Article Archive: Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Artillery: Play It Safe And Delay The Future
   Next Article → INFORMATION WARFARE: Why Obama Hustles for Osama
August 16, 2007: The U.S. Army is not so sure the new NLOS-C self-propelled howitzer will replace the half century old M-109. The NLOS-C will be the first of the eight MGV (Manned Ground Vehicle) systems to enter service as part of the FCS (Future Combat System) program. The FCS brigades have fewer troops (2,500) than the current (and newly implanted) combat brigades (3,500 troops). The FCS brigades depend on automation and more electronics to make up for manpower. If that worked, many in the army believed that the NLOS-C would quickly replace the M-109, especially in the newly reorganized Brigade Combat Teams. But there is resistance to this vision of the future.

 

The prototype of the 155mm NLOS-C, fired several thousand rounds in three years of field tests. The system was cobbled together in six months, after the new Crusader SP artillery system was cancelled. The current self-propelled system, the M-109, is a fifty year old design. Although the M-109 has been frequently updated, the NLOS-C incorporates many new technologies. This includes an auto-loader (from the Crusader) and a more modern 155mm gun (the M-777, a towed, British designed system) and an APC chassis with a hybrid-electric engine (to reduce fuel consumption.) This all weighs 23 tons, about the same as the M-109. But the NLOS only has a two man crew, compared to five in the M-109.

 

The final version of the NLOS-C will be heavier (about 27 tons), because more defense systems have been added, to reflect experience in Iraq. be a ton or two lighter. The M777 howitzer will not be used in the NLOC-C, but an even lighter (by at least half a ton) 155mm gun.

 

Congress originally demanded that NLOS-C be in service by 2008, but now 2010 or '11 seems more likely. Production of the final version begins next year, but the first 18, to be produced at the rate of six a year for the next three years, will mainly be for additional field testing. If that goes really well, the testing might involve operation in Afghanistan or Iraq.

 

Meanwhile, the new Excalibur GPS guided shell, which entered service this year, could change everything. Excalibur appears to work in combat, and this is radically changing the way artillery operates. Excalibur means 80-90 percent less ammo has to be fired, meaning less wear and tear on NLOS-C (and less time needed for maintenance), and less time replenishing ammo supplies, and more time being ready for action. The NLOS-C uses GPS and networked computers to take care of navigation, fire control and communicating with its customers (the infantry and armored vehicles of the combat brigade it supports). Each battery (4-6 guns) has several support vehicles with ammo resupply, maintenance and such. Thus while each NLOS-C only has a crew of two, there are additional support personnel available to help with maintenance. This is another new development, a crew too small to do all its own maintenance, that will require a lot of testing.

 

But if the new self-propelled gun works out, the M-109s may disappear a lot more quickly. Currently, the army plans to keep M109s around until 2050, just in case. You never know, and it pays to be careful.

 

Next Article → INFORMATION WARFARE: Why Obama Hustles for Osama
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
doggtag    A few key points to address   8/16/2007 7:13:26 AM
-The latest incarnation of the M109 series, the A6 Paladin, is the current US Army standard, and weighs closer to 32 tons (according to FAS.Org and its clone, GlobalSecurity), about as much as a late-model WW2 Sherman. Only the initial prototypes and early production M109s weighed remotely close to 23 tons.
 
-The part mentioned about Congress supposedly pushing its fielding back to the 2010-2011 timeframe, and suggesting it possibly could thus see limited preliminary operational service in A-stan and/or Iraq,
that would never fly with the American voting public, as that would right there automatically register in many people's minds that the US Government is in no hurry to withdraw from either country (even if it does make tactical sense to deploy it under battlefield conditions).
(...but then again, what better way to guarantee lucrative defense contracts, most often offering considerable campaign kickbacks to supportive politicians, than by maintaining the country at war status?)
 
-The suggestion the M109 series may well soldier on to the 2050 timeframe isn't all that unrealistic.
The US Army has already announced that the M1 MBT and M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles families will also continue in service to the 2040+ timeframe, and are not going to be wholly replaced by the FCS series.
But it's certainly a gimme that further artillery, and engine, technologies will funnel their way into the M109 vehicles, taking us from the current A6 Paladin standard well beyond A7, A8, A9, perhaps even into a radically-altered -B or -C series, incorporating the same autoloader tech as the NLOS-C, hybrid drive technologies (perhaps overcoming its comparatively weak road range, when judging it against other newer SP gun systems), and additional protective upgrades.
It wasn't for naught that the M109 has remained successful for the past few 4 decades (well, perhaps in no small part that it has been offered, often thru Foreign Military Aid programs, to so many US allies).
 
Just as today's -A6 Paladin bares only superficial resemblance to the first M109 prototypes,
so it is likely that 30 years from now, any future forces' M109 would bare minimal resemblance to the Paladin now.
 
Quote    Reply