Black Hawk Down Oart III

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are currently no XM777 in the hands of the operations forces. In June or July the first will show up here at Ft Sill, for the cadre of the Cannoneer Course to ring out and start to develop TTP. Will there every be a 52” caliber tube? I can’t answer that. There is a plan for the eventual replacement of the 39 after the M982 ERGM comes on line. However, that would mean that it would probably not longer to be able going to able to be lifted by the MV-22 (you are adding more than 6 ½ feet of steel to the tube). You have hit on the one thing that artillerymen have been saying about artillery raids or air movement for the longest time. The prime movers are not going with the guns. So if the guns receives counter-battery fire they are sitting duck. You can’t lift them out under fire and they are to heavy to move by hand. CAX is kind of a funny unrealistic thing, A DS FA battalion normally supports a Maneuver regiment. At the stumps a DS BN supports a Bn, plus having a regiment’s plus air. If you couldn’t get fire because guns where displacing it sounds like a S-3 problem in the DS FA Bn. It is unusual to move more than 1 battery at a time. You would still get twice the artillery a Bn would normally get.
E5M Who are you with right now? I am on my B billet right now here at the school.


------------------
God truly fights on the side with the best artillery
 
I couldn't get fire cause I was way up in Argos pass, inserted about two days prior to anything going on with the maneuver element. The only thing that could range that far is RAP, and IMHO RAP sucks. I had shells landing here,there and everywhere. It was really hard on the flyboys cause I was doing SEAD and counting on the arty to suppress notional Rolands and ZSU's. After the Maneuver force crossed the LOD, we got cut off for RAP and were out of range for several hours. I'm currently in the Reserves with Scout-Sniper Platoon 2/24. It's better than active duty was, since people aren't killing each other to get school seats here, they're all set for the asking. If you like I could fill you in better via E-mail. I'm not sure they appreciate us burning up the bandwidth. Semper Fi...
 
Yep, 549A1 kind of sucks, at the stumps because of the high ord they have to coordinate with LAX to shoot it, anything above 17,999 posses a risk to comercial airlines and it is not unsual to shoot to 60-70000 AGL. Also, because of the chance of motar failure you need a 6000 meter buffer short of the target. the PER for RAP is also tremendous

------------------
God truly fights on the side with the best artillery
 
V-22 overpriced.

OICW weight is 19 lbs, from what I've heard. I wager 20MM ammo will be too expensive, and have doubts about reliability in the grit.


Still waiting on a good M-79!
 
In an interesting new case of high tech vs low tech, the Army is developing a new high tech infantry "rifle" planned for initial issue to troops in 2005.
The new weapon is called the Objective Individual Combat weapon. (OICW) It combines a .223 (5.56mm) automatic rifle with a semiautomatic 20mm (.84 caliber) semiautomatic rifle. The 20mm high explosive rounds use laser range firing and are set to explode at the range determined by the laser range finder.
Accuracy firing 5.56mm ammunition is to be "equal or better than that of the M16A2 ."
20mm ammunition is tp be accurate at 1,000 meters. The weapon is supposed to weigh 12 ponds or less and incorporate "recoil mitigating features."
One concern I have is the 20mm round. A typical 20mm cannon HE projectile weighs approximately 4 ounces. I wonder just how efective this will be as an air burst(AB) round. The Army has said that a single burst will "produce hundreds of lethal fragments capable of defeating Kevlar type body armor resulting in a large lethal area."
Perhaps the miricales of modern science will save us.
[This message has been edited by Hard Ball (edited February 19, 2000).]
I am updating this post because of some new informatopn obtained from Army PR releases and supplied by other TFL members, (we are a clever and knowledgeable bunch! I learn something new every time i visit TFL.)

o the OICW may be changing its name to the "Selectable Assaukt Battle Rifle (SABR)"
o The OICW prototypes have 12 inch 5.56mm barrels. Muzzle velocity of standard NaTO 5.56mm ammunition will be 2,500 to 2,600 feet per second.
o The 5.56mm weapon will ose current M16 magazines or a simikar improved version.
o The 20mm weapon has a 13.5 inch barrel. It has a muzzle velocity on 760 feet per second.
o The 20mm HE round projectile weighs 2.8 ounces
o The complete 20mm HE round weighs 3.2 ounces
o The 20mm magazine holds 6 rounds
0 The current date for initial isue to troops is now 2007
 
Hard Ball - did you just switch to a MS "Natural" keyboard? Just asking...
From what I understand they will change the name to SABR because the Senators some commitee will be able remember what the heck it is.
 
George:

a) No, I am still pounding away on the original keyboard of my faithful MAC. If you have noticed the numerous typos that decorate some of my posts that has nothing to do with equipment, just the fact that whatever other talents I may have, I am a lousy typist.

b) Your explaination of the name change of the QICW is superb. I would bt a few bucks that you are absolutely right!

Regards, Hard Ball
 
Hard Ball, I'm having a hard time reconciling your username with my mental stereotype of Mac users (ponytail, earring, Grateful Dead headband, children named "Sequoia", etc). ;)

OK, STLRN, I give up; "the stumps" is Twentynine Palms? that's the only placename I can think of that has to do with trees...

and what's the solution to the mobility problem? if you slingload a bunch of wheeled prime movers husky enough to tow the guns, it'll take twice as many choppers, and if you make the gun chassis into a stripped-down 4WD, the weight increase may eliminate the ability to slingload under a given aircraft. the "easy" solution is to have a whole bunch of heavy-lift choppers that can slingload a lightweight self-propelled gun, but then you're talking about two new procurement programs.
 
Ivanhoe;
I did wear a head band occasionally when I was a ranger. It kept the sweat out of my eyes and helped me get in touch with my gentler side.
As for "Hard Ball" it just comes from an old army proberv concerning the .45 Colt Model 1911A1:
"They all fall to hard ball."
 
EchoFiveMike, use of titanium alloys on a gun chassis is not necessarily a problem per se. the common Ti alloys are corrosion-resistant, have good stiffness/weight ratio, good strength/weight ratio. relative to steel, the downsides are materials cost, manufacturing cost, less abrasion resistance. use of Ti alloys, or aluminum alloys for that matter, can be a Good Thing if their use was properly integrated into the design from day one. if used as an afterthought, it can be bad news.

for something like a gun chassis, it seems obvious that the main structural problem would be fatigue cracking. both carbon steels and Ti alloys are excellent with respect to fatigue; stainless and aluminum alloys less so. since that M777 thing is designed to be transported by medium helicopters, I figure there is no way around having a limited service life. metal fatigue is literally an accumulation of stresses; thus a lightweight structure of any material can only absorb so much before it starts to go. in fact, with instrumentation technology now, you could have a small box mounted on the chassis which would act as an "odometer" to show remaining service life. a lot of work has been done in the aeronautical world on "health monitoring" onboard systems to track structural stress levels during flight.



[This message has been edited by Ivanhoe (edited February 26, 2000).]
 
Ivanhoe:
Part of the Battery XO's duties are to track "EFCs" Effective Full Charges fires through the weapon. After coming out of the field, he sits down with a TFT, a calculator and the gun books to enter the total wear on the tube of the weapon, which also equates to the wear on the trunnions and recoil mechanism from firing shock and recoil. This has record keeping on artilery tubes has been done since the the 30 years war (these types of records are kept on all cannon and large arms tubes in the military). And although many artillerymen in the Marines want a SP, we will in all likelihood never get it. The first problem is maintenance cost, take for example the 1 tank BN in 2d MarDiv takes about 1/2 the maintenance budget for the division. Additionally, if a SP chassis goes down you lose the gun, if a towed prime mover goes down, you switch prime movers and keep going.

------------------
God truly fights on the side with the best artillery

[This message has been edited by STLRN (edited February 26, 2000).]
 
I was talking about Ti in the maintainance aspect. I like titanium for stuff, don't get me wrong, but if the gear has to go back to Albany or Barstow to be repaired then there are real problems here. The time it takes to repair gear is a critical issue for me, especially today since we can't just go to supply and get a new one. Supply doesn't have any new ones, just recycled crap (at least here in the infantry) From what i understand, you can't just bust out the MIG or TIG welder and work on Ti. Maybe the USMC will have to train more welders and push them down to the units(Regiments) But from my experience this doesn't happen, we had our HUMV's taken from the company level and sent to BN. Now it's the stupid paperwork games to checkout your HUMV. So in this case, the artillery types can't just QC their guns at Bn or Regiment, they have to go to 5th echelon. Maybe I'm off base, not knowing very much about artillery(other than how to control it)
As for SP arty, I think it's a definate cost-benefit relationship. After we lose a battery or two to counter battery fire, maybe someone will find the money. SP arty is faster to set up/displace. It's more survivable. It's able to move with the manuever force over rough terrain. It's faster to respond becasue all the computer firecontrol stuff is right there. I don't think the USMC needs to duplicate the Army's effort here. Maybe one battery per Bn is SP? Hopefully with 52cal tubes and maybe organic counterbattery radars? I know the USMC has done stuff similar to this in the past. (eg The NBC Fox) Sooner or later we WILL have to come to terms with these issues. Unfortunately it will probably be after some 3rd world country with decent(read 45/52 cal arty) runs conterbattery on our tubes from 5-10 klicks outside our guns range. And CAS can't fly cause "the weather's too bad" (said with dripping sarcasm about people who brag about their allweather capability) And then I have to actually use this 14.5 lb bolt action rifle of mine, made in 1968(not kidding), to accomplish my mission. Semper Fi.....
 
EchoFiveMike, if they went to Ti for weight reduction, it follows that the structural elements were probably sized to the minimum dimension. in which case, whether Ti or steel, I'm skeptical that a quick-n-dirty weld in the field will hold up for long. I'd want thorough surface prep, preheat, and post-weld heat treatment if possible. this sort of thing doesn't sound like something you could do on a beach somewhere (since I work for a Large Defense Contractor, I tend to assume all work requires ugly gray partitions, time sheets in triplicate, a conference room for staff meetings, and a senior manager to walk around the facility checking that the secretaries are at their desks ;)). though maybe a quick Tig weld would get the gun up-n-running for a few more shots, which could make all the difference.

the long-term peacetime situation is a tough nut to crack. when you look at highly stressed lightweight structures (i.e. airplanes) you'll notice that the full wrench-bender shop is usually right on the base (or ship). and there's a well-oiled parts pipeline from the manufacturer to the field shop. other than planning for disposable items, there's no easy solution to the combination of high stress and light weight. the problem is that the Marines don't seem to have the monetary resources to have sufficient spares.

as long as the USMC is under the Dept of the Navy, its only going to get just enough resources to get its *ss shot off. if Uncle Sam split the Corps off into a separate service, then we could hope for some up-to-date hardware. likewise, as long as the USAF has a monopoly on fixed-wing, the Army is going to be starved of usable CAS and short-range interdiction.

and I think you misunderstand what pilots mean by "all-weather;" it means they collect flight pay in all weather. ;)
 
It's interesting, that in the push for lightweight, the contractors may have compromised durability. Now I don't know what the testing of the XM-777 involved. I don't know what sort of repairs are required on the current M198 and how it stands up to use, but I think that anything designed for use on the ground needs to be overbuilt to a degree. Especially when you have nice trucks and vehicles to move them around. OTOH overbuilt is bad when you are a grunt, because you have carry all this crap on your back. Case in point, AN/PRC119(prick-119) is the new radio. I carry it alot(everywhere I go)It weighes over 20pounds with batteries!!!! I have two spare handsets, two extra batteries(depending on mission length) and some other misc crap to keep it working. I also have a little motorola talkabout, weighes six oz, batteries weigh 4oz and it has only slightly less range. It works ALL THE TIME, something I can't say about the 119. Another place where lightness would be more desirable. Now these cannons(XM777) are designed for airtransport via CH53/MV22 which is all well and good for arty raids and such. Question is? How important is the occasional arty raid (given the fact that these operational asset MV22/CH53's are ALWAYS in heavy demand elsewhere) compared to the consistant and always available extra 10 klick range of a long tube (45/52cal) gun. Also would it be desireable to have an onboard SPU so the gun can avoid counterbattery without having to hook up to the primemover? I would like to think that this has all be addressed by procurment, but I don't trust them anymore.(that stopped after about 6 monthes of AD) What is the role that is foreseen for the XM777? Is it designed for use by a MEU(Marine Expeditionary Unit)? Last MEU I saw most of the gear was being open purchased because the issue gear is outdated. Is the XM777 going to help them? would a bigger gun? do the MEU's even use arty? Questions for open discussion. Semper Fi....
 
On the MEU, the battery provides the BLT CO a 4th maneuver company. The guns are hardly ever taken off the ships. The West-Pac floats normally take them off the ship for a Kuwait and possibly a Australian FFEX, On Med Floats they same applies, normally the battery, if it lucky it will go on a FFEX in Israel, Southern France or Corsica. It is unusual to taken the guns ashore, most of the time they a battery plays provisional truck-borne rifle company. However, MEU CO are reluctant to give up the fire power that is inherent in a firing battery, so they will not leave the battery of the task organized force list.

------------------
God truly fights on the side with the best artillery
 
Sorry, poorly phrased question: I shall try again. Has a MEU,in the past, ever used their artillery to support the maneuver element ashore. Would a 120mm mortar system be better(for the MEU)? 105's? I know the French peacekeepers in Sarejevo used their 120mm mortars to good effect back in 95 prior to the Dayton peace accords. Would this work for us? The US Army has fielded a 120mm system, I don't particulary care for it but it works. Sea Dragon was evaluating the "Box Mortar" Thoughts? Comments? Semper Fi....
 
One of the biggest problems with mortars is accuracy and inability to manuever under their fires in peacetime training. The dragon fire "box mortar" tube was based on the French 120 mm rifled tube, it cannot use the same ammunition as the M120 120 smooth bore that the Army has adopted. However, because it is not a smooth bore system it is extremely accurate when compared to mortars. It however, since it is automous, relies on digital communication currently only the Artillery community works much with the obsolete DMS, the grunts would have to start carring another 15lbs or so of gear just to talk to their mortars, And although the TLDHS was supposed to be fielded this summer, it software and components haven't even been finalized, the DMS will have to continue to serve for many many more years. The second 120 the Marines are looking at, the 120 LAV is a breach loader, but can fire all standard fin stablized rounds. In testing at the stumps (yes 29 Palms) It had some accuracy issues. Just like almost all mortars, firing a fin stabilized, high angle projo through, many, many lines of met ensure that is not that accurate. Also since it is in a LAV, it can be fired direct fire, to do this a special clip is placed on the tip of projo to keep it from sliding forward in the tube. If I remember right one of the rounds in the test slips part of the way down the tube and had to be punched out.
Although the 120 has a 75m ECR, it currently only gets about 7-8 KM, and doesn't compare to the lethality of DPICM that can range out to 28.3 KM. We abandoned the 105 in 1994, there still is one firing battery at Quantico and 1 salute battery in each active Regiment. The reasons where many fold. 1) range and killing power of 155 verses 105. The 105 was not ideal to fight in a mech enviroment, again lack of lethality. One single piece and caliber to simplfy logistics and training. Ability to shoot precision munitions (almost all developement at the time was in 155 munitions), but this has left us with the only meduim to light force supported by a 155 system.

------------------
God truly fights on the side with the best artillery
 
to follow up on Hard Ball's wist list item, if we wanted to develop the ideal heavy piece (as opposed to a lightweight piece for air assault use), what would it be? we seem to have some votes for 200mm, self-propelled, integral counterbattery radar, some sort of semi-automated supply chassis.

what else? would it be smoothbore, firing fin-stab rounds, or rifled? have the counterbattery radar or a lidar provide atmospheric data? have the chassis common with the issue MBT? built-in fridge and propane grill? ;)
 
The M110 eight inch (203mm)howitzer was truelly a great piece of gear. Great accuracy, good throw weight per shell, but only third that of a MLRS rocket. But you could get HE, unlike MLRS were you only have the M77 DPICM.
The built in met station per gun or per battery sounds great, but won't probably work 1) it would cost a whole lot. 2) Emplacement and displacement times for radars, specifally their antennas is way too long (I know the Mk90, M93 and M94 chronographes are real small and can be set up in minutes, but only has a very limited ranges. 3) Over pressure while firing high charges, it not because of the sound of our vehicle that we all loose or hearing. 4) signature of a unit using these devices could invite a ARM or counterbattery fire.

------------------
God truly fights on the side with the best artillery
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top