msg437968

Pour moi à part l'Aster, je pense que le système idéal antimissile de complément pas cher serait deux lanceurs à rampes MICA style Sadral ou (RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile  et MK49) et non un VLS qui fait perdre du temps de réaction et de l'énergie à un missile qui en a moins que l'Aster.Le missile est suffisament léger pour un rechargement manuel et tu peux boulonner la rampe sur le pont partout avec donc un minimum de modif bâtiment.

2 lanceurs de 12 et roule jeunesse  !

Avec ça tu es aussi efficace qu'un SM2 dans les derniers 15 km.

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

J'aime bien, je prends pour mes what-if!!  :lol:

Sinon pour du canon, le 40mm est pas mal, mais pourquoi ne pas imaginer un système articuler autour d'un (ou mieux deux) canons DEFA 30mm?

Le DEFA 791 du Rafale est le monotube le plus rapide du monde, mais les rafales restent limitées en durée, ce qui n'est pas le cas du 781 il me semble.

Je dis ça mais je n'y connais strictement rien en artillerie hein, pas taper si je dis une grosse bêtise! :lol:

[falcon7x]

bonjour à tous,

la cadence de tir du fast forty de 40 mm est impressionnante mais il ne me semble pas que les munitions soient téléscopées... Peut-on arriver à une telle cadence avec l'arme de CTAI, à munitions téléscopées et système de chargement par rotation ??

en ce qui concerne le defa 791, sa cadence de tir fait rêver...Serait-il pour autant efficace ...

[PolluxDeltaSeven]

Le 791 en tant que tel, pas forcément.

Il a effectivement une cadence de tir exceptionnelle (en réalité, sur une rafale d'une demi-seconde, il tire plus de munition qu'un Gatling conventionnel) et bien plus de précision qu'un multitube.

Mais il a les défauts de ses avantages. La précision demanderait un système de stabilisation d'une extrême précision, sinon autant miser sur une plus grande dispersion. Et sa grande cadence de tir imposerait des rafales courtes de moins de 2 secondes.

Mais il n'y a pas que le 791, on le voit avec le 781 du Tigre.

A mon avis il est  tout à fait possible de viser un affut double 30mm qui offrirait un bon compromis entre cadence de tir et durée des rafales. La précision n'est à mon avis pas un problème, GIAT ayant une très bonne expérience sur blindés et hélicoptères.

[Babou]

ca en anti infanterie style WWI ca aurait réglé vite fait le problème  >:( O0

[g4lly]

C'est ce qu'Otomelara appelle le kit STRALES, non ?

http://www.otomelara.it/EN/Common/files/OtoMelara/pdf/business/naval/development/STRALES.pdf

Exactement :)

Un article assez complet en plusieurs page qui explique bien l'interet du systeme, chez "defense observer" http://www.defence-observer.info/articles/sea/549-gun-or-missile-strales-1

On Feb 17th for the first time a direct-fire guided ammunition was fired from a naval vessel gun. The ship was Nave Comandante Foscari of the Italian Navy and was conducing the first series of shots of the Development Phase of Davide program (named Strales by Oto Melara for marketing reasons) which is expected to be completed by the year end, always at the PISQ, an Italian inter service firing range located in Sardinia.

DART_3501 This event probably opens a new era in naval artillery or, better, for artillery tout court. Integrating guidance capability, typical of missile technology, with cannon flexibility seems to be a wise moves to revitalize naval artillery. and especially medium caliber artillery.

While large calibers, that seems to be living a second youth in its traditional role thanks to long range guided munitions , are mostly oriented to ground attack roles , medium caliber guns have always been employed in a multitudes of tasks, from coastal fire support to air defence. This is the main reason of the worldwide success of the Oto Melara 76mm that in its Compatto and Super Rapido versions has been produced so far in more than 800 pieces! By the way, its only competitor, the Bofors (now BAe Systems) 57mm, lies far behind in this count.

If in the past the Oto 76 mm system has been able to meet operational requirements of a lot of word navies this by themselves does not necessarily means that it will be the same in the future . Actually the evolution of operational scenarios and of missilistic threats opens new possibilities and, at the same time, unfold new challenges to this category of naval guns.

CURRENT OPERATIONAL SCENARIO: NEW THREATS AND NEW REQUIREMENTS.

Coastal water operations introduces into naval scenario most of the complexities, intricacies and uncertainties of ground operations.

The wide, open and someway predictable blue waters are replaced by strict and short field of view areas characterized by rapidly changing environmental conditions. Land, air and sea borne attacks all can take great advantages from better scouting possibilities (due to essentially a very restricted area of operation) and surprise factor.

Without dwell on this point we can safely state that coastal Hyuuga_05 waters are by far the most dangerous ones.

