[Pro Patria] Artillery - still the King of the battlefield?

[Oleander Ardens]

The concept of the air superiority goes often with the one of airpower. Different Aircrafts combine many strengths into different powerful packages, enabling them to wreak havoc on ground forces and strategic targets.

Artillery on the other hand gets little attention from outsiders. Still they have been subject to great changes in the last 20 years, increasing their potential manyfold. The race for range began with the G5 a towed 155 howitzer able to increase the range up to 40km, outshooting the soviet counterpart by over 10km. This enabled a G5 to dominate the artillery duels, to cover a vastly bigger area: 5024 km² vs. 2461,76!

Then the G6, the selfpropelled G5 became the longrange king while the Phz 2000 excelled in firespeed, mobility and survivability. Nowadays ranges up 60 or even 70km with rocket-assisted rounds from Demel allow for immense coverage - up to 15386 km² - with readily available, fast firepower.

G6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9z_VfZ3W7M

Phz 2000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR_9pcNT_Qs&mode=related&search=
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQYd5XvZJnI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYKUW5ysiX8&mode=related&search=
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWASFvByg5k&mode=related&search=

The new kids on the block

Archer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leYCwU7B8jI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW7Vrwysdok after 20 sec
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7SAgTCrpIw&mode=related&search=

K9
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF1gKwhraQw


Different rounds bring at various ranges unknown precision and abilities to the artillery. The special rounds against armor with their heavy load have ranges up to 30km - still enough to bring serious trouble to the tank...

Here Excalibur:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XLr24-YrGU

Here BONUS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOLTbWmr88k&mode=related&search=

XM982
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaJBmyDxtYE&mode=related&search=


So which artillery system do you chose? How heavily do you want invest into it. And what consequences has it on your choice of other weapon systems?

Cheers
OA

[Husar]

I like the PzH 2000 since it seems to offer some protection, uses tracks and can do almost anything very fast. Combined with those two really cool artillery shells(not so cool on the receiving end though) it could be quite capable to operate behind a warzone even if the borders aren't that clear. What I mean is that by offering armour protection and offroad ability, ambushing it with a group of infantry or small weapons should be a lot harder since it is armoured and not depending on roads. In an artillery vs artillery duel it might lack range, but such duels don't happen often, do they?

Here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xdRXVizij4&NR=1) is some cool video from Bofors defence that I found while browsing your video links. Of course it may be a bit of propaganda, but it's always nice to watch IMO.:2thumbsup:

[Lord Winter]

I have to say I like Excaluibers accuercy and usefulness in urban combat, but it's not cheap. It's also just out of its development so it will be a little shakey.

Depending on the type of terrian I would take etheir Excalilibur (if we can afford it) if we're a mountous or built up area, or PzH 2000 for its mobillity and regudness if we're in a more open area.

[Husar]

Depending on the type of terrian I would take etheir Excalilibur (if we can afford it) if we're a mountous or built up area, or PzH 2000 for its mobillity and regudness if we're in a more open area.
How can you take one or the other if one is a gun system and the other is ammunition?
You could simply put the Excalibur round into a PzH 2000 if it fits or create a similar round fitted for the PzH 2000, same for almost any artillery gun I suppose.

[Oleander Ardens]

How can you take one or the other if one is a gun system and the other is ammunition?
You could simply put the Excalibur round into a PzH 2000 if it fits or create a similar round fitted for the PzH 2000, same for almost any artillery gun I suppose

Exactly Husar. The PzH can fire like other modern guns a wide range of rounds. Demel makes the ones which fly the furthest, Excalibur is like others able to reduce the "shadow areas" in difficult terrain and is consistently accurate over every range while Smart155 and Bonus are the costly kings against armor.

As we don't know how much each one costs it is hard to say which combination is best. But really long range is supreme for avoiding counter-battery fire and winning artillery duels, as long as the accuracy is fine. The GPS guiding system of Excalibur might get jammed, while both Bonus and Smart155 are for sure very expensive - but ideal when you face tanks and tanks and tanks...

The PzH 2000 is a great, very mobile and hardhitting system, while the G6 too is very nice. The Archer should be easier to transport, operate and to maintain than the PzH 2000 and the G6. It is a different concept built for different world....


OA

[Atalus]

I like the look of the Archer and I am also a sucker for Volvo's

[The Wizard]

How does the K9 perform compared to the others?

[Oleander Ardens]

How does the K9 perform compared to the others?

Well although the Koreans boast that it is a indigenous system it fields a license built Reihnmetall gun, and heavily resembles in many ways the older PhZ 2000. It has a slower fire rate, a slightly higher street speed, and is 8t lighter. The planning started one year after the Phz 2000 entered service setting a new standards of firepower for a heavy, tracked self propelled artillery piece. The K9 will have a hard time wrestling for market share, given that the Phz 2000 is an excellent and proven system and is cheaper thanks to its large numbers and its use of a LEO II chassis. Maintenance and operating cost are also down, as all the users of the PhZ also field the Leopard II MBT while also its mobility is comparable to the LEO's. The Dutch guns performed very well in Afghanistan, providing accurate, fast and devastating fire support for Operation Medusa...

Anyway the K9 is a very good system and makes perfectly sense for the Southkorean army. Thanks to Multiple Round Simultaneous Impact a single K9 thunder can hit an enemy position depending on the range with up to three rounds simultaneously. The PzH should be able to deliver 6. Both can extend their range with various rounds to up to 60km - a long shot indeed...



Here the International Comparisons: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/k9.htm

[Oleander Ardens]

I forgot to mention the AGM from KMV, the maker of the PzH 2000. It is actually very similar to the Archer, as it is light and just needs 2 persons to operate which sit in the separated driving cabin. It should give NATO a highly mobile system which is also easily air transportable..


http://www.kmweg.com/gb/frame.php?page=21


OA