Houthi Red Sea Blockade

[GK .Dundas]

It turns out that guns aren't as obsolete as the pundits seem to think.

 

[AmmoTech90]

It turns out that guns aren't as obsolete as the pundits seem to think.

 

[Lumber]

It turns out that guns aren't as obsolete as the pundits seem to think.

Most naval guns are actually intended for AA warfare. For the smaller calibers like the 57mm and 76mm, it's actually their primary intended use, and the 127mm guns are capable as an AA weapon as well.

Missiles were first being used against drones primarily because (in my opinion) of fear and inexperience. However, missiles are god dman expensive. Short range SAMs like ESSM and Sea Ceptor aren't THAT much cheaper than SM2s either. However, ships started to reliably engage drones with their guns. This happened both on purpose (choosing to hold back missiles) and by "accident" (missiles not working or missing their target) leading to successful engagements with guns. Once navies realized they could successfully and reliably engage drones with medium caliber guns, they could hold back their SAMs for either anti ship missiles or higher-altitude and longer range drones.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Most naval guns are actually intended for AA warfare. For the smaller calibers like the 57mm and 76mm, it's actually their primary intended use, and the 127mm guns are capable as an AA weapon as well.

Missiles were first being used against drones primarily because (in my opinion) of fear and inexperience. However, missiles are god dman expensive. Short range SAMs like ESSM and Sea Ceptor aren't THAT much cheaper than SM2s either. However, ships started to reliably engage drones with their guns. This happened both on purpose (choosing to hold back missiles) and by "accident" (missiles not working or missing their target) leading to successful engagements with guns. Once navies realized they could successfully and reliably engage drones with medium caliber guns, they could hold back their SAMs for either anti ship missiles or higher-altitude and longer range drones.

Coincidence, this just came up on my feed.

 

[Lumber]

Coincidence, this just came up on my feed.

Would've been a lot cooler to see the fire control video of the rounds impacting!

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I understand that the Houthi are using swarm attack to deplete the missile stock onboard and send in the more dangerous missiles in the 2nd wave. I expect more guns to appear on ships and more foward reloading capacity to be developed. Not to mention the size of "war stocks" are being revised upward significantly.

 

[OldSolduer]

Does the Phalanx gun work on drones?

 

[Lumber]

Does the Phalanx gun work on drones?

Depends on the type and size of the drone. Most drones out there are treated just like any other AAW problem. It's the smalle "micro" drones that might be a problem depending on the type and version of CIWS. Fortunately those types of drones aren't a huge issue in open water. Their range is too short, they have poorer C2, and are more suseptible to heavy winds. This micro UAVs are more of a force protection problem for when ships are in Harbour.

 

[Lumber]

I understand that the Houthi are using swarm attack to deplete the missile stock onboard and send in the more dangerous missiles in the 2nd wave. I expect more guns to appear on ships and more foward reloading capacity to be developed. Not to mention the size of "war stocks" are being revised upward significantly.

Forward reloading capacity has been proven several times. There's a news story of a frigate, can't remember which one, reloading ESSM near Darwin. But to be clear by "forward reload" we are still talking about reloading alongside. No navy does reloading of missiles "at sea". For the USN, they have so many ships it's probably quicker and simpler to simply "cycle" units between home ports and the OA, bringing in full loads, than to try and "reload" a forward deploy unit.

 

[brihard]

I wonder how much longer before we see operationally deployed lasers used to splash drones? It would seem to be an ideal solution against drone swarms.

Forward reloading capacity has been proven several times. There's a news story of a frigate, can't remember which one, reloading ESSM near Darwin. But to be clear by "forward reload" we are still talking about reloading alongside. No navy does reloading of missiles "at sea". For the USN, they have so many ships it's probably quicker and simpler to simply "cycle" units between home ports and the OA, bringing in full loads, than to try and "reload" a forward deploy unit.

VLS replenishment at sea is being developed and has had a preliminary empty canister test back in the fall. Presumably this is something they’ll be working on quite actively.

https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/3935108/navy-demonstrates-first-at-sea-reloading-of-vertical-launching-system/

 

[daftandbarmy]

Battleship diplomacy continues.

Yemen’s Houthis vow to continue attacks after more than 70 killed in US airstrikes on port​

https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/18/middleeast/dozens-killed-us-airstrikes-yemen-intl-hnk/index.html

 

[Lumber]

I wonder how much longer before we see operationally deployed lasers used to splash drones? It would seem to be an ideal solution against drone swarms.

VLS replenishment at sea is being developed and has had a preliminary empty canister test back in the fall. Presumably this is something they’ll be working on quite actively.

https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/3935108/navy-demonstrates-first-at-sea-reloading-of-vertical-launching-system/

There are a lot of quirks to work out before lasers become a reliable AA weapon. Against drone swarms, it's just not feasible at the moment. It takes way too long to burn through and destroy a single drone, and adding more powerful lasers won't solve that issues because of "blooming" . Basically, the lazer also vaporizes the air around the drone, creating a cloud around the target that attenuates the laser. Something similar will occur if you are operating in fog, sandstorms, or rain. If you had multiple lasers hitting the same drone, that would get around the blooming issue, but not the weather issue, but then you would need either multiple lasers on one ship (meaning more power generation and less room for other weapons), or you would need close coordination of laser fire from multiple platforms, which is not easily done, especially against a "swarm". Plus, all you really need to do protect drones from laser fire is to paint them with mirrors

 

[HavokFour]

There are a lot of quirks to work out before lasers become a reliable AA weapon. Against drone swarms, it's just not feasible at the moment. It takes way too long to burn through and destroy a single drone, and adding more powerful lasers won't solve that issues because of "blooming" . Basically, the lazer also vaporizes the air around the drone, creating a cloud around the target that attenuatee the laser. Something similar will. Occur if you are operating in fog, sandstorms, or rain. If you had multiple lasers hitting the same drone, that would get around the blooming issue, but not the weather issue, but then you would need either multiple lasers on one ship (meaning more power generation and less room for other weapons), or you would need close coordination of laser fire from multiple platforms, which is not easily done, especially against a "swarm". Plus, all you really need to do protect drones from laser fire is to paint them with mirrors

Thales' RapidDestroyer (RFDEW) enters the ring, and what I believe will come out on top over lasers vs drones. Even cheaper (~$0.18 CAD/shot) than lasers to just microwave your target.

 

[Lumber]

Thales' RapidDestroyer (RFDEW) enters the ring, and what I believe will come out on top over lasers vs drones. Even cheaper (~$0.18 CAD/shot) than lasers to just microwave your target.

The limitation of microwave weapons is that they can be easily defeated by simply wrapping the drone's "sensitive systems" in a Faraday cage, just like your microwave oven is. So, this technology is really only useful against mini and micro drones. Great for land based targets, but in an anti-ship role we're talking about swarms of larger drones, which could have their internals protected against microwave weapons.

 

[KevinB]

Thales' RapidDestroyer (RFDEW) enters the ring, and what I believe will come out on top over lasers vs drones. Even cheaper (~$0.18 CAD/shot) than lasers to just microwave your target.

You need both kinetic and non kinetic energy defensive weapons in the stable, the same way you need other non energy weapons as well.

Lasers offer a good solution for some targets, but MW and other energy options are good for others.

While you could harden a target against Microwave and other EW methods, it then becomes a fairly decent sized target that won’t be a swarm and can be interdicted via either laser or conventional direct fire systems

LRads and other ultra sonic systems can also be used against drones, the only issue in that most of those where design originally as less lethal weapons, and the requirements for them to damage electronics put them heavily into the lethal range.

 

[YZT580]

I wonder how much longer before we see operationally deployed lasers used to splash drones? It would seem to be an ideal solution against drone swarms.

VLS replenishment at sea is being developed and has had a preliminary empty canister test back in the fall. Presumably this is something they’ll be working on quite actively.

https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/3935108/navy-demonstrates-first-at-sea-reloading-of-vertical-launching-system/

from what I have read, Ukraine is getting one ready as we speak with a range of 5 km or so. The Napoleonic navies used to spread nettings to keep the rigging from striking the crews working below. Would a modernized version work to snare the size of explosives carried by drones or even to snag the drones themselves?

 

[childs56]

It turns out that guns aren't as obsolete as the pundits seem to think.

Funny you would say that. A few years ago there was discussion on here about guns and that they were past their time. I guess we should be building fast cruisers and or battle ships with lots of air defense assets including a but load of guns.

 

[GK .Dundas]

You really don't need a gun ......until you REALLY need a gun.
Missile and rockets are the current Shiney objects that get all the attention. But they come with a couple of limitations. Both financially and in the amount of space both above and below deck they take up.
The British were on the way to removing their deck guns they competed for space with other systems and it was felt that in the future there'd be no need for such old fashioned foolishness.
And then the Falklands war happened and they began relearning all sorts of painful truths and not just the ones involving shipboard artillery.

 

[daftandbarmy]

You really don't need a gun ......until you REALLY need a gun.
Missile and rockets are the current Shiney objects that get all the attention. But they come with a couple of limitations. Both financially and in the amount of space both above and below deck they take up.
The British were on the way to removing their deck guns they competed for space with other systems and it was felt that in the future there'd be no need for such old fashioned foolishness.
And then the Falklands war happened and they began relearning all sorts of painful truths and not just the ones involving shipboard artillery.

Sea Wolf goes 'clunk'

 

[OldSolduer]

It turns out that guns aren't as obsolete as the pundits seem to think.

Neither are tanks. Remember that debacle?