C-RAM Centurian Air Defense Is So Hot Right Now

C-RAM is the US Military's air defense Counter-Rocket, Artillery, Mortar initiative. The U.S. Army announced its counter mortar weapon systems successfully intercepted 100 enemy fired mortar bombs protecting multi-national Corps Iraq assets.
The Centurion systems, a ground based version of the 20mm Naval Phalanx point defense weapon was declared initial operational capable in July 2005. It scored its first intercept in March 2006. Since then, C-RAM system deployed in theater provided over 1,500 localized warnings, allowing troops time to take protective cover.
unironically hooah photos: / cappyarmy
uniornically hooah tweets / cappyarmy
Written and Produced by: Chris Cappy and Andrew Tucker
Edited by: Savvy Studios
Email [e-mail] for inquires.
#MILITARY #WAR #NAVY

[@Taskandpurpose]

Hey Spare Parts army! Thanks a ton for watching let me know what you think of the C-RAM should we send some to Ukraine? unironically hooah photos: instagram.com/cappyarmy/ uniornically hooah tweets twitter.com/Cappyarmy

[@leonidashanna4740]

You should do a YEET! instead of hooah in your next video.

[@ItsJoKeZ]

you posted video game footage throughout the video while talking about it as if it as real...

[@madrabbit9007]

You should look into the new laser defense system that will be replacing it. Cool as hell!

[@kresbes7240]

Can it take out an ATGM?

[@JoanoftheArk300]

Yes send everything to Ukraine 🇺🇦 to scare 😱 the BejeezUS ❤️‍🩹 out of Noko, puktin, I ran 🏃‍♂️ so far awayyýy and conquer the communist jihadist new world order there please 🙏 Glory to the Heroes🔱 🇺🇦 💙🇺🇸💪

[@r.b.seiple5913]

The reason the USS Stark's CIWS failed to protect the ship from Exocet missiles in 1986 was that it was literally broken. In the preceeding days the ship's crew tried unsuccessfully to repair the CIWS but could not find the problem, so they had processed the necessary paperwork (called a CASREP, short for Casualty Report), which would have informed the regional powers to provide expedited technical & logistical support to diagnose the problem, deliver any required spare parts, and provide all the assistance required to expeditiously effect the repairs (all of these resources were immediatley available from Bahrain during this time period). However, the Stark's Commanding Officer refused to sign the CASREP and forward it to the regional powers, because it would look bad for him to have a CASREP'd system listed on his daily Situation Reports (SITREP), so in effect to save his own embarrasment, the C.O. was responsible for the deaths of those sailor's. If only you knew the whole story, because that's just the tip of the iceburg of how incredibly incompetent and negligent the C.O. of the Stark was in the command of his ship.

[@edwardkopp1116]

I was a Fire Controlman at this time and this is how I remember how it went down as well. I had a shipmate from the Stark in FCS/ORTS C School who confirmed the CWIS was down at the time of the incident.

[@r.b.seiple5913]

@@edwardkopp1116 I was a EW2 back then working on the SLQ-32 on board USS Horne yeah we know what happened...

[@paullywog13]

Wow, this is the same game we play at my tank battalion daily. Half our shit is broken, and the other half is breaking, so we play a constant game of "report this, not that" to make it seem like our combat slant is high enough.

[@billhanna2148]

Ok so how does DELIBERATELY not reporting a problem STILL not getting people fired ??😳🤯😱💀 NOTHING CHANGES

[@ShorlanTanzo]

@@billhanna2148 Because when a commanding officer gets promoted, it's not an isolated incident. Multiple people recommended him upward, and a higher officer stamped on their approval as well. That officer screwing up looks bad on all of them. Officer promotions is a big huge ego battle in the military. So no one wants to admit a problem, because their future promotion, pay, prestige might be affected. Another Very common issue is that people who do raise flags on issues are seen as "troublemakers" and not "team players". They don't get a promotion for making the military better, they get sidelined, blocked up, and their paperwork gets "lost". It's a huge mess that somehow pulls it together in times of crisis....

[@MStonewallC]

I first learned about these things almost a decade ago and I thought they were like brand-new cutting edge tech. It blows my mind that they've been installed on ships ever since the original Star Wars films were being released in theaters.

[@Saanonymous80]

Yeah, angry R2D2 is pretty old, but still badass

[@JL-XrtaMayoNoCheese]

Of course, we kew Pearl Harbor was comming too. The Civilians didn't. It's the same with the Maine and Luistiana

[@kit888]

@@Saanonymous80 He looks excited to me.

[@aaroncabatingan5238]

@@JL-XrtaMayoNoCheese That's pure conspiracy bullshit

[@davidransom4476]

They were put on both of my AOR's back in the 70/80's.

[@edwardkopp1116]

I was a Fire Controlman on the USS Ticonderoga CG-47. I worked on the FCS/ORTS part of the AEGIS weapon system and sat Missile System Supervisor in CIC. The CWIS guys were in my division and the work center supervisor was my good buddy and we called it R2-D2 with a Hard On. Once we did an evolution testing the CWIS on a drone. I stood 20' away as it unloaded and I could feel the air reverberate against me. As it was explained to me by my buddy mentioned above, the incident of a CWIS shooting down an airplane towing a target was more complex than explained in the video. It didn't just up and target the plane. The CWIS fire control radar is so accurate and the beam so small that beast shot the target into pieces, shot the pieces into littler pieces, and then locked onto the tow cable and shot it until it came to the plane. THEN it shot the plane.

[@timf2279]

That's very impressive. I'm glad the CWIS is not self aware.

[@billpugh58]

Rubbish.

[@BeingFireRetardant]

@@billpugh58 No, once again you are wrong, Bill. Simply because you can't comprehend it, has nothing to do with whether or not it took place.

[@huwhitecavebeast1972]

Damn.

[@Laugh1ngboy]

@@billpugh58 The gun literally targets the outgoing rounds to correct it's aim. The tow cable is over a mile long. What makes you think it doesn't walk up a tow cable?

[@bosoerjadi2838]

"The A-7 Crosshair.." The disappointment about so much disrespect is painful.

[@yareps]

There were a few other mispronunciations, and it almost seemed like he was leaving Easter eggs for us to find.

[@BagoPorkRinds]

Martin Martee-ah

[@corentinnaisse5350]

After Harrison and Zapateria on the last video about Ukraine, I'm starting to think it may be some kind of dyslexia if he makes the same kind of mispronunciation in his native language.

[@lqr824]

@@yareps IFFF!

[@krisfrederick5001]

"I asked for ships with frickin' laser beams" -Dr. Evil

[@mattkissmyasstyrants8676]

Yes but those cost..... two MILLION DOLLARS!...

[@Drtydeeds]

Ahh yes, the A-7 Crosshair 😂

[@LuvBorderCollies]

I had to listen 3 times just to make sure he said CROSS HAIR. Maybe that was the supersonic air superiority version of the "Ugly But Well Hung" A-7D. Probably a Long Island accent issue.

[@adamdejesus4017]

Martin Martia? Lock keyed? The gun can be driven "mnemonically"? 🤣

[@z31beck]

I have to ask myself if he is having a stroke about 3x per video. I'm disappointed this comment has so few likes and I had to go this far down into the comments to find it.

[@bigmac421000]

I remember these when I was on the Eisenhower cvn 69 back in the 80's. They were nicknamed R2D2 units because of it's looks. Very awesome weapon

[@clumsiii]

haha ya when I toured my uncle's destroyer with him he called them R2D2s, too. I never saw them in action before this video. Always wondered...without any training or what not, I had previously imagined it sent up a wall of rounds, with a wider spread. Complete opposite

[@nated5355]

R2D2 saved my ass at least once in Iraq. Mortar shrapnel rained down on us after being shot down. Unfortunately they only worked about 75% of the time. Some people still got hit. Sometimes the weapon system just didn't fire. I was about 10 meters away from one when it went off. I nearly sh!t myself. Bada$$ weapon though. The sound is unmistakable & still raises the hair on my arms.

[@theoneandonlydetraebean8286]

*RDR2 Deadeye sound effect*

[@timf2279]

75% less chance of taking a hit is good odds.

[@thh4584]

From what I remember being briefed about it was that it will priortize the munitions that will land in a certain area.

[@timf2279]

@@thh4584 Anything that helps eliminates a non direct weapon is good odds even at 75%

[@petervanschepen8809]

@@thh4584 They also have cutouts for areas they won't defend at all. Which can be a problem, because troops will frequently take shortcuts through these empty fields no matter how many times you tell them not to.

[@christmastrees9095]

Gotta love Arma 3 at 0:48 Always funny when it pops into things and people don't notice atleast the clip at 1:41 says it's Arma but I bet some people will not have noticed

[@ItsJoKeZ]

I was wondering like as an avid player I instantly knew that was ARMA3 not real life.

[@ItsJoKeZ]

man there are 4 moments he uses arma 3 footage

[@tomvobbe9538]

Gets me every time 😂

[@garethfairclough8715]

I worked with these guys during my time in Iraq, on the COB in Basrah. Impressive gear.

[@Bagger808]

When I first joined the Navy in the late 80's the CIWS stood for "Captain It Won't Shoot" by the crews. Obviously far more reliable now, but it was a rough start when first deployed.

[@SoundBoy808]

haha trust the crews to come up with the real name!

[@furmanmackey5479]

The first time I saw a "Vulcan" system in action was while I was stationed in what was then, circa 1984, West Germany. The "Vulcan", mounted on a modified M-113 hull, absolutely shredded a RC "Huey" that was approaching, flat out, at tree top level.

[@henryrollins9177]

At what speed was the RC flying? 😉

[@billpugh58]

@@henryrollins9177 1 billion miles an hour……..

[@Farweasel]

@@henryrollins9177 I told them . 'Take the break off' I said Would they listen? [OK max speed's around 110 knots]

[@patverum9051]

Dutch army had the M113 1/2, (Lynx in Canada) with the Vulcan.

[@furmanmackey5479]

@@henryrollins9177 Sorry, poor choice of words. I was a tanker, so choppers always looked like they were "going flat out" to us. The old Huey was flying very fast while the controller kept it close to the treetops and zig zagged it a bit. To be perfectly honest I have no idea what the top speed of a Huey was fresh off the assembly line much less after decades of hard use. Please forgive my poor choice of words concerning air speed.

[@fightingfalcon1986]

This weapon also was used as defensive weapon on the B-52 tail barbette (specifically in the B-52H variant) until early 1990s decade.

[@donnbyrne1971]

There's always been a "fantasy expectations" element with weapons systems which when combined with the "fog of war" eventually leads to some disappointing outcomes. Also, there is no substitute for well trained operators being where they're supposed to be and doing what they're supposed to be doing if you want the best results without any unwanted failures.

[@Treblaine]

The firepower isn't that revolutionary, 6000rpm is as fast as 6 Oerlikon 20mm cannons and in WW2 the ships were literally lined along their entire length with such cannons. CIWS saves space but doesn't give unprecedented firepower, the main difference in firepower is how it's theoretically it's easier to focus.

[@lqr824]

> There's always been a "fantasy expectations" element I wouldn't summarize it as "fantasy." The real fantasy is acting as if any weapon system is going to be a world-beater the day it goes into service. Every complicated system will need a long time both to debug and to figure out how to best use. Simple software upgrades probably have even the original hardware orders of magnitude better than before and I'm sure there have been continuous improvements in the hardware as well.

[@leone3394]

The C-RAM, for when you wanna just give a big middle finger to the rockets and artillery shells that your enemy fired.

[@chiefexxor5069]

Its a nice adaptation of a navy system on land. Germany developed a dedicated defense System for Landbases calles Mantis where you have multiple guns connected to one radar site. It has less rounds per minute but every round will eject a cloud of tungsten balls to basically become an automated shotgun.

[@user-jd7gh2ef4s]

Developed by Rheinmetall Weapons and Munitions - Switzerland (former Oerlikon) 😉

[@michaelmoorrees3585]

One of my engineering professors, worked for General Dynamics (in Pomona, CA) who designed some of the circuitry of the Phalanx (the early 1980s version). I got my BSEE from Cal Poly, Pomona, (back in the mid 1980s) which was often referred to as "GD West", because many General Dynamics engineers, taught part time at that school.

[@paulrouth5997]

Vulcan is the God of Fire, Metalworking and the Forge, appropriate I believe.

[@doujinflip]

Speaking of goalkeepers, the Dutch developed the Goalkeeper CIWS around the GAU-8/A 30mm cannon. If that sounds familiar, yes it's the same cannon flown on the A-10... it's literally BRRRRRRT in the other direction 🇳🇱😎

[@Laugh1ngboy]

They are basically the same weapon just bigger. The real difference is the radar.

[@Jon-ic3bt]

Hey Cappy, love your videos! Just one feedback: Could you add metric units next to imperial units when showing the weapon specifications? I'm sure you have tons of fans outside US (like me) who aren't to familiar with imperial units

[@MR-hb9xk]

Or just go full metric.

[@CptSpears007]

“Pneumonically driven” never change Cappy, never change.

[@petervanschepen8809]

When I was in the Navy I worked with both variants, and we do indeed adore the system. The 70-80% figure is also a little unfair, given that each mount has cutouts for empty plots on base that they don't defend. We had a big problem convincing guys not to cut through these areas until the inevitable happened and a couple guys taking a shortcut caught mortar shrapnel. I would also note that one of the major reasons it was adapted for land based use is specifically so we could sell it to Israel - where it has proven its worth countless times.

[@gallendugall8913]

My experience with CIWS was hearing the gunners mates complain, "We've got an exercise coming up so we need to get the CIWS working again." Then complaining, "We can't postpone the test. In another hour we're going to have to bring the CIWS down for two weeks of maintenance." One time they managed to get off three bursts before the entire system fried itself. It generated a burnt electronics stench at the back of the ship for a month and never worked again.

[@bosoerjadi2838]

That sounds unacceptable in any navy on any ship to any selfrespecting crew.

[@streboret]

FCs run the CIWS not GMs.

[@billpugh58]

Sounds about right

[@snailspace1269]

hmmm. when I played Gunners Mate we didn't work on CIWS the FTGs did

[@Laugh1ngboy]

@@bosoerjadi2838 Sounds like the smoked the train and elevation motors at best or worst the radar.

[@matthewanthony3romeroburri82]

I was a 14 S in the US Army. During my Warrior Leadership Course WLC US Army NCO Academy for my Instructor Class Course I did my class on the CRAM system. I remember describing it as a primitive force field which impressed our WLC Class instructor and class. Needless to say I got a 96 for the class 4 points taken off by the WLC E 7 Sergeant for saying a single cuss word lol, which was "If you hear the alert hit the fuckin dirt.” Class of 2011 graduate number 13 of 264.

[@matthewanthony3romeroburri82]

Thank you, this is by far one of my favorite channels very cool.

[@Sagart999]

Great video - but.... It's pronounced Martin Marietta, not Marin Mareeta. We had one on my second ship. Thank you for your kind indulgence.

[@toddchatterly9310]

It made my ears hurt...

[@antoniohagopian213]

He said martiya

[@calvinshipman4567]

Also, A-7 is a Corsair. More specifically Corsair II. Not A-7 Crosshair. And the A thru Cmodels had twin 20mm single barrel cannons. M61 replaced these in the D models and above. Her nickname was Miss Suck and Blow

[@patrickpatrick9132]

I was in in the Gulf in 91. I remember hearing this gun fire

[@FLORATOSOTHON]

Thanks, very informative video about the C RAM and the CWIS. We do use extensively the CIWS version on all frigates and a number of other ships in the Hellenic (Greek) NAVY. It is a very reliable system, but also has its limitations. As a C RAM system however, although impressive, the limitations involved may limit its effectiveness. The ammunition drum holds 1440 rounds, that are sufficient for 6 to 8 engagements (in shipborne use). After this, a time of 10 to 15 minutes are required to reload the ammunition drum, during this time of course the ship will be vulnerable. At sea, the number of missiles fired against a CIWS equipped ship will not be too large for the CIWS to handle. In a C RAM mission however, the system may have to deal with hundreds of mortars and artillery shells, that will deplete its ammunition load very quickly, allowing for significant time periods that the base will remain unprotected while the C RAM is being reloaded with ammunition. For a ground role, I tend to favor larger calibers with air burst ammunition such as the 30 or 35mm AHEAD rounds or the Bofors 40mm rounds, or even high-power lasers. In any case, having seen in military exercises in Greece, how devastating air defense guns like the twin 20mm Rh-202 and the 23mm ZsU 23-2 are while firing in a ground support role, against ground targets, I think that the withdrawal of both the towed and SP versions of the 20mm VULCAN PHALANX, from service was wrong. True, they were no longer effective as air defense weapons, but they could definitely create havoc as ground support weapons for the light infantry, far superior to any .50cal or 14.5mm. PS The Phalanx was created as a point defense system so converting it to an area air defense system for base protection would change its role, with questionable effectiveness unless a battery of at least 4 to 6 systems was used, so that some would fire while others were reloading. However, the C RAM system proposed could be adapted to protect air defense radars from anti-radiation missiles and loitering munitions. In such a role, this system would do exactly what was designed for: Point Defense. Two systems per air defense radar, in order to have protection by one while reloading the other, would provide effective protection. For example, in Patriot batteries two C RAMs could replace the two AVENGER systems (or whatever they have now) that were supposed to protect the radar, with far better results.

[@apieceofpi5463]

scam

[@FLORATOSOTHON]

@@apieceofpi5463 No, not if it is used for what it was designed for, point defense and not area defense. I added some more things to my comment, PLZ read the PS part at the end.

[@scammicus7110]

Another great video Cappy. Just to add to the many excellent comments, "Some chance is better than no chance". Prior to C-RAM, any aimed direct / indirect fire was going to hit, the question was if it would penetrate. The advent of land based Phalanx, and its more challenging high energy laser (HEL) cousins, finally meant that there was a chance the round would never even make it to the target. Another vital point here, is that the unique search and tracking data generated. by the phalanx offers near simultaneous impact prediction (so your warnings AT the point of impact, not all over the place causing false alarms) and point of origin data for counter battery fires or QRF response. So essentially, a core element of the detect, warn, defeat, deter model.

[@ivanstepanovic1327]

Long ago, I read in some magazine how Gatling guns were resurrected... Mr Gatling wanted to make a rapid firing weapon and to some extent he did it. A hand cranked multi barrel gun... But then came Mr Maxim and his gas operated machine gun and Gatlings were soon phased out and moved to warehouses and museums... In one of those, some guys were bored and they had Gatling gun, lots of ammo for it and a shooting range. So naturally, they decided to have some fun and shoot it. It was fun and all, but hand cranking was a pain in the a$$. So they came to idea to use electric motor to rotate it and then they improvised a solution with some electric motor they found and some belt. When they tried it, the result was unbelievable! However, loading and feeding then were the issue. But they saw the potential and reported their findings which some people found interesting and decided to work on the idea... The rest is history...

[@williamzk9083]

Maybe. The problem was that in the 1940s the guns of fighter aircraft kept jamming in high G maneuvers. The Germans came up with a solution that became the MG213 which used a 6 barrel rotating breech so as to separate loading, firing and extraction. It increased reliability. the US solution was the Gatling which had the advantage of letting barrels cool at the cost of more space. It also allowed the expended cartridges to be stored rather than letting them fall on your own population or troops.

[@ghassanboubez8890]

Thank you for your great videos. Incredibly well documented and well explained.

[@solargoomba]

CWIS cosplaying as Elizabeth always makes my day

[@labcdel4384]

you know that feeling you get when that one youtuber keep watching uploads a video, and you always watch it no matter the topic. That is most certainly chris cappy for me, these videos are entertaining and just so informational. Always learning something new in these. They make my dark days into good ones.

[@0v3rd0s]

Always love your work and humor. Keep the videos coming

[@fightingfalcon1986]

Other fighters that used and currently uses the M61 Vulcan Gatling autocannon are the Lockheed Corporation F-104 Starfighter, the Grumman F-14 Tomcat, the Boeing (formerly McDonnell-Douglas) F-15 Eagle in all variants, and the General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon (currently produced by Lockheed-Martin) and the retired General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark supersonic bomber, electronic warfare and ground interdiction strike aircraft.

[@chrissmith4568]

Another excellent video, thank you!

[@davec3717]

Nice touch with the "DANGER WILL ROBINSON!"

[@bryanduchane2371]

These systems are amazing.

[@exellion82]

It can be disguised as an alien called “Elizabeth”. #gintama

[@Larken42]

It took far to long to find this comment.

[@walkercustoms]

Thanks Cappy

[@grunt1807]

Love your videos brother, Hooaa!

[@terrynewsome6698]

In defense of the CWIS, the one on the USS stark was off line do to being broken.

[@Emery98]

This vlog shows a tremendous amount of research and fact finding. Outstanding work.

[@user-ob3gi5do1i]

Another great video. Thanks for your effort!

[@jacob_90s]

so happy you made this video. absolutely love these things and have been wanting more channels to talk about them

[@toddabbott781]

The thing is a system like this... the more it is used, the more data it has, the more accurate it becomes. These systems have improved GREATLY over the last 20 years. Also to mirror this system if the LaWS or Helios. It is used for a VERY similar roll. It costs more to build and requires significantly more power to operate, but do to the lack of munition it is FAR cheaper per shot. They put the system of a ship to test and it went well. They were planning on decommissioning the system but do to the cost of something like $1 to use the requested the system stay. The used the system HEAVYLY for about 18 months. This gave them a MASSIVE amount of data to work with. The land based C-RAM were heavily used in the Middle East and gave the US critical data needed.

[@hifinsword]

Great video, especially the part about the U.S. Navy's Sea-Whiz. Just a few corrections though. At 2:44 it's Martin Mar-i-et-ta, not Martin Mar-tee-a. At 3:04 it's the A-7 Corsair, not the Crosshair. It's a very effective weapon, once it's turn on in AUTO mode. It does nothing but track in the STANDBY mode. In the AUTO mode, it shoots at anything and everything in its envelope. So if you're a friendly, don't get near it unless you're cleared inbound.

[@CarlJacobsen]

Sometimes I wonder if he butchers names in order to troll for comments correcting him. Both names (Marietta and Corsair) are literally pronounced just how they look, there’s nothing tricky about them.

[@bobdylan7567]

Thanks cappy

[@barrydaemi6287]

Absolutely love this channel, the information is always well-research and the information is presented elegantly with cheeky remarks sprinkle-in.

[@TheOriginalJAX]

Love the Cwis but interestingly over here in the Uk we Use the Dutch variant that fields 30mm and a different ECS set up, would be interesting to see how it compares to the US version. Cause personally I think this style of weapon system is the future for point defence and gunnery in other roles too.

[@aymonfoxc1442]

I think the future of close-in defence will be a combination of C-WIS, high powered energy weapons, EW, missiles and drones with an integrated command and control system. Despite all the fancy technological changes, I don't think sprayers of 'lead' are going anywhere.

[@bosoerjadi2838]

I think I can agree. I am very impressed by the newly developed Rheinmetall Oerlikon Skynex ADS.

[@granatmof]

Overlapping and redundant field of fire at different ranges are key, but there is still the issue of just overwhelming fire. These systems can only handle so many threats at once. It's why while the US military has researched hypersonics, they weren't deployed because a large enough Salvo of multiple cheaper missiles will eventually overwhelm such defenses

[@michaeldendulk9225]

The UK navy actually use both the Dutch Goalkeeper and the US Phalanx, with the majority being Phalanx. For many years the Dutch system was considered superior, but as far as I've been able to find, they are pretty much equivalent to each other these days. Doesn't matter much, both the USA as the UK are actively looking for replacements for these systems (the US navy, for instance, is starting to switch to RIM missiles and investing heavily in laser based systems for future use and the UK is looking for a combination missile/gun system for their next generation of ships, similar to the latest Russian systems).

[@TheOriginalJAX]

@@granatmof Everything has limitations that can be overcome by an opposing force with enough resources, there is no 1 shoe fits all solution and I never said this is the end all and be all. like I get what you are saying and am already aware of all this but you are missing my point. Unlike Aymon FOXC who does and who I agree with 100% .

[@paultemple5042]

The U.S. Army had ' Vulcan Cannons ' mounted on Tanks in the early 1980's. My NJROTC unit witnessed a live fire test with drones at an Army test range.

[@caltonfollows2168]

Good quality info-packed report.

[@timothywood4402]

Great work.

[@icutthings649]

A video on the aegis system vs the PAAMS system would cool

[@Trident023]

The Patriot missile system covers icbm up to 40000km!? That’s where geostationary satellites are deployed…The ISS orbits at around 400km. Are you sure you got your conversions right on that one…?

[@josiahpadgett3440]

Great video!

[@GenikaXVI]

always such great videos

[@The_Heisenberg_]

So even though it doesn't have IFF, the system still needs fire authority from an operator to fire (Army side anyway) and usually this is in conjunction with different radars, visual feeds, and things like that to provide info to the operator. It's neat stuff, truly.

[@Laugh1ngboy]

More to the point the weapon is selective on what it shoots at. Meaning if you fly a certain way it will ignore you as not being a threat. A artillery shell can't slow down so it doesn't have the option of being not threatening.

[@richardmeo2503]

Another great show. Hey Cappy does the Military have any smaller versions for the grunts. Possibly using a smaller less expensive 50 cal gatling system for troops in the field?

[@garethfairclough8715]

Nope. It'd be a lot less effective, with much shorter range, without being all that much lighter or cheaper.

[@baldieman64]

There's the SGR-A1, the Super aEgis II and another option made by Sentry Tech. None are capable against incoming projectiles, but otherwise, they fill a similar role. There is a land based version of C-RAM nicknamed Centurion Weapon System, but it's just a wheeled version of the ship based system

[@exo068]

The smallest system that could been used is probably the Skyranger 35mm. It is basically a single Mantis unit with a search and tracking unit on a boxer. It can be used against against basically anything that can fly but it’s about 36t so not exactly small.

[@mrvwbug4423]

They have the minigun, but that's 7.62 and is manually aimed so not really useful for shooting down artillery. Most commonly used as blackhawk door guns if I recall

[@Wick9876]

Ian at the Forgotten Weapons channel just had a Q&A that covered this.

[@SparrowFae]

Lol, 1:38. When I saw the CIWS I immediately thought "Gee, I wonder how long until we get ARMA 3 footage" XD

[@ralphmorgan6130]

@9:23 "At heights up to 40,000 kilometers" LOL. That's higher than geostationary satellite orbit.

[@lordbob9606]

Ah yes, the very famous A-7 Crosshair II

[@Charge11]

I realized you called the aircraft that attacked the USS Stark a fighter jet. In fact, US intelligence determined it was actually a Falcon 50 (Business trijet used as a trainer) with 2 Exocet missile hard points welded on. Those 2 Exocets are what struck the USS Stark.

[@BattalionCommanderMK]

Nice documentary man

[@theHentySkeptic]

Danger Will Robinson!! Gold

[@GameFuMaster]

3:55 still not more expensive than Heavy Weapon guy's minigun, which costs $400,000 dollars to fire the weapon for 12 seconds

[@CircaSriYak]

I scrolled long and hard to find this comment.

[@STEVEARABIA1]

I was wondering about guns like that as far as down range unintended damage. It’s brilliant that the rounds self destruct.

[@grahamogle6332]

The British pom pom AA guns from WWII era also had a self destruct feature. I wonder how common it is/was?

[@paultemple5042]

Great Post, keep 'em coming. 😊✌️🇺🇸

[@MZ-bl6wg]

AWESOME VIDEO AND FOOTAGE!

[@antonleimbach648]

I spent 6 years in the navy and we never, never, never would have CIWS armed and ready to fire when in international waters. We also would never use a tracking radar (usually a continuous wave transmitter) while in international waters. When your out at sea there can be dozens of planes of different countries flying all over the place. We can’t just shoot down planes for heading toward one of our ships. Our ship got buzzed by pilots from England, France, and Italy and those pilots got between the masts of our destroyer. It was very cool! If the USS Stark had wanted to it could have shot down that Iraqi jet long before he shot those two missiles.

[@Josep_Hernandez_Lujan]

The USS Vincennes showed the world

[@jcnikoley]

Maybe you don’t need to share that. Perhaps it’s better our enemies believe that our soldiers and weapon systems are always ready like in the movies.

[@cpi3267]

@@jcnikoley lol cope

[@polarzxo1530]

0 opsec

[@patrickrannou1278]

I agree. It's not the 1940s anymore. Nowadays there are THOUSANDS of planes flying everywhere all the time. It's getting kinda "crowded" out there lol.

[@alexfortin7209]

There have been effective defense against missile attacks since the 1980s but the real difference is that the threat was badly underestimated until the 1982 Falklands War.

[@baldieman64]

HMS Sheffield and the merchant ship Atlantic Conveyor were the only two ships sunk by missiles in the Falklands War. HMS Ardent, HMS Antelope, HMS Coventry and RFA Sir Galahad were all destroyed by bombs. The danger of stand-off missiles was nonetheless very, very obvious after the Sheffield.

[@anuvisraa5786]

@@baldieman64 HMS Glamorgan was a County-class destroyerOn 12 June 1982 an MM38 Exocet missile was fired from an improvised shore-based launcher as she was steaming at about 20 knots (37 km/h) 18 nautical miles (33 km) offshore.it hit the deck coaming at an angle, near the port Seacat missile launcher, skidded along the deck and exploded, making a 10 ft × 15 ft (3 m × 5 m) hole in the hangar deck and a 5 ft × 4 ft (1.5 m × 1.2 m) hole in the galley below

[@markdavis2475]

I'm sure I read that an Exocet was intercepted a 4" shell. Total fluke, can't remember the vessel.

[@alexfortin7209]

@@markdavis2475 A total of 5 air launched Exocet scored 3 hits with 2 ships sunk. Another 2 Jerry rigged scored 1 hit. So the total is 4 hits out of 7 launches with 2 sunk ships and 1 damaged. This is a downright scary result considering the Royal Navy’s competence and professionalism. There were discussions about the viability of surface ships exact like what is going on now.

[@hemaccabe4292]

Love that Phalanx and your pronunciation of, "Marietta"

[@II__argo__II]

Shout out andrew! This was a great episode :)

[@worldsokayestcatdad6798]

I have serious doubt as to the capacity of the patriot missile to engage threats up to an altitude of 40 THOUSAND kilometers, given that the geosynchronous orbit of earth is at 35 thousand kilometers. Pretty sure he meant 40 kilometer altitude, since the Karman line, the edge of space, is 100 kilometers above sea level.

[@bryanst.martin7134]

He doesn't fact check his presentations before uploading. I catch him on lots of goofs. At least I'm not relying on him for my safety. ;-)

[@chiguireespacialespecial]

cloriiue effect

[@xavermooshammer4816]

in the West German army we had equivalent things back in Cold war times to defend the frontline. The Gepard, twin 35mm guns, range up to 6km, mounted on a Leopard 1 chassis. They were retired around 2010 but now are transfered to Ukraine. 5 are already in operation, 20 more promised "as soon as ammo can be sourced". They work nicely against ground targets, too...

[@huwhitecavebeast1972]

We need to stay tf out of Ukraine.

[@superschrotty1573]

the equivalent of the German Army is MANTIS

[@lqr824]

It's that "as soon as ammo can be sourced" point that is the strong point of US procurement I think. The systems aren't necessarily better than near-peers and allies, but the logistics train is. The Abrams is an old tank and I bet beat in most ways, if you compare the tanks. But other countries buy weapons without budgeting for the training, supply, and repair. The US mostly does pay attention to that stuff.

[@dyeske]

It's Martin Marietta. It's attached to Dobbins ARB in Marietta, GA

[@jona.scholt4362]

Cappy's classic pronunciations continued in this video with Martin Marietta being called "Martin Martia" and the A-7 Corsair being called the A-7 Cross-hair. I love watching to see what vehicle/aircraft/program will get the special "Cappy" treatment

[@benwilson7869]

A7 Crosshair?

[@rayven1749]

I noticed that too

[@thegoldeneagle9890]

The British were forced to use the phalanx ciws against missiles after the Falkland war mainly because of HMS Sheffield

[@garethfairclough8715]

Pretty much. The ships were "fitted for, but not with" and that's something which has caught us out time & time again!

[@thegoldeneagle9890]

@@garethfairclough8715 caught the British out row many themes from budget cuts

[@Tkidddd]

They were also forced to use a couple of their luxury liners.

[@thegoldeneagle9890]

@@Tkidddd they were not luxury but were cruise ships

[@Tkidddd]

@@thegoldeneagle9890 cruise ships with no luxuries

[@PeklyCZ]

About goalkeeper reference. Dutch CIWS is named Goalkeeper and insted of M61 Vulcan it has Gau-8 Avenger (30mm 7-barrels)

[@labrat2069]

Task & Purpose!

[@ralphmarkasher]

Cappy, did you know the Army mounted the Vulcan to an M113 as a close-in ADA weapon?

[@kswis]

Excellent video

[@thomasglessner6067]

Great video. Thanks for researching the cost of these systems.

[@kevinlove4356]

This is a good system for a low-intensity war as demonstrated in the video. Because in a low-intensity war, the number of incoming rounds is limited, and spending thousands of dollars to shoot down a $100 mortar round is OK. But in a high-intensity war, such as is currently being fought in Ukraine, the enemy will possess mortar platoons and artillery batteries that will fire a large number of rounds at the same time. If the rate of fire is 4,000 RPM and the weapon has 1,500 rounds, then that is only 22.5 seconds of firing before the weapon needs to be reloaded. My mortar platoon can fire for a lot longer than that. K40 592 576 Captain (retired) Kevin C. Love, CD The Royal Regiment of Canada

[@bjkarana]

Sounds like it's more effective for covering bases and other critical infrastructure, than something that would be useful for the front lines.

[@kevinlove4356]

@@bjkarana The problem is that with such high-value targets, it is worthwhile for the enemy to fire enough rounds to swamp the capability of the system. A good example is the naval version. An aircraft carrier is so expensive with so many sailors aboard that it is worthwhile to fire a large number of missiles at it simultaneously.

[@jurzyjohner432]

Great system, but my observation of it looks like it not super direct and seems like its missing its target after then hits it after like over a thousand rounds. There looks like it needs improvements to save bullets and be more direct with less shots.

[@libfab1]

Most of the scenes he put up were CGI. Real world it's a short burst, around two seconds or so.

[@kubagra456]

I like how people are now calling Arma 3 game a "CGI"

[@manbaby9166]

Some of the footage is from a game. If you watch real footage of it taking out missiles you will understand why it’s used.

[@ItsJoKeZ]

@@libfab1 CGI 😂 it is a videogame that is years and years old.

[@mikehopper1025]

It tracks not only the target but outbound bullets as well. It then constantly corrects aim point. A few seconds of firing drop pretty much anything. Some of these incidents he cites are missing relevant information that generally points to operator error or maintenance/repair failures.

[@11ccom1]

Good stuff.

[@nerdfatha]

Thanks for this video. I have been fascinated by the Phalanx system since my friend on the Enterprise carrier called it the R2D2 gun.

[@shardsofaperture]

I was thinking, you really are an average infantryman but now I'm starting to wonder if you aren't just a super advanced AI (you know the ones with the robot voices that do far less well researched videos). Have we been fooled? Also - pronounced Martin Mary-ET-TA - think city in Southern Ohio

[@Taskandpurpose]

yeah I'm completely not familiar with that company at all , thanks for the heads up

[@kwinzman]

Downvoted for not giving the range in meters instead of yards.

[@kwinzman]

​@@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket Meters are American as well.

[@frednugent2310]

I've always visualized a giant blanket getting ripped when hearing the Vulcan cannon spitting out rounds.

[@mrgunn2726]

G-WIS, I learned something! Thanks Cappy!

[@GIJose-mw9zy]

I was part of a Navy detachment called Task Force Hurricane that utilized the CRAM in Iraq(2007-2008). I was an operator on the LCS. Our kill percentage at that time was over 90%. It was good at what it what asked to do. We turned over the system to the Army in mid 2008.

[@bocadelcieloplaya3852]

could the c-ram take out small drones as well? Like foot long drones?

[@GIJose-mw9zy]

@@bocadelcieloplaya3852 I believe so. We shot down mortars, scud rockets and even actively tracked our own helicopters that wandered into our AOR. As well as other aircraft.

[@drfelren]

Seeing a Phalanx CWIS camouflaged as Elizabeth was the funniest thing I've seen all day... and I've seen Russians doing strategic temporary retreats today... Quack!

[@clermeil]

2:45 Martin Marietta as in Mary-et-ah.

[@billbrockman779]

It’s Mar-e-etta for the pronunciation of the name Marietta. AF Plant 6 is in Marietta, GA. They build C-130’s now.

[@zeebaa6]

Inf afg my bunk was a few spaces down from the speaker outside. My favorite was waking up to a "ballistic missle incoming" drill warning. Fantastic

[@bobrat]

Love the hoodie

[@jathalan]

I love your videos, even if you can't pronounce words. Corsair becomes Crosshair, pneumatically becomes mnemonically, and others lol.

[@notatakennick]

6:01 That is some next level evading skills right there