Stop spreading pointless BSfor to stop incoming missile 35-40km is the limit for sensors range,so extension of range only can be achived by heli or uav assist,so reaction time almost same for all ships sensors for subsonic incoming missiles
ESSM is not only used against sea skimming missiles. It is a point defense missile used as a MR-SAM when needed.there also a gap between detection and fire of ESSM missile
He just doesn't know there is datalink between missiles and command post.ESSM is not only used against sea skimming missiles. It is a point defense missile used as a MR-SAM when needed.
And not all sea-skimming missiles follow low-low-low , it is usually high-high-low and with a dedicated radar these can be detected earlier too (depending on profile-launch site-range, that is why KEMENT project matters to Turkey).
Korkut? Does navy want Phalanx type one instead of Korkut?
MKEK is developing a Close Air Defense System (CIWS)!
They should instead make better barrels to increase rate of fire and durability.
MKEK is developing a Close Air Defense System (CIWS)!
They should of course give their best but if it is ground based they can as well employ multiple units to target the same target and double or triple the firing rate if they hit a bottleneck in packing all the power in one unit.They should instead make better and more compact barrels to increase rate of fire.
They won't able to make a gatling gun as good as the one used on Phalanx, it will have a lot of dispersion, issues with the munition and a lot more, we are sure they won't be doing else than the gun, they will make it and say "we have done the CIWS" for the PR, they won't care about control units or the rest, will give it to Aselsan so they can pack it up as a CIWS.They should of course give their best but if it is ground based they can as well employ multiple units to target the same target and double or triple the firing rate if they hit a bottleneck in packing all the power in one unit.
They should instead make better barrels to increase rate of fire and durability.
They should of course give their best but if it is ground based they can as well employ multiple units to target the same target and double or triple the firing rate if they hit a bottleneck in packing all the power in one unit.
Probably not just yet.They won't able to make a gatling gun as good as the one used on Phalanx, it will have a lot of dispersion, issues with the munition and a lot more, we are sure they won't be doing else than the gun, they will make it and say "we have done the CIWS" for the PR, they won't care about control units or the rest, will give it to Aselsan so they can pack it up as a CIWS.
There is already one good CIWS platform and if they could actually make a better barrel (invest money in here), it could have a single barrel and become more compact.
Or instead they could work on 40mm -50mm barrels, alternatively ,for munitions with higher velocity and greater range.
In sum, they are not the the maker of the CIWS, they only make the gun-barrel-cannon.
Durability of barrels for CIWS or for minigun for ATAK would require R&D in metallurgi.
Considering the weapons platform being produced atm by Turkish defence firms don't we have the necessary level of R&D to deliver what's needed ?
I just thought it would need proper R&D based on it being one of the fields within mechanical engineering.There's nothing special about the barrels of the original M61A1, there really isn't any need for R&D for metallurgy, if anything they can add a coating which can be purchased or one of recently developed coatings...
I just thought it would need proper R&D based on it being one of the fields within mechanical engineering.
DTU Construct
www.mek.dtu.dk
I am not sure if the same principles apply to that case but MKEK managed to pull off very high quality barrel with special coating and manufacturing technique for the MPT-76 that is the best barrel for its class according to Can Yazici.We know MKEK can make barrels with it's current tech to reach 20,000 rounds before it's deemed unsafe/inaccurate to use further as the rifling deteriorates.
Let's say 5,000 rounds is the best they can do for 20mm cannon, which is decent. Now, imagine having 6 barrels with same durability of 5,000 rounds each.
Maximum burst rate of Phalanx is stated to be 1000 rounds, each barrel would cycle through 160-170 rounds. That means each barrel could sustain max burst 31 times or around 48 reloads of ammunition before barrels have to be replaced. I don't think it's that bad. Of course we are going off imaginary numbers for durability, it could be whole lot better or a little worse.
Hence, why I don't think metallurgy is the issue here - it would be nice if they could bring the weight down with advanced metals but not a necessity, perhaps for the TFX it would be.
At this point, the issue would be keeping the dispersion rate as tight as possible.
İ appreciate your afford, your drawing a great job but why don't we go for SM-2 fuselage which is larger, so that it'd give more range. Nonetheless larger seeker space could enable to use simpler sensors.View attachment 15913
G40-ER dimensions compared with tactical length Mk 41 VLS if the rocket motor inside the missile or a similar length motor is used as a booster. I don't expect this kind of experiment with close fitting until booster tech and two stage is mature enough for us though. There are small errors and width is not considered for VLS cell, but gives an idea.
Edit: Fixed graphical errors and booster length. I left some space on the bottom of VLS cell for cables so the SM-2/Hisar-O also starts after the gap.