Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Interestingly the mortar team in the above vid is driving around in the same (2) ATVs that the US Rangers use for theirs. Wonder if they are actually in service with the Israelis (or were just borrowed for 'shooting' the advertisement)?
- there's so much tech going with these solutions that the ATV with the mortar can only carry 4 rounds... no wonder there's two vehicles

Compares favourably with the RM video of them doing shoot&scoot with even lighter vehicles (for their 81mm) on the Salisbury Plain.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
whitelancer
Member
Posts: 585
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by whitelancer »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Compares favourably with the RM video of them doing shoot&scoot with even lighter vehicles (for their 81mm) on the Salisbury Plain.
Using hired trailers and having to manually load and unload the mortar! It is the 21st century isn't it?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The two + the team = a Chinook load
... so more Ranger stuff than run of the mill. But having that precision round lightens the load (delays resupply need)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

Exactly the sort of kit that 16AA should be being provided with. Now we just need some sort of 120mm Mortar on the rear of a Viking for the Royal Marines, together with that Guided round.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

CGI answers your prayers (and the guided round can be bought for money):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EsK4o3GXMAE6dS9.jpg
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/imag ... A&usqp=CAU
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

As long as it comes in the right colour scheme, as you say my dreams are answered :D

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Ron5 »

A recent article about a new Chinese light weight self propelled howitzer whetted my appetite for a self propelled light gun on maybe a 6x6 MRV chassis. A man can dream :D

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... -mm-66-sph

Image
Image

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

122 is much better than the 105 on a Humwee
- thought the former seems to need supports to stabilise for the recoil impact (not a big surprise, but for shoot&scoot not so good)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

If they roll out this system widely, it will considerably increase the effectiveness of their regimental(Brigade) level artillery, of which the 122mm in its towed form is the main weapon. Makes you think we could do something with our 105mm Light Guns, but I would want to see the data, both on performance and cost verses the purchase of modern 120mm mortars together with smart and cargo rounds.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

When I said about fitting some of our 105mm guns to the MAN 6x6 you all said no thanks now you are all wet for a 105mm fitted to a 6x6 I still think say 50 105mm fitted to MAN 6x6 would be good

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1146
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by mr.fred »

Tempest414 wrote:When I said about fitting some of our 105mm guns to the MAN 6x6 you all said no thanks now you are all wet for a 105mm fitted to a 6x6 I still think say 50 105mm fitted to MAN 6x6 would be good
I’ll stand by a portee being neither fish nor fowl.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

Tempest414 wrote:When I said about fitting some of our 105mm guns to the MAN 6x6 you all said no thanks now you are all wet for a 105mm fitted to a 6x6 I still think say 50 105mm fitted to MAN 6x6 would be good
If that ends up being far cheaper than acquiring a decent 120mm Mortar platform then it would be better than nothing, but the gun is a dead end as far as advanced ammunition types with the possible exception of the US Precision guidance kit that replaces the fuse. What I don't know is whether US fuses etc. are compatible with the 105mm Light Gun's bespoke ammunition.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

As I have said before for me taking a MAN 6x6 and fitting a 105 gun should not take more than 3 months to get to the testing phase and should carry the gun plus 30+ rounds

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

You could be right, but it would be spending money an a platform that is already outclassed by the Artillery of many third tier countries. Yes the 120mm os no better but this would be allocated at Battalion level and other systems such as MAN/Archer if possibly HIMARS would be providing the longer range punch. Then you can add systems like Extractor and maybe Brimstone 3+ (Brimstone 3 with a man in the loop capability) providing precision strike at ranges greater than the Light Gun, and the former being trailer mounted can easily be moved around by Helicopter of vehicles such as Foxhound and the JLTV.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

We would all like to see the Artillery move at pace to say 2 regiments of 155mm Boxer 2 regiments of MAN 8x8 Archer and maybe 1 regiment of M777A2 or ER

This being said I think we will be waiting for some time and if we were to say fit 30 or 50 105 guns to MAN 6x6 the army could get on with learning how to use such mobile guns in context of the BCT's I only see this as a stop gap on the road to Archer

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1146
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by mr.fred »

M777 is too big and heavy for light forces and too slow an lightly protected for heavier forces.

