Germany only has 121 PzH 2000 and and 41 M270 MLRS, that's all of its artillery. Obviously more should be procured. As far as gun artillery goes, which system is the best out of the 4 in pic related, taking cost and logistics into consideration as well?:
>more PzH 2000 (L/52)
>RCH155 (L/52) on Boxer
>Rheinmetall L/60 howitzer on a MAN 10x10 truck
>RCH155 (L/52) on an Iveco 8x8 truck
No they dont they have all been destroyed already by russia
Germany gave/is giving away 10 PzH 2000 and 3 M270 to Ukraine, not sure if they're already subtracted from the numbers I posted above
and there is no prove a single one has been destroyed yet
yes PzH 2000 is in production and proven, but it seems too heavy, is the armor and tracks really worth it? the other options are basically the same tech as far as the gun system goes, just mounted on different vehicles
the Boxer version is probably the most capable, it can even fire out of movement, but it's probably also the most expensive and its capabilities might not even be necessary
the RCH155 on the Iveco truck would probably be the most economical option
and the Rheinmetall truck has the option for a L/60 gun which is supposedly able to fire 80km far
>yes PzH 2000 is in production and proven, but it seems too heavy,
yes human life above all and with drones picking up you need that extra protection
>human life above all
Silly argument. With the amount of money needed to build track arty instead of truck arty, you might very well have saved a lot more people in other ways.
>but it seems too heavy, is the armor and tracks really worth it? the other options are basically the same tech as far as the gun system goes, just mounted on different vehicles
Germany struggles to purchase anything, even something with foreign exports, chasing a new and "better" option is inferior to making a commitment to an existing ones because it's the difference between getting another 30 systems and 300 for roughly the same final price
even the PzH is only just starting to pay off
weight is not a major concern in any of the places Germany would need it, it's a bit heavier than the AuF1 which has seen successful service on variable terrain, but has a moderately longer track length (2m) and that helps distribute weight
failing bridges might matter, but Germany can't even ship armor, so it'd mostly see defensive use in Europe, which has bridges and frail but tolerable roads
the question of "why procure artillery at all if you have no real use case, why not streamline rocket artillery and light tanks to act like a bigger baltic state" is perhaps a better one
tracks and weight help with stability,kinda important for artillery
wheeled is nice gimmick but it should be only considered by poor with no fuel money
no one is buying L/52 or L/60 as isolated units, PzH 2000 have existing orders and are the clear and only choice of these four options
if Rheinmetall can prove efficacy of an HX2 mount variant it might be effective
Exactly one of those four has finished development, undergone miltary trials and enough published info for us to make an assessment.
Generally speaking, I would suggest PZH2000 or Boxer for counter battery resistance, of which boxer for less cost, easier maintenance, better road marching (gotta get from germany to warsaw fast if putin comes knocking). If russia stays at is in military terms, that will be overkill, but in that case we don't need more arty anyway.
If we want truck arty too, for whatever reason (depends on the relative cost of the systems) probably rather rheinmetall for higher range. Since I expect boxer to have rather shorter range, it would well complement it.
Btw germany won't buy more arty, all the money will go to expensive toys that won't be maintained or stocked with ammunition in the end. Which won't matter because none of them will ever be used anyway.
to me it just seems like the M270 vs HIMARS
yeah the M270 may be slightly more capable, but it was replaced with the HIMARS anyway because it isn't worth it
same would probably be the case with the gun trucks, and I doubt finishing development would take that much longer if there was political will to procure it
>with drones picking up you need that extra protection
I doubt PzH 2000 has enough armor to defend against an incoming missile
a RWS mounted on top of either the PzH or a truck is probably a much better defense against drones
>dropped from drone
>missile
pick one
I see vatniks are running rampant today
you have autism and cannot read, or at the very least, cannot understand what you are reading
and you are overconfident turbo Black person
I think you will find that illiteracy runs higher in the accelerated black community, making you the one who is in fact the turbo Black person
that anon is saying that because PzH is not a rocket launcher and is threatened by counter-battery fire or MLRS, armor is kind of a moot point, and that a lighter artillery with anti-drone weaponry or something like a C-RAM interception suite would be more effective since it would restore a lot of the mobility
par of the proven efficacy of the CAESAR in a contested theater is how fast it can pop up, shoot base-bleed, and frick off, while PzH need more work
>because PzH is threatened by counter-battery fire, armor is kind of a moot point
Explain that logic to me. It's the exact opposite, you want light armor against shrapnel from indirect hits and such.
>anti-drone weaponry or something like a C-RAM interception suite
Sure should be there., but you can mount it on an AFV just as well as on a truck.
>PzH need more work
What? I don't know about PZH, but Boxer RCH155 can literally shoot on the move, it doesn't get any quicker. Truck arty needs to deploy stabilization before shooting, it will always be slower. I don't think a truck is much more mobile than a boxer either.
>don't think a truck is much more mobile than a boxer either.
but probably substantially cheaper
That was not the point though. I stated before that trucks in addition might be worth it, but there will be use cases in which truck are too vulnerable.
>Explain that logic to me. It's the exact opposite, you want light armor against shrapnel from indirect hits and such.
Light armor doesn't require 51 tons.
The goal is to not get hit by "shrapnel," so if you can shoot and scoot and intercept it's never a concern, meanwhile the PzH is not adequately equipped or long range enough to counter anything but moderate range/1990s MLRS, so it can't act as a fixed position, contrast the ERCA/M1299 which has a similar design and weighs most likely 10 tons less
>Boxer RCH155 can literally shoot on the move, it doesn't get any quicker
Boxer-2000 is a neat design and not the one being discussed, slapping a big gun on a smaller vehicle is what that anon would probably recommend as well, the problem is that they don't fricking exist beyond prototypes and no one is buying them
this is also true, but even if Germany wants to use their trucks, Rheinmetall only tested with their new (obscenely expensive) HX3, so it balances out
I don't fricking get your logic anon. RCH155, or PZH2000 to a lesser degree, are great at shoot and scoot and have decent armor. Good truck artillery can shoot at great range and cheap (Rheinmetall L60 supposedly 80km of range like M1299). So fricking get both. Having arty close to the enemy is not a bad idea - don't need RAP rounds, can hit stuff without GPS guided rounds, shorter flight times.
>or PZH2000 to a lesser degree
sounds like you get my logic perfectly
> So fricking get both.
because Germany cannot afford it, but the effectiveness of the PzH design specifically was what was being discussed, one anon pointed out that "close" at 47k for PzH basebleed, but if it's never going to be at that range and always using RAP, why is the PzH 50 fricking tons?
my point overall is that the PzH is the best system because it is actually in production, not because its design principles make any sense in a modern war, and that such "advantages" make it inferior to Rheinmetall's modular alternatives which will unfortunately never be produced/sold in large enough numbers to be affordable because everyone else will just but Paladins
meanwhile, that anon proposed using C-RAM or an anti-drone system instead to avoid penetrating strikes, because the extra 10 tons will not save it from a cruise missile no matter what
then the pseudo-namegay decided to go cross-eyed and assume that the two ideas were directly connected and that they were implying drones were "dropping" missiles, when the point was that anti-drone systems are lighter than a heavily armored vehicle,
I'm contrasting the PzH vs ERCA which knows this principle and is lighter but still armored "enough" for shrapnel, or CAESAR which is practically unarmored but doing great on the hotly contested Ukrainian front
>CAESAR which is practically unarmored but doing great on the hotly contested Ukrainian front
Russia does not have good counter battery fire, or good anything apparently. My words:
>If russia stays as is in military terms, that will be overkill, but in that case we don't need more arty anyway.
The potential threat here is not russia right now, it's russia after it gets its shit together (so far as russians are capable of that) and, dunno, gets tons of chinese supply, while america is having a civil war.
mutts really can't live without Black folk living in their heads rent free
Are the vatniks in the room with us right now?
yes obviously
see
shitting on Germans for being moronic and bad at procurement is a proud NATO tradition
I shit on Germany for getting fat like pigs on Ukranian blood, butthole. Ribbentrop motherfrickers.
shut the frick up, Germany has changed course and is sending weapons to Ukraine for months now
this thread is about the artillery gear, frick off with your boring seething
That why the Krauts are going to send the turbine to Russia, block 9 billion in help to Ukraine, pressure Lithuania to lift the Kaliningrad blockade, right? Your fricking banana republic has been exposed vatnik b***h.
We owe Shitkraine exactly nothing. You should be grateful that we are helping AT ALL.
>getting fat like pigs on Ukranian blood
Oh frick off with that bullshit. We're still buying a minor amount of gas from russia (12% of russian exports before the ukraine war) because otherwise we'll send europe into a recession and need public heating rooms to prevent cold deaths. There are things germany is doing wrong right now, but buying gas from russia is not it.
>need public heating rooms to prevent cold deaths
have a nice day vodkaBlack person
... It's almost like it is summer right now. How moronic can you be. Problems will start in winter.
ok, so Germany has nearly 9 months before it runs through existing gas capacity and has to stop being autistic homosexuals and restart non-Russian energy sources, what's your point?
Winter starts in 5 months, heating season in 3 months.
>restart non-Russian energy sources,
They're building two gas terminals right now, but it won't suffice if all russian deliveries stop now.
And before you come up with some nuclear bullshit: The problem is heating. Industrial processes use gas for heating, private homes use it. Both can be replaced with other means, but it's not done within a few months. There's not enough tradesmen in the country to replace a third of the home heaters and I don't know about the industry.
>Winter starts in 5 months, heating season in 3 months.
Germany's capacity is already at 56% and it goes through about 10% a month in the cold months, you stupid homosexual
>They're building two gas terminals right now, but it won't suffice if all Russian deliveries stop now.
they could stop all deliveries now and it would suffice for 6 months, though it isn't necessary for at least 3 months still
>nuclear bullshit
Germany has the largest coal supplies in the world and can authorize more sale and energy interdependence with Poland, as it already was to compensate for the moronic de-nuke approach, this would gut gas consumption by 30-50% and turn a 6 month stockpile into possibly 3 years worth with market optimizations
>largest coal supplies
actual quick correction, Australia does beat Germany in terms of accessible lignite, so second largest and not the largest
>it goes through about 10% a month in the cold months
You mean, while getting russian gas at full capacity?
Current supplies are at 157 TWh.
https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Fachthemen/ElektrizitaetundGas/Versorgungssicherheit/aktuelle_gasversorgung/_downloads/07_Juli_2022/220712_gaslage.pdf;jsessionid=F19B0EFA6B85DB67339738F9C474828F?__blob=publicationFile&v=2
This was the monthly use so far.
https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Fachthemen/ElektrizitaetundGas/Versorgungssicherheit/aktuelle_gasversorgung/grafik_gasverbrauch.png?__blob=normal&v=21
Current reserves are sufficient for a bit more than one winter month.
>authorize more sale and energy interdependence with Poland, as it already was to compensate for the moronic de-nuke approach, this would gut gas consumption by 30-50%
Pure nonsense. 12% of the gas used in 2021 was used for electrical energy. Coal cannot supplant much more, not quickly anyway.
https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/37985/umfrage/verbrauch-von-erdgas-in-deutschland-nach-abnehmergruppen-2009/
It has to conceded at this point that german gas dependence on russia was idiotic, but don't act like that makes us responsible for everything russia does in ukraine.
The funny thing, the german government is doing tremendous (comparable) harm by not turning up weapons manufacturing and delivering stuff as fast as possible. The relative cost would be negligible, the relative benefit much greater than cutting russian gas. Problem is, the chancellor is stalling for some reason and the boomer demographic basically doesn't care.
they are all bribed by gasprom
>for some reason
Well he has a point with the federal republic of big businesses. I didn't know he was a Marxist though. Maybe not really a surprise
>Send more German weapons to Ukraine
>Putin pissed off even more
>War ends sooner (it actually wouldn't)
>????
>Germany gets gas from Santa Claus since he was a gud boy
>Eastern europe likes us
>One harsh winter
>Lot's of ukrainian reconstruction orders, trade cooperation, investment opportunities, help in the racewar, etc. etc. etc.
>Maybe the poles even stop pulling the nazi card every other day (doubt it though)
Tbh I personally just want to see russians SUFFER, and I want to see german arms do it. Frickers are costing us several hundred billions in rearmament, energy costs, commodity costs, etc. We trusted them, we traded with them, and they spat us in the face and left us looking like absolute fools. Showing russia what's what would go a long way to make the world respect germany. Instead... well, you know.
>Eastern Europe likes us
>Germany gets orders from Ukraine
You should be smarter than that at this point. Ukraine will be rebuilt by the USA, UK and Poland. The Anglos are playing the same old game again.
>One harsh Winter
You are aware that this is not about freezing plebs right?
The chemical industry will collapse and things will snowball.
Yeah the bridges are burnt now.
the poles even stop pulling the nazi card every other day (doubt it though)
Not as long as PiS needs a bogeyman to blame for all the shit they broke.
>need public heating rooms to prevent cold deaths
As opposed to Russians just letting people freeze to death
That is newest Wheelchair Copelord lie
Source of image
https://oec.world/
I hope every last anti-german ukraBlack person is obliterated.
Rocket launchers fire less often and from longer range, they're not threatened by counter battery fire.
>I doubt PzH 2000 has enough armor to defend against an incoming missile
definitely enough for a typical russian missile, russians can only hit civilian buildings
>Btw germany won't buy more arty, all the money will go to expensive toys that won't be maintained or stocked with ammunition in the end.
It hurts, it hurts so much.
Our issue wasn't a lack of money but a lack of will for a functioning military and it won't change.
more artillery is always nice, but the west decided they like bombing shit from the sky
Germany is an African country with money.
One thing to keep in mind is that for a defensive purpose the vector of attack will be East Germany or South Germany. This means either flat terrain with (for German standards) shit roads in the East, or mountan/hilly terrain with excellent roads and bridges in the south. Both not optimal terrain for a superheavy artillery tank, but probably not bad enough to disqualify the pzh2000. Although I assume it is less suited to be used in Poland (even worse roads) or in Austria (even more mountains).
>Germany only has 121 PzH 2000 and and 41 M270 MLRS, that's all of its artillery.
South Korea has more artillery pieces than all of the NATO countries in Europe combined, and they continue to build more.
>No Archer
No idea how it compares to the german truck offerings, but it certainly isn't german so no buy.
The PzH2K is getting a little old but it’s still the best SPG on the planet. Speed and accuracy is best in the world. It’s very expensive and slow to procure but if you want the best possible speed, accuracy and protection it’s got to be the PzH2K.
Boxer and HIMARS
Just buy more PZH2000 and M270.
There's no reason to buy Himars, but it might be worth upgrading the PZH2000 with the L60 gun.
>thread about Germany
>tourists seething
Ahh, yes. /k/ in 2022.
>Obviously more should be procured
What for? Russia can't even get past donbabwe. Why do germany need those weapons when they can spend money on more refugees that they urgently need to fix demographics?
K9 > PzH 2000
nope