Confirmation of some aspects BAE Bofors 57mm

[Lucasnz]

I've been researching the Bofors 57mm, but have been unable to confirm a couple of aspects.

All versions have a 120 round ready use magazine in the gun house, but a cutaway of the Mk 110 version for the USCG shows an intermediate magazine in the gunhouse.

A couple of web sites state that the Mk III version holds 1000 rounds in the gun house.

Can anyone confirm for the Mk II version...

1. The total number of rounds in the gun house taking into account the intermediate and ready use.
2. Whether as reported the Mk 57 has to goto 70 degrees to reload the ready use.

I looked at a number of sites including Nav Weapons. These are about the only two questions I can't get a satisfactory answer on. Links to other sites of info more than welcome.

Thanks in advance

 

[Systems Adict]

I've posted a couple of related links on page 4 of the CIWS thread, here in the navy forum.

.http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5591&page=4


Hopefully these will help a bit. I'll go back & ask the question of a gunbuster or two that I know that have worked with the Bofor/BAE 57mm.

Systems Adict

 

[Systems Adict]

A couple of web sites state that the Mk III version holds 1000 rounds in the gun house.

Can anyone confirm for the Mk II version...

1.The total number of rounds in the gun house taking into account the intermediate and ready use.

2.Whether as reported the Mk 57 has to goto 70 degrees to reload the ready use.

Having re-read your quote, & checked the websites, I can understand why you may be a little confused.

Point 1. : As documented in many places on the web, the Gun is designed to carry 120 rounds within the capola.

The BAE/Bofors site has Technical data/specification, including a "statement" on the weight of the Gun including the 1,000 rounds (I'm assuming that means LCS will carry this in the magazine, not that the Gun will carry 1,000 rounds inside it.)

Point 2. : I've not been able to confirm this fact, so can't comment on it.


Hope this helps

Systems Adict

 

[Lucasnz]

For those interested in the capability of the BAE Bofors 57mm this video clip gives a demostration in shore fire, small boat capabilities, along with an internal video of the firing process.

http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/future-weapons/weapons/zone2/mk110/mk110.html

 

[Systems Adict]

Excellent clip !

I especially love how the gun rattles off a 50 round burst, emptying the magazine, then the barrel goes vertical as the magazine is reloaded to fire the 40 round burst, all in less than a minute.

The demonstration shown in the clips prove that for a small gun, it's still versatile. Link it with a good tracking & command system, with some well trained / drilled operators & you'll have an excellent all round NGS/AA/CIWS/point defence weapon.


Systems Adict

:dance

 

[Lucasnz]

Excellent clip !

all round NGS/AA/CIWS/point defence weapon.


Systems Adict

:dance

I know some of the promotional material shows the 57mm been used in the NGS role, but I would have thought that it was only suitable for visable bench front targets.

 

[Systems Adict]

...Beach front Targets? C'mon it's a 57mm for Pete's sake, not a 14" shell from one of the Iowa class...

But consider this, km is approx. 6 Nautical Miles (yes, I know that the max range is km, but 10 is easier to work with !!). If the Gun is fitted to a vessel about 90m long, weighing in at about 2500 GR Tonnes, it's highly likely that the mast isn't gonna be more than 20M above the waterline.

At 6 miles that's a hard target to see with the naked eye, especially on either a very sunny day or a highly dull / overcast day ! !

Add to that the ability to dump 50 rounds in less than a minute on the same target?? All that would be left is "soup".....


Systems Adict

:ar15

 

[Lucasnz]

...Beach front Targets? C'mon it's a 57mm for Pete's sake, not a 14" shell from one of the Iowa class...

But consider this, km is approx. 6 Nautical Miles (yes, I know that the max range is km, but 10 is easier to work with !!). If the Gun is fitted to a vessel about 90m long, weighing in at about 2500 GR Tonnes, it's highly likely that the mast isn't gonna be more than 20M above the waterline.

At 6 miles that's a hard target to see with the naked eye, especially on either a very sunny day or a highly dull / overcast day ! !

Add to that the ability to dump 50 rounds in less than a minute on the same target?? All that would be left is "soup".....


Systems Adict

:ar15

I wasn't really thinking of targets like bunkers etc, but some of the reading I've been doing indicates that the USN is using the 57mm for close NSFS on the LCS. In terms of NSFS 76mm has always been considered the min so using a 57mm has tickled my interest, given the lack of weight and explosive power etc. Against soft targets airburst would be effective. The more I read on NSFS the more interesting it becomes - One article I've indicates that the 127mm is only effective on soft targets and lacks effective hitting power (Thesis written by a US Marine officer)

 

[Systems Adict]

NSFS - Naval Surface Fire Support ?? An FLA (rather than a TLA) meaning NGS...? All amounts to the same thing, using a Naval Mount to put either covering fire or directed fire onto shore.

Like I said previously, the thought of putting 50, 57mm HE shells onto a shore based target wouldn't leave a lot behind. After all if the HE warhead equates to say 1.5 Kg of explosives, that's 75 Kg of HE your putting into a target, that would certainly ruin your day !

If you look at the promo clip again from Discovery Channel, you can see how effective they are against a concrete bunker.

The downside of the clip is that you don't know how far away the mount was from the target, as I feel that it could have a slight impact on the outcome (further away = chance of being less accurate), especially with things like barometric pressure, precipitation & wind-age.

Carrying on with your comments, I have a feeling that someone sat down & worked out the figures for LCS & realised that there was a fair amount of weight saving to be had utilising the 57mm, over say Oto Melara 76mm, which is used by the Coast Guard cutters.

I know I've waxed lyrical elsewhere in the forum about fleet continuity for spares / training, etc. but the impact on the design of LCS, due to factors such as services, mount foot-print & storage space for the ammunition, I would say fully justify the choice.