That ordnance on a vehicle could make a reasonable gun for light mechanised forces.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Tempest414 wrote:maybe 1 regiment of M777A2 or ER
mr.fred wrote:M777 is too big and heavy for light forces and too slow an lightly protected for heavier forces.
If "ER" is ERCA,
and acknowledging mr. fred's comment,
this incredible delay to 2029 (AS90 retirement the next year!) could tie in with what the USMC Commandant said:
" would be hesitant to invest in artillery pieces tat cannot 'do' the new hi-velocity projectiles"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

Maybe we should pay more attention to what Rheinmetall are doing with their Tube Artillery research, increasing the size of the propellant chamber whilst retaining the 155mm shells to get 70km+ range. With the extra forces such a gun would exert on its host chassis, would this mean any weapon systems using this gun would have to be tracked or towed as wheeled systems would struggle unless the chassis is strengthened and enlarged making its mobility decline. looking at the huge 10x10 and bigger Russian platforms, wouldn't this also increase costs closing the gap between tracked and wheeled platforms.

Maybe we should not try to overmatch the opposition with our 155mm in the counter battery role, using them instead as support of ground units, and use the GMLRS as our main weapon for the the former role. Systems like the Archer and Caesar will be able to reach targets out to 50km easily with the newer munitions being developed to they will be able to provide support over a wise area, possibly sufficient for use in the Deep Strike BCT.

The GMLRS need more advanced munitions, which seem to be on the way. Having both sizes of rocket able to dispense large number of Sensor Fused Munitions over an area would give any opponent's Armour Commander as well as his Artillery counterpart a serious headache as to how to deploy and use his assets safely.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote:we should pay more attention to what Rheinmetall are doing with their Tube Artillery research, increasing the size of the propellant chamber whilst retaining the 155mm shells to get 70km+ range.
Not aware of what they are doing, but ERCA should be ready in the 2022-24 timeframe... 5 yrs bfr our deadline
Lord Jim wrote: Systems like the Archer and Caesar will be able to reach targets out to 50km easily with the newer munitions being developed to they will be able to provide support over a wise area, possibly sufficient for use in the Deep Strike BCT.
They (more likely the Archer could have a role as a fill-in for divisional artillery and then step into the AS90 shoes when they will be retired, c. 2030
- i.e be that part of "DAG" that at times is delegated directly the bdes, sorry BCTs
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Ron5 »

Jane's says that the German requirement for their new howitzer is 100km range which is why RM is playing long range games in South Africa with their subsidiary.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Ron5 »

Rheinmettall just announced their new howitzer on a truck, design looks a tad sketchy..

https://rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rhei ... /index.php

Image

Image

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

It sure looks like a big Beastie, and heavy too. An 10x10 chassis together with 155,, Turret has got to way mot than the Archer using the 8x8 chassis of the pervious family. Maybe the idea solution for he BA is Archer on the HX3 platform together with the associated Limber vehicle?

andrew98
Member
Posts: 196
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:28
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by andrew98 »

Dunno, I kinda like it, wonder about the stability, if it can fire without extending stabilizer legs through the full 360 then I prefer it to the other lorry based solutions I've seen.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

I have to say I would still go for MAN 8x8 Archer over the above 10x10. As said before for me we should go for 2 regiments of Boxer 155mm and 2 regiments of Archer 8x8 each with 6 Batteries these should be enough to cover the Deep strike and both the Heavy and light mechanised BCT's the question is what do we give the air mobile and Commando BCT's

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Lord Jim »

Royal Artillery Regiments and those of the Horse only between 24 and 32 guns each split between three or four Batteries. Even if you include "Limber" platforms, the numbers required to equip four Regiments and cover training etc. are not that big. We would only need to purchase say 60 Archer/MAN 8x8 combos and half as many limbers to equip two Regiments to provide support of the Light BCTs as well as compliment that which is supporting the Heavy BCTs and the Deep Fires BCT.

This should be done sooner rather than later and if funding were available could be done by 2025, whilst the remaining updated and new systems would arrive in 2030 or later. At least that would give us two state of the art Regiments to work with the forward deployed formations and their reinforcements.

With "Strike" either being canned or heavily revised, no pun intended, there is no reason a heavy tracked platform could not replace the remaining AS-90s, and waiting to see how developing technologies pan out is not a bad idea. In fact we could see any Archer purchase are replacing the 105mm Light Gun, with our Light Forces getting Battalion level 120mm Mortars to rebalance their fore support. In that case we could purchase say three Regiments worth of Heavy tube artillery. I would also like to see a purchase of HIMARS , again to support the lighter formations, though this could be only a Battery attached to each Archer Regiment.

Post Reply