Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
sunstersun
Member
Posts: 363
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 04:00
United States of America

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by sunstersun »

RunningStrong wrote: 16 Feb 2023, 18:58
sunstersun wrote: 16 Feb 2023, 18:41 The answer is the Boxer.

Most of the artillery game is not being spotted. If you're spotted by a drone, the difference in armor isn't that useful. Add on a fortune in logistical savings and it's a pretty good deal.
Spotted by a drone armed with what?
Artillery fire or a kamikaze drone. The biggest revolution in Putin's war is drone spotting for artillery.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2783
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Caribbean »

RunningStrong wrote: 16 Feb 2023, 18:58 Spotted by a drone armed with what
A datalink to an enemy GMLRS battery?
These users liked the author Caribbean for the post:
Djpowell1984
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

sunstersun wrote: 16 Feb 2023, 19:29
RunningStrong wrote: 16 Feb 2023, 18:58
sunstersun wrote: 16 Feb 2023, 18:41 The answer is the Boxer.

Most of the artillery game is not being spotted. If you're spotted by a drone, the difference in armor isn't that useful. Add on a fortune in logistical savings and it's a pretty good deal.
Spotted by a drone armed with what?
Artillery fire or a kamikaze drone. The biggest revolution in Putin's war is drone spotting for artillery.
So why isn't armour helpful against counter-battery fire and small warheads? Isn't that entirely why we've had armoured SPG for nearly 30 years?

TheLoneRanger
Member
Posts: 331
Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by TheLoneRanger »

K9 makes the most sense - given how many Poland will be buying - we need more commonality - I do think the Army is right on this one.
These users liked the author TheLoneRanger for the post:
Ron5

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Jake1992 »

TheLoneRanger wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 19:26 K9 makes the most sense - given how many Poland will be buying - we need more commonality - I do think the Army is right on this one.
K9 would offer commonality with some allies, I say some as who else is planing on buying it ? RCH 155 will offer commonality with in our own vehicle fleet.

RCH 155 could see the death nail of Ajax as well IMO as a push for tracked Boxer being brought in for it.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

Jake1992 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 20:06 RCH 155 could see the death nail of Ajax as well IMO as a push for tracked Boxer being brought in for it.
RCH155 on tracked Boxer is a gamble, and 5 years away minimum. MFP is planned to see service in 2027.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by SW1 »

If they are going dwn the root of 120mm mortars for the close support role does that not make the requirement for 155mm rather moot as it main role will then be “deep” battle so in stead of replacing it should the artillery not focus on mlrs (tracked/wheeled) for that mission not 155mm guns.

sol
Member
Posts: 528
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 09:11
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by sol »

Jake1992 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 20:06 RCH 155 could see the death nail of Ajax as well IMO as a push for tracked Boxer being brought in for it.
No chance. Ajax will be adopted into the British Army, and its fate would definitely not be impacted by Boxer RCH 155. Also tracked Boxer is still far from being completely developed and tested on its own, and even further from being tested with 155mm gun on it.
SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 20:39 If they are going dwn the root of 120mm mortars for the close support role does that not make the requirement for 155mm rather moot as it main role will then be “deep” battle so in stead of replacing it should the artillery not focus on mlrs (tracked/wheeled) for that mission not 155mm guns.
120mm is replacing 81mm mortars in the mechanised and, potentially, light infantry battalion equipped with light protected vehicles. Units in 16AABCT should keep 81mm mortars tho. 120mm mortar can not replace 155mm just like MLRS can not do it either. 120mm mortar simply don't have a range or weight like 155mm gun. Even 105mm gun has more range and heavier shells than 120mm mortar. Just like 155mm shells are much cheaper than MLRS missiles and have greater RoF. If war in the Ukraine shown something is that heavy artillery is still very important component and UK needs both 155mm guns and MLRS in their arsenal.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 20:39 If they are going dwn the root of 120mm mortars for the close support role does that not make the requirement for 155mm rather moot as it main role will then be “deep” battle so in stead of replacing it should the artillery not focus on mlrs (tracked/wheeled) for that mission not 155mm guns.
Err no.

120mm mortar range is crica 10km.

155mm artillery range is currently 25km in the obsolete AS90 gun system. Newer systems are nearer 40km with standard rounds and beyond 60km with assisted rounds.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by SW1 »

RunningStrong wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 21:48
SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 20:39 If they are going dwn the root of 120mm mortars for the close support role does that not make the requirement for 155mm rather moot as it main role will then be “deep” battle so in stead of replacing it should the artillery not focus on mlrs (tracked/wheeled) for that mission not 155mm guns.
Err no.

120mm mortar range is crica 10km.

155mm artillery range is currently 25km in the obsolete AS90 gun system. Newer systems are nearer 40km with standard rounds and beyond 60km with assisted rounds.
So 120mm won’t be capable of providing the close support previously provided by old as90 it would after all be closer to the front than the old artillery?

are preferring 155mm over mlrs for the deep battle then?

If 120mm mortar are ordered and more mlrs are wanted the 155mm is going to be really squeezed imo as those longer ranged 155mm are both very expensive and have reduced explosives.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 22:07 So 120mm won’t be capable of providing the close support previously provided by old as90 it would after all be closer to the front than the old artillery?
AS90 never provided close support. It was always a long range artillery piece, but in 30 years the capability of artillery has changed.
SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 22:07 are preferring 155mm over mlrs for the deep battle then?
No because they do entirely different things and upgraded GMLRS has greater range again.
SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 22:07 If 120mm mortar are ordered and more mlrs are wanted the 155mm is going to be really squeezed imo as those longer ranged 155mm are both very expensive and have reduced explosives.
How do the 155 have reduced explosives?

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

For me we need to be thinking in terms of Mech Infantry battalion weapons and Artillery weapons

Infantry should be NLAW , Javelin , SP 120mm mortar and Brimstone Overwatch allowing for 1km to 40km range

Artillery should be 155mm and MRLS allowing 40km to 500km range

this could allow the retirement of the 105mm gun and those regiments to transfer to a HIMARS option in tern allowing a re-enforced mechanised battalion battle group to deploy with

NLAW , Javelin , SP 120mm mortar , Brimstone and HIMARS

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 22:07
RunningStrong wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 21:48
SW1 wrote: 17 Feb 2023, 20:39 If they are going dwn the root of 120mm mortars for the close support role does that not make the requirement for 155mm rather moot as it main role will then be “deep” battle so in stead of replacing it should the artillery not focus on mlrs (tracked/wheeled) for that mission not 155mm guns.
Err no.

120mm mortar range is crica 10km.

155mm artillery range is currently 25km in the obsolete AS90 gun system. Newer systems are nearer 40km with standard rounds and beyond 60km with assisted rounds.
So 120mm won’t be capable of providing the close support previously provided by old as90 it would after all be closer to the front than the old artillery?


are preferring 155mm over mlrs for the deep battle then?

If 120mm mortar are ordered and more mlrs are wanted the 155mm is going to be really squeezed imo as those longer ranged 155mm are both very expensive and have reduced explosives.
As we know the British ROWANEX 105mm HE round has the same explosive power as a standard 155mm M107 round so if we wanted we could make some ROWANEX 155mm rounds with the power of a 205mm round

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 09:07 As we know the British ROWANEX 105mm HE round has the same explosive power as a standard 155mm M107 round so if we wanted we could make some ROWANEX 155mm rounds with the power of a 205mm round
Does anyone think the HE content is something that needs improving?

Does increased HR performance balance with the same amount of splintering as the round is physically the same? Would a lower weight, equally explosive performing round offer any advantages?

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

RunningStrong wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 16:15
Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 09:07 As we know the British ROWANEX 105mm HE round has the same explosive power as a standard 155mm M107 round so if we wanted we could make some ROWANEX 155mm rounds with the power of a 205mm round
Does anyone think the HE content is something that needs improving?

Does increased HR performance balance with the same amount of splintering as the round is physically the same? Would a lower weight, equally explosive performing round offer any advantages?
Clearly someone did as they come up with and use the ROWANEX 105mm HE round but what that means on the battle field I don't know I am not a Artillery man

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Ron5 »

Isn't the problem with 105mm that if you put in all the precision guidance with GPS/IR etc, there's not much room left for the bang. And it will still be out ranged by 155mm.

And any SPG versions wouldn't be significantly cheaper and still too heavy for helo's.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

Ron5 wrote: 19 Feb 2023, 13:36 Isn't the problem with 105mm that if you put in all the precision guidance with GPS/IR etc, there's not much room left for the bang. And it will still be out ranged by 155mm.

And any SPG versions wouldn't be significantly cheaper and still too heavy for helo's.
105mm at the ranges it's used at only needs a course correction fuze for sufficient accuracy. It doesn't have the payload for a anti-armour capability anyway, so precision guidance is unnecessary.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

Ron5 wrote: 19 Feb 2023, 13:36 Isn't the problem with 105mm that if you put in all the precision guidance with GPS/IR etc, there's not much room left for the bang. And it will still be out ranged by 155mm.

And any SPG versions wouldn't be significantly cheaper and still too heavy for helo's.
Remember the accuracy of 105 at 20km range is going to be a lot better than 155mm at 40km. But also it depends what sort of guidance you use. If you use a full up dedicated round like Excalibur for 105mm (or Vulcano) the payload will be significantly reduced. But somethng like PGK won't have the same effect, PGK won't have to do the same amount of correction at 20km range so will have a significantly better CEP as well, probably good enough to negate the need for a more complex guided round.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
Ron5

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

Looks like the UK might be abandoning the Denel Assegai shell design in the near future...suspect BAE don't like the licensing costs...

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/land ... ry-rounds/

https://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/land/a ... ammunition

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by SW1 »

Would be nice if on a man truck almost a universal launcher

These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 2):
RunningStrongwargame_insomniac

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

I agree. However, the rigid 10x10 truck used for the Artillery turret is huuuuuge.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 08:55 Infantry should be NLAW , Javelin , SP 120mm mortar and Brimstone Overwatch allowing for 1km to 40km range
Brimstone 3 from ground launch will get you out to 25km....personally I'd retain 81mm Mortar as the volume of fire it can deliver is fantastic. 120mm mortar is nice....but not if it displaces 105mm...The only real advantage of 120mm is that it tends to be Infantry manned and directly under command of the battalion.
Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 08:55 Artillery should be 155mm and MRLS allowing 40km to 500km range
I would add to that that we've got the opportunity to go straight to 58cal 155mm...That opens up ranges of 70km from RAP 155mm, add in PGK and its a fantastic capability.
Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 08:55 this could allow the retirement of the 105mm gun and those regiments to transfer to a HIMARS option in tern allowing a re-enforced mechanised battalion battle group to deploy with
HIMARS is great...but why not just resurrect LIMAWS(R). The development was complete, and Supacat are still there....

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

Timmymagic wrote: 05 Jun 2023, 09:25
Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 08:55 Infantry should be NLAW , Javelin , SP 120mm mortar and Brimstone Overwatch allowing for 1km to 40km range
Brimstone 3 from ground launch will get you out to 25km....personally I'd retain 81mm Mortar as the volume of fire it can deliver is fantastic. 120mm mortar is nice....but not if it displaces 105mm...The only real advantage of 120mm is that it tends to be Infantry manned and directly under command of the battalion.
Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 08:55 Artillery should be 155mm and MRLS allowing 40km to 500km range
I would add to that that we've got the opportunity to go straight to 58cal 155mm...That opens up ranges of 70km from RAP 155mm, add in PGK and its a fantastic capability.
Tempest414 wrote: 18 Feb 2023, 08:55 this could allow the retirement of the 105mm gun and those regiments to transfer to a HIMARS option in tern allowing a re-enforced mechanised battalion battle group to deploy with
HIMARS is great...but why not just resurrect LIMAWS(R). The development was complete, and Supacat are still there....
Well for me the 120mm SP mortar within the Mechanised infantry is a good fit and maybe giving infantry 60mm mortars could be a good move

As for LIMAWS(R) I would be happy with this for me it is about bring deep fire's to a re-enforced Mechanised Battalion or BCT

I would like to see the 1st division move to a Stryker style set up using Patria 6x6

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2783
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Caribbean »

Timmymagic wrote: 05 Jun 2023, 09:25 HIMARS is great...but why not just resurrect LIMAWS(R). The development was complete, and Supacat are still there....
Maybe a redesign to use the lightweight PULS launcher?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

sol
Member
Posts: 528
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 09:11
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by sol »

Tempest414 wrote: 05 Jun 2023, 10:23 Well for me the 120mm SP mortar within the Mechanised infantry is a good fit and maybe giving infantry 60mm mortars could be a good move
I agree about 120mm for mech battalion, Infantry is getting CG as a replacement for 51mm mortar.
Tempest414 wrote: 05 Jun 2023, 10:23 I would like to see the 1st division move to a Stryker style set up using Patria 6x6
Boxer battalions are already Stryker style formation. Unfortunately even weaker than US counterpart as half of the Strykers in US battalion will have 30mm gun. 1st Div should be equipped with JLTV type vehicles.

Post Reply