>
Posted on 11/30/2022 2:33:49 PM PST by Zhang Fei
The Ukrainian army’s newest howitzers also are among its oldest. On Sunday, the first video appeared online depicting ex-Lithuanian M101 howitzers in front-line use by Ukrainian forces, apparently somewhere in eastern Ukraine.
The 105-millimeter M101 was the standard light howitzer for U.S. and allied forces ... in World War II. But the design’s age belies its effectiveness. The 2.5-ton M101 is a classic—an artillery piece that nearly perfectly balances weight, range and accuracy.
The M101 was a battle-winner 80 years ago. In the hands of experienced, motivated gunners, it still can win battles today. Especially as those gunners combine the old howitzers with new drones.
Ukraine’s M101s come from Lithuanian army stocks. Lithuania acquired 54 of the towed cannons from Denmark back in 2002 and today is replacing them with the latest German and French self-propelled, 155-millimeter howitzers. Dozens of countries still use M101s or keep the old guns in reserve.
Vilnius pledged to Ukraine an undisclosed number of redundant M101s. The first guns shipped in September. The classic M101s join a bewildering array of donated Western guns—some old, some new—that increasingly are supplanting Ukraine’s pre-war inventory of ex-Soviet guns.
The M101 might be old, but it fires the same 105-millimeter shell that’s standard for all NATO light artillery. The United States and United Kingdom have supplied Ukraine with tens of thousands of modern 105-millimeter shells.
The M101’s range—seven miles—is greater than the five-mile range of Ukraine’s ex-Soviet 100-millimeter field guns. Still, an M101 battery is at a huge disadvantage in an artillery-on-artillery counterbattery fight with, say, a Russian 2S19 battery firing 152-millimeter shells out to 15 miles.
But Ukrainian commanders would be fools to assign the M101s to counterbattery missions. The classic howitzers always have been infantry-support guns. Towed by trucks or armored tractors, an M101 battery follows close
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
I’d like to have one but DC is to far away.
Earlier the story was: “the Russians are reduced to using old worn out WWII tubes that can’t hit anything”
Now it’s: “Heroic and resourceful Ukrainians are using 80 year old tubes that are as good as new!”
P-51s did not fare well when used in Korea. They were also tried in Vietnam, again with disappointing results.
>
Ukraine should be breaking out Stukas left behind by the Luftwaffe any day now. :)
“I doubt we could produce 700 of the same plane today without defense contractors bankrupting the Treasury.”
The defense contractors build what they’re told to build. Meaning I blame the USAF and their bureaucrats and the political idiots in Congress for why modern fighters each cost $100 million and up.
The idiots in the USAF want “One Plane To Rule Them All” and thus we get turds like the F-35 that does everything and it excels at nothing. The morons in Congress get hold of the plan for the plane and then they make sure that each one of 435 Congressional districts gets a taste of the pork by producing overinflated parts.
I think that’s why the F-22 got killed. Not enough corruption involved.
As to the A-10 it needs an updated version and then that version needs to be assigned to the Army since the Chair Force can’t be bothered with ground support.
51’s ran up against Yak 9’s and Mig 15’s in Korea. Only shone in ground attack. Interestingly, the P 82 Twin Mustang made the first kill, a Yak 11.
Vietnam....not much to report there.
Towing a mil-surp 105 behind a Corvair:
Now THAT is a mind picture...
Don’t forget trebuchets...
P-51s did not fare well when used in Korea.
—
By the time of the Korean War, jet fighters rapidly dominated the sky.
First, we were actually still using the M101A1 in the 80's. It's a nice little gun that can crank out 10 rounds/minute with a good crew.
Second, you can have different guns for different missions. Even when the M101's (usually just called "05's") were still a primary gun for direct support units, we had 155mm and 8 inch artillery for longer range/counter-battery fire. Those larger calibers tended not to be as good for direct infantry support as their rate of fire was slower, and they took longer to emplace/CSMO. The '05's were great for shooting and scooting in a direct support role, and the larger stuff was used for longer range/counter-battery fire.
