Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

[ArmChairCivvy]

Strong points, but with the concept (shown, I think the vid does not play though)
1. you can have a very compact (and for railway tunnels, lower) package
2. the concept had two drums autofeeding a total of 50 ready rounds
3. as the main threat to artillery pieces not subject to direct fire is top attack (and heavy splinters from c-battery fire), having a flat top might make for a more straight-forward installing of an APS to counter Bonus-like submunitions.
-These have a conical search function when decending (initially covering an area 200 m across)
- so the APS search would require fewer sensors than one on an MBT (360 around and 180 up coverage).

Perhaps sliced bread still takes the biscuit, but worth some thoughts
... like why stop with the gun, when you can add some oomph with an erectable MRL https://external-preview.redd.it/CcdfvH ... 712159e2e7 positioned on top of the area vacated by the turret

[Lord Jim]

Both ideas are interesting, though the idea the US Army had of reducing the battery size sort of defeats the idea of greater rate of fire. By halving the number of guns but doubling the rate of fire, the weight of fire remains the same according to my rudimentary maths. This time might be shorter which is a plus, but I would prefer to see say six guns operating in pairs.

The German 155mm is one I am keeping my eye on. It can use existing shells but has a larger non NATO standard firing chamber so a bigger charge can be used. I think the barrel is still an L52 but it may be longer.

An alternative to the M4 Calliope pictured above would be what we did, strap 3" rockets to the turret sides. The Army wants Brimstone 3 on its Challenger 3s which would be the modern interpretation.

Also I am sure I have seem multi barrelled 120mm Mortars somewhere. They have between four and six barrels, are mounted on a 4x4 which lowers the base plate off the back and they lets rip. with a modern FCS this would provide a lightweight systems able to throw a lot a weight rapidly. Reloading is by hand but it takes seconds to fire, and can come in and out of action in a couple of minutes.

[ArmChairCivvy]

but I would prefer to see say six guns operating in pairs.

I guess the video did not play, but it included a 3x3 org. chart, with armoured resupply.
- also, just read a piece by Corporal Frisk about BG level artillery in the Finnish army : the 2 x 6 gun batteries that make up the supporting bn can be spread across 40 km ( try to do c-battery against individual guns), but in his view without 8 per battery, a pair on the move takes away too much fire power (and moves are frequent). He even played with the idea of replacing the nearly half thousand 122 mm pieces with LG... taking the cumulative global production of it 48% higher

would be what we did, strap 3" rockets to the turret sides.

Exactly what was in the plans when the airmech for the US army was still in the works (bfr Stryker): scale down the M1s in weight by using a 105 mm in the turret, and make up for it with precision rockets "strapped to the turret's sides"... the good news: they can be lased for by infantry, helos - and the effective range penalty from having a 105 would be overcompensated for

[BlueD954]

Mobile Fires Platform - AS90 replacement - RFI 3 is out. However, file is labelled 'OFFICIAL' so much is secret.

[ArmChairCivvy]

RFI 1
future market scanning
RFI 2
bring back to what exists (to be bought; exists includes 'under trials')
RFI 3
Official/ Secret?
Idle speculation: the quantities will be brought down (and stretched out to 2030) by so much that the whole thing is reduced to a 'trial' from the capability POV
- which is not a bad thing as there is much life left in AS90s when used tactically; while they can't achieve that much as divisional fires
... so middle of this decade the 'reduced' warfighting division will soldier on with
- AS90s (not that many) for the AI element
- 2 x 8 guns (to be selected) on wheels for the medium element
- GMLRS for divisional fires (still no sign of AW, to strike down formations when they are massing, as opposed to only taking out pinpoint targets)
- if 16X gets thrown into the melee, a few LGs, to be taxied around the (supposedly) lesser density of future battlefields by Chinooks - the only asset that we seem to have plenty of; just because the rqrmnts driven by A-stan made the helo force lopsided

[BlueD954]

RFI 1
future market scanning
RFI 2
bring back to what exists (to be bought; exists includes 'under trials')
RFI 3
Official/ Secret?
Idle speculation: the quantities will be brought down (and stretched out to 2030) by so much that the whole thing is reduced to a 'trial' from the capability POV
- which is not a bad thing as there is much life left in AS90s when used tactically; while they can't achieve that much as divisional fires
... so middle of this decade the 'reduced' warfighting division will soldier on with
- AS90s (not that many) for the AI element
- 2 x 8 guns (to be selected) on wheels for the medium element
- GMLRS for divisional fires (still no sign of AW, to strike down formations when they are massing, as opposed to only taking out pinpoint targets)
- if 16X gets thrown into the melee, a few LGs, to be taxied around the (supposedly) lesser density of future battlefields by Chinooks - the only asset that we seem to have plenty of; just because the rqrmnts driven by A-stan made the helo force lopsided

116 guns

MFP is not abot replacing GMLRS

[BlueD954]

IOC and FOC is very late. So Strike and Armoured Infantry won't get new gun artillery until very late.

That's as much as i can say on an open forum. It will likely appear on Janes or IISS Military Balance.

[ArmChairCivvy]

2 x 8 guns (to be selected) on wheels for the medium element

in the "reduced" Division

116 guns

MFP is not abot replacing GMLRS

Of course it is not; things to consider
- at what rate will we be getting any new ones
- considering that the roll out, at least before, was to be to Strike Bdes first and AI bdes then

GMLRS was there to highlight how little of 'go-to' fires we have/ will have above the level of artillery embedded at bde level. Multi-Domain operations at the division level ( AKA manoeuvre warfare in the modern sense) cannot assume air-supremacy and immediate support "from a taxi rank, kept over the area of ops by a plentiful fleet of tankers, for availability at all times".

Artillery’s sine qua non - King of the battlefield for Russians and Queen for the US army, I seem to remember - is its ability to mass fires. Leaving this ability (talking here en mass), or advantage, to the OpFor is not wise. Rather we should ASAP ensure that all the fires that can range the fight are available across an extended battlefield... and not limited to a few dozen GMLRS with unitary warheads.
- the point I was making, rather than looking at bde level in isolation

[BlueD954]

With only 1 regular and 1 reserve GMLRS regiment that's very tight.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Yes; makes the point that there is only one type of warhead available even more... poignant

[Lord Jim]

I can only hope the Army get some new munitions for both the AS-90 and GMLRS a lot sooner than the introduction of new kit. AS for 16XX why don't we try a Coyote with a 105 LG lashed to the back and spades fitted as a light SP gun. Other nations havge tested similar combinations with even lighter platforms so we might as well give it a go, as long as the Treasury doesn't think it will also meet the Wheeled SPG requirement for the medium Units.

As for Regiments composition, I would still prefer to see 3 x 6 gun Gun Batteries and 3x4 GMLRS Batteries along with the relevant support vehicles. Ideally each would also have an attached or permanent SPAA Battery as well, probably SP Starstreak/LMM on a new platform such as Boxer or even the JLTV.

[ArmChairCivvy]

I would still prefer to see 3 x 6 gun Gun Batteries

rather than overloading Coyotes ( with the gun crew and a few rounds, the 'taxi' is full) we could add to each LG battery a four-wheeled companion - already being bought at the vehicle level - loaded with six Hero 120s that have
..."high-speed transit flight and low-speed loitering, BLOS capability, and rapid reaction in response to time-sensitive targets deliver a critical advantage in confined and populated battlefields."
and the combo would look like this
https://www.joint-forces.com/wp-content ... -MDM19.jpg

This would be a tactical/ BG level mix; not assuming that divisional assets would move together with it.

[Lord Jim]

Ok stick a 120mm Mortar on the back instead. The Coyote could easily take four crew and a few dozen 120mm mortar bombs.

[Dahedd]

Ok stick a 120mm Mortar on the back instead. The Coyote could easily take four crew and a few dozen 120mm mortar bombs.

https://supacat.com/newsevents/news/sup ... apability/


81mm mortar but its a start

[ArmChairCivvy]

The described Vingmate FCS, for the above, relies on many things that might not be 'there' in a small-scale SF/ RM insertation.

Whereas Hirtenberger makes a more capsulated solution, a fully electronic Arc Fire fire control system – with components from Rockwell Collins. The computer-assisted fire control automatically takes the data from the handheld of the forward observer – who may be out in the field dismounted or in another vehicle (or a helicopter) – and marks targets up to a distance of 9,000m out while computing the relevant ballistic data. It uses laser target acquisition, a GPS navigation system and a digital map.
- distance from the forward observer; the 81 mm will not quite reach that far

[Lord Jim]

Regardless of whether it is a 81mm or 120mm out light forces could really use an SP Mortar Carrier. Hopefully funding will also be found for the just as important Boxer based SP Mortar for the Mechanised Battalions, and which could also be used in the Armoured Infantry Battalions as well. This should be the first recommendation form the "Strike" Trial unit followed by a AVLB and an Under Armour Heavy ATGW Carrier.

Adopting a 120mm would allow us to also take the Swedish Stryx laser guided rounds, optimised for armoured targets but would work pretty well against bunkers or other defended positions. The steep trajectory is also far better then other forma of indirect fire in built up areas. In fact their are many very useful 120mm speciality rounds available out their in addition to the more common High Explosive and Smoke.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Adopting a 120mm would allow us to also take the Swedish Stryx laser guided rounds, optimised for armoured targets but would work pretty well against bunkers or other defended positions.

A couple of points on that:
Would exclude yr favourite; the rifled versions. When Sweden was still going for Amos, they gave all their heavy (smooth-bore) mortars to their 'TA' so that those would still have something more far-ranging than NLAW/ CG. Of course, when they cancelled Amos (on their part) the regular forces were left with nothing in the mortars category (rectified of late).
I seem to (?) remember that Stryx, being an early development, used just infrared for homing, unlike the later Bonus... if so, finding bunkers might be a stretch?

[Lord Jim]

Yes you are right, Stryx does use an Imaging Infrared seeker. Oh well we will just have to buy the US Army's M395 Precision Guided Mortar Bombs as well, 7km range, CPE of less than 5m at that range and it is relatively cheap for a PGM.

[Ron5]

If the US Army does end up buying NEMO (currently being evaluated), production of the turrets would most likely be in the US.

I wonder if that would bring the turret & gun price down to the point that a UK Boxer NEMO would be on the cards.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c81vKKodIWo&t=6s

[ArmChairCivvy]

As one can see from the vid, the wholly automatic feed of Amos has been done away with
... in line with that Patria base vehicle, which costs a 1/4 of an AMV; so call it an 1/8th of a Boxer

The combo is starting to align with what one would expect of mortar system = to be cheaper than a field artillery piece

[Lord Jim]

Even if the US doesn't adopt it, buying forty turrets to install in Boxer Modules should be affordable surely, especially as "Strike" is the face of the Army's future.

[BlueD954]

IOC and FOC is very late. So Strike and Armoured Infantry won't get new gun artillery until very late.

That's as much as i can say on an open forum. It will likely appear on Janes or IISS Military Balance.

I can type out from the RFI:

MFP plans IOC 2029, FOC 2029, total 110 plus guns, more than RFI 1 and RFI 2. Old IISS article, https://www.iiss.org/blogs/military-bal ... s-platform Key user requirements won't be released until after the IR is released.

[ArmChairCivvy]

MFP plans IOC 2029, FOC 2029, total 110 plus guns

Standing up the first Strike Bde in 2029 then?
"InterimWarfightingDivision" absorbing the experimental group into its Light(er) Bde, if need arises

A lot should be done in between at the BG level, so that "tanks" won't be the answer to everything, especially as there will be so few of them.

[BlueD954]

MFP plans IOC 2029, FOC 2029, total 110 plus guns

Standing up the first Strike Bde in 2029 then?
"InterimWarfightingDivision" absorbing the experimental group into its Light(er) Bde, if need arises

A lot should be done in between at the BG level, so that "tanks" won't be the answer to everything, especially as there will be so few of them.

The MFP will cover both AI and Strike Brigades.

[ArmChairCivvy]

both AI and Strike Brigades

Sure, evident from the total, but no u-turn on who gets them first
... that was my inference (and only that).
- it was a harbinger for this that the OSD for AS90 was recently set to 2030 or was it 2032

EDIT:
"“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what is the expected out-of-service dates of AS-90s; and if he will make a statement on its replacement.”

Jeremy Quin, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, responded:

The expected out-of-service date for the AS-90 is 2030."

In 2015 we had 117 of them, so the new number (116 mobile fires) is not a coincidence