• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Phalanx for Base Defense?

NavyShooter

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,105
Points
1,120
Hey folks,

Came across this article:

http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/002430.html

Kind of a neat idea....use a CIWS (Close In Weapons System) for base defense from mortar attacks on bases.

I don't know what kind of size of base we have in 'stan....but would one of these (with about a 2KM radius of protection) provide some defense for our folks?

phalanxciws.jpg


If I'm outta line, let me know.

NS

 
could be usefull for some of the regularly-targeted FOBs if they really work...
 
I'd just be worried about where the rounds land when it gets set off....
 
~RoKo~ said:
I'd just be worried about where the rounds land when it gets set off....
I was just thinking that.  The Phalanx is pretty good at sea, because all those rounds that miss (and many do, why else would it have such a high rate of fire?) well, they just hit water.  In any land based engagement, unless you're in Antarctica, all bets are off, I'd say.
 
I'd be a little worried about an automated weapon system spitting out that kind of firepower when I have people out there.  But then I'm paranoid.
 
C-RAM

Air Defense Artillery Takes On New Counter-Rockets, Artillery and Mortars Intercept Mission
by CPT Scott L. Mace

Land-Based Phalanx Weapon System​

With hostile rocket and mortar attacks inflicting significant casualties in Iraq, the Army is moving forward with testing to support the counter-rockets, artillery and mortars (C-RAM) mission. The C-RAM mission represents a revolutionary approach to countering insurgent activities by intercepting rockets, artillery and mortar rounds in the air prior to impact; thereby, reducing or eliminating any damage they might cause.  The Army is integrating existing sensors, systems and command and control capabilities to provide a C-RAM capability that units can easily incorporated into forward operating base and logistics supply area defenses.  The C-RAM systems, once deployed, have the potential to save lives and reduce injuries from rocket, artillery and mortar attacks

The weapon system selected as the near-term C-RAM interceptor is the Army’s Land-Based Phalanx Weapon System, a reconfigured version of the U.S. Navy’s Phalanx Close-In Weapon System.  The Navy uses its sea-based system as a point-defense weapon to protect the fleet from low-flying cruise missiles and other air threats. The Phalanx was first tested for C-RAM missions in November 2004 and did so well that C-RAM production was moved forward. The first test of the Army-configured C-RAM system took place in April 2005 at Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz.

The Army made slight reconfigurations to the Navy system to integrate it into the Army’s ground defense mission and command and control structure. The 20mm, six-barrel Phalanx gun system and its search and track radars are trailer-mounted to allow movement to key military sites. Figure 1 shows the basic layout. The Phalanx is familiar to some air defenders because it is similar to the Vulcan air defense gun system, which was the mainstay of divisional air defense battalions in the 1970s through the early 1990s.

The Forward Area Air Defense Command and Control (FAAD C2) system is one of the technologies used to integrate the C-RAM intercept system with other presently fielded Army and joint service systems. The FAAD C2 software and hardware solution allows the C-RAM system to communicate freely with existing air defense sensors and other Army battle command systems.  The C-RAM unit uses the Air and Missile Defense Work Station (AMDWS) to pass information to other Army battle command systems.  Put together, these tools will allow soldiers working in engagement operations cells to easily integrate a C-RAM battery into the defense of a forward operating base.

Colonel Paul McGuire, the C-RAM Intercept Task Force leader, said “The deployment of this weapon system and its integration into a holistic approach to defeat rocket, artillery and mortar threats will change the face of operations on the battlefield and will force the insurgents, currently operating in Iraq, to seriously consider their activities when attacking deployed forces.  The enemy will be forced to change his tactics and potentially make mistakes that will allow coalition forces to react quickly and defeat his threats.” 

The first battery to perform the C-RAM mission is C Battery, 5th Battalion, 5th Air Defense Artillery, a separate Bradley Stinger Fighting Vehicle force that has been testing the C-RAM system and perfecting C-RAM battle drills for several months.  Charlie Battery Soldiers are now the tip of the spear in C-RAM development and fielding.

Charlie Battery will be augmented with Navy personnel who have many years of experience on the basic system to make up the first C-RAM Intercept Battery.  Navy personnel are already an integral part of the battery’s daily operation. Sailors quickly pass their expertise from years of maintaining and operating this system to Soldiers.  The Soldiers received training from the Navy in several locations across the United States to facilitate the operational timeline. Soldiers have been firing the weapon system and intercepting mortars and rockets regularly.  Their training culminated in a mission rehearsal exercise in Yuma. With help from the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Air Defense Artillery, during the evaluation, the mission rehearsal exercise was successfully completed, and Charlie Battery is considered trained for any potential C-RAM mission. 

Collateral damage has always been a major concern whenever combat developers considered high-speed gun systems as a solution to the rocket, artillery and mortar  threat. In urban terrain or heavily populated areas, outgoing rounds might prove as dangerous—if not more dangerous—than incoming rounds. To minimize collateral damage, the C-RAM interceptor will fire rounds that self-destruct (High-Explosive Incendiary Tracer Rounds-Self Destruct) when they miss their targets. These rounds have a very low dud rate, and studies show that residue from self-destructed rounds cause minimal damage.

Chief Petty Officer Jonny S. Schurch, the Navy’s lead chief assigned to Charlie Battery said the system would be even more effective except for safety measures imposed to prevent friendly casualties and collateral damage.

As First Sergeant Stephen D. Kinzer observed, the Phalanx system will have to prove itself in new combat environments, where it has never been deployed.  Time will tell how environmental factors may affect the intercept system once it arrives in a theater of operations.

Charlie Battery continues to operate on an aggressive schedule, racing an accelerated timeline, to bring the intercept capabilities online and prepare for a potential deployment.  Every day that goes by before we deploy the system is another day service members have to survive rocket or mortar attacks without C-RAM protection. The sooner the C-RAM system is deployed, the sooner Soldiers, Sailors, airmen and Marines on forward operating bases will sleep safer and wake more rested for the next day’s missions.  The overall goal is to save lives and make the cost of firing mortars at U.S. soldiers in Iraq too high for the insurgency to pay.  Soldiers of Charlie Battery have accepted the mission of saving Soldiers’ lives and are prepared to execute their new mission.



Captain Scott L. Mace commands C Battery, 5th Battalion, 5th Air Defense Artillery, the Army’s first C-RAM battery. He was also the officer in charge of the Army’s first Air Defense Airspace Management (ADAM) Cell. The author would like to thanks COL Paul McGuire for his assistance on this article. 

Source: http://airdefense.bliss.army.mil/adamag/June%202005/C-RAM.htm

Anyone know of the deployment results ?
 
If nothing else it would be and encouragement to the locals to stay out of the engagement/safety zone.  I can only imagine that that must be more than 5 km if the engagement range is 2 km.

Doesn't sound like an appropriate measure for an urban environment.
 
Kirkhill said:
If nothing else it would be and encouragement to the locals to stay out of the engagement/safety zone.  I can only imagine that that must be more than 5 km if the engagement range is 2 km.

Doesn't sound like an appropriate measure for an urban environment.
I would say farther.  The engagement range is much much less than how far those projectiles would travel if they missed (and as I said, most would).

The problem is that if you have to separate from the locals, then you are losing the moral plane war (not "moral" as in ethical, but the non-tangible part of it).  Anyway, I digress...

(edited because I typed something in that sounded like a 13 year old typed it).  Sorry.
 
To minimize collateral damage, the C-RAM interceptor will fire rounds that self-destruct (High-Explosive Incendiary Tracer Rounds-Self Destruct) when they miss their targets. These rounds have a very low dud rate, and studies show that residue from self-destructed rounds cause minimal damage.
 
There are many safety issues, but perhaps technology can be extremely useful in defining arcs and no-fire zones. Other technologies can help determine best placement. And, not every deployment will have the same restrictions.

 
Cool, I did a bit of searching on the web, and it seems that the US has been deploying these since somewhere around last summer as experimental units, and now have a bunch done up.  (open source)

Fits on a tractor trailer, completely self contained!  Drive it to where it's needed, flash it up, and you're good to go.

Nice to see in the pics though that it's still painted Ships Side Gray, instead of some green or tan colour!

NavyShooter

 
Hmmm.... depending on technology to keep your ass out of the fire is not always a good thing.  Already, the local population is upset at NATO for shooting & bombing Friendly Fire incidents - do you think this will correct - I don't.
 
If I was a betting man I would say hello to the next air defence weapon of the Canadian Forces.  Since we can't engage the shooter how about we concentrate on engaging the shot.
 
With the self-destruct rounds, the danger to the local area will be lessened, but you're right, the populace will not be thrilled I'm sure.

NS
 
self destructing rounds..... on the assumption that they work as advertized..............

How many times will defence contractors tell you everything?
(and you believed him?)
 
True, and even if you have say, a failure rate of less than 1%...with a Phalanx, that's still a HECK of a lot of rounds!  :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet:


:warstory:
 
I think the article is about a year old.
The US is going ahead with developing it further, and deploying more
Evidence of effectiveness?

a bit more info
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/cram.htm
 
I thought the Isrealis were working on a laser-based system along the same line for defeating incoming rounds by superheating them to the point of detonation? Can't find the reference right this second, but I have heard of it.
 
Back
Top