Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scorpion replacment?

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

  • Originally posted by paul g View Post
    Actually we have caught up, look at the way ISTAR company is structured, the effort artillery have put into developing fire support teams, its all about interoperability and joint operations these days.
    yes fair point, we are catching up. but have a way to go.

    ISTAR Coy probably works better is the Battlegroups, etc. where there is interoperability and other nations providing serious back up for medium/long range armoured patrols.

    ISTAR and Arty fire support teams might seem great for exercises at home where all the assets conveniently stay within effective ranges of their support weapons. but there is still a gap overseas.

    Liberia, Chad and to a lesser extent East Timor (not a great example as not armoured) have shown that we are moving to multi day, medium/long range patrols duties. we don't bring 105s overseas and 120s always stay static. so once we are outside their static ranges we have no organic fire support above 30mm/40mm AGL. This is probably getting a bit off topic, however.

    What this topic is showing though is that putting a 76mm gun on a P111 hull might be a reasonable use and stop gap in ability for organic infantry fire support.

    However, that is dependent on the gun and associated/new sensor suite still being fit for purpose today. If it useable then it should be considered.

    If its not then the whole Scorpion package is completely obsolete, as was AML 90, and the DF should accept this fact and stop wasting budgets on it. The money would be better put into increasing capability elsewhere.
    An army is power. Its entire purpose is to coerce others. This power can not be used carelessly or recklessly. This power can do great harm. We have seen more suffering than any man should ever see, and if there is going to be an end to it, it must be an end that justifies the cost. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain

    Comment


    • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
      Didn't that ammunition document about the 76mm round mention that it's lethal radius for HE was only 6 to 8 metres? That's hardly better than an 81mm mortar? It's not going to be effective against a well dug-in enemy. Apart from that, isn't the 40mm grenade round still the same old M79 round of the Vietnam days? In the Irish context, if you remove the 76mm from service, does it then leave a capability gap that the 30mm doesn't fill/

      regards
      GttC

      Lethal = kill
      76mm - 6.5m
      40mm - around 5m
      30mm - around 3 m

      A lot has happened to 40mm ammonia in the last 20 years

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Archimedes View Post
        I totally agree that you don't go around destroying a civilian building because of one sniper (though some armies do) and that using a 76mm for that purpose is completely over the top. Neither am I suggesting that the excellent RWS/12.7/AGL should be replaced by the 76mm.
        If we want to have something bigger just in case though or we want to be able to deploy smoke/illum at a distance without having to dismount and set up a mortar, the 76mm turrets could be a safe way to support a patrol at medium ranges knowing that you are carrying a biggish stick in case you ever need it.
        But that is the problem, all the major conflicts since 1991 with the exption of afghanistan have been primarily fought in an urban environment (somalia, Iraq, Chechenya). And if we look at future areas for deployment, then it likely that future conflicts will primarily revolve around urban areas
        Accuracy and limiting collatoral damage are the name of the game and for those tasks 76mm is too big.

        and when it comes to vehicles the bad guys since 1991 have worked out that they are going to be hit heavily by air if they move in conventional armoured vehicles, hence they opt for technicals that are hard to distinguish from the air. Its better to engage them with 30mm cannon or of the gmg/HMG mix
        Last edited by paul g; 19 February 2014, 19:11.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by DeV View Post

          A lot has happened to 40mm ammonia in the last 20 years
          Very true.
          Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by The real Jack View Post
            Very true.
            predictive text

            Comment


            • Interesting link - http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/Global/...cification.pdf (someone else put it up before)

              ISTAR Recce Coy must be capable of (including others):
              2.2 Capable of deliberate but very limited engagement of opponent forces.

              Comment


              • Japanese wheely 105mm platform
                Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

                Comment


                • Wheeled tank
                  Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    Interesting link - http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/Global/...cification.pdf (someone else put it up before)

                    ISTAR Recce Coy must be capable of (including others):
                    2.2 Capable of deliberate but very limited engagement of opponent forces.
                    Which it is.

                    Comment


                    • Surely fitting Javelins onto Mowags would be far more effective than pumping money into a dead platform such as the Scorpion?

                      Comment


                      • Here's some comments from a Canadian I was talking to who had operated in Cougars in Somalia.

                        As you know the turrets are all manual except for the traverse mechanism, so they were very outdated and really only suitable for training or internal security tasks. The Radnis night sight left much to be desired.

                        The gun wasn't all that bad for what it is actually, but it too is obsolete for front line service in my opinion. We only used HESH and smoke. I have some pics somewhere of different vehicles that we shot while in Somalia (derelict vehicles for target practice, not during fighting). These ranged from APC's to M-47's, Centurions and T-55's. I'll see if I can dig them up.
                        "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."

                        Comment


                        • Some distinctions may need to be drawn between the terms 'not fit for purpose' (I.e. not doing the job they were designed for) and 'Obsolete' (out-of-date, old fashioned and not modern) and the inference that the subject items no longer work (i.e. are 'broken').. and maybe for want of a better term 'competitive' could be used.

                          Taking the last term 'competitive' ... against what/who and to what extent?...

                          E.g. Can FN FAL rifles still kill people easily, and AML 90s destroy steel armoured vehicles up to circa 30 tons in weight without huge difficulty? Yes.
                          Are FNs as good as Steyr AUG rifles at the same job - by all accounts the answer is no.
                          Are FNs broken - no. Old - definitely.
                          Are they terribly uncompetitive and not 'updatable' (at least to an extent..) - probably no on both counts.

                          Can AMLs move as fast, shoot as fast and as accurately as the most modern vehicles? = No. Could they destroy 30+ ton armoured vehicles? = no.
                          Were they designed to = no.
                          Could they be updated to be 'competitive'? = somewhat.
                          Are they likely to 'compete' directly against modern armour over 30+ ton, &/or fast firing modern sighted/more accurate opposition - in most Irish Army missions? = No.
                          Are they more bullet proof than infantry firing a Javelin? = Yes.
                          Could they destroy armour (or most anything else) under 30tons far cheaper than a $68,000 Javelin missile? = Yes.
                          Do AMLs, FNs etc. etc. necessarily have to 'keep up' with Mowag armoured vehicles, Steyrs etc.? = No.
                          Can Mowags be up-armed with Scorpion turrets (like 'Cougar' Armoured Personel Vehicles) or AML 90 turrets (like Ratels) and still 'work' as they were designed, and competitive against anything likely to come into opposition? = Yes.
                          Can Mowags, AMLs, Scorpions be updated and given supplemental weapons that enhance their capabilities, but don't cost the earth? = Yes.
                          Has it been done on other vehicles? = Yes.


                          Would modernisation of above and similar divert funds from acquisition of the most modern equipment? = Yes.
                          In some instances would there be a case of no money been made available/ required funds been prohibitively high for purchase of the most modern equipment? = Yes, quite often.
                          Does updating &/or and keeping to the side (properly storing) old equipment mean no new equipment?
                          I'd say no, especially it is made explicit the distinction between old working/ and not-the-best and required most modern equipment e.g. offering most protection to crews within.

                          Comment


                          • It's very hard to call. Soldiers might review their kit and state that it's old/obsolete/unfit for duty,etc,etc and the DoD simply says no, make do, your kit is up to the job until they find that like with the Alouettes and Fougas, the aircraft were obsolete because the manufacturer was miking them for NOS spare parts, no new parts were being made, they horsed fuel and were like Trigger's broom in terms of being constantly rebuilt. Same with the AMLs and Scorpions; they have gone about as far as they could with them and they are no longer competitive/supported by manufacturer/being retired worldwide. The same applies to radios, clothing, footwear, firearms, IT, radar and a host of other military items, not to mind mundane stuff like new buildings or upkeep of barracks. Some older stuff can be kept going, eg; older Bedford trucks being remodelled with better engines, creature comforts, better tyres and so on because it makes sense but it's a fine line between having a small, modern, fit for battle Army and having Dad's Army. God knows, the DF kept a lot of old kit going for far too long and the DoD understand that.

                            Comment


                            • While Scorpions still feature in the order of Battle there can be valid discussion around them , however AMls have gone and no longer have relevance and are best consigned to history.
                              Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                              Comment


                              • I know, Murph, but the AMLs are a case in point where they were upgraded to a point where they were reasonably useful and then chopped from the line-up, which made observers wonder what the hell the upgrade was for?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X