Artillery fire or a kamikaze drone. The biggest revolution in Putin's war is drone spotting for artillery.RunningStrong wrote: ↑16 Feb 2023, 18:58Spotted by a drone armed with what?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.
Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
-
- Member
- Posts: 363
- Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 04:00
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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
Winston Churchill
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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?sunstersun wrote: ↑16 Feb 2023, 19:29Artillery fire or a kamikaze drone. The biggest revolution in Putin's war is drone spotting for artillery.RunningStrong wrote: ↑16 Feb 2023, 18:58Spotted by a drone armed with what?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.
-
- Member
- Posts: 335
- Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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.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.
RCH 155 could see the death nail of Ajax as well IMO as a push for tracked Boxer being brought in for it.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
RCH155 on tracked Boxer is a gamble, and 5 years away minimum. MFP is planned to see service in 2027.
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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.
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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.
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.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.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
Err no.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 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.
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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?RunningStrong wrote: ↑17 Feb 2023, 21:48Err no.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 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.
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.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
AS90 never provided close support. It was always a long range artillery piece, but in 30 years the capability of artillery has changed.
No because they do entirely different things and upgraded GMLRS has greater range again.
How do the 155 have reduced explosives?
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5624
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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
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
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5624
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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 roundSW1 wrote: ↑17 Feb 2023, 22:07So 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?RunningStrong wrote: ↑17 Feb 2023, 21:48Err no.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 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.
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.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
Does anyone think the HE content is something that needs improving?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 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?
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5624
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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 manRunningStrong wrote: ↑18 Feb 2023, 16:15Does anyone think the HE content is something that needs improving?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 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?
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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.
And any SPG versions wouldn't be significantly cheaper and still too heavy for helo's.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3247
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3247
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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
https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/land ... ry-rounds/
https://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/land/a ... ammunition
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
Would be nice if on a man truck almost a universal launcher
- These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 2):
- RunningStrong • wargame_insomniac
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
I agree. However, the rigid 10x10 truck used for the Artillery turret is huuuuuge.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3247
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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 Infantry should be NLAW , Javelin , SP 120mm mortar and Brimstone Overwatch allowing for 1km to 40km 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 Artillery should be 155mm and MRLS allowing 40km to 500km range
HIMARS is great...but why not just resurrect LIMAWS(R). The development was complete, and Supacat are still there....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
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5624
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
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 moveTimmymagic wrote: ↑05 Jun 2023, 09:25Brimstone 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 Infantry should be NLAW , Javelin , SP 120mm mortar and Brimstone Overwatch allowing for 1km to 40km 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 Artillery should be 155mm and MRLS allowing 40km to 500km range
HIMARS is great...but why not just resurrect LIMAWS(R). The development was complete, and Supacat are still there....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
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
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
Maybe a redesign to use the lightweight PULS launcher?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....
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments
I agree about 120mm for mech battalion, Infantry is getting CG as a replacement for 51mm mortar.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
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.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