[Colonol Dekker]

One of these took 79 guys to operate.

I'd expect the majority of an orion crew is used up by weapon stations after watching this in full.

[NeonShivan]

Nah, robots took our jobs.

[Colonol Dekker]

Gatekeeper Goalkeeper and CIWS,  but main guns?  That's a shame :C. They're the funnest happy time ones of all.

[NeonShivan]

Gatekeeper Goalkeeper and CIWS,  but main guns?  That's a shame :C. They're the funnest happy time ones of all.

Assuming an Orion uses projectiles, why wouldn't it be automatic? It's far safer and quicker than any manned crew could ever accomplish. Aiming and firing, on the other hand...

[Colonol Dekker]

I'm just an old romantic, but I figured the individual turret systems would be manned as per above. Hence the statement from the Hatshepsut prior to the Bellisarius' destruction.

[Nightmare]

If they weren't automated, then why would destroying/damaging the weapons-subsystem have any effect?

[Colonol Dekker]

Dunno, could be a power distribution and sensor uplink hub/node?

[The E]

If they weren't automated, then why would destroying/damaging the weapons-subsystem have any effect?

Because that's mimicing something from WW2 ships. If you look at how fire control worked on those, you had fire control computers that feed into one or more gunnery control stations that had electromechanical computers that figured out the various rotations necessary to get shells on target. If you destroyed the fire control directors or the central gunnery control, the turrets could still operate under local control, which was of course less effective than director-controlled fire.

[Snarks]

Oh, I've watched that video before. Even then, there was a decent amount of mechanical assistance for that turret. The technology in the FS1 era ships would have even more automated services.

I'd imagine the "modern" gunnery crews to be mostly operating computer terminals instead of moving physical ammo around into chutes and such.

Don't forget that Orions are also carriers. My guess is that the largest personnel allocation is probably strikecraft services, everything from maintenance to modifications to moving the things. But overall, there are plenty of things that need manning it seems.

[HLD_Prophecy]

The E has it. In the Battle of the Java Sea, (I think it was the cruiser De Ruyter?) saw a catastrophic dropoff in accuracy after its fire control system was destroyed. As I recall. I could be remembering another incident... but thi was far from the only such example. And the Dutch were known for their fire control techniques, it was quite good despite the Dutch being very much on the back burner as far as equipment was concerned.

Yes, each turret could have a large control suite that also coordinated with the other turrets for redundancy. Thus necessitating more space, MUCH more space, and MUCH more crew. Easier to organize it all into a central suite and have backup local control computers for a modicum of targeting ability if the main one should go down.

Yes, its science fiction so maybe there's a workaround, but it's a reasonable game mechanic that fuels in-mission obejctives and overall story. Plus it makes sense to us with our 21st century minds. lol.

[NeonShivan]

I'd imagine the "modern" gunnery crews to be mostly operating computer terminals instead of moving physical ammo around into chutes and such.

Exactly what I was trying to get at.

[Destiny]

Gatekeeper Goalkeeper and CIWS,  but main guns?  That's a shame :C. They're the funnest happy time ones of all.

[From the perspective of modern surface combat]
Hopefully you enjoy being in a gun turret of today. They're cramped as hell, hot, oily and lots of sharp edges! Can't stand up sometimes without knocking your head on the cupola.

Thing is, human bodies don't like being in close proximity of loud, exploding sounds, limb-shearing hydraulics and 900kg~ of recoil force that fires 76mm rounds every half-second or per second. It's disturbing.

If you're sitting in the compartment, tending to the gun magazine, it's juuuust slightly better. All the tension and anxiety is shot out of your chest together with the first round out of the barrel.


I hate the smell though, it's like a rotten egg stench that permeates the entire ship regardless if I'm in the CIC pushing the button or inside the compartment.

[Asteroth]

I've always wondered with modern destroyers and cruisers being simply missile boats, with anti-ship, anti-ground, anti-air missiles and ciws to protect them from other missiles, what exactly are the point of these direct fire guns? What are they used on, theoretically or practically?

[The E]

I've always wondered with modern destroyers and cruisers being simply missile boats, with anti-ship, anti-ground, anti-air missiles and ciws to protect them from other missiles, what exactly are the point of these direct fire guns? What are they used on, theoretically or practically?

Several uses:
1. A gun round is much, much cheaper than a guided missile*
2. A ship can carry a lot of ammo for its main guns, especially given that main guns these days are relatively small-caliber affairs (like the Oto-Melara there)
3. Tactically speaking, these guns deliver incredibly accurate and almost impossible to intercept rounds, making them ideal for the occasional shore bombardment and the occasional need to fire warning shots at someone

*Unless you're the US, then you're going to develop guns that are literally too expensive to shoot (See: Zumwalt class)
There's a reason why modern warships carry main guns that even the tinniest of WW2 tin cans would laugh at: They really don't need them for anything except what could broadly be called "police" actions like antipiracy patrols. Anything else, anything you'd describe as a "peer threat" (read: other purpose-built warships) is dealt with via missile.
That's not to say that there haven't been developments in artillery: There were a few attempts to adopt land artillery guns to warship use (see: MONARC), and there are a few projects to adopt advances such as guided shells into modern shipboard artillery (see: Otobreda 127/64), but the intended use-case here seems to be more along the lines of coastal gunfire support rather than ship-to-ship firepower.

