The BAE Systems 127mm Mk 45 Mod 4 gun in action

More details in this article about the gun that will equip the RN's Type 26 frigates
www.navylookout.com/in-focus-...
Footage: US Navy

[@jth877]

Nearly 80 years later they have almost the same amount of sailors feeding the gun and the same projectile/case format as the 5"/38.

[@Phil451]

They're just loading the ready ammo

[@rachdarastrix5251]

That just means they found something that works beyond need of improvement.

[@thelittlestmig3394]

5"38 had more men in the turret alone than these guys have for whole system. 5"38 had around 15 men in the turret, few in the powder magazine, a dozen in the upper handling room and a number in lower handling room to prepare and pass the ammunition to the turret crew.

[@wilsonle61]

Actually, that gun is 1/2 of MK-42 which was a dual drum dual feed design firing twice the 5" 54 rounds per minute. But, good point! Accepting only having one drum below decks looks like my old MK-42s on the DDG-2 class as far as sailors loading it are concerned.

[@willcall9431]

As a 3’50 mk 33 mod 1 and 2 GMG I can say things have come a long ways. 😁

[@nathanmarshall2826]

Maybe explain that Loading system would love to know more on how that works ☺️

[@RJM1011]

Two part loading due to the size of it.

[@nathanmarshall2826]

@@RJM1011 Thanks for the explanation much Appreciated what happens to the Empty shell's on deck then I assume they store them below deck somewhere?

[@RJM1011]

@@nathanmarshall2826 Yes they would be saved but some do get lost over the side from time to time there's a few just off the Dorset coast on the sea bed from when that was used as a range in WW2 and other. Thank you

[@ezOqekuRitusohI]

Need more matts

[@eddie9027]

under counter battery our GMG1 threw MT53 into rapid continuous fire and went for coffee, lol, 120 rounds expended, no casualties.

[@andrewhayes7055]

It would be nice to see the other end ie a target being hit.

[@hueytran9691]

I find the way the shells are ejected kinda amusing.

[@rachdarastrix5251]

127 second video. Nice sense of humor for the filmer on the USS Mask.

[@daniels2250]

Can you shoot with a scope?

[@charlestellis7021]

Had three of them fall on my foot during rough seas and action stations ouch, 56 lbs a piece 😏

[@charlestellis7021]

@@Future-Preps35 hello to you, it was the 4.5" twin barrel, and I've been retired for the last 20 years from the service, they were on the Type 12 frigates

[@mitchbarredo3990]

Dont you wear steel toe boots?

[@seansean9675]

Missed the protective mats every single time though lol

[@ThomasSteffien]

pretty fast rate of fire for a 5" gun

[@seansean9675]

@@Future-Preps35 same gun

[@Cobra-King3]

About 3 seconds between shots, so about 20 rounds/minute

[@yeetusfinitus49]

Ever heard of the otomelara 127? Its the same caliber with a signifcaantly Higher firerate

[@alessandromazzini7026]

OTO Melara 127 better

[@extremathule982]

OTO Melara 127 more accurate and better rate of fire (ca. 120/min)

[@Rat-nl1xe]

What's the biggest gun you can have?

[@DanielsPolitics1]

I believe the US had 16 inch guns, which worked well. Japan had an 18.1 inch, and Britain an 18 inch. I’m not sure either were a particularly good gun. Both ships to carry the Japanese gun were sunk by aircraft, and the British gun was removed from the intended ship and moved to a monitor, so we’ll never know.

[@johnnytyler5685]

This IS the biggest naval gun currently in NATO service. 127mm projectile.

[@xxnightdriverxx9576]

​​@@DanielsPolitics1 the japanese 18.1 inch gun outclassed the US 16 inch gun. Both had similar armor penetration, but the japanese gun had almost twice the explosive filler inside it, so it would have caused more damage after a penetration. However, it had a longer fuze delay, so a longer delay between hitting something and exploding, so if it hit thin sections of a ship (like some parts of the superstructure) it possibly would have detonated outside. At the same time, this longer fuze delay would have likely caused more damage if the shell hit a thick area of the ship, for example it would have allowed the shell to travel deeper into the mid section of the hull, into the magazines or machinery rooms. The British 18 inch gun is outclassed in all aspects by the other two, however the British gun was a WW1 era gun, while the others were WW2 era guns, so this isn't surprising. It also doesn't diminish the power of the British 18 inch gun, because when you compare it to other WW1 era guns, it outclasses then all (though those are all 16 inch guns).

[@atlaslesueur171]

whats this if it cant fly 20miles whats the point?

[@apolloaero]

It does go about 20 miles, what are you trying to say?

[@josephlezano7691]

❤️🙌👏👏👍

[@christophertam4017]

470 damage per hit

[@MD-xb5jt]

Our 5 inch popgun, compared to the monsters we used to have in WW2. Disappointing for sure.

[@jasonmote9529]

Still a great gun mind

[@alphasixfive1658]

BAE?

[@gabban7883]

This is Oto Melara!

[@valerianocuomo996]

No,this is shit, oto melara is the top

[@xxnightdriverxx9576]

No it's not

[@rael5469]

There are LOTS of videos of these guns firing. How about a video that shows them hitting the target? What's the use of wasting ammo unless you are training the gunners for accuracy at the same time?????

[@phil20_20]

So,... the U.S. will equip the mighty 57mm! 😅😂

[@ancientbriton8262]

Not as fast as the Royal Navy 4.5 inch Mk 8

[@danhaines9056]

It never works this it the odd time it's not jamming

[@jedisaki730]

Do you know what part jams? I've never heard of a case of one jamming.

[@iandoughty7142]

Thats American

[@elnesti1890]

How many km can this round go ???

[@apolloaero]

37 km since it's mod 4

[@willw8011]

That ship is too well designed to be British... it is a DDG 51 class. United Defense Systems created the mk 45. BAE bought United Defense. The US Government should have never allowed the Limeys to buy it, though. If the US Navy was smart, then it would go with a 155mm, instead of the 5 inch (127mm), so it would be more efficient.

[@Numtalegau]

What´s the point of having a caliber gun higher than 127mm on a destroyer/frigate? Battlecruisers are a thing of the past and 127mm is more than enough for the intended role of the gun.

[@willw8011]

@@Numtalegau The 155mm is used by the US Army and other NATO land forces. The US Army has millions of the dumb-shells... well maybe less due to giving Ukraine about 500,000 155mm shells. Why would the Navy want a 127mm and need to develop similar shells as the 155mm? The Navy has a guided 127mm, which costs a fortune, because the production is limited due to it only being a Navy shell. The US Army has 2 guided 155mm shells and those cost less due to the production numbers. Similarly, the DDG 1000 class has 2 of the 155mm guns, but it will be taken out due to the ridiculous cost of the shells, because the Navy did not want to use the same 155mm as the US Army.

[@willw8011]

@@Future-Preps35 The DDG 1000 class had a different 155mm. The Navy wanted a 155mm that could not use the same shells as the US Army. The Navy wanted to have a 100+km range out of the 155mm on the DDG 1000 class. After spending about a billion dollars on R&D, the Navy canceled buying the few thousand shells due to cost. The US Navy spent over 600 million dollars to attempt to make a 5 inch GPS or Laser guided shell, just to cancel it due to the very high cost. The last I heard, Raytheon is researching using the same guidance components from the 155mm Excalibur within the 127mm (5 inch) gun. Interestingly, the Navy wanted 100km range shell and the US Army just developed a 90km 155 gun with an experimental shell. This new shell and gun will be part of an upgrade package for the M109 in the future. The whole thing is ridiculous, just like the Navy, Air Force, and Army having different research projects for hypersonic missiles. BTW, the whole extreme range 155mm navy gun requirement was ridiculous too. You know what the USMC did... they chained a M142 HIMARS to the deck of a ship and fired GMLRS rockets to hit land targets. When the GMLRS-ER rockets go into full production, then that is a 150km range. I have no idea why the Navy is so damned dumb, but it is.

[@robertf3479]

The MK45 5"/54cal and 62cal are DUAL PURPOSE guns. Any new 152 or 155mm gun (6" or larger) would have to be designed from scratch to be Semi Auto, Dual Purpose and have a high rate of fire. The last "new gun" developed for the Navy was the 8"/55cal (203mm) Semi Auto mount tested in USS Hull (DD 945.) While successful the program was abandoned after the first shipboard tests due to costs. To my knowledge this mount did not have an anti-air or dual purpose capability.

[@willw8011]

@@robertf3479 The US Navy already designed the Advanced Gun System (AGS) in 155mm, but the USN did not make the system compatible with the 155mm used by NATO ground forces. The AGS could fire 10 rounds per minute. The only real change required would be to manufacture it for the standard 155mm used by land forces. The US Army and USMC are also currently independently developing extreme range 155mm shells. The US Army also has a self loading 155mm, which it developed for the XM2001. The US Army also has a self loading 155mm upgrade for the M109, which will soon enter service. There are other much more effective CIWS than a 5 inch (127mm). However, upscaling an air burst CIWS 155mm would not be that big of a cost. Usually it is much easier to upscale a shell than to down scale.

[@alessandromazzini7026]

OTO Melara 127 make this look slow af

[@valerianocuomo996]

Oto melara 127 60 COMPAT vulcano, 76 60 super rapid,the top,this is shitbull