Thanks Thanks:  81
Likes Likes:  171
Dislikes Dislikes:  1
Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 412131415 LastLast
Results 326 to 350 of 358
  1. #326
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,640
    Post Thanks / Like
    Is there a tow hitch on a MOWAG?

  2. #327
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Is there a tow hitch on a MOWAG?
    Yes, there is, but if you hitch anything onto it the ramp can not be opened. It's used for emergency towing another Mowag.

  3. Thanks DeV, Truck Driver thanked for this post
  4. #328
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,640
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhodes View Post
    Yes, there is, but if you hitch anything onto it the ramp can not be opened. It's used for emergency towing another Mowag.
    Can the door?

    Could it therefore pull a 120?

  5. #329
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by California Tanker View Post
    I have to say, I'm at something of a loss to wonder what purpose the 105 has in the DF. Today the only reason for a gun of that calibre tends to be for air mobility, hanging it under a small helicopter or chucking out of an airplane. It's worth noting that the Aussies replaced their 105mm light guns with the M777 155mm howitzer, a 4-ton gun vs the 105mm 2-ton. (The previous towed 155mm was a 7-ton gun). The M777 can be carried by most of the Australian army's helicopters, so it's reasonable for them. The Americans have shown what is possible to upgrade the 105 to with modern fire control and navigation, if you really do feel like keeping the gun (and dropping it with a parachute)

    But realistically, where is the Irish Army going to be airlifting towed artillery with its AW139s on operations? If they're driving around Chad or somewhere and they want to have a bit of fire support emplaced before going into a town or valley, the 120mm mortars ought to be plenty handy enough. If they're in Lebanon, with a much smaller operating range, the towed 155s on a firebase would be fine (Worked for us in Afghanistan). If they want to take the artillery on long range operation anyway, then they're towing it and the weight is irrelevant. And if it's a matter of WW3 and conventional combat, then the ability to displace rapidly to avoid counter-battery becomes critical, making towed units very vulnerable.

    However. If the purpose of the Artillery Corps in the DF today is simply training in processes/procedures with no expectation of combat use, then the current 105s are fine and don't need replacing until the barrel falls off.
    I think you have hit the nail on the head; it is training with no expectation of combat use. If we were too deploy the 105 in a EUBG, we would likely be the only ones with the 105mm pattern, as the majority use 155mm. Maybe if the US Army adopts the AM General Brutus there could be a few M-777's going cheap. But then again if they arenot going to be deployed why bother?

    What a lot seem to forget is that places like Chad or Mali are vast, both of them cover areas 3 times the size of Sweden. Mali alone is double the size of Afghanistan so patrol areas are also vast, hence the need for mobile fire power.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5Rm...ature=emb_logo

  6. #330
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Can the door?

    Could it therefore pull a 120?
    The tow hitch on a Mowag is much larger than the type fitted to a Pajero so I highly doubt it would fit.

  7. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  8. #331
    Lieutenant X-RayOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dublin
    Posts
    1,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Can the door?

    Could it therefore pull a 120?
    You're not going to let go of towing artillary, are you??

    Maybe we should multi-task the horsey school to help out!!
    Fate whispers to the warrior, "There is a storm coming"

    And the warrior whispers back "I am the storm".

  9. #332
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,173
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    You're not going to let go of towing artillary, are you??

    Maybe we should multi-task the horsey school to help out!!
    Only if we bring limbers back too!
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  10. #333
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,086
    Post Thanks / Like
    Towed artillery is still very viable, even in this day and age. Some of the schemes put forward are bordering on the bizarre or ill thought out. All of those wheeled truck based mobile guns still need support vehicles,just to keep them fed with rounds and they are getting more and more complex. A simple 105 or 120mm mortar can be kept in the field and operated by a fairly simple support system. I wouldnt rule them out yet.

