ERCA cancelled

>The U.S army has canceled its ERCA program which is capable of firing certain shells over 110KM. The army cited excessive barrel wear in prototypes.

What's the future of American artillery now? More refreshes of the M109?

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2024/03/11/us-army-scraps-extended-range-cannon-artillery-prototype-effort/

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    What's the program in the middle?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Good, the initial prototypes couldn't fit the autoloader and it kept getting pushed back so that plus barrel life mean it's the right call to cancel. With Russian artillery numbers and quality in the state it it'll be okay. M109 needs to be replaced but it's important that they get it right.

      XM1201-09. Was the a fricked sort of M2/M113/M109 replacement. Got canned officially due to budget cuts and the focus on the sandwars and lack of IED protection.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >With Russian artillery numbers and quality in the state it it'll be okay.
        You can criticize a lot about their military but no serious analyst claims they don't have superior artillery numbers, that's just delusional.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          HAD superior numbers. Nowadays that's just not true unless you count ww2 era guns that have bores rusted out one caliber wider than they meant to.

          Reminder that US have 1000 M109s, 1000 M270s and 500+ HIMARS systems in active service with more units being produced each month. This was broadly comparable to the russian pre-war numbers for the self propelled artillery units, with russian stuff being much older and less modernized. The source for the huge russian artillery numbers have been the towed guns, and they're burning through them at an alarming rate too.

          The only caveat to all this remains the military presense and balance in Europe, but seeing how fricked russians are it's not really something to be concerned either.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Reminder that US have 1000 M109s, 1000 M270s and 500+ HIMARS systems in active service with more units being produced each month.

            Now tell me US ammo production and procurement. Its next to nonexistent compared to the numbers of guns.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >need to increase ammo production
              >build new factories
              >???
              >profit
              its not super complicated

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                except none of that has happened shit brain,
                and it wont be happening, ever
                and even the most optimistic assessments of the totality of nato's production pooled to gether by 2028 is ~100k shells/month at full surge-production capacity,
                which is roughly the amount of shells Russia was shooting off every 36hrs in Summer/Fall of 2022, and parts of 2023

                valueless shitbrain

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >except none of that has happened shit brain,
                General Dynamic is building a plant in Texas as we speak.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              There's about 6000 GMRLS rockets produced every year, which is 6000 times more than the russian equivalent.

              except none of that has happened shit brain,
              and it wont be happening, ever
              and even the most optimistic assessments of the totality of nato's production pooled to gether by 2028 is ~100k shells/month at full surge-production capacity,
              which is roughly the amount of shells Russia was shooting off every 36hrs in Summer/Fall of 2022, and parts of 2023

              valueless shitbrain

              >and even the most optimistic assessments of the totality of nato's production pooled to gether by 2028 is ~100k shells/month at full surge-production capacity
              Why spread such blatant lies, shitskin?
              >which is roughly the amount of shells Russia was shooting off every 36hrs
              russia has been mowing empty fields with their shells ww2 style this entire war

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Why spread such blatant lies, shitskin?
                its right here you fricking shit brain
                and theres no less than a dozen+ identical articles from any *source* you want to choose from, all saying the same thing

                https://www.army.mil/article/273152/us_army_and_industry_partners_mobilize_to_boost_us_artillery_production
                >"At present, the U.S. Army is manufacturing 30,000 155mm rounds per month, doubling its previous output of 14,000 rounds prior to the conflict. Moreover, plans are underway to build and commission new production facilities to further expand production capacity."
                >"his initiative, undertaken by the Joint Program Executive Office Armaments and Ammunitions (JPEO A&A), aims to produce 100,000 155mm artillery projectiles per month by 2025."

                but where the millions of pounds of "energetics" will come from is anyones guess
                and when ground will be broke on these new "factories" was never stated

                you should just completely and totally stop talking about shell production
                just back away from the topic at all, and enforce better message discipline to avoid embarrassing btfo moments that make you look like an even bigger shit brain than you already are

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                So not the "totality of NATO's production" becomes current non-surge US production rate.

                Funny how you ignore guided weapons because your moronic shit for brains handler didn't mention them in the metodichka.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                the US is currently at *SURGE* rates
                >~30k a month
                right now

                IF the new factories are built
                IF the millions of lbs of propellant are delivered
                then MAYBE ~100k shells could be produced at surge rate, by 4th quarter 2025

                the
                >*
                here is that european nations will be supplementing the current ~30k US produced per month, to bring that number to ~100k per month, from the "nato-sphere"

                its duplicitous, misleading explanation of the production scheme

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you talk like a schizophrenic?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                for some reason artillery threads bring out the morons. Look no further than the dipshit saying that tracked SPG's are needed for island hopping in the 2020s/30s because they needed it in the 40s and screeching about 8x8s

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >USA can't into metallurgy and ballistic technology North Korea mastered literally half a century ago

        SAD! Many such cases!

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The US had 203mm artillery for decades before phasing them out in favor of M270 and HIMARS.

