C3 Howitzer Replacement

[Kirkhill]

There's always a Parachute Regiment BGp on 'zero notice' to move, as part of 16 AA Bde, anywhere outside of the NATO area.

I'm just trying to be unfair to the RAF Regt

I know.

RAF Regiment or Paras, or even Marines - it was a Light Infantry requirement. Soldiers walking on planes with what they could carry.

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

Ukrainian artillerymen are mastering another howitzer: a video of the exercises of the Armed Forces of Ukraine soldiers on the American 105-mm M119A3 howitzer has been published on the Internet.
It is noted that this is the most modern version of this howitzer: it is equipped with digital fire control system, similar to the M777A2, as well as an inertial navigation system with GPS.
The Armed Forces of Ukraine servicemen are already familiar with this howitzer, its common name is 105 Light Gun, in Britain it received the designation L118, in Australia and New Zealand it’s L119. Defense Express has already talked about this howitzer in detail.
At the same time, in one of the defense aid packages, the USA announced the transfer of its 105-mm M119 howitzers to the Armed Forces. However, it remains unknown whether howitzers will be transferred to Ukraine in the “upgraded” version of the M119A3.

just some updated 105mm

 

[daftandbarmy]

Ukrainian artillerymen are mastering another howitzer: a video of the exercises of the Armed Forces of Ukraine soldiers on the American 105-mm M119A3 howitzer has been published on the Internet.
It is noted that this is the most modern version of this howitzer: it is equipped with digital fire control system, similar to the M777A2, as well as an inertial navigation system with GPS.
The Armed Forces of Ukraine servicemen are already familiar with this howitzer, its common name is 105 Light Gun, in Britain it received the designation L118, in Australia and New Zealand it’s L119. Defense Express has already talked about this howitzer in detail.
At the same time, in one of the defense aid packages, the USA announced the transfer of its 105-mm M119 howitzers to the Armed Forces. However, it remains unknown whether howitzers will be transferred to Ukraine in the “upgraded” version of the M119A3.

just some updated 105mm

They're a pretty handy piece of kit:

 

[KevinB]

They're a pretty handy piece of kit:

It’s handy, but outranged by newer 120mm Mortars, (which are even more handy…) and pretty much any other howitzer.

It isn’t what I would want to be using in an active theatre with the threat of CB.

 

[FJAG]

It’s handy, but outranged by newer 120mm Mortars, (which are even more handy…) and pretty much any other howitzer.

It isn’t what I would want to be using in an active theatre with the threat of CB.

I know the US Army is looking at a turreted mortar system with a range out to 20kms (currently 19.5 for the M119 with Ch8 RAP). I haven't heard of any system that fits the bill yet. What have you seen in that respect? As it stands, 81mm does about 6 km and 120mm about 11kms. There are some foreign ones doing 13.5kms.

The problem with even longer range is a bigger bang in the tube which means a more robust tube and base plate and before you know it you've got yourself an artillery piece stuck on high angle. Flat trajectory means shorter time of flight. ToF matters.

I sometimes wonder why one needs a longer range mortar. What type of fight do we envision where the mortars need to be a dozen kilometres away from the battalion it supports? Or drop rounds fifteen kilometers in front of the battalion's forward position?

I guess I'm back with the idea of a lighter mortar that can be handled by a small crew and can drop lots of dumb neutralizing rounds in close to their own battalion and also launch long range UCAV rounds to destroy point targets out beyond that.

I think its time to sit back and closely study the mortar, gun, rocket, UACV mix needed at the different echelons.

 

[GR66]

I know the US Army is looking at a turreted mortar system with a range out to 20kms (currently 19.5 for the M119 with Ch8 RAP). I haven't heard of any system that fits the bill yet. What have you seen in that respect? As it stands, 81mm does about 6 km and 120mm about 11kms. There are some foreign ones doing 13.5kms.

The problem with even longer range is a bigger bang in the tube which means a more robust tube and base plate and before you know it you've got yourself an artillery piece stuck on high angle. Flat trajectory means shorter time of flight. ToF matters.

I sometimes wonder why one needs a longer range mortar. What type of fight do we envision where the mortars need to be a dozen kilometres away from the battalion it supports? Or drop rounds fifteen kilometers in front of the battalion's forward position?

I guess I'm back with the idea of a lighter mortar that can be handled by a small crew and can drop lots of dumb neutralizing rounds in close to their own battalion and also launch long range UCAV rounds to destroy point targets out beyond that.

I think its time to sit back and closely study the mortar, gun, rocket, UACV mix needed at the different echelons.

And what's the cost of a 20km capable mortar and rounds vs a 12km capable 120mm mortar and a 20km capable 105mm Howitzer?

Could you get both of the latter for the price of the former? Sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I think its time to sit back and closely study the mortar, gun, rocket, UACV mix needed at the different echelons.

Especially within the context of a fully integrated (Army, Navy, Air) force.

Allied air supremacy, naval dominance and artillery in WW2 made up for alot of the deficiencies in tanks and small arms in comparison to the Germans, for example.

 

[KevinB]

I know the US Army is looking at a turreted mortar system with a range out to 20kms (currently 19.5 for the M119 with Ch8 RAP). I haven't heard of any system that fits the bill yet. What have you seen in that respect? As it stands, 81mm does about 6 km and 120mm about 11kms. There are some foreign ones doing 13.5kms.

A few new systems being trialed are over 17km.
They are all mounted Mortars -

The problem with even longer range is a bigger bang in the tube which means a more robust tube and base plate and before you know it you've got yourself an artillery piece stuck on high angle. Flat trajectory means shorter time of flight. ToF matters.

I believe the goal is longer range bands for precision munitions - and the expectations taken from Afghanistan about longer range dispersed positions and engagement.

I sometimes wonder why one needs a longer range mortar. What type of fight do we envision where the mortars need to be a dozen kilometres away from the battalion it supports? Or drop rounds fifteen kilometers in front of the battalion's forward position?

I guess I'm back with the idea of a lighter mortar that can be handled by a small crew and can drop lots of dumb neutralizing rounds in close to their own battalion and also launch long range UCAV rounds to destroy point targets out beyond that.

I think its time to sit back and closely study the mortar, gun, rocket, UACV mix needed at the different echelons.

We took a lot of bad lessons learned from GWOT, and some of the doctrine changes from that are going to damage us for a while.

But the concept of (theoretical)
range band overmatch remains a driving force, not just with us.

 

[Kirkhill]

I know the US Army is looking at a turreted mortar system with a range out to 20kms (currently 19.5 for the M119 with Ch8 RAP). I haven't heard of any system that fits the bill yet. What have you seen in that respect? As it stands, 81mm does about 6 km and 120mm about 11kms. There are some foreign ones doing 13.5kms.

The problem with even longer range is a bigger bang in the tube which means a more robust tube and base plate and before you know it you've got yourself an artillery piece stuck on high angle. Flat trajectory means shorter time of flight. ToF matters.

I sometimes wonder why one needs a longer range mortar. What type of fight do we envision where the mortars need to be a dozen kilometres away from the battalion it supports? Or drop rounds fifteen kilometers in front of the battalion's forward position?

I guess I'm back with the idea of a lighter mortar that can be handled by a small crew and can drop lots of dumb neutralizing rounds in close to their own battalion and also launch long range UCAV rounds to destroy point targets out beyond that.

I think its time to sit back and closely study the mortar, gun, rocket, UACV mix needed at the different echelons.

Are we looking at a 15 km Coy Area of Interest?

 

[KevinB]

Are we looking at a 15 km Coy Area of Interest?

No - but a dispersed BN potentially.

 

[Kirkhill]

No - but a dispersed BN potentially.

So a BN with a 15 km AoI and dispersed Coys needing 15 km collocated capabilities in order to supply mutual support?

 

[KevinB]

So a BN with a 15 km AoI and dispersed Coys needing 15 km collocated capabilities in order to supply mutual support?

The CAV are starting to use drone swarms for ISR, so some parts of a Bde or Div may have that requirement.

 

[Kirkhill]

The CAV are starting to use drone swarms for ISR, so some parts of a Bde or Div may have that requirement.

So the Bde or Division needs both a dispersed, long range force and and concentrated, close range force?

 

[KevinB]

So the Bde or Division needs both a dispersed, long range force and and concentrated, close range force?

MDO Concept is for dispersed for sensing and safety, but able to quickly reform to strike. Technology is pushing the sensing range and folks want integral fires to support.

 

[Kirkhill]

So the Bde or Division needs both a dispersed, long range force and and concentrated, close range force?

Perhaps like a Light Infantry and Cavalry, ISR rich group and a Heavy(ier) Close Combat Assault group?

 

[Kirkhill]

MDO Concept is for dispersed for sensing and safety, but able to quickly reform to strike. Technology is pushing the sensing range and folks want integral fires to support.

Which brings us to the Brits and their Deep Strike Recce Brigade and their abundance of Special Brigades (ASOB, SFAB, Cdo Bde and Air Asslt) and their small unit focus (company - battlegroup).

They have one National Hammer - 3 UK Div.

 

[childs56]

I am curious all this talk of drones with little talk about anti drone technology. Most of the drones being used are low tech and can be jammed/ scrambled so they either crash or return to sender.
Russia at first appeared to have one of the best EW/Air defense set ups in the world. Yet from the looks of things it was in as bad of shape or worse then their tank fleet and truck tires.
In the civilian market they can jam drones about a Km away, might even be further now, there are other consequences of doing this such as communication concerns. But overall they process works pretty good.
Just wondering what has been talked about or even worked on in this matter. It seems were worried about the drone swarm. Yet not many places have the ability to sustain such a aspect of warfare.

 

[KevinB]

I am curious all this talk of drones with little talk about anti drone technology. Most of the drones being used are low tech and can be jammed/ scrambled so they either crash or return to sender.
Russia at first appeared to have one of the best EW/Air defense set ups in the world. Yet from the looks of things it was in as bad of shape or worse then their tank fleet and truck tires.
In the civilian market they can jam drones about a Km away, might even be further now, there are other consequences of doing this such as communication concerns. But overall they process works pretty good.
Just wondering what has been talked about or even worked on in this matter. It seems were worried about the drone swarm. Yet not many places have the ability to sustain such a aspect of warfare.

Several anti drone programs exist here, but most are not OS.

 

[Kirkhill]

Several anti drone programs exist here, but most are not OS.

On the other hand we still have aircraft in the presence of anti-aircraft systems, submarines in the presence of ASW systems, EW in the presence of counter measures, tanks in the presence of machine guns, and we had swords with shields for a very long time.

No magic bullets but the game keeps changing.

 

[KevinB]

On the other hand we still have aircraft in the presence of anti-aircraft systems, submarines in the presence of ASW systems, EW in the presence of counter measures, tanks in the presence of machine guns, and we had swords with shields for a very long time.

No magic bullets but the game keeps changing.

My counter point would be that all of those have direct human controls.
With either AI/ML or remote input all of those can be interfered with non kinetic means, and no human at the controls means no way out.