[sbierwagen]

>Effective countermeasures already exists against this kind of threats, like CIWS.

Phalanx has a magazine of 1,550 rounds, and each burst fires 100 rounds. Firing continuously, it would expend its magazine in 20.6 seconds. Firing perfectly, (with no hostile ECM) it could splash fifteen incoming targets.

What if they launch thirty?

[nradov]

As the threat had evolved, the US Navy has started phasing out the Phalanx CIWS and replacing it with various RIM-116 (RAM) launchers. These are much more capable against high-speed maneuvering targets.

https://navalpost.com/searam-ram-vs-phalanx-goalkeeper/

But realistically the limiting factors for point defense are more likely to be detection and engagement range rather than magazine depth. Hence the focus on layered air defense including longer range missiles, countermeasures, and decoys.

[avereveard]

A carrier move with a large screen of ships, each bringing their own missiles defenses, plus pans with their own missiles that are likely to pick up and shoot stuff large enough not to be launched in range of the carrier group suppression zone

[varjag]

you reload

[sbierwagen]

Here's a video of a crew reloading a Phalanx turret. Note how long it takes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk6HL8URIcI

An actual attack intended to overwhelm point defenses would be a single wave, obviously. There wouldn't be any chance to reload anything. Whatever you have in the magazines and VLS cells at that moment would be all you get.

[CamperBob2]

Also, how good is Phalanx at detecting and killing something that comes in 6 feet above the water's surface?

[WastingMyTime89]

Somewhat good. That’s the whole point. It was put in service specifically to counter sea skimming missiles. Its effectiveness is questionable however.

[marshray]

It's definitely designed for that scenario.