CROWS remote weapons system

[tomahawk6]

CROWS keeps the gunner under armor, rather than exposed in the turret. Operating CROWS is very similar to a video game, as most of our young soldiers play them, they dont have any problem scanning 360 views around the vehicle. The cost is $200,000 per system and can be used with the 50 cal, 25mm and various other systems. By the end of the year there will be 1000 in service, but the army wants 9000 but production is only 15 a month.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2005/aug/army_explores.htm

http://www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/printDS/61956.php

 

[George Wallace]

Very interesting system.  Looks good, but is very Software and Hardware 'intensive'.  Doesn't look like there is any "Manual Backup" as to when or if the sensors or system becomes disabled by enemy fire, could they system be fired manually?  It looks like the remote system, does not have the capability of a man actually manning the weapon, should there be a software or hardware failure, as there is no hatch available to do so. 

 

[tomahawk6]

It does have a manual/emergency operating capability. Not sure how that works. The system is operational in Iraq and this doesnt seem to be a big problem.

 

[Kirkhill]

Just looking at the picture of troop/platoon of these vehicles on the link you provided you have to consider the thoughts running through the head of the single/solitary designated, turretless, CROWless air gunner.  Or is he the Platoon Commander?

 

[tomahawk6]

There arent enough CROWS for every vehicle in Iraq so alot of people still have to physically stand in the turret. In the picture you cited looks like a photo op, something the CROWS gunner cant do. ;D
During operations the gunner is at name tag defilade which minimizes exposure and enables the gunner to get back under armor in the event of explosion.
Or better yet what does the Iraqi thinks when he see's the CROWS in operation but doesnt see anyone ? There are stories that the Iraqi's think its more US "magic".

 

[vonGarvin]

I wonder how this compares to our Remote Weapon Stations on the TLAV (formerly known as "M113") and the Kongsberg on the APV going into service in A'stan shortly.

 

[tomahawk6]

This pic gives a great view of the gunner.

 

[Kirkhill]

There are stories that the Iraqi's think its more US "magic".

Evil djinni. 

As to the gunner - slight of frame with well developed thumb muscles - the perfect modern soldier.

 

[BernDawg]

Just to think all that "nofriendo" training hasn't gone to waste.  ;D

 

[ArmyRick]

Why didn't the US just use more kongsberg weapons stations on hummers instead of CROWS? The Kongsberg is already in service with stryker vehicles.

 

[yogi]

Canada bought the Oerlikon/Rafael Overhead Weapon Station for the M113 TLAV - unstatbilzed and only 7.62 mm GPMG

Next bought the Kongsberg RWS (same as the US Kongsberg/CROWS II) - stabilzed, multi weapon capable

Next bought the Rheinmetall RWS due to "made in Canada" - same cap as the Kongsberg

Most vehicle makers are putting protected hatches behind the RWS for emergency RWSaccess/RWS use.

Most RWS have revisionary fire control, re-cocking/clearing mechanisms for manual back up ops.

RAW

 

[Bzzliteyr]

Wow, drudged up from the dead.. nice....

Welcome to Army.ca Yogi!!

 

[ArmyRick]

Nothing wrong with resurrecting the dead.

 

[Trinity]

Nothing wrong with resurrecting the dead.

Jesus did it once or twice  ;D

 

[Kat Stevens]

cylons do it every week.