Also worth noting that the light '05's can be used more effectively when there is mud/bad weather/bad roads, etc.. Much less likely to get stuck, more maneuverable etc..
Anyway, while using 05's certainly is not ideal in 2022, the criticism that they are outranged by some Russian artillery misses the point that they are not used for artillery v. artillery duels anyway. We have HIMAR's, M777, and other stuff for that.
M101 meet Orlan-10 and his night time cousin, Orlan-30
I think that’s why the F-22 got killed. Not enough corruption involved.
—
Sen Obey (D-WI) killed it with his amendment forbidding export - known as the Obey Amendment.
Put some decent sights on that puppy and it's good for another 80 years.
On the subject of the P-47 Thunderbolt, I found one once. I was a lieutenant back then and spotted it from the air underneath some trees on a dry island. I took a team with me to locate it and it almost completely intact: the canopy was open and looked almost new, the cockpit was complete - no scavengers had ever found it. Even the wing guns were all still loaded with 1942-lot ammo.
Like the idiot I was, I told my commander about it and he in turn, in turn told his commander and they all went out to that island to pick through the wreck and pillage it. They stripped souenir parts off the thing (including a really nice cowl painting of a bee riding a bomb) and removed the wing guns with an axe.
Damn shame - it was in really good shape, considering it bellied in in 1944 and was an absolutely virgin wreck. Could've had that thing back in the air in a year or so.
>>> “Even when the M101’s (usually just called “05’s”) were still a primary gun for direct support units, we had 155mm and 8 inch artillery for longer range/counter-battery fire. Those larger calibers tended not to be as good for direct infantry support...” <<<
WAY different eras and missions.
From Vietnam to Afghanistan, USA Arty was NEVER in “artillery battles.” Not even in Khe Sahn, but that was probably the closest. [Until we cratered their firing positions with B-52s, with 100% air superiority from piston pushers to the stratosphere.]
Outside of (maybe) Khe Sahn, American arty has been firing from basically safe semi-immobile dug-in fire-bases in support of random USA troops on the ground. From 1966 in VN to 2000 in A-stan. You have to go back to Korea to have actual “artillery battles” on even terms. So basically, we have ZERO experience at massed arty in living memory.
In the Donbass, it’s much more like WW1 or WW2: massed arty, mano a mano. If our 155s outrange your 105s, you are dead. We find and hit you before you even sneak into range.
Data point often now mentioned: The M-777s and other NATO 155s are asked to fire more rounds PER DAY in the Donbass, than in Afghanistan IN A MONTH.
What is great for firing random precision rounds at goat-humpers near a squad of American troops in A-stan, is NOT great for firing 100s of rounds per day, every day, in the Donbass, when the enemy is firing back with fast accurate counter-battery.
Reminder: the B-52s are old too but I wouldn’t want one dropping bombs on me.
The 105 was sure fun to shoot.
“””51’s ran up against Yak 9’s and Mig 15’s in Korea. Only shone in ground attack. Interestingly, the P 82 Twin Mustang made the first kill, a Yak 11.”””
“Despites its denials at the time, the Soviet Union was intimately involved in the Korean War. The contribution made by the Soviets was vital. They provided diplomatic support, strategic and grand tactical planning, including the planning of the invasion of South Korea, and essential logistical support. They supplied and trained the air forces of China and North Korea. Soviet pilots flew aircraft with Chinese or North Korean markings and after the war claimed to have shot down over 400 UN aircraft.”
The P51s external radiator made it very vulnerable to ground fire which was why the USAAC used P47s more in the ground attack role in WW2. The USAF scrapped its P47s by the time of Korea. The USN still had its F4U Corsairs during Korea and they fared better in that role.
Oldest? Nope. Rear guard Russian troops are armed with mosin nagants, first produced in 1891.
CC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.