Interesting. A fully automated 155mm gun on a modified dump truck chassis:
http://www.baesystems.com/en/article...stem-to-sweden
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Senior Member
Interesting. A fully automated 155mm gun on a modified dump truck chassis:
http://www.baesystems.com/en/article...stem-to-sweden
Banned
.......
Last edited by 7.62NATO; 10-19-15 at 16:56.
Senior Member
Membership in NATO circa 1986 might have helped; now, not so much...Originally Posted by 7.62NATO
Scout Rider for the Mongol Hordes
Banned
.......
Last edited by 7.62NATO; 10-19-15 at 16:53.
Member
Please like to those blue hat clowns will down anything productive.
Senior Member
The sad thing is that Sweden along with dozens of other countries have managed to modernize their artillery cost effectively while the U.S. Army is stuck with the M109A6 Paladin which although modernized is still on a 50 year old chassis and whose gun is outranged and rate of fire is a generation behind competing systems.
Senior Member
NATO is a paper tiger without US muscle, and the US will not engage in a direct confrontation with Russia. When push came to shove, NATO (read: United States) basically told Georgia to pound sand even though Georgia had gone pretty far along the path to full membership. And when our current POTUS drew a "line in the sand" on Syria's use of chemical weapons -- then blinked -- that told me all I need to know about how far he will go to check Putin's Russia. Sweden will not be allowed to join NATO under his watch. Simple as that.
Like I said, the NATO of today is not the same NATO that stood watch on the Fulda Gap during the '80s.
Scout Rider for the Mongol Hordes
Senior Member
The Crusader system was supposed to be the Army's next-generation artillery weapon but it went the way of the dodo over a decade ago. As the below video shows, it would have been a significant step forward in firepower over the M109A6:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bjcHqqema0
Senior Member
I was a FA Officer and I spoke with individuals who were on the Crusader project. Basically a single Crusader had the firepower equivalent to an entire battery of M109A6. Even after the Crusader was cancelled the U.S. could have bought an off the shelf solution such as the German PzH 2000 which probably would have been a 80% solution at half the cost.
Senior Member
It would appear that the Army sees the current M109A7 (which uses Bradley components, as I understand it) as adequate to the task. At this rate we'll see M109A8, M109A9, etc. I take it that MLRS is regarded as an effective supplement to tube artillery?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks