Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Southack
I agree with you, sort of: we will always need a mix of towed/helicopter-mobile direct support artillery and heavier self-propelled general support/GS reinforcing artillery.

We tried the "make one howitzer do everything" silliness with 155s and that's just stupid. The beasts are large, bulky, heavy, and hard to find enough geography to deploy and the ammo piece is 90% of the logistic load for a division. Our bean-counters have tried for years to show that making one gun do all save us money and fights all enemies in all situations handily but that has always been poppycock.

We still need and 105/120 medium-caliber expeditionary high rate of fire direct support howitzer for mobility and responsiveness and we will still need mass and reach and flexibility in our GS weapons.

18 posted on 05/14/2013 12:42:30 PM PDT by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: Chainmail

I see no compelling advantages for SP artillery.

Put me in the “Towed Artillery is lighter, cheaper, faster, and more durable” column.


20 posted on 05/14/2013 1:32:09 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson