Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scorpion replacment?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by The Blue Max View Post
    I read the Scorpion's 76mm gun can be used in the indirect fire mode..

    I'm presuming but certainly could be wrong but that means something like the principle of how a mortar works?

    Historically speaking has our own cav or other militarized every used this function?

    Speaking hypothetically what technology would improve this in direct fire mode? GPS or new FCS?

    The real question is why would you want to. No real benefit or advantage over a mortar, with lower rate of fire.

    Comment


    • The advantage could be that being a medium recce asset they could be operating out of range of friendly fire support

      Comment


      • So where is the advantage?


        Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Goldie fish View Post
          So where is the advantage?
          a 120mm mortar is undoubtedly a better weapon for producing long range, guided/supressive fire than the Scorpion's 76mm gun - however, if a mortar isn't present on the patrol...

          i'm firmly of the belief that barring a lottery win that provides AH, GMLRS and medium lift helicopters to carry the 105's to wherever they are needed, the 120mm mortars are the cheap, easy answer to ONH's mobile firepower problem - however if the Scorpions can be used, relatively cheaply, relatively quickly, and can produce a result that is better than the current situation, then i see no problem.

          the problem of course is that the Scorpon is relatively unprotected, and as ONH doesn't have many of them keeping a useful capability available for overseas operations is going to be difficult.

          Comment


          • I don't suppose it would work to use the chassis for a wiesel style weapons carrier?
            "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

            Comment


            • The germans tried to 120mm mortar on the wiesel, the concept didn't work and they only bought eight. The Wiesle in too lightly armoured.


              I could list a whole host of countires similar in size to Ireland that deploy troops without having attack helicpters and GMLRS and medium lift helicopters, etc (Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Slovenia, Belgium, Denmark spring to mind)

              The DF operate as part of international units overseas, always have and will do so in the future with increasingly regularity, with the increase emphasis on EU Battlegroups and the capability conference in Autumn. The simple fact is that if the ISTAR company in 2016 finds itself in trouble overseas, they will have the fire power of the bundeswher behind it, (who have the largest MLRS fleet and attack helicpter fleet in Europe). So no need for 120mm mortars on antiques.

              And that not wishful thinking, thats the coming policy.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by paul g View Post
                ..And that not wishful thinking, thats the coming policy.
                the EUBG policy, great, except of course that the EUBG's have never been used and don't look likely to be used... a pity the policy has absolutely no impact whatsoever on the deployments ONH actually undertakes.

                but yes, apart from that, its a brilliant plan, i can't see what i was thinking of...

                Comment


                • The advantage could be that being a medium recce asset they could be operating out of range of friendly fire support
                  Primary reason for having such a weapons is to protect the vehicle rather than being an offensive weapon,while used in secondary taskings such as fire support and direct fire against hard targets and bunkers in the falklands, this was considered a bonus as no other armour/self propelled artillery was available.

                  We had mobile mortar carriers capable of direct/indirect fire.....AML60s!!! We got rid of them, so someone considered there wasn't a need for a mobile mortar carrier, so why should the scorpion be used as one.

                  If there is an argument for self propelled artillery or mortars let it be highlighted and a suitable platform chosen rather than compromise an already aged asset.
                  Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
                    ...If there is an argument for self propelled artillery or mortars let it be highlighted and a suitable platform chosen rather than compromise an already aged asset.
                    i think the problem is not knowing where to start, the paucity of cash to start, and the lack of political will - or outright hostility - to start.

                    no one, i think, thinks that Scorpions with guided ammunition/a gunnery table is the answer - its an unprotected, aging, scarce platform with a pretty limited weapons capability - the only thing going for it is its mobility and the fact that ONH already owns them.

                    given the lack of anything else on the horizon, they could be an answer - however unsatisfactory. personally i prefer the 120/81mm mortars as a 'quick and dirty' firepower option: higher rate of fire, PGM ammunition is already available and in use, theres more of them, and you can throw them, a crew and some ammunition in a helicopter and have a firebase 100km away up-and-running in 35 minutes - getting a Scorpion there would take 2-3 hours plus, and the Scorpion has to deal with IED's, which its very vunerable to.

                    using the Scorpion would be, for me, the least attractive option bar doing nothing - its a doctrinal/developmental/cash dead-end given the age and limitations of them, but it would provide some mobile firepower, albeit at great risk.

                    Comment


                    • what would you rather fire on your potential enemy? A weak 76mm HE round, from an obsolete platform, trying to function as an artillery piece or a 120mm/14 lb mortar round thru the top of his head, from a weapon that needs little more than an ACMAT to use?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                        the EUBG policy, great, except of course that the EUBG's have never been used and don't look likely to be used... a pity the policy has absolutely no impact whatsoever on the deployments ONH actually undertakes.

                        but yes, apart from that, its a brilliant plan, i can't see what i was thinking of...
                        nato went from 1949 till 1995 without firing a shot.

                        EU battlegroups are in their infancy, but a cursory look at the german and European newspapers will show that the concept is developing.

                        its the future, can't get away from it.

                        Comment


                        • Since the doctrine change and the AMLs could not keep up the Mowags. I was thinking the CVRTs could compliment the 1st Armored's MRVs along with Infantry APCs in the medium recce role.. I believe they have the speed to keep up with the mowags..

                          The 76mm gun is still a potent fire support weapon and with all the talk of AMOS mortar systems etc.. being wanted/wished for the mowags with a small upgrade the scorpion could offer an armored indirect & direct fire mode to the like of Long range patrols we have completed in the past as part of overseas missions if had to deploy again in the future for these types of roles..

                          At 30 years old the CVRT is still young in comparison to other AFVs operated by other western forces.."old doesn't necessarily mean obsolete"

                          With some more upgrades like rubber tracks, appliqué armour, NVE and a new FCS it could be potent enough..

                          http://www.scorpiontank.co.uk/html/ContentsPage.html

                          Is this likely to happen...probably not but some comfort in knowing there is a capability jump there in the CRVTs offering a larger weapons then the 30mm cannons of the MRVs..

                          http://youtu.be/9j1BO9RYJog
                          British officer: You're seven minutes late, Mr. Collins.
                          Michael Collins: You've kept us waiting 700 years. You can have your seven minutes.

                          [As the British flag comes down]

                          Michael Collins: So that's what all the bother was about.

                          Comment


                          • From what I've read, indirect fire from tanks & the like was generally considered to be not worth the effort by US tank crews in Korea & Vietnam. It wasted ammo & wore out barrels for not enough benefit.
                            "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."

                            Comment


                            • Could be well right FM.. I honestly have never heard much about mention of such indirect use in battle bar the previous israeli example given.. Just though i would throw it in the mix..

                              Our own organic mortar fire support is up there with the best with 60s,81s and the 120s and the Morfire system so could provide a relatively quick,accurate fire support mission in the event of a combat situation arising..
                              British officer: You're seven minutes late, Mr. Collins.
                              Michael Collins: You've kept us waiting 700 years. You can have your seven minutes.

                              [As the British flag comes down]

                              Michael Collins: So that's what all the bother was about.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by The Blue Max View Post
                                Since the doctrine change and the AMLs could not keep up the Mowags. I was thinking the CVRTs could compliment the 1st Armored's MRVs along with Infantry APCs in the medium recce role.. I believe they have the speed to keep up with the mowags..

                                The 76mm gun is still a potent fire support weapon and with all the talk of AMOS mortar systems etc.. being wanted/wished for the mowags with a small upgrade the scorpion could offer an armored indirect & direct fire mode to the like of Long range patrols we have completed in the past as part of overseas missions if had to deploy again in the future for these types of roles..

                                At 30 years old the CVRT is still young in comparison to other AFVs operated by other western forces.."old doesn't necessarily mean obsolete"

                                With some more upgrades like rubber tracks, appliqué armour, NVE and a new FCS it could be potent enough..

                                http://www.scorpiontank.co.uk/html/ContentsPage.html

                                Is this likely to happen...probably not but some comfort in knowing there is a capability jump there in the CRVTs offering a larger weapons then the 30mm cannons of the MRVs..

                                http://youtu.be/9j1BO9RYJog
                                +1 in the main but we should be looking along the lines of a transformational upgrade (or replacement)

                                - new engine (and all that goes with it)
                                - FCS & recce suite
                                - possibly new gun
                                - possibly new armour

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X