          Also using a frickhuge 58 caliber barrel was pretty experimental to begin with and I'm not surprised that the Army quickly found out a barrel that long was going to be a maintenance nightmare.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            why not put the old barrel but leave all the features?

            Word is they are opening it up to outside bids. So likely to see stuff like K9 and PzH2000 offered.

            Damn, this and the FREMMs, US must feel pretty desperate to have something to replace inventory. It will probably come down to how fast contenders can build assembly line in the US.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              The consequences of the peace dividend. Follow up programs from the 90's were canceled. Attempts in the 2000's failed for various reasons, budget priorities for GWOT, program bloat and mismanagement etc. Now they find themselves 30 years on with largely the same equipment we had at the end of the cold war and a new one starting with China. The US has to rearm and fast, faster than it can realistically design, test and field everything it needs. So opening up to off the shelf solutions in the short term is the only thing you can do.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                So basically euros aviation industry got fricked and skipped entire 5th gen, but rest of MIC limped along by turning to exports,
                While US kept the dominant aviation but other things just crashed and burned.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The USAF and USN always got the priority for funding for obvious reasons. While the USAF more or less turned out fine, the problem with the USN was that apart from the Fords, they didn't actually know what they really wanted out of the LCS and Zumwalt and an entire generation of surface combatants was lost.

                The Army and Marines were always working with the short stick, which is why you see the Marines reorganizing into a lighter force and the Army putting greater funding priority into their missile forces.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >entire generation of surface combatants was lost.
                Not... really?
                I mean the LCS and Zumwalt turned out suboptimally and well overbudget, but the Zumwalt is getting its hypersonic missile upgrade while the LCSs are replacing the Avengers as mine-clearers and smaller surface combatants

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                There are a total of 92 Burkes planned with 73 active right now and there will ever be only 3 Zumwalts. Of course it is good that they were built to preserve the institutional knowledge and no doubt many things developed for the class will be useful on DDG(X)

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                There's only 3 Zumwalts and many of the LCSes are due for early retirement. Until the Constellations are start getting built, the majority of the surface combat workload still falls on the Burkes.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              The only thing setting apart ERCA from the A7 is the gun and autoloader. The A7 already got all the non-gun upgrades.

              Realistically, I can see the Army paring back their requirements to use a more standard 52 caliber barrel in a future M109 block.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            why not put the old barrel but leave all the features?
            [...]
            Damn, this and the FREMMs, US must feel pretty desperate to have something to replace inventory. It will probably come down to how fast contenders can build assembly line in the US.

            The 170mm Koksan cannon has been the most feared long range cannon on earth for more than half a century. Iraq to this day is trying to replicate it.

            It has a greater range than any other commonly deployed artillery system on the planet.

            The 170mm Koksan Cannons range and quality have been confirmed by the USA on several occasions, notably in the Iran/Iraq war, via an example seized from Iraq and through live fire exercises that the UAE allowed the USA to observe that confirmed it's range and the accuracy of it's GPS/GLSS base bleed rocket shells.

            It is no surprise that no one besides the Choson Race who invented firearms in the first place would be able to master this technology, the USA is trying to play catch up to a people whose technology eclipses theirs by over half a millennium.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Truly light of the greatest Korea is above all

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                This guy gets it. If you ever hear this song sung by the Moronbang Band in your city please hide and we will rescue you as soon as possible.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Nice fanfiction.

              The only Koksan the US recovered from Iraq was a nonfunctional piece they captured and later scuttled.

              The only Koksan that ever went to the UAE was a parade piece.

              Also none of this is indicative of the Koksan's barrel quality, which was the US' main point of concern regarding the ERCA. NK, Iran, and Iraq may be willing to accept shit barrels but the US pretty clearly doesn't.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Iraq captured 12 during the Iran/Iraq war. The USA didn't 'scuttle' the example they took, they eventully gave it back. They gave it back to the new Iraqi government which has been trying to copy it for decades.

                The UAE has a battery of them.

                Reports from the Iran/Iraq war/UAE give the Koksan a normal rate of barrel wear with normal charges, it can do around 1000 on it's maximum charge assuming a new barrel. It has a very high rate of barrel wear but that is to be expected.

                TL;DR: You know nothing about Best Gun made by Best Korea.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Nice fanfiction.

                The only Koksan the US recovered from Iraq was a nonfunctional piece they captured and later scuttled.

                The only Koksan that ever went to the UAE was a parade piece.

                Also none of this is indicative of the Koksan's barrel quality, which was the US' main point of concern regarding the ERCA. NK, Iran, and Iraq may be willing to accept shit barrels but the US pretty clearly doesn't.

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

                [...]
                The 170mm Koksan cannon has been the most feared long range cannon on earth for more than half a century. Iraq to this day is trying to replicate it.

                It has a greater range than any other commonly deployed artillery system on the planet.

                The 170mm Koksan Cannons range and quality have been confirmed by the USA on several occasions, notably in the Iran/Iraq war, via an example seized from Iraq and through live fire exercises that the UAE allowed the USA to observe that confirmed it's range and the accuracy of it's GPS/GLSS base bleed rocket shells.

                It is no surprise that no one besides the Choson Race who invented firearms in the first place would be able to master this technology, the USA is trying to play catch up to a people whose technology eclipses theirs by over half a millennium.

                https://i.imgur.com/KVKyEf6.jpg

                >USA can't into metallurgy and ballistic technology North Korea mastered literally half a century ago

                SAD! Many such cases!

                There is a Spore model of it that does a very good job of showing how it was built, the things are pretty big:

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D0z_24bYcs

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Choson
              Paekje beats Choson

              ancestral Buyeo breaks up. slave caste became choson. warriors caste became Paekje. you are gay

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The US had 203mm artillery for decades before phasing them out in favor of M270 and HIMARS.

            The US also had long range 175 mm artillery before converting them into 203 mm howitzers.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Ice Cream Carrier

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The Future Combat Systems Manned Ground Vehicle. A family of vehicles including a MBT, IFV, SPG, mortar carrier, ambulance, ARV, recon vehicle, and C2 vehicle ALL built on a single common chassis (the one in the dead center).

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Combat_Systems_Manned_Ground_Vehicles

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Unironically I feel like there needs to be more light arty. With the next war looking like island hopping again, having guns with good mobility in that kind of environment is going to be important, as is rate of fire. Having good range is still important but less so especially when HIMARS exists to supplement it. Hell we've got GLSDB if we need it now now and ER GMLRS is slated to be in service next year.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >light arty
      M119. You can sling load a humvee and the gun then bring another helicopter for the ammo.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I'm thinking more a lighter tracked, autoloading SPG to supplement M109 rather than a lightweight towed howitzer. I know the island chains aren't nearly as jungle-covered as they used to be in WWII but I don't think relying on Humvees to tow guns in the jungles is gonna work out

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I mean yeah but that'd be an orphaned child in the current force structure, USMC might like it but that'd be about it.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I mean we're talking about the next war, I think it makes sense that we need to think about re-organizing. Sure, war is unlikely to break out but we need to be ready for it. I don't think we can rely on M109 in such cases and being able to load more than one per hovercraft at combat load would be good logistically.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              But they just DID reorganize. ERCA was meant to supplement the M109 in heavier divisions. Pic related, light divisions don't even have M109s let alone ERCA.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes and I'm saying instead of pursing an ERCA-esque program again we should put serious thought into a lightweight SPG to supplement light divisions with. We're already adding MPF to them because we recognize the gap in capabilities there and I think there's a gap in artillery capabilities.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I mean that's kinda silly though, unless you can airlift it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, that'd be the point anon, a gun lighter than M109 that still offers that offroad mobility and provides a lot of fire support in a small package.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I mean, that's still the M119 though. They were making fire bases in the middle of valleys and shit in Vietnam, ground mobility is kinda irrelevant when you can airlift it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Did you forget just how vulnerable helis are to ground fire these days? The jungles are going to be infested with fricking MANPADS, not just DShKs.

                The Army is like:
                >We don’t need this advantage to overmatch our opponent in a future war *cancels*
                Based?

                >yeah no bro just pay all this money for a gun that wears itself out hilariously fast that we're gonna have to try really hard to fit an autoloader in there. Especially when the most relevant enemy that this system is designed for is currently shitting the bed

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >what is nap of the earth fire
                Need I remind you that the VDV, over clear water, made it the entire way to the outskirts of Kyiv with like two losses?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >they flew through in a surprise attack
                >surely this means chang won't place a gorillion infantrymen all over the jungle with MANPADS galore
                >btw ignore the heli loss rates after the invasion started

                light artillery in the context of the pacific isn't super relevant. The pacific is yuge, tube range is not. Good mobility in an island hopping campaign looks like something you can sling under a chopper, which is the pretty much the towed shit they already use and even that isn't super useful in the pacific.
                [...]
                [...]
                There's been a lot of army work into lightweight self propelled howitzers. Things like Hawkeye and Brutus. The issue isn't a question of capability or desire but more of cost. Infantry divisions are the most numerous army unit and self-propelled anything is going to be a hell of a lot more expensive than a basic b***h towed system in total cost, maintenance, and training. You also loose the ability to fly them easily into weird spots which is a major advantage of towed shit. It's a good idea for the army IMO but they're gonna need to find a way to balance it out.
                [...]
                I can see where he's coming from given the prevalence of drones + counterbattery getting very lethal. Wheeled 105/155 systems are fine if you're willing to pay but towed still has it's place. I think ideally armored units would get an M109 type system, traditional SPH meme. Stryker units would get a wheeled system, and infantry would get a 2/3 towed 1/3 wheeled mix.

                I hate to always refer back to WWII but I think tube arty is still going to be hugely relevant to modern island hopping. Especially if we're expecting Chang to start fortifying. Yes, we've got HIMARS, we've got airstrikes but we should be planning for all eventualities. I know Hawkeye and Brutus are around but my whole point is wheeled mobility might not be sufficient in that environment. We don't need to throw this into every infantry div either.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >surprise attack
                They had MANPADS in place waiting for them to come you fricking moron. I'm done replying to you.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I can see where he's coming from given the prevalence of drones + counterbattery getting very lethal.
                I mean yeah, but that's the problem of the supporting assets, not the artillery. Towed is completely fine if you can keep drones away. I don't know why everyone obsesses about the fricking things.

                How about a new approach then: power-driven towed artillery via an auxiliary 25hp lawnmower engine? The engine helps power up rough, hilly terrain and quickly reposition from wherever the helicopters have landed it, and it can also power hydraulics for rapidly deploying the stabilizers or add a power rammer to fire faster. Seems like one of the rare good ideas among VDV kit.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Sweden built exactly that in the 1970s. Turned out as a relativly good concept, and today, 50 years later you could probably cut the weight in half. Named Haubits 77 if you want to look it up.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Beautiful! With NATO rearming it seems the perfect time for a FH777.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                They are all retired by now as someone figured out that putting them on dump trucks increased mobility significantly

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                RETVRN
                >14 shells in 45 seconds
                Imagine with modern guided ammo.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                ?si=RTXWvNF_NgVtfXYf It fires at 2:14. While the insane RoF is kino as frick, I think we won't see its like again now that we have the Archer. Allegedly only the original engineers could make complex repairs on the Bkan which isn't great with a conscript army.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's a perfect time for Bofors deez FH77s lmao

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Beautiful! With NATO rearming it seems the perfect time for a FH777.

                Haubits 77A used the German locking system with a block and a short stub case for obturation. It managed 7 shots in 21 seconds or 1 shot ever 3.5 second. But it was not the USA derived NATO standard, so 77B had an interrupted screw and the rate of fire dropped to 1 shot ever 5 seconds. Archer fires one shot every 9 seconds because the platform jiggles after firing which is why the norwegians dropped it.

                BTW Scharnhost and Gneisenau managed to reload in 17 seconds under battle conditions because they used the block and short obturation case system. American BBs manage 1 shot per 60 seconds because they use interrupted screws and a loading mechanism that has to go slow or the powder bags detonate from friction heating, which is what happend to Iowas B turret.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                they see me rollin

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >How about a new approach then: power-driven towed artillery via an auxiliary 25hp lawnmower engine?

                A friend once enlisted the services of a mobile elevator platform, it used an auxillary engine to move around and it sank into the soft ground on his lawn. We managed to salvage it by sticking planks under the wheels. These things work fine on parade grounds or inside the depot with hard ground but not in the field. His immaculate lawn looked quite wrecked afterwards. If you upgrade this concept just a little bit you end up with a crude SPG.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/16Bq6N9.jpg

                Sweden built exactly that in the 1970s. Turned out as a relativly good concept, and today, 50 years later you could probably cut the weight in half. Named Haubits 77 if you want to look it up.

                Finnish 155 GH 52 APU

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                useless without shells

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes projectile weapons tend to not work without ammo.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >I'm thinking more a lighter tracked, autoloading SPG to supplement M109 rather than a lightweight towed howitzer
          So like a K9 Thunder?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Anon K9 is a fat frick, what are you talking about? Are you asiaticshill? You better not be.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              My bad, I forgot the K9A2 was much heavier than the M109A7.
              If your goal is lightweight but still tracked, then I don't think there are many options. The 'lightweight' part has been met by wheeled 6x6 and 8x8 vehicles.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah, an AMPV or M10 chassis with an autoloading 105mm howitzer (or a 76mm OTO, since that's already widely available and diversifies the critical counter-UAS role) would be great. A modern, long range take on the old IFV-based FV433 or light-tank derived Mk 61. At about 16-18 tons, half the weight of an M109.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Heavy mortars would be perfect for island campaigns, anything too strong for them can be deal with via proper artillery or direct fires.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          What like some sort of Nona-S deal with a 105 or 120gun/mortar. The 120 gun mortar seems to be popular recently and that would be decent at putting the hurt on stuff.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Gun mortars are frickin gay

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >What like some sort of Nona-S deal with a 105 or 120gun/mortar. The 120 gun mortar seems to be popular recently and that would be decent at putting the hurt on stuff.

            At a maximum range of 12 km you are in the kill zone of enemy drones. With rocket assisted ammot this goes out to 17-18 km. These "mortars" are not mortars, they are rifled howitzers with recoil absorbers where the diameter over the lands is 120 mm so they can fire mortar bombs with a reduced charge.

            BTW the latest Swedish sp mortar, the "Mjölner", has a 6 km maximum range. It is obsolete when fielded.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Very true, but keep in mind infantry etc are going to be in the front 10km range band regardless and they're going to want fire support; while drone teams are going to continue boosting their ranges to go after howitzers.

              GMLRS type rockets are probably the future but howitzers and mortars of some kind will remain on armies' shopping lists, just like tanks.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I'd go find a M1 75mm pack howitzer and mount that shit on a modified Bradly hull. That should be enough to deal with whatever you're asking

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          So an updated 108?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That and/or close support mortars. Dispersion = survivability in light of Ukranian events. Cheaper and lighter is imperative. Kill Chain should be faster with mortars, provided the carriers can safely enter range with drone spotting.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      light artillery in the context of the pacific isn't super relevant. The pacific is yuge, tube range is not. Good mobility in an island hopping campaign looks like something you can sling under a chopper, which is the pretty much the towed shit they already use and even that isn't super useful in the pacific.

      Yes and I'm saying instead of pursing an ERCA-esque program again we should put serious thought into a lightweight SPG to supplement light divisions with. We're already adding MPF to them because we recognize the gap in capabilities there and I think there's a gap in artillery capabilities.

      Yes, that'd be the point anon, a gun lighter than M109 that still offers that offroad mobility and provides a lot of fire support in a small package.

      There's been a lot of army work into lightweight self propelled howitzers. Things like Hawkeye and Brutus. The issue isn't a question of capability or desire but more of cost. Infantry divisions are the most numerous army unit and self-propelled anything is going to be a hell of a lot more expensive than a basic b***h towed system in total cost, maintenance, and training. You also loose the ability to fly them easily into weird spots which is a major advantage of towed shit. It's a good idea for the army IMO but they're gonna need to find a way to balance it out.

      I mean, that's still the M119 though. They were making fire bases in the middle of valleys and shit in Vietnam, ground mobility is kinda irrelevant when you can airlift it.

      I can see where he's coming from given the prevalence of drones + counterbattery getting very lethal. Wheeled 105/155 systems are fine if you're willing to pay but towed still has it's place. I think ideally armored units would get an M109 type system, traditional SPH meme. Stryker units would get a wheeled system, and infantry would get a 2/3 towed 1/3 wheeled mix.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I can see where he's coming from given the prevalence of drones + counterbattery getting very lethal.
        I mean yeah, but that's the problem of the supporting assets, not the artillery. Towed is completely fine if you can keep drones away. I don't know why everyone obsesses about the fricking things.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        There is zero chance anyone will fly in towed howitzers anymore. At most, lightweight howitzers on Humvees chassis or equivalent can be airlifted in, but only because they can be mobile.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Flying howitzers in is dependent on the situation. It's relevant for a ground war in Europe, artillery in general is irrelevant to the pacific.

          >they flew through in a surprise attack
          >surely this means chang won't place a gorillion infantrymen all over the jungle with MANPADS galore
          >btw ignore the heli loss rates after the invasion started
          [...]
          I hate to always refer back to WWII but I think tube arty is still going to be hugely relevant to modern island hopping. Especially if we're expecting Chang to start fortifying. Yes, we've got HIMARS, we've got airstrikes but we should be planning for all eventualities. I know Hawkeye and Brutus are around but my whole point is wheeled mobility might not be sufficient in that environment. We don't need to throw this into every infantry div either.

          I think you're misunderstanding what the marines meant when they said island hopping. They don't want to take islands from china at all, they want to set up killzones for Chinese ships using long range missiles. The context of a war in the pacific is entirely predicated on Taiwan, where the main goal is to destroy the landing force and prevent them from getting a foothold on Taiwan itself. Any artillery, whether it's light, heavy, tracked, or wheeled is pretty much not going to be useful in this situation unless you're China or Taiwan. If you wanted to support Taiwan with long range fires from an island as the US then the useful weapon set is cruise and ballistics missiles in the 500-1000km+ range exclusively.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Flying howitzers in is irrelevant for a ground war in Europe because it will never be used.
            Artillery in general is very relevant to the Pacific. Same as armor. It works and it saves lives because it helps clearing out entrenched enemy positions. Especially in an age where air power is more at risk and can't cover the gap between mortars and nukes, as reliably.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Flying howitzers in is irrelevant for a ground war in Europe because it will never be used
              hurry anon go tell every military to stop doing this since you know better kek
              >Artillery in general is very relevant to the Pacific. Same as armor.
              Outside of Taiwan itself, which is dubious on it's own right, name one scenario where the US would have to clear out an entrenched Chinese position on an island using tubed artillery and heavy armor.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >hurry anon go tell every military to stop doing this since you know better kek
                Does any euro military besides the bongs still use air-mobile artillery? (Unless you count loading an SPG intoA C-17 or something)

