View attachment 574977
The Indonesian Navy has selected BAE Systems’ Bofors 57 Mk3 naval gun system for the country’s KCR-60 fast-attack vessel program.
The initial contracts with government-owned shipbuilder PT PAL Indonesia include four 57 Mk3 gun systems.
The Bofors 57mm naval gun is designed to address surface, air, and land threats in the littoral environment, and is already in service with a wide range of navies and coast guards, including those of the United States, Canada, Sweden, Finland and Mexico.
“This most recent contract with PT PAL Indonesia signifies the nation’s continued trust that BAE Systems naval guns consistently meet quality requirements and capability needs,” said Ulf Einefors, director of Weapon Systems Sweden at BAE Systems.
With a length of 60 meters, the KCR-60 was designed to quickly deploy guided anti-ship missiles against surface combatants and then rapidly and safely withdraw into the region’s archipelagos. Three KCR-60 vessels are currently in service with the Indonesian Navy, Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Laut, or TNI-AL, with a fourth ship scheduled to be operational in 2021.
Two of the new 57 Mk3 systems will be for two KCR-60 vessels currently under construction, while the remaining two guns will be integrated onto two existing KCR-60 ships. The gun systems will be produced at BAE Systems facilities in Karlskoga, Sweden. The first unit is scheduled for delivery in 2020 and the final unit in 2021.
038/2019
https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/ar...ected-for-indonesian-navy-s-fast-attack-craft
more favor this rather than the burevestnik afterall , is it compatible with raytheon darpa mad fires munition ?
ah yes , i seemingly forget about the mountain rangeEven the seemingly small canal in Panama and Suez are regarded as grand projects, not without reason, obviously for it's strategic and economic benefits, and also the challenges present in it's construction. Panama canal cuts across some lake area, cutting the cost of it's construction, yet the canal still have limited capacity of how much traffic it could handle at a time, also due to it's series of barriers. Suez canal is built on a flat and "sterile" desert land, which made it easier to build compared to building canals on a mountainous or rocky area, yet it still costs a lot to build and even repeatedly become a hot zones in various wars simply because how important the canal was (and still is) and how it's strategic value is irreplacable elsewhere.
To put it simple, a strip of 100km canal built on an easy terrain cost a **** tonne of money already, even with the massive economic incentive. but 1000km+ canal across the mountains of Central Asia and Caucasus? with a very miniscule economic and strategic incentive? just imagine wanting to build a canal to cut Sumatra in half
