The AMOS system can fire 26 RPM, with up to 14 rounds simultaneously impacting at 8.7 miles (14,000 meters). The Marines have mounted one on an LAV-300 chassis. Check out the slide show at: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2004armaments/DayII/SessionII/07Lindsey_Dragon_Fire_II.pdf Pay particular attention to slides 14-16. Once an area has been geographically described (using GPS coordinates) to the FCS, aimpoints for complete coverage are automatically computed. A single, 2-barrelled, Patria Hagglunds AMOS unit could destroy an irregularly shaped, 440M by 830M area in 3 minutes, 45 seconds (800 rounds divided by 26 RPM). I see two problems with this system. 1. The Patria Hagglunds machine is very expensive. So far, only the Finns have ordered any, and they only bought 24 units. Everyone else is waiting to see how they perform off the showroom floor. 2. It may be to indirect equivalent of a mini-gun; in other word, an ammo-hog. It will probably need 2 dedicated, tracked, ammunition vehicles per unit. But, the problems aside, I think it’s the coolest piece of machinery to come down the pike in many moons. One unit could take the place of a mechanized infantry battalion mortar section and provide much better coverage. The current solution is four vehicles with crew-served, 120mm mortars mounted on M113 chassis. I personally would like to see it assigned at the Company level, one per company. This would eliminate the need for a general support mortar unit at Brigade. The Battle Command, Brigade and Below System can link up the units in the companies for larger targets if need be. This also places an artillery unit at the lowest feasible level of command.

It was developed with very little money when comparing to that US equivalent and as far as I know US army has been very interested in it, because its cheaper and performs better than US design. And in fact, AMOS is a turret system that can be put on any vehicle big enough and is already fielded and complete system. Basic Patria model carries 48 rounds which is enough for 8 attacks. Its not bad when comparing to other systems and the logistics arent worse because accurate and fast firing requires less ammuniton, in fact most of the damage done by mortars occurs within first seconds. After that the enemy has taken cover and the effect goes way down. In those few secs AMOS battery (6 pieces) has put 48 rounds in the target area. One would need 48 normal mortars for that. I think that its more efficient than normal heavy mortars. Finland has also those tracked 120mm pieces (mounted on BV206 chassis or on Finnish version of that), but in the field tests AMOS has proven itself superior. Its basically immune to counter battery fire, shoots more, can be used in direct fire and so on. The price is bit high but a little more than 100M€ for 24 pieces that include the vehicles and all the needed stuff for the brigade, its not SO bad. And that money includes also the field tests (over 2000 rounds shot and 12000 km driven). Swedes have tested AMOS on a ship and are probably buying it in near future. Check these: http://www.aaicorp.com/corporate/press/amos_release.html And this http://www.patriahagglunds.fi/09092003.html http://www.patriahagglunds.fi/company.html

I would like to see the U.S. Army contract with Patria Hagglunds to produce the tracked version of AMOS in a full MANPRINT / Integrated Logistics development. This machine would be deployed on a one-per-platoon basis in Mechanized Infantry Units. This provides the company with highly mobile, direct / indirect fire capability in real time. By linking AMOS units together with Battle Command Brigade and Below, the excess capacity at company level could replace general support mortar units altogether. Since each machine only carries 90 rounds (3 and a half minutes of firing), an ammunition carrier should be assigned to each AMOS unit. The standard mortar and top-attack tank round will give a company commander capability to deal with infantry and armor threats.

It will be curious to see where the US goes with the FCS system: the NLOS-M (Mortar) will have a breech-loaded 120mm system, but as to whether it will be on par with, derived from, or superior to the AMOS remains to be seen. In all pictures/concepts, the NLOS-M only mounts a single, relatively short tube (as compared to the Russian SP 120mm systems), most likely relying solely on the munitions to achieve improved performances, rather than enhancing the barrel. I still think the AMOS series, which can be single-, twin, or quad-barrel installation, will be a superior system, having an already proven loading system and very rapid on-target saturation capability. With BAe acquiring UDLP, and certainly a sizeable stake in both the US' FCS and UK future Systems, and seeing as BAe also now contains Bofors, and a plethora of others, I certainly believe we could see an interesting offer for a 120mm SP system come from the BAe/Alvis/UDLP/etc stables. Hopefully, they could at least develop a useful system that could be retrofitted to the current vehicle inventory (Bradleys, Warriors, Scorpion series, etc...) Shucks, with BAe now working with DARPA on the 60mm ODAM (guided mortar round), and suggesting the capability could be fitted to larger calibers, I would hope to see a whole family of mortar turrets in 60, 81, AND 120mm coming from their engineers. But as far as fieldable-NOW systems, Patria scores big on this one. I personally was impressed with the videos on the twin mount on the fast patrol boat, as well as the 6x6 AFV firing sideways at elevation from a rather precarious-looking sideslope. http://www.patriahagglunds.fi/

You mentioned a video of the AMOS patrol boat. Can you give me a link to it. I couldn't find it on the Patria Hagglunds site. Thanx, Texastillidie

The clips I HAD were from a previous version of Patria's site, and I am having difficulty finding a search engine that is not an incompetent piece of sh*t that is capable of finding it. The boat is the CB90 Combat Boat, of which several links can be found, even stills of the craft fitted with the turret. The AMOS system also has countless links, but I haven't been yet able to find a site with the video showing the CB90 trials craft maneuvering and finring the twin turret. I know it's been posted up quite a while ago somewhere here on SP, but there are no archives past a certain cutoff point, so it's possible it was posted up here too long ago. I'll keep looking. Sorry. :(

Thanx, I've looked at all the stills. I assume that both versions of the turret are gyro-stabilized in two directions to compensate for pitching and rolling of the ship/chassis, but I don't remember reading this. By the way, why the 2 G's in DOGGTAG?