C&C Generals is getting more real everyday

@denrittejanant7049

3 жыл бұрын

I have many bullets to spare.

@brothercharanus1927

3 жыл бұрын

@@denrittejanant7049 "THEY CANNOT DESTROY CHINA!" *base proceeds to get 90 scud missile strikes*

@Zam15

3 жыл бұрын

"China will grow larger"

@Archer89201

3 жыл бұрын

How about a shell shower?

@b172ddm2

3 жыл бұрын

@@denrittejanant7049 gatling tank ready for action.

It costs 400,000 dollars to fire this weapon, for 12 seconds.

@Klentung8989

3 жыл бұрын

Smaller round, 20 mm, 20 barreals for higher hit Probability in close range according to one reknown statistician, so they test ot out.

@intelcom4964

3 жыл бұрын

😳

@DrazCo786

3 жыл бұрын

"I am Heavy Weapons Guy...and this [grabs Minigun] is my weapon. She weighs one hundred fifty kilograms and fires two hundred dollar, custom-tooled cartridges at ten thousand rounds per minute. "Some people think they can outsmart me. Maybe, maybe. I have yet to meet one that can outsmart bullet."

@aniksamiurrahman6365

3 жыл бұрын

Imagine these guns shouting Pootis LOL!

@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368

3 жыл бұрын

It cost 400,000 to animate that 12 second clip as well.

"If brute force is not working, you are not using enough of it" -Sun Zu

@aniksamiurrahman6365

3 жыл бұрын

Was it Sun Tzu or Mac Sun Zoo?

@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368

3 жыл бұрын

"You just ate cat, bat, and rat." - My recent fortune cookie.

@CharChar2121

3 жыл бұрын

-Isaac Arthur

@sebsunda

3 жыл бұрын

@@CharChar2121 Aye, I second the reference!

@TheBetterManInBlack

3 жыл бұрын

@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 cooked in sewer oil.

20-barrels sounds less excessive when the system fires two at a time.

@koekiejam18

3 жыл бұрын

7 barreled Gau-8 fires on at a time too. It still gives them a ridiculous firerate, dont get me wrong. However in this case i really doubt that the 20 barrels do much good in this case

@maastomunkki

3 жыл бұрын

@@koekiejam18 more barrels, less heat per barrel per salvo, so less barrel wear and also enables longer salvos without failure. This is most likely a proposed solution to counter sustained attacks with a single weapon platform.

@koekiejam18

3 жыл бұрын

@@maastomunkki no i know why you want multiple barrels, i just hardly understand why you would want that much, sustained attack are going to overrun your CIWS system one way or another and sustained fire will take ALOT of ammunition, so why not use a 4/6/7/8/12 barreled system and focus on accuracy in short bursts. even if a sustained firing CIWS is perfectly accurate, it shoots so fast that the moment you transition from one target to another target you may have very well burned through another 250 bullets

@maastomunkki

3 жыл бұрын

@@koekiejam18 Fair enough.. but, as I am not a CIWS engineer myself, I will not delve deeper in speculation to what might, or might not be a good feature for a more efficient system. Then again, paper theories and simulations can take things only that far and most likely the designer had an idea they wanted to test out. By making a prototype, and submitting it to trials, they can get actual data if the idea works, or not.

@koekiejam18

3 жыл бұрын

@@maastomunkki i understand that, prototyping takes a considerable amount of work and resources, combined with trial and error. perhaps they will go the russian route and this 20barreled monstrosity will be forgotten in 4 months

Chain gun upgrade is complete. - Gattling Tank

@smithwerber414

3 жыл бұрын

Not a bat idea

@hypersonicaurora2

3 жыл бұрын

Yeeeeeas

@Cheese_Boi1986

3 жыл бұрын

was that a warzone 2100 reference XD

@aap9167

3 жыл бұрын

Ready for Action Oiled and Ready

@aap9167

3 жыл бұрын

@@Cheese_Boi1986 no nub c&c generals

China's engineering department: How many barrels should we put on this CIWS? Bob the lead of the project: Yes.

@classifiedad1

3 жыл бұрын

It'd probably be "Wang" instead of "Bob" tbh.

@juan-pierreleroux8323

3 жыл бұрын

@@classifiedad1 Based Chet-mate

@hoangvuification

3 жыл бұрын

bob the top chinese guys pay him some respect :3

@USSAnimeNCC-

3 жыл бұрын

Xang, Mao, or Lao

@abaskamal8599

3 жыл бұрын

I've heard of some Bobbys'...you know, hey, Pobby.

When a russian dual gatling gun do a fusion pose then this is the result

@rickv9180

2 жыл бұрын

That would be the AK630-2

The idea of more barrels is that each barrel fires less.... resulting in more cooling. In this case even if 2 are discharging rounds, it’s 1/10 barrels discharging compared to 1/7 in the US system if they spin at the same rate. This results in more rounds per minute as you can speed up the spin speed of the system and still have the same “cooling” time as the 1/7 system.

@gerfand

Жыл бұрын

well if they fire in the same rate. if they spin in the same rate then you firing more, but we get what you mean.

Because they cant have similar metallurgy as the US barrels, they made it 20 barrels Rate of fire is already topped by russian.

@hosmerhomeboy

3 жыл бұрын

that was my thinking too. It's probably about dispersing the heat more. Which tells me that it's probably preferable to have fewer barrels if you can.

@GarioTheRock

3 жыл бұрын

Muh metallurgy 😩 if only osmium had more tensile strength

@tonywu1222

3 жыл бұрын

They made it 20 barrels and a smaller caliber than 30 mm because they wanted better cooling at a higher firing rate, while not having the same accuracy nerfs one would see on systems using two Gatling cannons

@casematecardinal

3 жыл бұрын

@@tonywu1222 it'll still be less effective. projectiles with less force equals worse, range, accuracy, and dispersion.

@Aaradorn

3 жыл бұрын

Indeed, this thing would also be an absolute nightmare for maintenance.

So basically it's two 10 barrel guns combined, clever thinking.

@Tounushi

3 жыл бұрын

Russia's already using dual seven-barrel guns on some of their ships. Squeezing two gatlings to be one with half-rotation cycles instead of a full rotation cycle is an interesting choice.

@xilpes6254

3 жыл бұрын

Seems more like a propaganda piece to be quite honest.

@charleyarchuleta4932

3 жыл бұрын

Not clever. Stupid actually.

@andrewholdaway813

3 жыл бұрын

@@charleyarchuleta4932 Clever _thinking_ it may not be so clever in practice.

@andrewholdaway813

3 жыл бұрын

@@xilpes6254 Maybe so.

When you need to shoot an entire years worth of military ammo within an hour.

More barrels equates to lower rate of fire per barrel which means more cool down. If it’s twin firing, it’s a 1:10 ratio versus 1:6 ratio for the Phalanx. If the barrels are at the same rotation speed, each barrel gets 40% more cool down while the system as a whole gets double the fire rate.

If I was a mechanic one one of these ships that have this CIWS and it has a mechanical problem, I’ll already call it quits.

@realtissaye

3 жыл бұрын

LOL

@kattapp

2 жыл бұрын

By that point you push it off the ship and call it an accident

When 19 barrels just isn’t enough... 🤣

That seems to be an awful lot of mass, and the barrels seem shorter than other types? Might have trouble with target switiching.

@lil__boi3027

3 жыл бұрын

I'm pretty sure it's just super wide lol not short barrel

@flyingtanks9313

2 жыл бұрын

Pretty long barrel, the shroud is just long as well and covers most of it

There are rumors from Chinese military insiders that the Chinese navy is looking into developing a 40,000 ton nuclear powered "all-rounder battleship / arsenal ship". equipped with railguns, laser defense weapons and a lot of missiles. maybe this gun is being developed as a part of that program.

@chucknoris7648

3 жыл бұрын

To be honest with modern warfare it’s not good to put all your eggs in one basket

@Phantom-bh5ru

3 жыл бұрын

Is there any links to articles? I’m quite interested in this all round battleship idea

@antman2826

3 жыл бұрын

Big target. Bigger they are, harder they fall. Anything like that would instantly become a priority target. Like the Bismarck, it will be harassed to death before it gets to reach its potential.

@Phantom-bh5ru

3 жыл бұрын

@@antman2826 nah first of all it’s smaller then a carrier so your argument is kinda pointless. Second it uses railguns and missiles making it have far larger range then any other ship. It would be able to engage targets far outside their range. It would most likely have its own support group like aircraft carriers so it would be very hard to get to it, and it’s railguns would be perfect to take out anything attempting to get close

@Thomas-fz9xw

2 жыл бұрын

Same kind of thinking produced the US Zumwalt-class, which was littered with problems from trying to integrate too many experimental systems into one design. I don't see China being able to pull that kind of money-sink off, and I believe this system shows it: a gun-based CIWS is a low-cost, rapidly aging form of point-defense, yet they seem to be putting significant investment into this type--not something you would see if they were ready to put mature laser technology on a new vessel.

The epitome of "Use a gun. And if that don't work, use more gun."

Matt have you ever thought of applying for an instructor position at a war college? You'd be a natural.

@_Matsimus_

3 жыл бұрын

I wish

@rael5469

3 жыл бұрын

@@_Matsimus_ Think subject matter expert. Think "Hunt For Red October". ;) I'd hire you in a minute.

I think from some of the chinese sources they are referred to as 2230 guns, as in 22 barrels 30mm cal.

@miggyo.2235

3 жыл бұрын

nutt

@analogdistortion

3 жыл бұрын

Not number 2230 from the menu then?

@RPclone

3 жыл бұрын

the current CIWS the navy deployed is 1130, so it makes sense this is two 1130 side by side, or up and down.

@LordHusky01

3 жыл бұрын

That would be the other proposal. Where they combined two 1130 into one turret like the Kashtan.

20 barrels Fighter jets from the US:Damn Boy

much rather have 3 guns with 7 barrels then 1 gun with 20

@Cheese_Boi1986

3 жыл бұрын

agreed having 20 barrels means fuck all when you can only point at one target at a time

@gamm8939

3 жыл бұрын

@@Cheese_Boi1986 plus the factor of accuracy and redundancy. 3 Guns shooting at a single target have a much higher chance of actually hitting, plus if 1 gets destroyed or damaged or jams, you still have 2

@antman2826

3 жыл бұрын

Much agreed.

@user-uv5ld3cx5t

3 жыл бұрын

@@gamm8939 Or that you can have 3 turrets that are all 20 barrel gats

@gamm8939

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-uv5ld3cx5t well if u want to invest that money, but also, i doubt it does more then a Phalanx

Imagine trying to keep it fed. The amount of ammo. Whooo my goodness

matt-exttraodinary-nothing to offer mate-you rock!

until it runs out of ammo in 3.3 seconds

The real question is if their Firecontroll systems can actually make use of it, or it isn´t just a fancier Phalanx

@SgtBeltfed

3 жыл бұрын

That's kinda the point of the extra barrels, what the fire control can't accomplish is made up for by putting more rounds down range.

@MrBandholm

3 жыл бұрын

@@SgtBeltfed only the range is so short that the ship get hit anyway... Phalanx is already being considered obsolete for defence against missiles, due to lack of range, this one does not seem any better, only with a lot more mass.

@SgtBeltfed

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrBandholm Would still work against navies with older equipment, which China is likely to encounter with it's neighbors. Against a first world opponent, their whole fleet would really show it's drawbacks.

@MrBandholm

3 жыл бұрын

@@SgtBeltfed South Korea and Japan are very much first world opponents... And the issue is not so much equipment pr say... It is that the modern missiles are now so fast that the normal "spray and pray" guns no longer has the reach... They will hit the incomming missiles, they will destroy them... But the ship will still be hit by debri comming from the missile at the same speed, so the missile is now turned into a giant shotgun shell. Guns like the 35mm Orliken millenium gun and ofc Bofors 40 mm guns are likely to take over, because they both have the reach and shells that can detonate near the missile, taking it out. 57mm and 76 mm guns are equally becoming more important as airdefence for the same reason.

@SgtBeltfed

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrBandholm South Korea and Japan are two of the countries that would showcase China's problems. China's been playing catch up for decades, and this is probably one of many programs that China's been shotgunning in an attempt to close the gap. CIWS like these would matter in bullying countries in South East Asia, where China is mostly likely to flex it's muscles. Against a first world power, Submarines are a bigger problem for China than missile defense. China does import all of it's oil if I recall. I'd guess that if something like this ever entered service, it would only last until China developed something better.

Pfts. Armatures. True ballers use the 30 30 - 30 barrels in 30mm 😎

if its a deadly as their escalators I would be worried

@RomantikongGinoo

3 жыл бұрын

lmfao wtf

@RomantikongGinoo

3 жыл бұрын

this new gun is as contagious as covid lol

@GarioTheRock

3 жыл бұрын

@@blazinchalice You should see Eastern Europe 😂

@oliverwells8011

3 жыл бұрын

Or as shaky as their skyscrapers

@lmbtcs1879

3 жыл бұрын

@@oliverwells8011 kek

the chinese navy: never enough dakka

It look like a meme gun made real.

Imagine the storage and reloading the rounds on this beast. Yes, Matsimus, I also thought of the thermal issues of this CWIS

Glad u r back to making videos on a regular basis

Loved seeing the weapon in action at the beginning

Overheating isn’t really an issue that’s unique to it tho. If you have 20 barrels but you capped it at the same speed as a system with less barrels, the interval is longer between one full rotation. If the rate of fire is double than that of a weapon that has, let’s say 10 barrels. The amount time between firing for each individual barrel would be the same. Because you have more barrels firing after that barrel until it is time for it to fire again. The only downside really is sheer mechanical complexity and the fact that you have more rotational mass so you are putting more stress on the electric motor spinning it and the mechanical components used to spin it.

@RedXlV

3 жыл бұрын

Plus it has to be physically larger, meaning it needs more space on the ship. Not only in terms of deck space, but also below-deck space for the motor and ammo storage. The Type 1130 11-barrel CIWS is already large, but the PLAN has been able to put it on their Type 052D destroyers and Type 054A frigates. A 20-barrel version I can't imagine fitting on anything smaller than the 13,000 ton Type 055 "destroyers".

So it allso doubles up as a Flame Thrower!

The closest we got to *ENOUGH DAKKA* yet.

Excuse me A 20 BARREL CIWS WTF

@jakegrube9477

3 жыл бұрын

Its CIWS

Meanwhile in America, leaders are designing a floral pattern gun.

“General we need a new way to waste money” Chinese Navy:

@ibrahimadiop7074

3 жыл бұрын

They’re rich as fuck. It doesn’t matter to them

@hamzaalirehan822

3 жыл бұрын

@@ibrahimadiop7074 Of course it matters they have to catch up to the huge US navy as quickly as possible before the US attacks them

@mattmarzula

3 жыл бұрын

How's it a waste?

@Emanuel-kz9lw

3 жыл бұрын

@@mattmarzula i believe a comment said it cost 400,000 dollars to fire this weapon for 12 seconds. That is the literal definition of a waste.

@Emanuel-kz9lw

3 жыл бұрын

On top of that maintenance is gunna be a pain plus ammunition costs, etc it easily piles up and becomes a problem.

Great vid mat

Finally, the best report ever made about this, this thing!

@MrTangolizard

3 жыл бұрын

Really lol

Impressive, if it actually works.

@Kevin-fj5oe

3 жыл бұрын

Well, it shoot bullets

@cwt4560

3 жыл бұрын

Your iPhone works doesn’t it?

@TheBetterManInBlack

3 жыл бұрын

@@cwt4560 Don't use an iphone.

@TheBetterManInBlack

3 жыл бұрын

@@Kevin-fj5oe China has a solid history of faking achievements. Just sayin'.

@rrvillareal2011

3 жыл бұрын

it just need to be effective

If you're going to take the approach of throwing more lead over better accuracy why not Metal Storm? :)

@kenny123200

3 жыл бұрын

Reloading that system was a problem last I checked; gets worse the larger the projectile, and the more ammo you want to put in the weapon, the larger it will be.

@GarioTheRock

3 жыл бұрын

Get outta here you Hispanic-name wielding Australian arms dealer >. Ahhh, jk, much love ❤

@yelectric1893

3 жыл бұрын

China approached the creator of metal storm for use in APS systems

@montys420-

3 жыл бұрын

@@kenny123200 you would think they would develop pre loaded magazines for metal storm and that would speed up reload times especially since they would only need to connect the power source and go

@Justineexy

3 жыл бұрын

Why not laser?

Where did you get the music & opening scene (Roman soldier) for your videos

I mean. it might still have a 2100~6000rpm fire rate, adding more barrels means each will be fired less, thus extending the lifespan of the barrel and its mechanisms. An issue that came from russia is that its CIWS was known to reduce the performance of accuracy or Time to Kill after some years of testing, war games, and so forth. No idea if western CIWSs have this issue, might be right up all different metals were all using or different ways were playing with the riflings, but, its a thing.

Chinese 20 barrel CIWS in theory is out of site. But metallurgical deformation is something to concider. Induction hardening can only take you so far before you need added materials to fortify the tungsten, titanium, inconel and CS in the steel. Then tempering it properly at approx 650c. They have a long history of failure in this part of the formulation.

@ravenkk4816

3 жыл бұрын

Dud anyone can make 650c alloys now days.

@suspicionofdeceit

3 жыл бұрын

All those failures get them that much closer to success.

3 жыл бұрын

@@suspicionofdeceit actually it's the opposite in case of China. They are,in an epic rush and don't want to just wait. Like Soviet union during WW2 they too want to mass produce without wasting more time, more money and more strength.

@GarioTheRock

3 жыл бұрын

A history they are more keen than anyone to move on from and forget.

@tonywu1222

3 жыл бұрын

The whole purpose of having more barrels is to prevent over heating in every single barrel while retaining a similar if not higher firing rate. Plus they decreased the caliber.

that starting music before 0:14 taste more Japanese, not Chinese lol

@Nelsonwmj

3 жыл бұрын

Wumaos gonna get so TRIGGERED.

@peekaboopeekaboo1165

3 жыл бұрын

@@Nelsonwmj Intentional for sly Chinese-bashing.

@kutter_ttl6786

3 жыл бұрын

Kinda did the same thing with his Japanese Type 90 tank video, except with Chinese music.

Hey Matsimus, you ever think of doing videos on interesting regiments or units from around the world? Also maybe like how a *country* Platoon/Section looks like and what equipment they have? Would definitely be interesting.

The Us department of defense:WRITE THAT DOWN NOW

extremely impressive, i however think it has this many barrels to stop it from overheating in the worst possible moment

Kinda cool idea, I guess they have two feed positions (at 3 and 9 o clock). Then you would need a long travel area for each mechanism to complete the full cycle of load/fire/eject before it reaches the next decoupler and starts over, hence the large radius that gave them the capability to mount so many barrels. However, if there's any advantage to this over mounting two Gatlings together I can't see it. Maybe dual cannons need a motor each while this only needs one?

@trezapoioiuy

3 жыл бұрын

I bet it's technologically easier to build a big one than a small one

@andrewholdaway813

3 жыл бұрын

They can be closer together concentrating fire better?

@abelq8008

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah I was thinking that, something like the concept of parallax but with the two streams of bullets.

Maintenance and expense. I can feel it aching my bones.

Give their experiments with anti-ship missile spam, maybe they're testing countermeasures to this tactic.

@rabidmidgeecosse1336

3 жыл бұрын

when designing your stuff, you tend to think of what you do, so you design against it. Zimmerit from WW2 is one classic.

Well, you dont have to be Einstien to figure out why it just means they have barrel overheating problems with fewer barrels:)

@synchronizeddissonance6243

3 жыл бұрын

Cry about it

@kiereluurs1243

3 жыл бұрын

Einstein, you genius.

Engineer: is 6 barrels enough sir? General: more Engineer: is 8 barrels enough sir? General more! Engineer: uh is 12 barrels enough sir? General: MORE!

@unclesam5230

3 жыл бұрын

Engineer: what? you want 16? General: M O R E !

20 barrels? Gaijin please nerf!

@Taistelukalkkuna

3 жыл бұрын

*Adds 20 more barrels* Fine now?

Every problem can be solved with the right amount of force

@kiereluurs1243

3 жыл бұрын

Keep a hammer next to the TV, grandad would say.

more moving parts = more that can go wrong

@Phantom-bh5ru

3 жыл бұрын

It’s more barrels, not more moving parts.

Lol my man actually called it 'See Aye Dubayue Ess' XD

@MrBlack75922

3 жыл бұрын

Delet dis

Many people misunderstand the purpose of a CIWS. Unless you’re on an Amphibious Ship or an Auxiliary - CIWS is your last line of defense. It’s meant to take care leakers ie missiles that have evaded other means of defense. While the ship maybe struck by shrapnel - it’s still better than a direct hit. Two systems that are different: The Italian Oto Melera 76MM Fast Version. This fires 120 rounds per minute - the rounds have a max range of 13 miles - and fragment - spraying a tremendous amount of superheated tungsten fragments to destroy the missile. Another system with longer range is The Dardo. This uses a pair of 40MM 60 Caliber Bofors Guns. It counts on fragmentationto destroy incoming missiles at a range of several miles. Another system is The Bofors 57 MM cannon. This has a range of several miles - and has the advantage of ammunition commonality. The round is programmed as it passes through three rings in the barrel - specifying when it should detonate or should it use a proximity fuze, etc.

Their next model with have 21 barrells. You know 21 is better than 20!

If less is more, just think how much more more would be!

Kashtan is unbeatable whatsoever, + having more barrels doesnt make it more efficient.

@joelau2383

3 жыл бұрын

It is all about chance of interception, not efficiency. What is the chance of Kashtan shooting down a Mach 5 hypersonic missile?

@RedboRF

3 жыл бұрын

@@joelau2383 Kashtan has its limits, everything does. only S400 and S500 systems can shot down 5+ mach hypesonic missiles, but no more than 7 mach, as stated

The movie at the beginning of your video where can i find it ?

I swear , china is improving more and more . They even landed on Mars and With it's rover hitting a milestone that took NASA decades . Gotta say I'm impressed in china

@antman2826

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, I’m impressed with how they managed to steal so much of western technology. They only know how to steal and copy.

The first thing that went through my mind was ammunition. The limiting factor for a lot of CWIS is that they generally have enough ammunition fort a mere 20 off 0.5 second bursts (some half that). Firing at what could be 20,000 rounds per minute that would equate to 3 to 6 off 0.5 second bursts. Even if you had 3 per side the 10th missile is getting through or 19th if they really do have monsterous amounts of storage. Remember this is likely the 23x152B. Just the bullet weight about 190g and the entire round more like 400g (heavy brass). So for 6 bursts you are talking 400kg of ammunition. That's just not practical for reloading in combat.

@ktiger1766

3 жыл бұрын

It's true,took more time to reload .

@joelau2383

3 жыл бұрын

China already has 11 barrels CIWS and missile CIWS to deal with saturated mach 3 missiles attack. This 20 barrels CIWS is clearly designed to intercept much faster target, peoperly mach 5 hypersonic missile. In ideal case, CIWS only have 5s max before it hits. This system would be worth even it can only shoot down 1-2 hypersonic missiles as the last defense measure.

That’s not a gatling anymore, that’s a circular full auto volley gun

Rumor has it that the whole ship is the magazine

@1:35 quite the fireball maker I see, looks badass

When will you make a video about Romanias military?

Thats a lot of moving pieces that can fail XD

how many rounds do you need pretty much following each other though? i dont see the point.

20 barrel is just a novelty.

All sailors rush on deck and cough at the incoming ordinance.

@deus0379

3 жыл бұрын

Fucking lol

@user-uy1rg8td1v

3 жыл бұрын

#StopAsianHate

@Azachor

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-uy1rg8td1v #TakeaJokeAsshole

@deus0379

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-uy1rg8td1v I'm a tiny bit Japanese myself, there are some rude asians out there, some do deserve the hate, whereas others are innocent

@kringe700

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-uy1rg8td1v Imagine using hashtag on KZread

Mat, " these are designed to shoot down High speed missiles, They are Very accurate an very smart .. its not just spray an Pray... hitting a small boat is zero problem an they don't cost that much.. to shoot.

@gordonlawrence1448

3 жыл бұрын

6 half second bursts is 1000 rounds. 400kg of ammunition. That's expensive just in raw materials. Have you seen the scrap price for brass and copper?

@reserva120

3 жыл бұрын

@@gordonlawrence1448 penny wise pound foolish.. How much does a Type 55 warship cost? how much for a trained crew??..you are just a product of a generation who never worked hard or built anything real..

If i was in the brass division, i'd be gleaming

Metal Storm is the electrically fired box that can do the Million rounds......

This tech is 40 years old, missiles is the new high tech CIWS, more accurate, longer range and more likely to actually take out the threat. A combination of guns and missiles is my personal favourite though, like the Russian style

@zainjawaid2556

3 жыл бұрын

one single Ciws missiles will cost up to 1 million dollars. are you sure these are best and cheap solution for Ciws

@tomsoki5738

3 жыл бұрын

@@zainjawaid2556 a few hundred thousand but I’m not sure about 1mil each, although you do have an excellent point, if a country has the money a mix of conventional guns and missiles will work the best

@joelau2383

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, seaRAM is the new high tech CIWS, BUT it cannot shoot down hypersonic missiles. If 6000 rounds/min CIWS can effectively shoot down mach 1+ missile and 10000+ rounds/min CIWS can shoot down mach 3 missile, then how fast is the missile that 20000+ rounds/min CIWS can shoot down?

@combatantfrost495

2 жыл бұрын

@@joelau2383 SM-6 or any sophisticated SAM batteries can take out hypersonic missiles. Oh? The hypersonic missiles can dodge? Yeah good luck at that speed. Faster missiles does not necessarily mean it's better

@joelau2383

2 жыл бұрын

@@combatantfrost495 Of course hypersonic missile can dodge at that speed. Have you watch the amazing video about China tested the maneuverability of their hypersonic glider at night? That is technology. Faster missile does not necessarily mean better, but in this case hypersonic missile is better in many ways. For example, hypersonic speed is faster than fragmentation velocity launched from warhead explosion. It means proximity fuse and fragmentation warhead, which is equipped by all long range sophisticated SAM, is useless against against hypersonic missile. The only way to intercept hypersonic missile is to pin point ramming at it, but the hypersonic missile can easily be 2 times faster than those SAM so that it is extremely difficult even if it doesn't perform evasive maneuver. Besides, Hypersonic missiles travel above the service ceiling of long range SAM most of the time, so long range SAM lose the advantages of long range and multi layers interception.

Just imagine if it was used for shore bombardments instead of missile defense...

@belluh-1huey102

3 жыл бұрын

Would be useless because enclosed turrets

@user-uv5ld3cx5t

3 жыл бұрын

Are 20 or 30mm even useful as bombardment shells?

@khoipham8303

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-uv5ld3cx5t against infantry, yes.

It is a good step for them into the right direction. They still seem to lack serious CIWS on their backbone of the navy, the Type 22 missile boats. Though gattling CIWS are just a part of a chain, if there are weaker links like LR SAMs and RIMs it will still be very vulnerable for saturation attacks.

Best lead in intro on youtube

Dude, anyone remember the Overlord tank from C&C: Generals? I want to see this badboy slapped on the Overlord.

@denrittejanant7049

3 жыл бұрын

Gatling cannon will be ready soon.

@4nix591

3 жыл бұрын

We need an Overlord Tank in real life

@henrycooper3431

3 жыл бұрын

@@4nix591 it gonna get wrecked easily by the design itself

I’ve already figured out how to beat it…. Send in a load of small, cheap, warheadless guided missiles to overheat the gun or deplete the ammo stores. The appetite this system would have in a prolonged engagement would render it useless in short order. For every “real” missile, precede it with 10-15 duds that only need to trick it into firing.

@robertlackey7212

3 жыл бұрын

A decoy that simulates a cruise missile would not be cheap or small .

@sorryociffer

3 жыл бұрын

@@robertlackey7212 compared to the actual kill shot, it could be, especially if it increases the likelihood of it getting through in an opening salvo. Cost benefit analysis would have to be done.

@telurkucing5006

3 жыл бұрын

That tricks works with many air defence in the world when you had more decoy than your enemy ammo, even israeli iron dome and russian pantsir got penetrated like this

@kolinmartz

3 жыл бұрын

More barrels mean each barrel is being fired less. That means less heat. Also it haste same rate of fire as systems with less barrels. The amp store problem is prevalent with any rotary gun system. The reason why they resorted to having more and more barrels without really raising the rate of fire is for cooling.

@kolinmartz

3 жыл бұрын

Also a guided missile will still be more expensive than bullets. And you’ll be able to store less guided musicale per ship than bullets. Kind of a dumb tactic.

Just me or every form of media entertainment shows every air defense doesn't had the 90% accuracy shoots on a closer range.

20 barrels, because the gun will wear out a minimum of 10 pretty quick lol

They either have an entire ship full of ammo or they'll only fire it once.

@FUZionist

3 жыл бұрын

It’s really just 2 10 barrel CIWS combined into 1. They will probably mount 2 of these on a ship. 2 barrels fire at once. So it will need to have the same ammo capacity as a ship with 4 CIWS. Which is manageable.

And the psychological effects it would have on it crew alone is deafening imagine three or four shooting at once you would lose your hearing in less then one minute if the missile doesn’t get you first(ears may bleed)

Metalstorm. That's a blast from the past. I remember that from 2000.

That is one way to keep your barrels cool.

Looks like 2 barrels are firing top and bottom. Maybe more, not sure. This means it's 2x10 barrel guns. Likely lower RPM per gun but higher frag zone. My bet is they're going for very brief bursts with fused airburst switching between targets instead of just locking onto a single target and spraying kinetic rounds like a fire hose until the missile gets it.

@dyong888

3 жыл бұрын

Fused airburst. Interesting.

soon we will go back to big guns since we are getting stupid good at stoping missiles

@jedispartancoolman

3 жыл бұрын

A railgun would do the trick

@brasstard7.627

3 жыл бұрын

Guns wont work as they can shoot artillery shells out of the air the same as missiles and rockets

@moekitsune

3 жыл бұрын

@@brasstard7.627 don't these ciws systems rely on detonating the missiles explosive payload? And if railguns ever become a thing on ships, it would be pretty hard to shoot down that round.

@joelau2383

3 жыл бұрын

@@moekitsune If the rail gun shell has no explosive, it would just penetrate the thin steel hull and probably cause no damage.

@moekitsune

3 жыл бұрын

@@joelau2383 I never said it wouldn't have explosives, I was just thinking it would be much harder to actually prematurely detonate them

It would amaze me if we don't see any metal storm CIWS turrets at least prototyped.

That Kashtan render looks like some nightmare killbot that would roam the streets after skynet gains sentience

Sounds like it's going to be a technical nightmare

@scheewheed8285

3 жыл бұрын

@trueblueprussian 23 basically everyone goes pew pew at each other

@young.angry.devildawg

3 жыл бұрын

ehh all ciws guns are absolute nightmares to deal with. but this one is the big daddy of ciws lmao. it’s beyond just being a nightmare

I would much rather be under the protection of SEARAM guided by the USN fire control system.

Also depends on the quality of metallurgy, these barrels can easily distort or wear out if not made from good quality metals. The faster the wear the less accurate it becomes in use. That thing reminded me of a cannon from ye olde wooden ships in it's size, frightening though. I wonder if in the future we'll see a dedicated missile defence Destroyer/Cruiser from western nations with like 2/4 57mm Bofors and 8 CIWS all designed for closer defence to deal with saturation attacks.

How many barrels do you want? China "yes"

Looks like a great piece of innovation.

That is going to be expensive

@ariqasadam199

3 жыл бұрын

like america phalanx

The reason for multi barrels is to stop the barrels melting , if 2 barrels out of 20 are firing it must have 2 feed systems , actually 2 gatlings mounted together , firing 30 mm , it would expend ammo at great wastage better to fire less rounds more accurately , and Chinese reliability might be a factor .

The problem with gun-based close-in weapons systems is that the gun is generally tasked with dealing with one incoming missile until that missile is destroyed, allowing other missiles to approach without opposition. Many of the more recent Western naval vessels have been going to missile-based CIWS's (the U.S.'s Rolling Airframe Missile and the European Common Anti-air Modular Missile) which are self-guiding, rather than relying on a radar trying to intersect the course of the incoming missile with that of the outgoing stream of shells. This would conceivably allow a missile-based CIWS to fire on a number of incoming missiles and then (if there is time) to fire second missiles at targets that survived the first.