Let's talk Artillery

[mack7.62]

I believe there is already shortages of Eastern Block ammo, that was one of the asks of the US to source some more 152 mm ammo so the sooner they swap over the better. But this conflict has been a wake up call to just how much is required to support intense combat like is happening in Ukraine, makes me wish I had some defense stock because NATO is going to have to buy a lot to replace what is being used.

[lowprone]

When we go boots on the ground, all our stuff will already be there !

[murphy j]

It takes a damn good crew to run a triple 7 efficiently let alone a battery.

I don’t see them being proficient with any of these systems in any short time.

Best bang for the buck would probably be the MLRS

While I believe you are correct about MLRS being best bang for the buck, I wouldn't be so quick to write off their ability to adapt to our systems and do it well. While I was there, our enlisted FO's and Artillery Officers, in conjunction with our Canadian and Polish partners, were running training for them. A couple of the FO's were friends of mine and the feedback in regards to the Ukrainians was that they're pretty damn good, even with the antiquated systems they had. One comment by an FO was he didn't want to be on the receiving end of an initial barrage from them, as they were likely to take you out first strike. Post first strike you had a fighting chance due to issues related to the age of the Ukrainian systems. I suspect they'd be quick on the uptake with a new system.

[mack7.62]

Update Germans are sending 7 2000's not sure how many Denmark has provided.

https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/statu...75720358281216

Woofers
@NotWoofers
The Germans have decided to send seven PzH 2000s to Ukraine. Taken from Bundeswehr stocks.

[Slater]

From what I've read, the US Army is getting out of the towed artillery business. Eventually everything will be self-propelled.

[mack7.62]

Against a near peer enemy towed are sitting ducks, truck mounted autoloaders are the way to go for replacing them iMO something like the Swedish Archer.

[Slater]

Haven't heard that anything came out of this comparative test. If nothing else, the Army got to take a look at some foreign designs:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...army-shoot-off

[eightmillimeter]

While I believe you are correct about MLRS being best bang for the buck, I wouldn't be so quick to write off their ability to adapt to our systems and do it well. While I was there, our enlisted FO's and Artillery Officers, in conjunction with our Canadian and Polish partners, were running training for them. A couple of the FO's were friends of mine and the feedback in regards to the Ukrainians was that they're pretty damn good, even with the antiquated systems they had. One comment by an FO was he didn't want to be on the receiving end of an initial barrage from them, as they were likely to take you out first strike. Post first strike you had a fighting chance due to issues related to the age of the Ukrainian systems. I suspect they'd be quick on the uptake with a new system.

Yep always other factors at play… But if it can work for them he’ll yes. I have a soft spot for good towed 155

[545Warman]

All I see is the world filling the Ukraine with the best we can ship to them & suddenly they surrender then give it all to Russia so they can copy it, then we will be fighting it in the next war.

[SomeOtherGuy]

All I see is the world filling the Ukraine with the best we can ship to them & suddenly they surrender then give it all to Russia so they can copy it, then we will be fighting it in the next war.

Before February I would have been concerned about this. After watching their WW-Z clown show for 2.5 months, I'm not so scared of the geriatric bear. The sinking of the Moskva was the peak of their failures so far, but they've had so many others. I don't think Russia has the engineering technical capability OR the manufacturing capability to duplicate most of the current western weapons. They sure talk smack and they have some very large non-nuclear bombs, but everything else seems to be duct tape and baling wire.

The $67,000,000,000 question is whether their strategic nuclear systems are equally obsolete and unreliable, or actually work.