Are CIWS and SMs really that inaccurate?

[Go_Rongor]

Their success rate in killing incoming vampires seems questionable. Especially the CIWS seems to require a software patch, constantly using offset lead angles...

[Stix_09]

Originally posted by RenegadeCEO:

Originally posted by rfenner:

yeah, i know for a fact that CIWS is much more accurate. Ive watched it shoot the towed decoy and then start working its way up the tow cable towards the lear jet towing the target... the lear pilot was getting very nervous

I was one of the CIWS techs onboard CG-53 from 2004-2007. Yes, it is VERY accurate (3m dispersion at 6000ft at 4500 rounds/min). And yes, we chewed up a tow cable as well :D

This game HORRIBLY FAILS to model the US CIWS engagement envelope, tracking, and accuracy.

How does a 2004-2007 generation system compare to one designed in the 1970's and early 1980's? How many missiles did you get fired at your ships?

Development
As missile technology evolved, Raytheon has developed the Phalanx System in response. The original Block 0 system could take two men as long as 30 minutes to reload from pre-linked ammunition boxes. Block 1 increased ammunition capacity from 990 to 1,550 rounds and a new preloaded ammunition loader/unloader cart dramatically reduced reload time to 5 minutes. The Block 1/Baseline 0 (1988) featured better radar to detect a new generation of smaller supersonic anti-ship missiles. B1 Baseline 1 raised the rate of fire from 3,000 rounds per minute to 4,500. B1 Baseline 2 (1991) improved accuracy with an improved muzzle restraint to decrease round dispersion. Block 1A (1996) introduced a new computer system to counter high diving and hard manoeuvring missiles and switched from hydraulic to pneumatic gun drive which could spin up faster.

The Block 1B upgrade PSuM (Phalanx Surface Mode) launched in 1999 was the most significant update so far, a response to navies increasingly operating in the congested littoral areas. The primary counter-missile capability was enhanced to defeat fast inshore attack craft (FIAC), helicopters, UAVs, USVs and small stealthy missiles, difficult to detect on radar. The solution was the addition of electro-optical thermal imaging technology to supplement the radars. The stabilised Forward-Looking Infra-Red (FLIR) camera is mounted on the left side of the radome also allows the operator to visually identify targets in complex environments.

The original M61A1 gun barrels were designed for short bursts and dispersion increased with barrel wear. The B1B remedies this with thicker Optimised Gun Barrels (OGB), their length has been increased from 1.520m to 1.981m and they are supported by the distinctive cage muzzle brace for further accuracy gains. B1B fires the slightly modified Mk 244 Mod 0 ELC (Enhanced Lethality Cartridges) featuring a 48% heavier tungsten alloy penetrator over the older Mk 149 rounds.

When assessing the effectiveness of Phalanx, it should be seen as one part of a layered defence system. This includes intelligence-led assessments of the threat, area air defence, electronic warfare and decoys which are often overlooked or underestimated. Clearly not an infallible shield against a saturation attack by modern hypersonic missiles, Phalanx is, however, an affordable and relatively simple way to add a significant layer of protection against many threats.

https://www.navylookout.com/last-ditch-defence-the-phalanx-close-in-weapon-system-in-focus/

[Stix_09]

I do however think they should perform better than they do

Based on game time frame i would expect these are the original Block 0 versions
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Phalanx.php

[buckoff124]

Originally posted by Gunboat Smith:

For as long as the US Phalanx has been around, I think that CIWS has ever been used as intended, maybe once... a ways back during Desert Storm... I'm not sure about the British "Goal Keeper"

It was successfully used very recently in the Red Sea by a USN DDG.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by Stix_09:

I do however think they should perform better than they do

Based on game time frame i would expect these are the original Block 0 versions
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Phalanx.php

They do perform quite good in game, but I guess for the Phalanx we are looking at survivorship bias here as everything Soviet they are really excellent at intercepting will have almost no chance of ever being launched or get in range of the Phalanx in the first place in game.

If you artificially create those situations though, you'll find that they have great intercept rates, e.g. things like the Kerry have almost no chance of getting through. You'd have to allow the launching planes to exist long enough to see it in action though.

[ijsthee2000]

I just played the Hormus hard mission and enemy aircraft made 3 bombing runs on my ships and Phalanx did not intercept any aircarft on those 3 seperate bombing attacks. So my conclusion: It Sucks. Probably in real life too. Oh and i'm also not impressed by the RIM 7 Sea Sparrow's performance either.

[Stix_09]

Can depend a lot on the missile type too, for example a ss-n-9 is a lot easier to hit than a SS-N-19. The latest beta also has some updates to CIWS.

very low sea skimming and high speed ballistic missiles are much harder target

I've seen ss-n-9 been shot down from 50 cal on a patrol boat

Ppl also put their formations far too close to the carriers and high value targets. I know I did. Formations density ww2 and coldwar era are not similar.

See this for a demo of how much this matters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hKdRTy270Q

[godfather]

layered defence-EW- formations these are key to keeping your fleet off the bottom of the sea floor. if you ciws is firing you have failed at having an effective defence.

[Stix_09]

yep CIWS is not what u want to be having to use at all.

[Witcher]

Recently bought the game and played one mission only. Can't comment on the game's CWIS accuracy but I believe the range is shorter than Cold Waters Dotmod v0.4.