[Spoon]

Gatekeeper Goalkeeper and CIWS,  but main guns?  That's a shame :C. They're the funnest happy time ones of all.

[From the perspective of modern surface combat]
Hopefully you enjoy being in a gun turret of today. They're cramped as hell, hot, oily and lots of sharp edges! Can't stand up sometimes without knocking your head on the cupola.

Thing is, human bodies don't like being in close proximity of loud, exploding sounds, limb-shearing hydraulics and 900kg~ of recoil force that fires 76mm rounds every half-second or per second. It's disturbing.

If you're sitting in the compartment, tending to the gun magazine, it's juuuust slightly better. All the tension and anxiety is shot out of your chest together with the first round out of the barrel.


I hate the smell though, it's like a rotten egg stench that permeates the entire ship regardless if I'm in the CIC pushing the button or inside the compartment.

That rate of fire, though    
*Thump Thump Thump*

[X3N0-Life-Form]

*Unless you're the US, then you're going to develop guns that are literally too expensive to shoot (See: Zumwalt class)

For reference, because this intrigued me : In November 2016, the Navy moved to cancel procurement of the LRLAP, citing per-shell cost increases to $800,000–$1 million resulting from trimming of total ship numbers of the class.

[NeonShivan]

*Unless you're the US, then you're going to develop guns that are literally too expensive to shoot (See: Zumwalt class)

I'm waiting for my railgun wielding cruisers.

[Destiny]

That rate of fire, though    
*Thump Thump Thump*

I know, right! I love the sound of artillery in the morning. You get flooded living quarters, broken lights, things dislodged from their mounts. Please design your ships with the gun in mind, like the A-10 was. It's real enjoyable stuff.

I've always wondered with modern destroyers and cruisers being simply missile boats, with anti-ship, anti-ground, anti-air missiles and ciws to protect them from other missiles, what exactly are the point of these direct fire guns? What are they used on, theoretically or practically?

Ship-borne missiles are generally a long-ranged affair nowadays (discounting SAMs for PD), so when missile-armed ships have to resort to using their guns in blue water...usually you are in some sort of predicament. I guess you probably already know that, so I'll pull out some rather stingy effective weapon ranges out of my ass.

Anti-air, Anti-ship missile defense
CAP: ~400nm (interceptor) + ~30nm (AAMs) [ASMD starts by killing the enemy before he throws bulldogs and bruisers at you, it is very hard to intercept sea-skimming things]
LR SAM: ~80nm (again, killing the enemy before you get time on target'd)
SR/PD SAM: ~3-15nm (SR SAMs and anti-missile missiles live here)
AA-capable naval gun: ~4.5nm
CIWS: ~1.5nm
Softkill (spectrum decoys i.e. chaff, flares, smoke, radar): ~You're in.deep ****nm

If somehow, someone manages to get past your CAP or LR SAMs (in case of aircraft) and launches ASMs at your fleet that somehow your PD SAMs fail to intercept, having a medium-caliber naval gun brings up your volume of fire, range of AA fire, gives you precious, precious additional seconds to hardkill missiles further away, rather than only relying on CIWS (like humans, ships don't like things that explode nearby) because sub/supersonic debris can **** your ship up even small things hurt when you get hit by them.

Take into example, that Oto Melara 76mm Super Rapid Gun Mount, you can fire prox. fused HE rounds with tiny tungsten bits inside of them every 0.5 seconds to blanket the space in between that anti-ship missile and you with tens of thousands of tungsten fragments. Hopefully those clouds of death you're making kills the missile.

Hopefully.

---------------
Green/Brown water warfare
Well that aside, when the war shifts over to landing your people on/fighting within someone else's islands, missiles start to become less and less effective. Radar clutter, jammers, being in range of enemy AAA (they're gonna shoot down your cruise missiles), enemies inside the missile's minimum engagement zone, NOE attack aircraft, helicopters, fast attack crafts (gunboats), shoot-and-scoot rocket artillery, counter-battery fire, pounding the hell out of the enemy's entrenchment, getting rid of their natural/urban camouflage...you need naval artillery for this if you haven't put boots on the ground.

Naval artillery can rival an entire SPG battery by themselves with rate of fire, magazine size, mobility, self-defense, chefs (arguably the most important point). The gunnery crew has to keep the gun magazine topped up for sustained naval gunfire support...if you're nuts enough you can deplete an 80-round magazine faster than they can get rounds out of the ammo store. To top it off, you also have to shoot at things. They are in essence, the Fusion Mortars/Maxims of FreeSpace.


Imagine you're a Deimos fighting within a tight cluster of GTI Arcadias. The crew of your multi-part turrets with Fusion Mortars/Maxims (yes it's a missile but the Deimos uses VLS) will save your stern from getting kicked when Shivan transports ambush you from all the nooks and crannies, armed with Shivan Megafunk Turrets.

Whereas if you only had missile launchers with Cyclops torpedoes...they will funk your day up. It's a hilarious scenario, honestly.

[Spoon]

Naval artillery can rival an entire SPG battery by themselves with rate of fire, magazine size, mobility, self-defense, chefs (arguably the most important point).

 

In addition to Destiny's good post, have an interesting video about Aegis to go along with it: