Posted on 07/25/2023 5:23:16 PM PDT by McGruff
“I see costs as low as $400.00 for the basic artillery shell for the 155,”
From when, the 1950’s?
The Rheinmetall contract was 3300 euros per shell.
(the Bulgarian contract is very opaque, “up to xxx,xxx shells”, deliberately in my view both from that gov’t to hide what they are doing, and likely to hide corruption)
How much are the basic shells like the M795 or M107?
“Under the budget request, procurement funding for the M795 would be $61.8 million in FY-22, down from the $145.6 million appropriated for FY-21.
The budget request would provide for the Army to buy 75,357 M795 rounds, which would support training and the service’s war reserve.”
https://www.fieldartillery.org/news/army-to-cut-155-mm-artillery-spending-citing-budget-pressure
The 2021 price was under $1000/per.
The problem is, there is a dire shortage, and the price has gone up, as the Rheinmetall contract shows.
(i guess they are making it up by Excalibur, at $168,000 per shot. Krasnopol is estimated at 13,500 !)
I appreciate your effort, it is hard to pin down the current prices of various shells and which shells are always involved in contracts, or even how many contracts are floating around or have recently been signed.
It has been many years since I served on the 155 and it was surprising at first to learn the Marines are doing away with most of its artillery but weapon systems change.
“The U.S. Marine Corps is remaking itself to better fight China in a potential conflict, and it’s making bold choices to make it happen. The Marines will eliminate all of their tank units (a capability the service has had for nearly a century), most of its tube artillery, and a substantial amount of aviation units.
In return the service will bulk up with long-range rocket artillery and anti-ship missiles, weapons the service thinks will be more useful in island-hopping campaigns in the South Pacific.”
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a31915295/marine-corps-tanks/
The Marines will eliminate all of their tank units (a capability the service has had for nearly a century), most of its tube artillery,
This is like Rumsfeld and his “experts” who decided artillery was obsolete and tried to kill the Palladin.
Since WW1, in peer conflicts, 60+ percent of casualties has been from artillery.
Everything else: rifles, grenades, bombs, missiles, machine guns, rockets, tanks, submaries, destroyers, mines .... all the rest is 40 percent !
They spend hundreds of billions on everything else, then dick around and Mickey Mouse with 70% of warfighting capability - artillery.
this guy is a former Canadian military staff officer. He talks about artillery as ~70% of all casualties.
(for the Ukraine war, I bet it is at least 70%)
https://youtu.be/0p2psJbLc44?t=278
Yes, that is why the Russian war has so shaken artillery stocks, Ukraine can’t fight like NATO/US so they need the old
ways.
The Marines are not disarming themselves they are differently arming themselves to fight China.
The problem is that the Maries hope “it will be different this time”. And most likely it won’t.
That Jimmy Thomas video actually had footage from The Thin Red Line as one of the few movies where they (somewhat) realistically show artillery fire and correction. So that was US Marines against the Japanese.
For US Marines against China. Most likely it will be the same.
Betting that it will be different - if that is wrong, US Marines will be destroyed and lose.
https://youtu.be/t8rPdF8H6rc?t=674
I don’t think the Marines are hoping, but share your concerns with them.
As soon as they convince China (who controls over 80% of the processing of strategic materials) to increase their shipments to NATO nations.
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.