Apart from the 120 mortar, have we ever deployed artillery overseas?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
New Mowag Piranhas in action
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Captain Edmund Blackadder View PostI'll take a crack at question 3. The Patria Nemo is a solid contender for this. Allows a Mowag to mount a 120mm Mortar.
It allows for direct and indirect fire, and the 120mm Mortar round is not a small payload in explosive terms. WRT going back to the Chad model of overseas mission, a Nemo equipped vehicle in a patrol would allow for an 8km bubble of indirect fire support around the patrol, in both HE and ILLUM, using current stocks of ammunition. As an added bonus, the system can be mounted on a TEU container, as carried by DROPS, and emplaced in a camp/ fob to provide base defence out to 8km in a 6400 arc.
The 30mm is a worthy round in an anti armour role, the GMG is a capable anti personnel round. Add a fire support vehicle with a UAV asset to the mix and a cav troop/ armoured patrol can suddenly reach out well beyond the reach of most any SACLOS weapons used, as well as tackle more stubborn non armoured targets in the direct role.
One could think of fitting either a CMI XM8 or OTO Melara Hitfact 105/120 turret to a PIII but given the limited number we have I would rather see something else. The Italians have the Centauro MGS of which they still have around 260 in service. These they are replacing with the Centauro II. Maybe we could do a deal for some their Centauros with some upgrades. A proposal could be:
28x Centauro either with the original 105mm or upgraded to the 120mm as was done for Oman. This would allow each for 2 full Cavalry Squadrons each with 14 vehicles.
8x Centauro refitted with the HSW M120 turret, allowing for 2 batteries of 4 units
2x Centauro refitted as Artillery Fire Control Vehicles
2x Centauro refitted as Armoured Recovery Vehicles
4x Centauro refitted as Armoured Engineering |Vehicles/Manoeuvre Support Vehicles
2x Centauro refitted as Armoured Bridge Vehicles
Comment
-
Is there anyone (apart from Belgium with their 90mm on Piranha III and the US with 105mm MGS on Stryker) with a 90/105/120mm DF gun on a MOWAG Piranha ?
Commonality is very important - especially as we need such a small amount of vehicles and manpower is an issue
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostIs there anyone (apart from Belgium with their 90mm on Piranha III and the US with 105mm MGS on Stryker) with a 90/105/120mm DF gun on a MOWAG Piranha ?
Commonality is very important - especially as we need such a small amount of vehicles and manpower is an issue
Commonality is good but not essential, we have in the past few years retired two type of AFV, the AML's and the Scorpions. The Piranha IIIH are only operated by the Danes (22) and ourselves so there is not going to be a lot of the same vehicle around.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostThe Saudi National Guard have LAV111 fitted with a CMI 105mm, but no other major Piranha/LAV user.
Commonality is good but not essential, we have in the past few years retired two type of AFV, the AML's and the Scorpions. The Piranha IIIH are only operated by the Danes (22) and ourselves so there is not going to be a lot of the same vehicle around.
We have 80 MOWAG Piranhas currently. At times serviceability and availability will be issues due to lack of spares and personnel.
Realistically the max of any kind of medium gun (90+ MM) AFV would be less than 15. Makes no sense at that level to introduce a new type, especially when the Cav already have Piranhas
Comment
-
That all depends on how deep the commonality reaches, right down to nuts and bolts, literally, apart from the basics of wheels/optics/engine/gearbox/geartrain/undercarriage/doors and hatches. Commonality is a very nice word but quite often the manufacturer won't play ball and submodels will have the same bolts given a different part number so you have to buy individual parts for that submodel at greatly increased cost...commonality also depends on cooperation between operators in an Army. If the Base Workshops won't share parts with the field units, then the system grinds to a halt very quickly and you get vehicles off road and unavailable because Unit A is hoarding hatch seals and Unit B has leaky vehicles and the expensive electronics are getting wet everytime you go up to the Glen.....Also, the tendency for all armies to make sure that their vehicles are entirely unique is guaranteed to harden a QM's heart and annoy the end user because his "unique" parts set is only made on special order by the manufacturer, who is sitting on his yacht at St Tropez,lighting his Cohibas with burning 50 euro notes, all because armies won't buy genuinely compatible vehicles.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostAlthough commonality with other nations is good ... I actually meant commonality within the DF fleet.
We have 80 MOWAG Piranhas currently. At times serviceability and availability will be issues due to lack of spares and personnel.
Realistically the max of any kind of medium gun (90+ MM) AFV would be less than 15. Makes no sense at that level to introduce a new type, especially when the Cav already have Piranhas
It was only a proposal amongst us, but we did but 14 Scorpions while we had 20 AML90's. Restoring that capability would be 2 Squadrons of 14 vehicles each, one per Brigade.
What is the problem with expanding the Cavalry, the role we are pushing is ISTAR and here more cavalry is good. An UN operation that needs basic foot soldiers will not get the numbers from us, there are too many Third World nations offering large numbers of these troops. So as a rich nation we should take a high level. We only have 80 MOWAGs, that is not a lot, now we have converted more to CRV this will have an impact on the number available to transport troops. I just thought the idea of getting around 50 Centauro hull from the Italians might be a relative cheap option for the short term. Best would be to replace all with a common vehicle platform starting in 2030 through to 2040.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostWhy less than 15?
It was only a proposal amongst us, but we did but 14 Scorpions while we had 20 AML90's. Restoring that capability would be 2 Squadrons of 14 vehicles each, one per Brigade.
What is the problem with expanding the Cavalry, the role we are pushing is ISTAR and here more cavalry is good. An UN operation that needs basic foot soldiers will not get the numbers from us, there are too many Third World nations offering large numbers of these troops. So as a rich nation we should take a high level. We only have 80 MOWAGs, that is not a lot, now we have converted more to CRV this will have an impact on the number available to transport troops. I just thought the idea of getting around 50 Centauro hull from the Italians might be a relative cheap option for the short term. Best would be to replace all with a common vehicle platform starting in 2030 through to 2040.
Ah got you
But Cav also need dismounts to do some of their roles so you need something to carry them (MOWAGs or Freccia’s ?) but again it’s adding a different vehicle type.
We had a long discussion previously https://forum.irishmilitaryonline.co...ighlight=ORBATLast edited by DeV; 16 January 2020, 19:10.
Comment
Comment