Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Artillery Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Advantages of lower calibers? (?)
WinsettZ    7/5/2003 9:01:19 AM
The Paladin is a 39 caliber barrel...that means...eight meters? The South African G5/G6 artillery piece (basis of the Mobile artillery from C&C Renegade) is 45 caliber with superior range. Then comes the German PzH 2000, with 52 caliber and 40 km range. The Paladin can get 30..but would need a rocket-assist. Accuracy might suffer. So why would they use a 39 caliber artillery piece? Is there a unique advantage? Shorter range, shorter recoil? Center of gravity?
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Sam    RE:Advantages of lower calibers? (?)   7/6/2003 7:42:45 PM
Some of the advantages are weight and length for transportation. You would have to look at the limiting factors of space and weight avaliable within the M108/109 chassis and turret for the gun selection. Something not taken into account is that you are comparing a early to mid 80s system (M109a6) with a late 90s system (PZH2000). A modified system compared to a ground up design. Comparing the PZH to the Crusader would have been more accurate/fair. The G5/6 cannot fire conventional 155mm NATO standard rounds and achieve those ranges. It uses a special base bleed projectile
Quote    Reply

WinsettZ    RE:Advantages of lower calibers? (?)   7/7/2003 8:37:48 AM
I know it isn't a fair comparison, but trying to compare pieces that are in service together, rather then canceled prototypes. Although I'd love to compare PzH to Crusader...Rumsfeld has temporarily put Crusader away in the closet. We'll be using our Paladin in battle, and as such, have to compare our front-line stuff to more advanced pieces.
Quote    Reply

GroundZero    RE: Thank you for ur help (GroundZero)   7/10/2003 6:14:23 AM
Thankyou for answering the question i had about rail guns
Quote    Reply

gunner    RE:Advantages of lower calibers?....Sam   8/22/2003 6:38:32 PM
The 39 calibre barrels were standard for NATO 155's until the 80's. New manufacturing methods allowed longer barrels to be produced, but the budget (or political will) to buy them wasn't there. Only the export success of the South African G5 family (which capitalised on those advances)and the superior range of the Soviet 130mm gun/howitzers shamed the West into catching up. The US govt could upgrade Paladin with 52 caliber barrels if they wanted to. Question is, do they want to?
Quote    Reply

Sam    RE:Advantages of lower calibers?....Sam   8/23/2003 12:38:38 AM
No they won't. What are the advantages? We have pushed the conventional (non base bleed,ect) rounds to their accurate range limit. The army already has a problem with deploying artillery by air and the marines no longer use SPs. However if they did use them, and this applies to the army with MPF, no upgrades due to limited deck space. Tube arty in the US has ceeded the counterbattery mission to MLRS and aircraft. If its not going to be used for counterfire why the need for long range? Interdiction is a rocket and air mission. The US has decided that the limiting factors with a smallet tube are worth it.
Quote    Reply

WinsettZ    RE:Advantages of lower calibers?....Sam   8/26/2003 8:01:58 AM
Hopefully the SP can compensate for limited range by being having forward mobility. Isn't counter-battery with aircraft a bit dangerous? Sending aircraft against known enemy positions, against a OPFOR tha tknows the USA loves aircraft?
Quote    Reply

Condor Legion    RE:Advantages of lower calibers?....Sam   8/26/2003 6:48:56 PM
You guys are missing the value of the big SP guns in the direct fire role...Where range isn't really relevent. IT HAPPENS, CL
Quote    Reply

216BC    RE:Advantages of lower calibers?....WZ   8/27/2003 12:37:57 PM
I do believe that the inherent risk associated with aircraft counter-battery missions is one reason for the development of the JSOW (joint stand off weapon).
Quote    Reply

erifnogarddloc    integral fire support   9/3/2003 4:44:07 AM
Has any consideration been put in to replacing all those 25mm canon on ifv's with 120mm gun/mortars?. A teh saying goes: why tap, it hit it! I realise that there will be less ready ammo and that the 120mm heat for the mortar gun has a slow flight time but it is faster that a missle. Also the 120 is just the ticket in urban areas for blasting holes in walls for the inf. ans the ifv can provide idf to teams on point imagin the effect of a company firing idf on targets spoted by any fire team! the restonse time should be excilent as the track is suporting it's own personel. ( just a thought form a red leg for all the cav scouts out there .
Quote    Reply