  11. Likes spider, DeV, Truck Driver, apod liked this post
  12. #334
    Lieutenant X-RayOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dublin
    Posts
    1,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm not ruling out towed artillery, however, I am saying we need to modernise the corps ability and efficiency in combined arms manoeuvring. Perhaps a sub unit of artillery should be mechanised specifically for close infantry support. Doable as air defence which is a different animal altogether is already folded into the corps mix.

    If nothing is done and the status quo remains we run the risk of making the corps obsolete. Plenty of others have already highlighted the lack of range of 105mm compared to what appears to be the new base standard of 155mm; the lack of high precision munitions and upgrades to current gun stock compared to other users, the lack of fire support over long mobile patrols and the vulnerability to counter fire while deploying and breaking down guns.
    Fate whispers to the warrior, "There is a storm coming"

    And the warrior whispers back "I am the storm".

  13. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  14. #335
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,640
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    I'm not ruling out towed artillery, however, I am saying we need to modernise the corps ability and efficiency in combined arms manoeuvring. Perhaps a sub unit of artillery should be mechanised specifically for close infantry support. Doable as air defence which is a different animal altogether is already folded into the corps mix.

    If nothing is done and the status quo remains we run the risk of making the corps obsolete. Plenty of others have already highlighted the lack of range of 105mm compared to what appears to be the new base standard of 155mm; the lack of high precision munitions and upgrades to current gun stock compared to other users, the lack of fire support over long mobile patrols and the vulnerability to counter fire while deploying and breaking down guns.
    The lowest level combined arms manoeuvre warfare can be conducted is a Bn Gp (really it is Bde level), for that we would need at least 1 fully APC mounted Mech Inf Bn (which we don’t have enough for).

    We could effectively, cheaply and cost effectively upgrade the 105s
    https://www.baesystems.com/en/downlo...4610546921.pdf

    120mm is a very effective and mobile weapon with a similar killing & danger area (double that of the 105) to the 155mm. It doesn’t however have its range but it is very mobile. We could work on upgrades of them
    Last edited by DeV; 30th October 2020 at 11:24.

  15. Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  16. #336
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,086
    Post Thanks / Like
    I thought the current type of guided 120mm mortar rounds makes them even more viable. Less rounds spent on getting first hits and less rounds spent on destruction of a target.

  17. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  18. #337
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    I thought the current type of guided 120mm mortar rounds makes them even more viable. Less rounds spent on getting first hits and less rounds spent on destruction of a target.
    Most guided rounds use GPS so an electronic fire control system is required to program the round.
    There also are laser guided round like Iron Sling from Israel and of course the famous but expensive Strix round from Sweden.

  19. #338
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,106
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Most guided rounds use GPS so an electronic fire control system is required to program the round.
    There also are laser guided round like Iron Sling from Israel and of course the famous but expensive Strix round from Sweden.
    Depending on GPS guided weapons is commented on in RUSI papers. "UK's Multiple Launch Rocket system is issued with a GPS-Guided rocket with an unitary warhead, which is inaccurate in the face of extensive Russian jamming, consequently is unable to course correct to deal with dynamic targets. The key factor is to establish are you outgunned and outranged by likely opposing forces and take steps to correct it by upping your capability in anti-armour and area effect ammunitions to disrupt infantry maybe even cluster munitions should be considered. RUSI points out that 16 Air assault Brigade and 3rd Commando Brigade have only 2 BATTY x 6 x105's each and is under gunned.
    The recommended fires capability for the BA- Batty of antitank GM's per battle group, Batty of SP x120mm mortars per battle group, 72 x 155mm (52 Calibre) SP Howitzers with anti-armour , area effect ammunitions; and a regiment of multi-launch rocket systems with anti-armour and area effect munitions, with precision long-range fires. In that regard it should match opposing fire of 120km.
    At a tactical level there is a need for most units to be self propelled to cut down large logistical tails. Even the 105's should be mounted on a suitable vehicle or replaced with an SP unit such as 120mm mortars. In our case maybe our list should include ATk GM Missiles, SP x 120mm mortars, and 6 x 155mm SP Howiters, with relevant fires and munitions.

  20. Thanks EUFighter, Flamingo thanked for this post
  21. #339
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,086
    Post Thanks / Like
    which is why the Russians are perfectly capable of "ordinary" unguided mortar/rocket/shell fire saturation as well as PGMs. They maintain the old school 122 and 152mm guns and the basic BM 21 type rocket for flattening a grid square, as well as the ability to drop one round into one small trench, as they need it. The UK has drifted away from the old school and is essentially casting about for a solution, while eyeing the current drone warfare in NK nervously. Apart from that, they have showed extreme reluctance to buy into the 120mm mortar yet will happily update the smaller calibres at unit level.

  22. #340
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,106
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    which is why the Russians are perfectly capable of "ordinary" unguided mortar/rocket/shell fire saturation as well as PGMs. They maintain the old school 122 and 152mm guns and the basic BM 21 type rocket for flattening a grid square, as well as the ability to drop one round into one small trench, as they need it. The UK has drifted away from the old school and is essentially casting about for a solution, while eyeing the current drone warfare in NK nervously. Apart from that, they have showed extreme reluctance to buy into the 120mm mortar yet will happily update the smaller calibres at unit level.
    I think since the 1970/1980's the RU's have moved very much towards SP units. The 155mm's are fitted into armoured SP units and can also be in a towed version. The newer 152mm is self propelled designed to disrupt deep behind their en's front lines. They can have as many as 80 Arty pieces supporting field units. In order to minimise movement logistics the need is dynamics and self-propulsion. It prevents getting trenched and overrun.

  23. Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  24. #341
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    I think since the 1970/1980's the RU's have moved very much towards SP units. The 155mm's are fitted into armoured SP units and can also be in a towed version. The newer 152mm is self propelled designed to disrupt deep behind their en's front lines. They can have as many as 80 Arty pieces supporting field units. In order to minimise movement logistics the need is dynamics and self-propulsion. It prevents getting trenched and overrun.
    Attached to each Motor Rifle Battalion is a 120mm SP mortar battery, at the higher level then comes the 122mm& 152mm SPG's as well as all their differ mobile MLRS's. They do maintain a large stock of towed pieces but these are more for reserve units and for the "little green men" to play with.

  25. Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  26. #342
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    Let's assume that the Army does intend to one day deploy and use it's artillery forces rather than just have them to practice procedures.

    As anyone who has ever towed anything will know, towing reduces not only speed but mobility. This is the same for towed artillery compared with self propelled, the latter will always have the advantage.

    Next is the issue of fire bases, yes they have their place and do provide troops with good support and here SP has no advantage as the elements are dug-in. But they are limited by there range, so to effectively give troops in the field cover they have to be plentiful. This is possible in an operational area like the south of Lebanon but not so when you get to north Africa or the Sahal region. In Mali the French have two main bases one at Goa and the other at Tessalit, the distance between them is about 500km! Trying to cover that distance with a 105mm just is not going to work. And the French knew this and so deployed their Caesar 155mm systems for combat operation.

    So today a lot of systems are non-protected, this is great for light forces such as airmobile troops but is it OK for a peer-on-peer confrontation. In many of the recent conflicts the opposition had little or no way of firing back at an artillery position. So there was little need for crew protection, but history repeats itself and once again the issue of crew protection is back. The US Army is currently trialing the Patria NEMO system for their Strykers as the current M1129 Mortar Carrier exposes the crew when firing.

    If we do want to have a modern artillery battery, howitzer or mortar it should be self propelled and protected if possible.

  27. Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  28. #343
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,086
    Post Thanks / Like
    Every Russian gunner starts off on the 122mm gun or the 81mm mortar as the basic weapon and they won't be giving up those calibres any time soon. They have had the 122mm Gvozdika in service for decades, when NATO armies were shunning SPGs in smaller calibres, because that calibre fires a very efficient shot and the bigger 152mm is even deadlier. As for the French in Mali, 500 km between bases suggests to me that they need to build another base halfway. I thoroughly agree about mobile guns, be they tracked or wheeled, but I consider that a basic layer of integral towed guns and mortars are needed in any Army. They can be moved easily, by truck, helicopter, freight aircraft, ship or boat and can be easily maintained. In our context, the DF won't be allowed to get tracked guns so it will default to a Mowag-portable weapon or a truck type like Caesar.

  29. #344
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,640
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why does the DF need arty?

    Because you can’t have a “light infantry based all arms force” without it

  30. #345
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,106
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post

    So today a lot of systems are non-protected, this is great for light forces such as airmobile troops but is it OK for a peer-on-peer confrontation. In many of the recent conflicts the opposition had little or no way of firing back at an artillery position. So there was little need for crew protection, but history repeats itself and once again the issue of crew protection is back. The US Army is currently trialing the Patria NEMO system for their Strykers as the current M1129 Mortar Carrier exposes the crew when firing.

    If we do want to have a modern artillery battery, howitzer or mortar it should be self propelled and protected if possible.
    The Finnish Patria Nemo seems versatile and able to provide stabilised fire on the move. They also fit it on patrol naval craft. Updating systems is to be encouraged to cut down on towed dependency and increase mobility.

  31. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  32. #346
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,173
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Why does the DF need arty?

    Because you can’t have a “light infantry based all arms force” without it
    The Almost total absence of Anti Aircraft artillery surely needs to be looked at too, even in terms of securing airspace around VIP events.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  33. #347
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The Finnish Patria Nemo seems versatile and able to provide stabilised fire on the move. They also fit it on patrol naval craft. Updating systems is to be encouraged to cut down on towed dependency and increase mobility.
    It is; the standard system can be installed on most modern 8x8 fighting vehicles and it even comes in a sheltered version which adds to its flexibility.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLns_5xadtA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNZYuk2dT1Y

  34. Likes Tempest liked this post
  35. #348
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    Every Russian gunner starts off on the 122mm gun or the 81mm mortar as the basic weapon and they won't be giving up those calibres any time soon. They have had the 122mm Gvozdika in service for decades, when NATO armies were shunning SPGs in smaller calibres, because that calibre fires a very efficient shot and the bigger 152mm is even deadlier. As for the French in Mali, 500 km between bases suggests to me that they need to build another base halfway. I thoroughly agree about mobile guns, be they tracked or wheeled, but I consider that a basic layer of integral towed guns and mortars are needed in any Army. They can be moved easily, by truck, helicopter, freight aircraft, ship or boat and can be easily maintained. In our context, the DF won't be allowed to get tracked guns so it will default to a Mowag-portable weapon or a truck type like Caesar.
    The thing about the western part of Mali is it is vast and there is no a lot in it. The region of Kidal where the second French base is located is twice the size of Ireland yet only has a population the size of Waterford. There is just nothing there, you can look at a map see a road and towns but zoom in on Google and the picture is different. Thus fighting the rebels in such an area is a mobile fight, the area is just too vast to cover with fire bases with the forces committed. Even if there were enough manpower it would likely take around 1,000 fire based to cover all the areas in Mali with LR-155mm. Thus mobility of firepower is essential either on the ground or as for most countries in the air.

  36. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes GoneToTheCanner, ropebag liked this post
  37. #349
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    The Almost total absence of Anti Aircraft artillery surely needs to be looked at too, even in terms of securing airspace around VIP events.
    Given that the Brits are replacing their Rapier systems (which replaced their Bofors 40mm's), would it not be an idea to pick up some Rapier FSC's for all-weather point defence?

  38. #350
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    As the NEMO Container is a ISO 20ft container they could be fitted to the aft of the P-60's, to provide NGS, but would they be manned by the NS of the Army?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTzzxDM39xg

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •