Hi Guys
Most abreveations I google. Please explain GOAT. When I looked it up I got a goat gamma used in Vietnam war
regards
DD
DD - my apologies. I hate over use of acronyms and not writing in plain English. As
@Redlands18 said, Gun on a Truck. Please don't hesitate to ping me (publicly or otherwise) when I don't make sense in the future!
I was only referring to Archer. It would not be as survivable in the event of a close hit but it’s a lot more than a gun on a truck. As for shoot and scoot times it’s comparable and in some ways better as speed to next position would be superior.
For Archer they may be* comparable, but for all GOAT's that are / were likely contenders, any SPH beat them when non-manufacturer details were compared, especially across multiple terrains. The lesser mass, higher CoG, and thinner frame demands external supports to be used that the SPH doesn't have to.
The speed to next position is slower - a truck just does not have the mobility of a wheeled or tracked system. Furthermore, its routes are a lot more predictable, even more than a Boxer chassis. Unless you want to drive on roads, the scoot part will always go to the SPH, with tracked having additional advantages as they are able to access all parts of their allocated battlespace.
* I say may be because I don't recall the details and all the wiki data is quotes from the manufacturer. I don't usually trust those.
My argument was only around the logistics of getting to the fight. Vehicle transport and crew transport are all additional movements and resources. Drive the last 4-500kms and devote the transport to fuel and ammo.
Strategically there is no difference, although the extra length of a GOAT works against it more than the extra width of the SPH when it comes time to loading an LHD.
Tactically the GOAT does have an advantage, as you say it's self-deployable along the same routes that the tank transporters are working. Which is fine, except that this is the only pro. When it comes to the fighting it works against it.
There's also an interesting, although separate, arguments to be asked about self deployment. (a), it's still yet to happen despite all the "Yay!" about Boxer and STRIKE in Europe, and (b), what threat will allow such easy self-deployment?
As for the heavy formation argument I don’t see that as all that valid for the guns as they would/should be far behind the front lines. Even far behind the front lines, the outcomes in Donbas for stationary armoured and logistics vehicles suggest a sweeping change to thinking is either happening or coming.
Maybe. Traditional thinking and doctrine has the guns 1/3 of their range behind the front line. But there have been times where even Australian artillery has operated in direct fire areas. On a more dispersed battlefield, against an enemy with reasonable to good counter-battery fire, the guns are going to be operating across a wider area, which may mean coming forward more than normal. And the indirect fire zone (which is where the protection of the SPH comes into play) is going to cover almost all of that, especially against a force using Soviet style doctrine.
For the cost of the 30 guns the AU army is getting ($1.3b) and the trucks required to move them we could have had 60-80 tubes ($4.5m each cost plus 2x that in support...sorry can’t copy the Wikipedia link for some reason) and the adage quantity has a quality all of its own still applies these days. If we are not on a budget these days it’s certainly coming.
You are missing the fact that $1.3 b doesn't buy 30 guns, it buys 30 guns + sustainment + a bunch of other stuff. And to keep the .... "optimistic assessment" ... of manufacturers in line, the Archer wiki page has a gun listed at $4.5 m and the K9 wiki has it at $3.9 m. Based on wiki, the SPH is cheaper...
Takao .....you said Overall, a GOAT is less flexible, less capable, slower and less resilient to a SPH - tracked or wheeled..... I’d argue otherwise on all bar the resilience under fire.
All a bit moot but we have discussed moot points plenty of times on this thread.
So it's one party trick is able to get to the fight quicker once landed. It dies quicker though, as it's not as mobile, not as protected, shoots slower and has more restricted terrain. In regional areas like PNG or SE Asia, these become even more stark. Against more capable enemies (let alone peer or above-peer), these become more stark. As I said, it's only good if you are comparing to a towed system - which at 155mm is worse in every single aspect.
