I misspelled some word, it should be ...The enemy goes to offensive, overextends his supply lines just to be hit later by evasive (!) force that does not hold ground but tries to break cohesion (!) of an invading force...

Well the occasional heli might avoid/be ignored by AWACS but air mobile ops need rather a lot of helis, the chances of them being undetected is about nil. Not forgetting as I previously pointed out there are passive sensors. Looking slightly into the future (probably less than manpack anti-AFV msls with 50km range) networked unattended sensors (eg ADDER and equivalents) will be excellant to detect and track helis over a wide area. No disagreement that airborne/airmobile formations need field arty, they've had it since the 1930s when the Soviets created the first airborne units. As I've previously pointed out this need and role is well recognised. Hitherto the role has generally been close support. However, lightweight MRLs have long been available and long range one (eg LIMAW(R) with GMLRS) that can be heli underslung will be in service in a few years and will give a longer range capability, then the problem is target acquisition. In the end wars are won by offensive action. The problem is that light infantry, even combined arms light forces, lack the physical components of fighting power to win wars. This doesn't mean they have no role, just that it's a limited one. This is why light forces are a mall part of western armies and look like being so for another decade or three. If light forces looked like being war winners then everybody would be rushing for them because they are far cheaper than heavy forces. That this isn't happening speaks volumes.

There have been some interesting developments within the past few months (recently public-released.) For anyone with a subscription to Jane's Defence, you can locate these follwing three concepts. They were also available in the Jane's Defence Weekly magazines: JDW, 10 NOV 2004 Soltam Systems (Israel) created the CARDOM 120mm ADAMS (Advanced Deplyable Autonomous Mortar System.) This is installed on a turntable in the bed of a HMMWV, and incorporates a specially-designed recoil reduction system. Weighing at 670kg in pre-production form, it is claimed to range to 7200m at up to 15 rpm. There are two aft-mounted outrigger stabilizers and two side-mounted firing jacks, and an over-the-front firing arc of 30* left and right is afforded. Lockheed Martin participated also in trialling the system on the Supacat HMT 4x4. The system demonstrated the feasibility of firing a 120mm mortar safely from a light vehicle. JDW 17 NOV 2004 General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems is developing for the USMC the Expeditionary Fire Support System. Utilizing American Growler's commercially-available UVDB-1000 as the basis for the USMC ITV (Internally Transportable Vehicle, for the V-22), the truck/buggy vaguely resembles a Willys Jeep in size, and will tow a TDA Armaments RT120mm mortar. A second vehicle will tow a 36-round ammo trailer. Projected ranges of the 120mm ammo family will reach to 20km. Each ITV will hold 2 persons and their gear. One ITV complete with its trailer can fit into a V-22 hold. JDW 1 DEC 2004 BAE Systems has teamed with Supacat to develop a portee concept for the UK LIMAWS(G) requirement, utilizing a modified Supacat HMT chassis (8x6) which can mechanically deploy and recover an M777 155mm howitzer from its aft platform. In current form, it weighs in at 13 tonnes (that's metric tons for us Yanks, or a little over 28,000 lbs.) The vehicle itself can carry the gun crew in an armored (splinterproof) cab, and can be utilized to transport and off-load 17-round projectile-and-charge crates with its material handling system. Air-transportability is claimed as 1 by C-130, 2 by A400M, and 3 by C-17. It is also up for offer to the US Army (273 vehicles?) and USMC (377 vehicles?), who are looking for a new, rapid-deployable and lightweight fire support system (perhaps pending on cancellation of the NLOS-C?) One additional benefit of the US acquiring this system is that some chassis parts commonality is available with Lockheed Martin's Supacat 6x6-based Soothsayer EW system. Considering it is reported that the US has already invested just over $179million in the M777 program (and the cancellation of the mutli-$$billion$$ Crusader program), it may be wise to pursue this vehicle as a compliment to the M109A6, MLRS, and HIMARS systems, especially if Boeing can't "get its collective sh*t together" (IMHO) on the FCS programs, which are already going over-budget (but then again, what doesn't?) So, from the innovative minds within the defence industry, we are seeing that the future militaries will have several feasible options for equipping light elements with reasonably effective artillery support on reasonably light vehicles which won't require considerable maintenance assets to keep pace with their rapidly mobile forces. .

Interestingly, given previous posts on this list the protoytpe portee M777 being delivered to RSA Larkhill in a few months includes LINAPS (as fitted to all UK's L118s but 'could be fitted with power rammer and power elevation', which could work wonders for the rate of fire and reduce the crew size. What hasn't yet been stated is its in/out of action time. If this is competitive with wheeled SPs then you'd have rocks in your head to buy something like Caesar where the gun is fixed to the truck. Note that Supercat is also the platform for LIMAWS(R), a single pod MLRS currently in full development.

http://www.raytheon.com/products/nlos/ Every kid knows this is coming! This is what killed Crusader and rightfully so. Rocket artillery is the future and will eventually replace even the BDE and bellow fight in heavy forces as well as the 105mm in Light units. Red6

Maybe yes, maybe no. Meanwhile back on planet earth every army that thinks about these matters is planning on a mix of guns and rockets/missiles and mortars delivering various types of effect, both 'smart' and 'dumb' for the next 20 years. In reality different 'launchers'and their munitions have complimentary characteristics and offer the flexiblity to cope with a wide range of foreseen and unforeseen military situations. What really killed Crusader was a changing and less predictable military environment. Basically Crusader was optimised for one form of warfare and lacked the flexibility to deal with the much else. History shows that every military measure results in a counter-measure - tactical, technical, whatever. This means that flexibility and not being limited to a single technology reduces risk and is the key to success.

Red6 wrote:"Every kid knows this is coming! This is what killed Crusader and rightfully so." NLOS-LS didn't kill Crusader. Maybe it's cousin NLOS-C did, http://www.uniteddefense.com/prod/nlos_cannon_faqs.htm NLOS-LS is more of a long-ranged ATGM system. It uses rather expensive munitions and isn't suitable for traditional artillery tasks.

Who was it that wanted the guided 60mm round? http://www.thefifthcolumn.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1307

heh heh heh... NICE! I knew it was only a matter of time... We already saw 81mm guidance in the Merlin mortar round (which had its share of troubles and lack of interest), and the (presumably still prototype) Russian guided 85mm system based off their larger 100mm and 125mm tank-gun-fired rounds. And I also mentioned the USN's 60mm ETC tech demonstrator using adjustable trajectory/course correction. It will be interesting to see how much lethality they can pack in the shell and equip it with such a miniaturized laser seeker... But, this could easily mean the difference of putting a mortar round (HEDP?) close to an AFV...or directly down through the turret roof: a top-attack 60mm shaped charge would easily penetrate there. ...but I'm still waiting to see who proposes (actually gets prototypes in their labs) a guided rifle grenade, programmed/slaved to some of the advanced optics on the coming advanced combat rifles of some nations. Seeing just how small the digital camera in my cell phone is, it seems obvious that if one of roughly that size could be made shock-resistance to launch G forces, that anything down to a miniature 1-inch diameter anti-personnel rocket could be created: that may, at a future point, allow extreme range sniping (i.e, assassinations even?) by utilizing some kind of low-observable drone flying into the target's vicinty from a launcher several miles away, then deploying the micro-rocket with pinpoint precision, by slaving the rocket's seeker/camera through a relay in the drone back to a control center. Now THAT could change warfare as we know it: why combat thousands of enemy troops when their leader can be hit as soon as he shows his face in public. (50 years ago, no one would've thought satellite-guided weapons with the precision we have today would ever happen, either.) .

Well at least BAe have done something like it before - Merlin. However, it's going to need to be very precise to make it worthwhile at 60mm.