The Pantsir- M presented at Army 2017
NavyRecognition is reporting that the Russians are planning to package air defense systems in standard containers.
Specifically they refer to possible use on the project 20386 corvettes and project 22160 patrol ships. One of the two systems discussed is a missile and gun “Close In Weapon System” (CIWS) but the other system is a much longer ranged system.
This is a significant departure from the container packaged cruise missile systems we have heard about before.
The Pantsir-M CIWS (photo above) would also be effective against surface targets, at close range. In addition to the two 30mm gatling guns, the missiles may also have an anti-surface capability.
In time of war, we might see these, or something similar, on naval auxiliaries or even merchant ships as well as the naval vessels mentioned above. Encountering them on a terrorist controlled vessel is far less likely, but not impossible.
The other way to look at this is, could we do something similar, to make it easy for our icebreakers or perhaps other ships, to go from armed, to unarmed, and back again relatively easily?
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
The US Army is already using something similar! The C-RAM “Centurion”, a Mk.15 CiWS mounted on top of a StanFlex Container as a Perimeter Defense (Sentry) Gun System…
I was about to say the Danish standard flex system. We have a 76mm oto as a standard flex module along with several others and it is fitted to the Knud Rasmussen class among others.
I don’t think anything would really match the firepower of the Russian Pantsir-M in the West. The MK15 isn’t really an offensive weapon and the USCG’s NSCs have Phalanx CIWS.
“Iron Dome” might work, but that’s also defensive. What the USN or USCG would need are SPIKE, Griffin, or Hellfire Longbow ATGMs, APKWS 2.75″ rockets, or the canceled CKEM hypersonic missile in a cargo container. The Patria NEMO 120mm mortar system might also work.
The Army and Navy’s plan was the Netfires NLOS system. This would have been a mostly self contained box of guided rockets with a range of about 40K and the punch of a 155mm. Alas, it did not work out.
Problem is that 155mm Howitzer has a Recoil Force of 20-tons/sq.in, which a Shipping Container won’t take. But Nexter of France and Bofors of Sweden are developing a Forward Recoil 155mm with less than 5-tons/sq.in. …
Netfires were vertical launch missiles or rockets. From what was released in the press, there were issues with the guidance system.
The Army pulled out and then the Navy decided it did not want to go it alone.
The VLS Longbow Hellfires replaced Netfires on the LCS, but is a much shorter range system than Netfires was supposed to be. Warhead size is similar.
So using an MML and “Brimstone” would be out of the question than…
Netfires used an autonomous guidance, image target library, GPS/INS, semi-active laser homing, and imaging IR. The target picture is stored in an internal database library with network link for constant updates.
I think that the guidance and targeting technology was too primitive for 2011. Four out of six missiles missed in 2010’s test. Now with 3D rotational imaging, 4K-8K OLED TV images, more memory, better processing power and CPUs, and better hack-proof GPS, Netfires may work again in 2019 if revamped. The idea of a NLOS VLS missile with a range of 25-125mi (125mi for LAM) is still appealing if they can get the guidance and data library corrected with better sensors.
Online websites say that Netfires can travel high subsonic and loiter for 30 minutes out to 45 miles, making it an impressive UAV/missile if it did work out.
While vertically launched Longbow Hellfire was selected to replace the aborted Netfires, the range difference between the is huge.
There was talk of work being done to produce a longer-ranged variant of the Hellfire for the Navy but it’s not clear if that’s a funded effort.
Yes, but the British-made “Brimstone” has virtually the same dimensions as the “Hellfire Longbow” and with more than 3.5 times the range (i.e. 25nmi.)…
Now the British Brimstones would be a potent much longer range “Force Multiplier” for the LCSs in place of Hellfire Longbow, and they’re available COTS.
US Military interest in the “Brimstone” has waned somewhat after 2015, France and Indonesia are showing great interest, Buy main users are the UK and Saudi Arabia, with Germany is joint development with the UK in the “Brimstone II” or “Spear” in Germany…
The U.S. Army is testing Israel’s Spike NLOS missiles with the AH-64E Apaches. It can travel 32KM, or 19 miles and would be more effective than Longbow Hellfire for the LCS.
Are you sure it’s “SPIKE”?/! Because specifications on “Spike” give it a weight of ~5-pounds and maximum range of ~2.5-miles…
@Secundius, Spike is a whole family of missiles. Spike ER (extended range) nd the longer ranged Spike NLOS (non-line of sight) are the largest and longest ranged. https://www.armyrecognition.com/israel_israeli_armi_light_heavy_weapons_uk/spike_nlos_rafael_electro-optically_guided_missile_israel_israeli_army_pictures_technical_data_sheet.html
I did a post on these, including some naval launch systems. .
Specs say ~25-kilometers, not 32 as quoted…
The range differences may be due to the launch platform. Surface platform launches always have less range than launches from altitude and particularly from fast flying aircraft at altitude.
Or the type of Solid Fuel Propellant used! The United States uses NATO STANAG 4115 Propellant, while the British use NATO STANAG 6016 Propellant…
Pingback: A Modest Proposal for a Containerized Weapon System | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
“Russian Navy To Begin Trials Of Modular Systems For Surface Vessels” https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/08/russian-navy-to-begin-trials-of-modular-systems-for-surface-vessels/
“Russia Cancels Its Own LCS Program: Project 20386 Corvettes” https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/07/russia-cancels-its-own-lcs-program-project-20386-corvettes/
The title may be overstepping. Body of the post states they are redesigning, apparently to deal better with unmanned systems.