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >hurry anon go tell every military to stop doing this
                I don't have to. The already did. See programs like Ceaser, Archer, K9, AMOS, NEMO, HIMARS, CHUNMO, Boxer RCH, drones etc.
                >name one scenario where the US would have to clear out an entrenched Chinese position on an island using tubed artillery and heavy armor
                Papua New Gunea, Burma, Philippines, Iwo Jima, Wake Island, Guadalcanal etc. Just replace your word Chinese with Japanese and it has been done.
                Significant American and Australian lives were saved because of the employment of armor and artillery in the Pacific.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                anon just because cool wheeled shit shit exists doesn't mean that flying towed shit doesn't fill a niche. It's still done and situation dependent and that's all I was ever saying about it lol
                >Papua New Guinea, Burma, Philippines, Iwo Jima, Wake Island, Guadalcanal etc.
                China's A2AD strategy is predicated on airpower, MRBMs and IRBMs fired from deep inside their own territory. You think that they're going to spare their sealift capability to land and support units on random SE Asia islands when they already have the most complex amphibious operation since D-Day right in front of them? And you think this now means American needs to land tubes and tanks to deal with them and not bomb them from standoff?
                >Significant American and Australian lives were saved because of the employment of armor and artillery in the Pacific.
                Even more lives are saved by using standoff weapons and airpower than committing artillery, infantry, and heavy armor in the first place.
                Your version is more kino but I think it's based on some wild assumptions anon

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The southern pacific is full of such islands, and if the Chinese go full moron they may try to secure the Strait of Malacca or other strategic regions. Same logic as Japan last go around, "Maybe we can make a conflict so messy America will allow us to keep some of what we took".

                Having a variety of specialized hardware prototyped and ready for production if needed is a cheap insurance policy.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Why not dedicated arty ships, like mini battleships?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Why not dedicated arty ships, like mini battleships?

        The Zumwalt was supposed to do this but the magic supergun was impossible from the start. It was a pure fraud, the solution was already available off the shelf in the form of a large gun in 240-280 mm caliber firing subcaliber muntions with a discarding sabot. USN did a lot of research into this back in the 50s and 60s. From a technological perspective, the Zumwalt system was pure fraud because it promised the impossible. To get the required muzzle velocity without subcaliber ammo you would need insane chamber pressure and to have the gun last more than a couple of shots you would need impossible materials. Due to the absence of staff officers with a basic insight in technology and natural sciences, the US procurement system has devolved into a massive system of grifting trough R&Ding impossible technologies under cost-plus contracts.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The next war is amphibious assault and holding coastal inlands and guerrilla raids in mainland.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Hate to say it but NATO should have standardized on the 25 pounder as well as the 155mm.

      The smaller shell allows for less chewing up of the land you're about to advance over, plus allows infantry and vehicles to keep closer to a rolling or creeping barrage, as the 155 mm shells have a pretty big danger radius. In addition, since the shell is smaller and lighter, you can keep up suppression on targets for longer as the friendly infantry closes on the objective without tiring your gunners out as much.

      Dont get me wrong, for destruction the 155mm is where it's at, but for advancing through the trench hell that the Ukies are doing, a creeping barrage would work fine and dandy for neutralization, or suppression in effect.

      Again, hate to say it but sometimes a quick barrage of light shells followed seconds later by a well trained infantry assault to kill the survivors is better than shelling a position for 11 months and stumbling towards it like the russians have been doing in Ukraine.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    i thought we were focusing on missiles

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >M109 must go
    >Who must go?

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Army is like:
    >We don’t need this advantage to overmatch our opponent in a future war *cancels*
    Based?

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    failgun possibly

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Also, why not just cancel the US Army? Literally, why not? The nation is apparantly under a ridiculous amount of debt and it running out of leeway to keep printing money, so why not get rid of this giant institution which won’t actually DO anything? Unless we plan to actually occupy another country then it’s literally worthless, the Air Force and Navy will continue to be the world cop arm, and even when we do occupy another country it never lasts and alway ends up being a massive waste of money anyway. All the Army’s shit is old and they wouldn’t be effective in a (near)peer war without the USAF anyway. Recruitment numbers are way down. So let the Marines be the occupational force for temporary policing action against sand people when bombing by itself isn’t enough. Just get rid of the Army.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      now we're cooking with gas.
      and while we're at it
      imagine there's no countries

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Per Powell, inflation isn't an issue, and they can focus on maximum employment. So called debt's a check Red China can't cash without totally rug pulling it's own Giga-Subprime overleveraged shell game bs. Russia 100% would intermediate nuke black mail Western Europe into being its technological sugar daddy. Ain't happening because it's in Uncle Sam's interest of not allowing cargo cultists access to space in any meaningful way.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >cancel the US Army

      The Army branch is the most pointless branch in the US military.

      The Navy, AirForce, and SpaceForce are by a mile much more important and relevant than the Army.

      Hell, even the Coast Guard are more useful than the Army since they have utility during peacetime.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        this only makes sense if you think that future peer warfare is going to be nothing more than a massive missile exchange.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        this only makes sense if you think that future peer warfare is going to be nothing more than a massive missile exchange.

        well shit, why even fight on the ground at all?
        Might as well change the entire military doctrine to fighting exclusively from the air via planes/drones/PGMs/loitering munitions/etc.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >why not just cancel the US Army?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      With america playing world police everyone is going to try to ethnically cleanse their neighbors and or grab territory

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The entire DOD is about to be <15% of all federal government spending. It's going to be smaller than the interest paid on the debt. Disarming isn't going to fix anything.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    People are really shilling for light arty in here? Must be a euro thing like posting cat pictures. Anyone who calls for light arty in the light of the Ukraine war are being silly.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don't disagree, but the have you worked out that the discussion is not necessarily about emplaced lightweight, but more mobile lightweight.
      Also, Ukraine is the direct opposite of South East Asia. Ukraine has flat, open fields with long sight lines, SEA has mountains, hills, beaches and jungles.

      and just in case you forget, no, I am still not in favour of towed lightweight arty. It must be wheeled at a minimum

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Anyone who calls for light arty in the light of the Ukraine war are being silly.

      The ukies use enormous amounts of light artillery all the way down to 23 mm. If anything, the ukrainan war shows that the US/NATO army artillery doctrine is dinousar tier.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    lmao
    so much for that ERCA battery in the Penetration Division

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Is there something wrong with guided missiles? Why were they spending money on another big cannon (that fired ammo nearly as expensive as the guided missiles it was competing against)?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This. What the frick does this offer over PrSM?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Artillery shell is smaller, with all that entails.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This. What the frick does this offer over PrSM?

      Uhhhhh….I’m pretty sure those ERCA charges would cost less than 3.5 million a shot.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >that fired ammo nearly as expensive as the guided missiles
      Lay of the coke my man.
      Some of the high end guided shells are stupid expensive, but it can also fire normal cheap shells with decent accuracy.
      And it gives you superior magazine depth, volume of fire and a much lighter logistics footprint per fire.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You're thinking of the Navy's AGS program. ERCA shells were more like $10K or less, plus another $10K for the PGK fuze (guidance is pretty much mandatory at extended ranges).

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Uhhhh bros???

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Combat_Systems_Manned_Ground_Vehicles

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You are not yet ready for MARAUDER.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The army cited excessive barrel wear in prototypes.
    the real reasons is that it would be useless without shells

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Rocket Artillery. Until Titanium barrels can be mass produced easily we are reaching a metallurgy ceiling with our current steels.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    M109s in mars

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Died with Crusader
    Damnit... Frick you OP, I've got tears for the Comanche and all the 90s kinoware.
    >F-22 was the only survivor of that era because it tore the throat out of someone in its crib before it ran off becoming the scariest fighter for a ewhile.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Seawolves are also alive and kicking.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Kinoest era of late/post Cold War hardware
        Limited numbers like B-2...

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >They took the Comanche, Little Comanche and the XM29 from me
    I HATE THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Word is they are opening it up to outside bids. So likely to see stuff like K9 and PzH2000 offered.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >More refreshes of the M109?
    ERCA -WAS- a refresh of the M109

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    More focus on longer range shells it looks like.
    >The company tested the projectile using a 39-calibre standard M109A7 and exceeded “more than double” the artillery's current range.
    >Miller said advancements in “miniaturised” technology enabled the guidance systems for the projectile but declined to provide details for the “secret” package developed by BAE Systems.
    https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/ausa-2023-bae-systems-boeing-face-off-for-us-army-extended-range-advanced-projectiles

    >In early 2022, the predecessor to our XM1155-SC concept, BAE Systems’ Extended Range Hypervelocity Projectile (HVP-ER) successfully destroyed a target at a range of more than 110 kilometers.
    https://www.baesystems.com/en/article/bae-systems-successfully-tests-guided-projectile

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      guided extended range tube artillery is a stupid meme

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        How so? PGK is as cheap as a JDAM kit, and at those ranges, the CEP on unguided shells is measured in miles.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >13k for a couple lbs of metal and a little guidance package

          Military contracting prices are absolutely disgusting

          >and hits within 50 m (160 ft) of the target at any range

          It's also worthless

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I genuinely don't get the point. At that kind of range you'll need guidance to have a chance in hell of hitting a point target and you'll never beat the kind of grid square saturation that MLRS can provide. What's the point of uber long ranged tube arty?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Counterbattery. Shorter-ranged systems like Caesar and M777 get wrecked in Ukraine, and it's only going to get worse

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Just buy a license from a US ally and make their gun in the US, and focus on innovation on ammo and sensors/ integration instead of the base vehicle.

    One of the big advantages for US and NATO/ western countries is that whenever one nations defense procurement goes wrong they can use others successful programs instead to help recover. The US should lean on that more.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    threads today are of a suspiciously high quality, it feels like 2013 again

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    WHY CAN'T WE HAVE NICE THINGS?

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >ERCA cancelled

    good, all traditional tube artillery even mortars need to be replaced by PGMs or drones.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Uhhh, tube artillery has been PGM-capable for over a decade

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I still don't get why the price of Excalibur is so obscene, while PGK is MUCH more cheaper.

        hell, we got missiles that are more effective AND cheaper than Excalibur.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Is the quoted price of excalibur the actual cost to build a shell or the price of developing it divided over a small production run?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Excalibur was a custom-built shell that tried to be a missile more than a shell. It had a folding tail that would slow the shell rotation and then correct it mid flight using those control surfaces, with all the similar electronics and power fitted inside. Coupled with the rocket motor, you're left with a substantially smaller explosive load in the shell too.

          PGK uses the shell rotation to generate its own electricity AND steer the shell at the same time without actually chaning the shell behavior but rather capitalizing on it. It's such a genious, elegant solution that i wouldn't believe modern society could even produce one if not for the fact that we just did.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Now imagine if they figure out how to put an electro-optical guidance in the tip ahead of the winged rotating band.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              it's dopesick, my brah

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebzh12PR0-U
            Now imagine if they figure out how to put an electro-optical guidance in the tip ahead of the winged rotating band.

            would that work on sabot rounds?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It works on most shells that accept the standard 155mm fuse. There are some old ones that don't because the PGK is a bit longer than standard fuses. If the subcaliber shells accept that then it's possible to fit those inside but afaik all the subcaliber shells are already designed as being guided because they'd be useless otherwise.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >would that work on sabot rounds?

              Yes, provided they are spin stabilized.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        And it's nearly as expensive as rocket PGM but the cannon is larger, heavier, much more expensive, and slower firing. Also, the electronics in PG arty shells need to be potted to survive the tremendous accel they're subjected to. Not good for any in-field mods or active cooling for especially long distance targets. Not that you're going to be hitting especially long distance targets since the range on those guns is measure in tens of miles, not the hundreds that put the arty crew outside the range of most counterbattery fire.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >And it's nearly as expensive as rocket PGM
          no it isn't Black person

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    As a reminder, North Korea has the most long range heavy artillery on earth and has had the worlds best guns for half a century.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the source of this statement

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Actually that source would be the United States Army who have examined and even test fired several examples of them.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          American and European engineers did analyze captured Koksans, but concluded they weren't anything particularly special. The only outlier is its 24 mile range with RAP rounds, which can be explained away by a combination of its ridiculously long 66 caliber barrel and cramming unsafe (by Western standards) amounts of propellant into their shells.

          The conclusion was that most of the Koksan's performance came from firing regular shells and the RAPs were only sparingly used.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I was referring to the one the UAE let us observe being shot along with a bunch of Nork guided heavy MLRS but yeah, the maximum charge erodes the barrel quickly. It is interesting that the only nation that has ever had them used against the (Iraq) has devoted alot of effort to copy it, even after Saddam was gone.

            Fun fact: The tracked version has direct fire anti tank sights and was used as such at least once in the Iran/Iraq war, the first human on Mars was probably a Iraqi tank commander.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Didn't you simp for the Koksan in exactly the same way earlier in the thread? Or are there actually two norks shitposting here?

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Since precision guided shells are a thing now, why not go fully in the small/light direction? Like have a 70 or 80 mm pack artillery with a long range that can hit targets on a dime

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Guided shells are expensive, and smaller guns have shorter range. The former is less of an issue, but the latter is a big problem.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    guys, is he in heaven with the other's too?

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Apparently one other big program is due to be chopped by the Army, which one is it?
    OMFV? NGSW?

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Unbeaten king

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    So this means big army is doubling down on mlrs and himars?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It seems that the Army is going to settle on M270 and HIMARS to provide their long range fires and keeping M109 for midrange engagements. Their main issue with upgrading beyond a 39 caliber barrel is that the extra size and weight of a larger barrel makes them harder to ship around.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Their main issue with upgrading beyond a 39 caliber barrel is that the extra size and weight of a larger barrel makes them harder to ship arou
        *"shux, unknown technology pardner'!"

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Does anyone have that webm of some sort of Western European military exercise where they conduct an almost perfect rolling/creeping barrage? I recall the footage was colour but really grainy in it's quality. I think it was Swiss, but I can't be sure. If I had to guess it was after 1945 but before the 1980's, perhaps in the 50's or 70's.

    If anyone's got it, cheers.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Is arty still relevant if you can stack semi-autonomous killer drone swarms in the area? What can a battery of artillery do that dozens of drones delivering a 40mm minimum payload with a CEP of 1m> every few seconds can't?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Is arty still relevant if you can stack semi-autonomous killer drone swarms in the area?

      Artillery is cheaper and you don't have to worry about electronic warfare reducing their effectiveness

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Response speed, bad weather, and buildings.

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    bunp

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The ERCA would have made sense if it was a larger calibre than 155. 203mm would have worked well to justify it as a bigger longer ranger gun with more boom, but less life.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      203 actually had a fairly short range, not all that much longer than 155. There was a 175mm gun for the really long shots (long for that time, at least).

      The amount of HE is kinda important, but not as crucial as you'd expect; at long ranges, guidance is pretty much mandatory, so your CEP is tight enough that a smaller bursting charge will often suffice.

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    replace howitzers with GLSDB. Only $40k per missile.

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