Moreover it is widely accepted that today and for a foreseeable future, anti-ship missiles are the most influential weapons shaping naval tactics and it is a matter of fact that until now they have been mostly employed in coastal waters, launched both from surface, air and ground platforms.

In coastal waters even the most sophisticated and stealthy ship can be easily visually discovered and identified then suddenly becoming a target for short range missile attacks. I suppose I do not need to remember the Hanit case.

Coastal water operations means also naval forces and land forces cooperation and it is not simply a matter of deployment or logistic support. Information, communication and fire support are equally or more important.

New requirements arising from the scenario briefly depicted above, clearly require to be able to to deal with multiform menaces in someway unpredictable and demanding situations. Coastal waters expose naval vessels to a variety of threats, salvo missile attacks being by far the most dangerous case.

So, also considering the object of the article, here we will concentrate on missilistic threat.

Small caliber high rate of fire guns as always been erroneously considered, probably from a majority of the insiders, the most effective last ditch missile defence system. Actually these systems were conceived as the last defensive layer but it was predicted that the searam_1 incoming missiles should not even get in the CIWS range at all. They should have been destroyed far away from ships, better if with their launching platforms!

This was surely true for the US Navy and a lot of other navies around the world, with only some exceptions. This at least judging from their acquisition choices.

Evidences show that this systems have been totally incapable to get the work done. Actually no one missile has been shoot down by such systems. Now the things are getting even worst.

The problem is that new maneuvering anti ship missiles have or will made them mostly useless just in their primary role which, by the way, is also the only role they are able to fulfill that can justify their cost. They are very specialized systems not truly capable to meet other requirements. This is to say that such systems cannot be justified by proposing to use them against pasdaran type small boat! Phalanx PSUM and other similar upgrade packages can only be considered acceptable so far they are a way to improve existing systems flexibility . By no way they can be considered a cost effective solution.

It is not a coincidence that USN is going to replace its Phalaxs with RAM systems on its new surface combatant vessels and it should not be surprising if man 76strales1 y advanced navies around the world will follow USN example.

We can reasonably be sure that no one new very-short-range CIWS will be hereafter installed on any new combat vessels.

The new trend in short range missile defence seems to be the employment of very short range missile systems. A serious U turn from previous concept!

If very short range missile systems can potentially deal with maneuvering anti ship missiles and increase the take down distance to safer values, what they lack is a real multirole capability.

In the scenario we have succinctly described above the new Strales system, able to keep together missile type guidance and traditional medium caliber gun flexibility, could be the most flexible and cost-effective solution.

(1)  Ok...I conced you that the title sounds some how like an advetisement,  but I have not been able to resist. Anyway, probably  you are not going to buy a new 76 mm. gun any time soon, and surely I am not going to get a cent form Oto, so there should be no problem.

THE DAVIDE SYSTEM

Italian Navy has always favoured medium caliber guns\ in anti missile defence role: from the twin Breda 40mm to the Oto 76 mm.

It is not meaningless that most of the navies oriented toward medium caliber gun are navies operating in someway restricted water, where missile thread is much stronger.

76strales2 Strales has been conceived to move antimissile capabilities of the Super Rapido above traditional artillery limits, making it able to defeat maneuvering high speed anti-ship missiles. Being able to confront such a high level menace makes it capable to defeat also less demanding target such as UAV, small and fast naval platforms and last but not least unwary or really courageous pilot not worried by flying at such a small distance from an adversary combatant ship.

If we consider a traditional ASM, that is a non maneuvering one, the 76 mm Super Rapido is quite capable to engage and destroy it at safe distance from the ship. Simulation model elaborated from the Italian Navy show out a more than 90% probability of shooting down the incoming threat, be it either a high-subsonic or supersonic missile.

Moreover the system is capable to perform multiple engagements int he inner area and is fairly capable in contributing to the defence against asymmetric threads.

Considering this last type of threat, other systems have shown relevant performance constraints. Among these we can remember: minimum intervention distance on one hand or reduced single shot kill probability on the other hand. Some new systems, for their part, has shown some relevant problems in discriminating among two near objects.

Hurdles begin when we consider missiles capable of performing complex high g maneuvers. As we have just noted this maneuvering capabilities make very short range gun systems totally unreliable but the same is true for any type of artillery systems. Even if the anti ship missile maneuvering possibilities greatly reduce approaching the target, a simple trajectory with irregular spiral turns of decreasing range is sufficient to drastically reduce system kill probability.

To effectively engage such type of target, missilistic systems seem to be a solution. The reason is simple: being capable of maneuvering, a missile is able to adapt its flight path to ASM maneuvers. Obviously it is easier said than done. Missile systems have their problems too when considering antimissile role. Compared to artillery systems they have some disadvantages. The first one is the longer reaction time than gun systems, second, reduced rate of fire and, third, acceleration lag/delay compared to a gun shell and, more generally, potentially worst maneuvering transients. Most of these parameters are of relative importance in long range engagements but they are very sensitive issues for a short range system..

The solution was very simple in principle but practically very challenging: a guided projectile.

The relative large 76mm shell size (that means a good internal available volume) made it theoretically feasible but a lot of problems were to be solved, first of all it had to find out how to make the projectile maneuverable. 01

The first concept explored was the so called CCS (Course Corrected Shell), in Italian simply known as “ Corretto”. The flight path cor rections were to be achieved by means of a series of small radial rocket thrusters. 

These studies were carried out in collaboration with BAe but ultimately the concept proved itself too complex and all in all not as effective as foreseen. For example trajectory correction could be performed only once and control law were extremely complex considering that the absence of aerodynamic control surfaces made the small rockets the only control system.

After this unsuccessful first attempt there was a cooling-off period from which sprang out what would become the definitive configuration of the driven ammunition.

The DART(Driven Ammunition Reduced Time of flight), this is its name, consists of a sub-caliber projectile of similar shape to an APFSDS tank ammunition but much more complex and sophisticated with a diameter of about 40mm.

Trajectory corrections are achieved through a pair of small canard surfaces moved by an absolutely ingenious moving mechanism that is at the same time efficient, small and extremely tough.

dart When you have a way to make the projectile changing direction you should also have a way to tell it where to go! Well this is another interesting feature of the Strales/Davide.

The DART rear section features two RF receivers and the projectile guidance is performed by means of a Radio Frequency Guidance System developed by Selex Galileo whose antenna generates 4 nearly-simultaneous beams received by those RF receivers.

As you can seen in the picture below the intersection of the four beams identify a well defined central point where the projectile should position itself. This particular guiding method greatly reduce one of the typical problems of CLoS guidance systems: the proportionality between intercept distance and loss of accuracy. The four beams are sequentially generated by four small transmitter placed on the Radio Frequency Guidance System antenna.

The Radio Frequency Guidance System is collocated on the right side of the gun and is provided with a mechanical frame to be connected to gRFguidance.un mount structure. Moreover, when in rest position it is shielded by a water tight cover which can be automatically removed to deploy the antenna. The Radio Frequency Guidance System can quickly shift its operating frequency to account for atmospheric effects, jamming etc.

Actually the DART has demonstrated an high level of accuracy in following guidance instructions and it is possible to say that at the moment accuracy of the system depends on the accuracy of the tracking radar installed on the ship. On Italian Navy ships this will be the last version of the Selex NA-25X. The role of the fire control radar is greatly reduced and actually it only provide tracking data to the turret build-in electronics where all ballistic algorithms are solved.

During an engagement the guidance antenna is aimed to the target actual position following the aiming provided by the ship tracking radar. Projectiles enter the guidance beam and recognize their displacement from the center so being able to maneuver to compensate for each error component.

DART Vo is very high: more than 1200 m/s. This coupled with highly aerodynamic profile makes it a really reduced time of flight projectile. It can actually reach the limits of its operational envelop (more or less 5000 m) in just 5 seconds. A clear advantage over any type of missiles, further reducing the overall engagement time.

There is no missile that can reach or hold out a 30000 g initial acceleration!

To meet these very stringent requirements it has been necessary a wide use of highly sophisticated and extremely resistant MEMS (Micro Electro-Mechanical Systems) hardware It is fair to remember that all these technologies have been developed by Oto Melara itself. principle

DART is also very agile. Maneuvers are performed thanks to a pair of “interconnected” canard fins operated through a very interesting mechanism based on two so called peek rings. This system has allowed Oto Melara engineers to realized a small but very tough control section, able to sustain the aforementioned accelerations.

Its maneuvering capabilities depends essentially on residual velocity. It can engage maneuvering target with lateral acceleration of more than 30g.

The maneuvering capability of the DART outperform by far any present or future anti ship missile. Clearly this is not an issue

The DART is equipped with a data-link by which it can receive instructions form the ship FCS. For example it can be instructed to “de-activate” the fuse to avoid enemy jamming. The fuze, really a sophisticated piece of electronic by itself, is a modified version of the 3AP (Three Actions Plus) multirole microwave fuze developed by OtoMelara in conjunction with Simmel Difesa and in accordance with specifications fixed by Italian Navy. This is a multirole fuze who has not been specifically designed for DART but whose highly flexible design and DSP technologies make it apt to be fine tuned to meet various specific requirements. We will see versions of this fuze on various categories of ammunition. For example on the 127 mm Vulcano.

Its long range microwave sensor is able to sense the target up to 80-100 m and its fully digitized electronics give it the ability to evaluate the type of target engaged and to “decide” the best detonation timing.. The 3AP is specifically design to be insensitive to sea clutter and to have an total action probability better than 95%. At the moment the 3 AP is i service with the navies of Italy and France plus an undisclosed middle-east country .

Thanks to the guidance system principle there is no limitation to the number of projectiles in flight, but it has been demonstrated that with 3/5 rounds it can be reached a cumulative kill probability greater than 90% against high speed maneuvering target. All this means the ability to perform multiple engagements maintaining a really conservative keep out range greater than 2000m.

Moreover the fuze can be replaced by a telemetry section to perform trials and demonstrations.

A kinetic only variant of the DART, called ART, has been developed simply removing the warhead. It can be very useful to reduce collateral damage especially in some specific situations...

ammunitionloader To better exploit new munitions capabilities and at the same time to retain gun flexibility and extensive multirole capability a new double feeding ammunition system ha been developed. This new system, suitable as retrofit on existing turret, is composed by 2 hoist and a screw feeder station which in turn is fed with rounds selected by a projectile selector. This feeding systems maintains radial dimensions of the old one, the same reaction time and rate of fire.

Strales can be retrofitted on any 76/62 gun by adding the guidance antenna and the associated guidance processor unit. It obviously requires anyway the modification of the existing gun cupola.

All these modifications and improvements have made the 76 a little overweight and various options are being evaluated to remedy. At the moment it seems that the gun shield will be the first component to be lightened by the insertion of new composite material elements.

Another improvement, in which Italian Navy is actively involved, consist in adding a further RF receiver to the projectile. This will allow the Dart to follow guidance beam even in case of the malfunction of one receiver. All in all this means a great increase in reliability of the whole system.

Other improvements are being studied but at the moment we can not provide more details. We can only say that one of the improvement under investigation could potentially enable a single system to engage multiple targets at the same time.

Last but not least, Italian Navy is investigating together with industry the problem posed by a rapid and sure kill assessment procedure/process. During this year on board trials the problem has been solved by Oto Melara with an in-house assembled EO sensor, visible on the top of the barrel in the photo above. It seems anyway, for various reasons, it will not be the definitive solution.

CONCLUSION

System development phase is near to be completed and the next and last phase will be that of qualification and industrialization and then, finally, the Davide/Strales will begin its operative service.

With the end of the development and sea trials well on track (next trials are scheduled for October) marketing efforts now rest upon a solid background.

Italian Navy has programmed a good number of systems to be installed on its first line vessels and on the more recent corvettes (the four “Comandanti”). The first export order is arrived from Colombia in the context of its frigates upgrade program.

A good number of navies around the world seem to be interested in the Strales.

One of them should be the Singapore Navy, which is especially interested in system pin point accuracy against surface targets.

US Navy has shown some interest in the Strales project and some officers have assisted at recent trials. Obviously the 76 mm it is a much more reasonable choice for a 3000 tons ship than a 57 mm gun and more so if you consider the munitions, but...this has nothing to do with technical and operative considerations.

[Serge]

Petite remarque:

Dans le HS-DSI d'octobre, on voit page 4 une image d'une corvette export sur base LCS. Elle ne porte pas de Phalanx mais un Skyshield allemand.

Amusant.

[Philippe Top-Force]

Petite remarque:

Dans le HS-DSI d'octobre, on voit page 4 une image d'une corvette export sur base LCS. Elle ne porte pas de Phalanx mais un Skyshield allemand.

Amusant.

N'ayant encore pas lu le HS DSI n°14, tu veux dire Serge, le Oerlikon Contraves Millinium 35 mm, qui est déjà dans la Marine Danoise.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTg5MjM3ODY0.html

http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiMMZ8RzeIg

[Serge]

Oui. C'est bien ça.

Je me suis trompé de nom.

Au fait, il n'y a qu'une très légère insinuation sur les carences francaises en CIWS à la fin d'un article sur l'artillerie navale.

[Philippe Top-Force]

Oui. C'est bien ça.

Je me suis trompé de nom.

Au fait, il n'y a qu'une très légère insinuation sur les carences francaises en CIWS à la fin d'un article sur l'artillerie navale.

Tu veux dire à base de canons multitubes, et hypervéloces,...

Le nom que tu as employé et le système que devait ou doit tester l'armée de l'air et celui que les allemands veulent vendre pour protéger les BA et FOB.

Parce que même les allemands ont des missiles Sea RAM.

http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWjUu7iiQNs

Prototype Samos/Satan/Mistral français

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=36318

Repris plus tard par les chinois pour le type 730

[Mat]

Oh punaise j'avais jamais vu de photo de ce proto mistral / canon

c'est beauuuu  :'( :'(

[Arka_Voltchek]

Oh punaise j'avais jamais vu de photo de ce proto mistral / canon

c'est beauuuu  :'( :'(

Bizarre, les tubes de missiles ressemblent pas à des tubes de mistral...

@+, Arka

[Mat]

Philippe est un petit farceur  :lol:

c'est un système chinois, copie du Kashtan apparemment

http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2007_04_01_archive.html