Self Propelled Artillery?

[umair]

O.K this might sound stupid :roll but I was hoping that some of u guys could shed light on my querry stated below.
Self propelled artillery has been around for some time in modern armies.What I want are your comments on the importance of this weapon system in modern force structures and it's viabilty on future battle fields specifically now that the threat to armour from air has increased in form of heavily armed gunships and close support fighters. :? :help
All opinons/comments about SPAs welcome and encouraged.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I would assume that any SPA would be part of an armoured brigade, so it would not really be operating autonomously.

As such that means that it will have heavy fire support, local SAM support (even if the SAM is vehicle based), It also means that it would be working in nominally safe areas that have a minimal chance of being overrun bt groundforces.

SPA is still useful and even more so if you consider the use of smart
munitions.

A good example would be advances in performance and technology of the Type 45 naval gun. Conceived to be able to provide shore bombardment support to US marines when they lost access to the use of the Missouri's 16" fire support capability. The 45 can fire just as far as the 16" with smart munitions.

There is no reason why similar capability couldn't be designed around the SPA/SPH.

It does get down to force and platform doctrine effectiveness though..

 

[Awang se]

In case of the SPA compare to the ordinary Artillery, its stand a better chance to avoid being destroyed by a counter-battery effort. the advancment in artillery detection technique have denied the Artillery to fire at their will. The SPA could lob several round and displace with minimal preparation before any enemy counter battery fire could reach it's location.

Compare to the air strike, the artillery is an ideal support for the field unit that required quick fire support and cannot wait for airforce to arrive (provided there is a friendly artillery within the vicinity) so at this edge, the artillery is a formidable support unit.

ps: once they called the artillery as the "god of War"

 

[gf0012-aust]

In case of the SPA compare to the ordinary Artillery, its stand a better chance to avoid being destroyed by a counter-battery effort. the advancment in artillery detection technique have denied the Artillery to fire at their will. The SPA could lob several round and displace with minimal preparation before any enemy counter battery fire could reach it's location.

Compare to the air strike, the artillery is an ideal support for the field unit that required quick fire support and cannot wait for airforce to arrive (provided there is a friendly artillery within the vicinity) so at this edge, the artillery is a formidable support unit.

ps: once they called the artillery as the "god of War"

During GW2 the US was running UAV's as FACs. Any opfor arty found by the UAV FAC (well outside of threat-effect range) basically signalled the death of that opfor.

In an open environment. arty without absolute control of the micro theatre will be dead very quickly

 

[Aussie Digger]

I agree with those above. SPG's are a vital part of modern warfare. Artillery is STILL the mainstay of fire support for every serious army today. Nothing else matches it's ability to provide massive, sustained and accurate firepower. SPG's are becoming more and more necessary for modern armies. "Shoot and scoot" tactics are becoming the norm with modern counter battery fire capabilities. Armies that still use towed artillery pieces as their ONLY indirect firepower capability (such as Australia and New Zealand) are in danger of losing that capability ver yquickly should they actually be employed in a "real" war. Australia currently has a program to replace it's entire howitzer fleet, with a modern self propelled piece. Does anyone have any ideas on the weapon we should buy? I personally like the look and promise of the French Caesar SPG's. Being a wheeled vehicle it is extremely mobile. It possesses an armoured cabin to protect the troops using it. It has a very long range, (42klms with Base bleed rounds) is fully compatible with all NATO standard ammunition (very useful from a logistical point of view) has the "Ogre" round which dispenses bomblets over a wide area, much like the US MLRS Rocket system. This system is also very easily deployable (compared with tracked SPG's) being able to be deployed by C130 Hercules (though I'm not sure if it can be "airdropped".) It also possesses the latest computerised fire control systems and given that bit can be brought into action, fire 3 rounds and brought out of action in less than 1 minute, it possesses very good firepower matched with excellent survivability. It should also be relatively inexpensive compared with tracked vehicle, both to purchase initially and to maintain. All up a superior vehicle in my opinion. What does anyone else think?

 

[gf0012-aust]

I agree with those above. SPG's are a vital part of modern warfare. Artillery is STILL the mainstay of fire support for every serious army today. Nothing else matches it's ability to provide massive, sustained and accurate firepower. SPG's are becoming more and more necessary for modern armies. "Shoot and scoot" tactics are becoming the norm with modern counter battery fire capabilities. Armies that still use towed artillery pieces as their ONLY indirect firepower capability (such as Australia and New Zealand) are in danger of losing that capability ver yquickly should they actually be employed in a "real" war. Australia currently has a program to replace it's entire howitzer fleet, with a modern self propelled piece. Does anyone have any ideas on the weapon we should buy? I personally like the look and promise of the French Caesar SPG's. Being a wheeled vehicle it is extremely mobile. It possesses an armoured cabin to protect the troops using it. It has a very long range, (42klms with Base bleed rounds) is fully compatible with all NATO standard ammunition (very useful from a logistical point of view) has the "Ogre" round which dispenses bomblets over a wide area, much like the US MLRS Rocket system. This system is also very easily deployable (compared with tracked SPG's) being able to be deployed by C130 Hercules (though I'm not sure if it can be "airdropped".) It also possesses the latest computerised fire control systems and given that bit can be brought into action, fire 3 rounds and brought out of action in less than 1 minute, it possesses very good firepower matched with excellent survivability. It should also be relatively inexpensive compared with tracked vehicle, both to purchase initially and to maintain. All up a superior vehicle in my opinion. What does anyone else think?

In all likelihood we'll go for trucked SPA and not tracked. I'd bet on CAESAR mounted on a mercedes platform

 

[Aussie Digger]

I just went and had a look at the specs of the Caesar SPG on the 'army-technology' website. The vehicle part of the Caesar IS a Unimog, a 6 wheeled variant, so that would fit in to the Australian Army's logistics system very well. Looks like this could be a winner in the upcoming Land 17/18 projects.

 

[Winter]

I just went and had a look at the specs of the Caesar SPG on the 'army-technology' website. The vehicle part of the Caesar IS a Unimog, a 6 wheeled variant, so that would fit in to the Australian Army's logistics system very well. Looks like this could be a winner in the upcoming Land 17/18 projects.

You suppose they wouldn't go a bit wild and acquire some lovely G6s from SA....?

The vital element of SPA is mobility. Mobility allows, as mentioned before, counter-battery fire evasion and just as importantly, rapid movement within a fluid battlefield and keeping up with an advancing contingent (or hasty movement away into the opposite direction ). This would be crucial to a successful campaign, and SPA can accomplish this substantially more proficiently than regular towed artillery.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I just went and had a look at the specs of the Caesar SPG on the 'army-technology' website. The vehicle part of the Caesar IS a Unimog, a 6 wheeled variant, so that would fit in to the Australian Army's logistics system very well. Looks like this could be a winner in the upcoming Land 17/18 projects.

You suppose they wouldn't go a bit wild and acquire some lovely G6s from SA....?

The vital element of SPA is mobility. Mobility allows, as mentioned before, counter-battery fire evasion and just as importantly, rapid movement within a fluid battlefield and keeping up with an advancing contingent (or hasty movement away into the opposite direction ). This would be crucial to a successful campaign, and SPA can accomplish this substantially more proficiently than regular towed artillery.

Winter, if we had sense we would go for the triple "T" Tracked, trucked and towed as all are useful in given environments.

We'll go Caesar before we go G6. Its better kit. The french do know how to fight from a distance (especially BVR on land)...

 

[Aussie Digger]

Winter, I KNOW that Australian officers have served on exchange with the South African Defence Forces and have closely inspected their equipment (g5 and G6 included.) but I'd be surprised if the Army didn't go for something like the Caesar. Reports were filed on the quality of this equipment but I'd be amazed if any is acquired. I know that the Royal Australian Army tested a South African 81mm Mortar system last year that the army is very interested in, but that will probably be the extent of our artillery purchases from SA. The Australian Government has a re-occuring habit of going for quality equipment, but at the lower end of capability, not the high end. G6's are a fantastic vehicle from all reports but I have a sneaking suspicion it might just be out of our price range. What I'd choose (if the budget allowed) would be a combination of Caesar SPG's and the US HIMARS system (based in Arty regiments with perhaps 2x batteries of 8 guns <Caesar's> and 1x battery of 8 HIMARS.) This would provide awesome firepower at a reasonable price. The mobility of our forces would be fantastic, the firepower would be superb and the cost more than reasonable. I can't see it happening though sadly...

 

[Aussie Digger]

GF, on the DMO's website Land 17/18 refer to our current 105/155mm arty fleets being rationalised and replaced with 1 type of artillery. I don't think we'll be going for 3 artillery types any time soon... The Defence Minister and the Chief of the Army have been talking about the need for greater mobility for our fire support and Peter Cosgrove has mentioned SPG's specifically. They will also still have a need to look at artillery that is deployable by air (ie: by C130 or greater), in order to support the Ready Deployment Force (3 Brigade). Given these 2 conflicting requirements you can pretty much rule out tracked self popelled artillery. Something like the Caesar is going to be the only option if you are going to have self propelled artillery.

 

[gf0012-aust]

A-Dig.

I'd punt on the M-777 for towed. also upgrade the Hamels to Gen 2's.

Personally I'd like to see a Bushranger chopped into a SPH. Cut open the rear lid and add a Hamel into the back. Would be an interesting combo.

A hamel in the back of a 6x6 Perentie would be even more interesting

I'd like to pick up a 6x6 perentie at auction when we eventually replace them. heck I'd even sell my trusty old range rover for one...

 

[Aussie Digger]

I'm not too sure about the Perentie idea. Us grunts didn't really know how to drive them all that well... They were smashed up just about every single time we took them out bush. Maybe that's why we're getting IMV's? And I wouldn't want to see our precious Bushmasters getting chopped in half. We can only afford to acquire enough of them to equip 2 out of the 3 battalions in 7 Brigade as it is!!!