Are Swedish Archer howitzer trucks any good?

Are Swedish Archer howitzer trucks any good?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    those steps into the cabin look very walkable

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's the exact same design as Volvo articulating rock trucks

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >no suppressor
    how are they going to stealth snipe anyone or do cqc with that?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Get one of these bad boys.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        hehe benis

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        hehe benis

        Benis in ..... benis?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous
  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    On paper they are amazing, but I've read there are some concerns as to platform durability and maintenance.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you'd think a mining truck would be pretty durable

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It’s sadly a case of awesome numbers on papers, and troublesome to operate.

      Huh. Any source on that?
      Not that I don't believe it, those fully automatic systems often have teething problems.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It’s sadly a case of awesome numbers on papers, and troublesome to operate.

      troublesome to maintain and operate FOR ukrainian subhumans. this is nothing new.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yeah, cuz everyone knows that soldiers wears dresses and when time comes you can't shoot any more, remember fuck dying soldiers service are most important thing. loves armchair CoD wariortards and how they understanding everyfuckinthing

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Post hands, rajeesh

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      UK is running their first batch through some pretty hard testing as part of Op Iron Titan so there will be a report to the Defence and Procurement APPG before Christmas so can get a decent assessment.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >platform durability and maintenance.
      It's a fucking Volvo.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Volvo is chinese and french these days, quality has taken a backseat to saving money on parts. Old volvos are still good shit but if you're going for a new car just get a toyota instead.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Volvo CARS, i.e. a completely different company than the one who produces Volvo a30, is owned by chinks yes

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Volvo is chinese
          Volvo's automotive division is.
          Volvo trucks is still entirely Swedish, as is Volvo's earth moving equipment division, and Volvo's jet engine division.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Volvo's aren't that great to maintain. There's a reason US industry steamrolled the entire Axis during WWII. USA NUMBER ONE BABY!

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What? It's a standard A30 dumper chassis.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >1/2
      Short answer? Yes and no
      Long answer?
      Like others have mentioned before, the chassis is based on a Volvo A30 and is damn near indestructible. However, there were some issues early on regarding the specific model going out of production, leading to issues with obsolescence management due to parts. Last time i checked this was covered by Bofors/Hagglunds buying up a shit-ton of parts stocks, especially when Norway signed up for their 24 vehicles.
      But for the chassis itself, the forces from firing the gun is mostly transferred through the rear frame and into the recoil spades, as pic related helps illustrate.

      Most of the reliability&maintenance issues were from a) the howitzer system with the autoloader, b) the electronics, and c) the weight increase.
      a) was, at least during development, tied to the hydraulics and the chamber/barrel of the howitzer and its loader, which did not agree with being miniaturized but also having to handle going from -40 to +150 degrees during firing, as well as shell setback giving way to much deviation in muzzle velocity.
      b) was in relations to the electronics of the system. If you look at the back of the cab, there is a big box for all electronics, circuitry, computers and what not. This compartment would be shaken the fuck out of by the muzzle whenever the gun fired, but especially when firing max charge and within a sector over the cab.
      c) when designed, the Archer was supposed to weigh around 25 tons. This was mostly tied to road regulation regarding max axle weights of a vehicle plus of-road mobility. That weight quickly rose to over 30 tons, leading to more wear and tear on the driveline (the contract specs had it going around 70kph, which it struggled to do even on a slight down hill track). Last time i checked the damn thing was closer to 35 tons but had some upgrades to the gearbox and engine to both go fast and not require an overhaul every 2 years.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Now, there are much much funnier shit from the development of this vehicle than just the reliability. Its the armored cab flexing and almost killing the crew through CO2. Its the aborted (and then re-started without any warning) firing sequences. Its the FMV project managed telling Bofors that the only competent engineers at Karlskoga can only found with the use of a shovel. Or the procedure for misfire. Or the vibration issues and how they fixed it.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >fucked up my formatting, but anyway:
          >2/2
          So there are not really that many damning things about it, most of the things were during development. But it became a bigger story because Bofors had pretty much advertised it as foolproof and ready to roll out of the factory when the Norwegians signed on, and not a set of poorly held together prototypes firing all over the place whenever and where-ever the machine gods wanted.
          Probably a lot of these and other teething issues followed it into Swedish Army usage as well, but from what i hear they are being worked through and that it is now quite a decent system, all be it not quite as simple to maintain as the Swedes had initially expected. But then again ,what is?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >its the armored cab flexing and almost killing the crew through CO2. Its the aborted (and then re-started without any warning) firing sequences.

          Kek, whatnow?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Its the FMV project managed telling Bofors that the only competent engineers at Karlskoga can only found with the use of a shovel.
          SAVAGE

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/7vfMy5B.jpg

        Now, there are much much funnier shit from the development of this vehicle than just the reliability. Its the armored cab flexing and almost killing the crew through CO2. Its the aborted (and then re-started without any warning) firing sequences. Its the FMV project managed telling Bofors that the only competent engineers at Karlskoga can only found with the use of a shovel. Or the procedure for misfire. Or the vibration issues and how they fixed it.

        >fucked up my formatting, but anyway:
        >2/2
        So there are not really that many damning things about it, most of the things were during development. But it became a bigger story because Bofors had pretty much advertised it as foolproof and ready to roll out of the factory when the Norwegians signed on, and not a set of poorly held together prototypes firing all over the place whenever and where-ever the machine gods wanted.
        Probably a lot of these and other teething issues followed it into Swedish Army usage as well, but from what i hear they are being worked through and that it is now quite a decent system, all be it not quite as simple to maintain as the Swedes had initially expected. But then again ,what is?

        thanks for the effortpost (I'm presuming) Swedeanon

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We could have had Archer on Tatra, but Caesar was chosen.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So Archers are dependant on the Chinese?

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Perfect for delivering canisters of snus over the border

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    yeah

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    modern day Tachanka

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      holy jiggle

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It’s sadly a case of awesome numbers on papers, and troublesome to operate.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No lets redevelop Bkan 1
    the name means just "tracked cannon 1"

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We will never know. The Ukrainians have agreed to a clause to not show their donated Swedish equipment in use.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Is there a legit reason behind that or is it some Swedish humanism or such?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Can you make sense of anything Sweden has done over last 20 years?
        The prolific arms industry is a contentious topic in Sweden to say the least.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Swedish military is obsessed with opsec to the point of retardation. Everything is super hush hush even when doing joint operations with foreign partners who publicly announce exactly what happened.

        What? It's a standard A30 dumper chassis.

        Pretty sure the whole 'it can't be maintained' angle was invented by the MIC finding parts for a regular dump truck is going to be an order of magnitude easier than whatever special needs military trucks many other spgs are based on.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          We'll see. Enduring thousands of recoil stresses from a 155mm powder charge at max strength (because you know they'll be shooting from max distance) is something most trucks are not designed for . Those are all speculations right now, but the UA domestic Bohdana which is a similar design is said to have structural problem before the first barrel wears out

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >is something most trucks are not designed for
            But this thing is not most trucks. It's designed for having heavy fucking rocks dropped into it by excavators, the recoil is nothing in comparison.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              https://i.imgur.com/y4yFpS7.jpg

              >UA domestic Bohdana which is a similar design
              It's in no way shape or form a similar design.
              An articulated hauler is a much more rugged and heavy duty design than any semi ever designed.
              They're more closely related to tractors than trucks

              I'll be happy to be wrong
              I guess we should contact the brigade who got archers and send them some drones in exchange for feedback lol

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I'll be happy to be wrong
                You're wrong already on the face of it thinking that the ua truck chassis is similar to that of an articulated hauler.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Question here.

              The recoil from the gun would be putting sudden, violent pressure on the chassis whereas I imagine heavy quarry loads would put slightly different stresses on it. Have I got that right or not?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                How do you think rocks and crushed material is loaded onto the dumper?
                Either dropped in by excavators or free falling from a loading chute, either way its violent as fuck if it's large boulders or a heavy load of crushed material dropped.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Impulse is still going to be lower and also not focused at the tail end of the chassis, even if the overall force is higher. I can't find a good reference for muzzle velocity, but given the US mil was developing a device capable of generating up to 10k Gs in the 70s, and range has only gotten longer since then, that's very different from pouring dirt and rocks from even a couple of yards above it.

                https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD0786512.pdf

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >UA domestic Bohdana which is a similar design
            It's in no way shape or form a similar design.
            An articulated hauler is a much more rugged and heavy duty design than any semi ever designed.
            They're more closely related to tractors than trucks

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              That truck is really badly designed. The engine bay is way out in front, which limits visibility for the driver. Great way to drive it off a cliff or over someone walking around.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Swedish general leaked secret plans about finland sweden co operation if russia attacks. So shut the fuck up sven

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh no someone leaked something that HAS to be public to have the desired effect anyway.
            Case and point.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No I’m sure there is no legit reason behind it and that decision was completely random

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Concealing power.
        People forgot that the archer was even delivered. Judging by it's theoretical capabilities it must wreak havoc but since media profits from spectacle, they can't whip up Wunderwaffe articles since there is no visual content.
        The USA are in a position that allows them a show of force while Sweden dwarfed by the big players in Europe, so it's a good thing to surprise your enemy with weapons that hit harder than expected.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      [...]

      yeah, maybe they've agreed to it but videos are still being released of swedish equipment, official TG channels of various brigades are releasing footage, which the ukie MoD happily reposts on twitter, you also have to worry about all the guys running around with gopros and all the drone operators, we're likely to get more footage eventually.
      some examples
      https://nitter.cz/DefenceU/status/1710357329881759832
      https://nitter.cz/front_ukrainian/status/1679546074527039489

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    artillery gun module from KMW is the best imo.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    seems like himars of arty - shoot and scoot - but due to shorter range they will be much more vulnerable to lancets...

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >barges into any engagement or artillery duel
    >fires three times
    >refuses to elaborate further
    >leaves

    Typical Archer.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    FUCK THE ARCHER! Wake me up when they release some COOL CV90 footage, alright? I'VE WAITED LONG ENOUGH

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/849r1ap.jpg

      We will never know. The Ukrainians have agreed to a clause to not show their donated Swedish equipment in use.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The footage of the ziggers inspecting a captured CV90, poking it with a stick and pondering over a can of fermented fish was pretty cool.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I hope they eventually opened the can
        and filmed the aftermath

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I can sell you better for only 250 million yen
    CHINA NUMBA WAN!

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They are useless niche. Howizers should be platform independent and towee by cheap trucks

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >quantity over quality
      Caesars and PzHs have been shitting on your ideology for over a year now.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Russian tactics are winning tactics. Quantity over quality is always a winning tacting including having men to just throw in the grinder

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So why is Russia losing in Ukraine?
          Or are you one of those delusional “Just you wait for the REAL Russian army to arrive!!” homosexuals?
          Why is Russian artillery fire constantly dwindling, especially after their ammo dumps get destroyed with PGMs?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Ah yes, the Russian wars they won like the... eh...uhhh...em

            Russia has gained 110 000 sq km of ukraine. Ukraine has gained 0 sq km of russia.

            Fact check: archer howizer $4 500 000
            the howizer its based on: $695 000

            So, you get 13 regular howizers in price of 2 fancy howizer. This is why ukraine loses.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Russia has gained 110 000 sq km of ukraine. Ukraine has gained 0 sq km of russia.
              2015 was most of those gains and then they lost to football hooligans in Mariupol.
              How many towed howitzers were in Iraq during the Desert Storm?
              Artillery militaries are a joke.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ukraine does not have air military either. So russia won. Mariupol is always russia now. Only dreams bow

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                But Russia didn't win, there is still a war to be fought.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Zelensky: i thought we would battle until the end?
                Biden: and this is the end

                Oh no someone leaked something that HAS to be public to have the desired effect anyway.
                Case and point.

                The real reason is you want remain neutral and not scare russia too hard. After all, sweden is not in NATO (and never will be)

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Biden isn't the sole reason why Ukraine is still fighting, tard.
                >The real reason is you want remain neutral and not scare russia too hard
                Or what?
                >After all, sweden is not in NATO (and never will be)
                ErDOGan just allowed them to join, tard.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Is there someone you forgot to ask?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Sweden?

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              yeah and you can use those 13 howitzers once before they're counter-battery fire'd (along with their crew, ammo, support vehicles etc) while the mobile artillery can be expected to shoot more than 13 times and still survive, making it more efficient.
              Nevermind that the ability to move quickly makes it much more versatile compared to the WW1 tier howitzer battalion

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Spoken like a guy that wants to sell $600k howizer with price $4.5 million

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              What territory have they taken that
              A) Satisfies the self stated Russian goal of the invasion
              Or
              B) is worth the losses they’ve taken to get it?
              They’ve taken some farmland they can’t even use due to UXOs and some bombed out shells of cities in Europe’s poorest region at the cost of thousands of armored vehicles and untold lives.
              It’d be like if I broke into my neighbors house, got shot and turned into a paraplegic but I got away with a VCR which “xaxaxa it’s mine forever I won!”.
              Judging by the other posts you’re trolling but funny thing is that brownoids are seething so hard today that it’s hard to tell. You might think you’re clever because you’re able to get (you)s, when in reality it’s simply because people on your side are actually retarded enough that people can’t tell bait from their actual opinion.
              Answer this; Is Ukraine on track to be demilitarized any time soon? Is Ukraine on track to be denazified any time soon?
              If not, Russia is failing. If so, how long?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That's the plan

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I like that the narrative changed from denazifying/demilitarizing Ukraine and replacing the kiev junta and assimilating the donbas and luhansk regions, to "if we hold any land at all we win". Truly a super power full of genuine people

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They assimilated donbass and other coastal areas. Ukraine was demilitarized by wrecking their warmachine into pieces. Not all goals were achieved, but objectively russia won as by doing even one goal, i.e. getting donbass.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                kek, they didn't get donbass
                that's the thintg
                why do you think ziggers are dying in meat wave attacks while trying to take Avdiivka

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Is that why Ukraine has more combat power now then before the invasion, while a large portion of Donbass is reduced to rubble and most of its military age males are dead?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >objectively russia won as by doing even one goal, i.e. getting donbass
                If both sides get at least one goal in a war, does that mean everyone wins that war and no one loses? Does that mean that the Confederates won the Civil War because their states retained right? Does it mean that the Ukraine has won the war because they control Kiev? Does it mean that the KMT won because they still govern some Chinese clay?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ah yes, the Russian wars they won like the... eh...uhhh...em

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *