Page 5 of 5

Re: How effective are CIWS?

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2019, 05:59
by SpudmanWP
Keep in mind that you cannot completely protect against EM if you use a datalink or comms to communicate.

Re: How effective are CIWS?

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2019, 07:23
by marauder2048
SpudmanWP wrote:Keep in mind that you cannot completely protect against EM if you use a datalink or comms to communicate.


That's true; apertures in general are weak points against HPM.

Re: How effective are CIWS?

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2019, 10:20
by popcorn
Even drones executing a swarming attack in autonomous mode would.presumably communicate amongst themselves to coordinate their movements. Presumably this is a potential weakness a HPM.weapo.n could exploit.

Re: How effective are CIWS?

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2019, 13:07
by madrat
sferrin wrote:
madrat wrote:Laser technology isn't exactly a 24/7/365 solution.


Those tiny drones won't likely fair well in poor weather either.


Not all poor weather affects drones and lasers equally.

Re: How effective are CIWS?

Unread postPosted: 30 May 2019, 14:07
by sferrin
madrat wrote:
sferrin wrote:
madrat wrote:Laser technology isn't exactly a 24/7/365 solution.


Those tiny drones won't likely fair well in poor weather either.


Not all poor weather affects drones and lasers equally.


Those "shotgun" rounds they currently have in 5" rounds wouldn't come close to cutting it. The odds of a pellet in the round hitting a small drone are simply too low.

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovclou ... _Bland.pdf

You'd want something like a Goalkeeper with tungsten shot and even then it would be a $hit-show.