Systems Adict

 

[Mercurius]

According to Jane's, the Mk II has four ammunition racks in the turret, each containing 32 rounds. That suggests a total capacity of 128 rounds rather than the widely-cited 120.

A 20-round cassette transfers ammunition from the hoist to the racks, and the gun must be elevated to 77 degrees to allow this.

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

 

[Lucasnz]

According to Jane's, the Mk II has four ammunition racks in the turret, each containing 32 rounds. That suggests a total capacity of 128 rounds rather than the widely-cited 120.

A 20-round cassette transfers ammunition from the hoist to the racks, and the gun must be elevated to 77 degrees to allow this.

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

A BAE Document I have states 120 rounds in the turret. Overall I think the 57mm is a good weapon; the biggest draw back I see appears to be its inability to provide addtional ammunition to the turret while firing and the length of time taken to reload (BAE quotes 4 minutes).

 

[perfectgeneral]

BAE bofors 57mm CIGS

A BAE Document I have states 120 rounds in the turret. Overall I think the 57mm is a good weapon; the biggest draw back I see appears to be its inability to provide addtional ammunition to the turret while firing and the length of time taken to reload (BAE quotes 4 minutes).

While the discovery clip shows a full reload in less than a minute, I'll bet that seems too long in a combat situation. Having said that, I'd love to see these fitted to all classes in the RN (including auxillaries).:uk

 

[Lucasnz]

FYI

Oto Melera now have developed a new version of 76mm ammo to counter the BAE Bofors 3P.

76mm 3A Plus Fuse
• Proximity Action (Gated, Anti Missile, Air Defence, Anti Surface)
• Proximity Action ( Proximity with Impact priority)
• Time Action: (Volume Saturation, Air Burst)
• Impact Action: (Fast Activation, Delayed Activation)
• Proximity Action (Standard)

BAE Bofors 57mm 3P Fuse
• Gated proximity mode (air defence).
• Gated proximity mode with impact priority (air defence, large targets).
• Time mode (small fast, manoeuvring surface targets and concealed on-shore targets).
• Impact mode (surface targets).
• Armour piercing mode (armoured surface targets).
• Proximity mode (default mode).

I think the new ammunition by Melera matches the capability of the 3P, with the exception of the Armour piercing mode.

 

[MrQuintus]

While the discovery clip shows a full reload in less than a minute, I'll bet that seems too long in a combat situation. Having said that, I'd love to see these fitted to all classes in the RN (including auxillaries).:uk

where exactly would they put them, the 57mm mount is a bit big for use as a phalanx replacement, that's why BAe has the 40mm 3p system (which if combined with the DARDO super rapid twin mount system would be truely stunning)

 

[Sea Toby]

While many see the Bofors 57-mm gun as a downgrade from the Oto 76-mm gun, quite the contrary the USCG sees the Bofors as an upgrade with their new cutters... Interesting...

 

[Lucasnz]

While many see the Bofors 57-mm gun as a downgrade from the Oto 76-mm gun, quite the contrary the USCG sees the Bofors as an upgrade with their new cutters... Interesting...

I've read that the USCG like the ease of maintenance on the 57mm. There was a power point presentation on the web that outlined the USCG roles in a number of conflicts since WWII. I found it extermely informative. The 57mm seems to fit the roles in the power point more than the 76mm.

 

[Todjaeger]

While many see the Bofors 57-mm gun as a downgrade from the Oto 76-mm gun, quite the contrary the USCG sees the Bofors as an upgrade with their new cutters... Interesting...

Keep in mind though that the USCG is the USCG, not the USN. a 57 mm cannon would do quite well in policing roles vs. civilian vessels, as the cutter can get within a few miles of the target. It is not as well suited for situations where longer-ranged fire, either against land-based targets (naval gunfire support) or other maritime vessels. Particularly if those vessels have the capability of engaging the cutter.

The guns themselves cover some of the same roles but at the same time, they also have additional roles which are differing. Which one is more appropriate is dependent on the end-user and how the vessel would be used.

-Cheers

 

[1805]

Keep in mind though that the USCG is the USCG, not the USN. a 57 mm cannon would do quite well in policing roles vs. civilian vessels, as the cutter can get within a few miles of the target. It is not as well suited for situations where longer-ranged fire, either against land-based targets (naval gunfire support) or other maritime vessels. Particularly if those vessels have the capability of engaging the cutter.

The guns themselves cover some of the same roles but at the same time, they also have additional roles which are differing. Which one is more appropriate is dependent on the end-user and how the vessel would be used.

-Cheers

But the 57mm is being used for the USN? And isn't it planned for some larger ships in almost a CIWS role?

 

[Todjaeger]

But the 57mm is being used for the USN? And isn't it planned for some larger ships in almost a CIWS role?

The 57 mm is being used by the LCS vessels. There might be plans for it to be used on additional vessels as you said like a large calibre CIWS, OTOH there is the 35 mm Millenium Gun to cover much of that as well.

The point I was trying to make about the 57 mm gun was that it can perform certain tasks/roles rather well. Others however are better performed using something else. Take the LCS as an example. With a 57 mm cannon, I would not expect an LCS to provide fire support for a nearby land force. This is because a 57 mm shell is fairly small, and does not have significant range. Instead, fire support would more likely be provided by missiles, or through some other means. Now, if the vessel contacted for a fire support mission was equipped with a 76 mm or 127 mm cannon, those shells are considerably larger and also have greater range, making them viable candidates for use in a naval gun support role.

-Cheers

 

[STURM]

In the past, the 57mm Mk2 has been advertised as being able to deal with sea skimmers, is this true or does it depend entirely on the ammo? The reason I'm asking this I because it was mentioned in another thread that 3P ammo can only be used on the Mk3.