SP, MLRS and SPAA Developments

[DRG]

WW2 25 pounder

Accepted rate of fire was 5 rounds per minute, but average thoughout the firestorm in Normandy was 12 rpm, with one documented case in 4th Field of an incredible 17 rounds fired by one gun in one minute

I know the background to that story and the crew ( Canadian ) was very motivated to set the record

Now that was a much smaller shell but 12-17 rounds per gun is a lot of hurt especially when you consider that a commonwealth FOO had the power to order a fire mission barrages beyond army level

Multi-battery Concentrations
Targets engaged by two or more batteries were called 'concentrations' in British terminology. Until 1942 the procedures for concentrations against impromptu targets were not particularly slick, although there was a choice of several methods developed from the mid-1920's onwards, and concentrations of several RFA brigades had been achieved in 1914. Nevertheless, in May 1940 a British regiment destroyed a refueling panzer battalion in what is generally recognised as the first successful use in war of a wireless controlled concentration on an impromptu target. However, in 1941 Brig HJ Parham, the CRA of 38 Division, invented and tested new procedures. These culminated in demonstrating a 144 gun concentration against an impromptu target within 5 minutes of the target being called. In mid-1942 XIII Corps conducted further trials and new doctrine was issued is September that year. These concentrations were known as Mike (regiment), Uncle (division), Victor (corps), William (army) and Yoke (AGRA) targets and always initiated by the radio call “Mike Target, Mike Target, Mike Target” (or Uncle, etc) that galvanised CPs and guns to action.

Any observer could request concentrations, however, some observers including Air OPs, were authorised to order them. It was usually Standing Instructions that a BC had this authority for his regiment, troop commanders were given it as required. BCs and COs of medium batteries and regiments were often CRA’s or CCRA’s Representatives and authorised to order the divisional or corps artillery and have communications on the divisional or corps artillery radio net. This authority was sometimes given to field BCs and observers, and there were sometimes CAGRA Representatives (BCs and COs) with similar authority.

Just saying... different time, different guns but as the adage goes "artillery conquers infantry occupies"

[Karagin]

So, in plain English have we (the US) or have we not given them MLRS? I ask because another gaming forum says yes, yet the other articles don't say yes for the US but that Poland and Czech have, so which is it?

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

No we have not given them (HIMARS/THAAD/M270 MLRS) to the Ukrainians NOR can those countries that have them give them to the Ukraine WITHOUT OUR PERMISSION. NATO countries have given them GRADs and other similar Soviet/Russian MLRS equipment that the Ukraine already operates.

Case in point: Denmark had to be given permission from Germany before they could send their PHZ 2000 SPA to the Ukraine which was given and are in country or will be by this week. Also, you may have seen that Germany is already training crews to operate the 7 units they're sending.

As my main refs have indicated, we are taking what's happening in the Ukraine onboard in realizing that we need more of those weapons not only to counter Russia but China as well.

You will EASILY find that NO MANIFEST of weapons we've sent even indicates that HIMARS or THAAD has been shipped to the Ukraine.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/prod...and%20national
https://thehill.com/policy/internati...ines-military/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-...e-for-ukraine/
(The longer-range artillery system is the M777A2.)
https://www.defense.gov/News/Release...ce-to-ukraine/

I believe my work is done here for now.

You can put those "game sites" in the same can I put the "irresponsible" labeled one from my last post.

The Lunar Eclipse was awesome and the company unsurpassed.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

I had the unit in my master but I have now re-nationalized it.... JUST IN CASE things change ( again )

[blazejos]

Hunting for 155mm M777A2 howitzers already started here Russian movie from drone. That must be very valuable asset for Ukrainians.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1526859578662608897

Russians uses KUB-BLA their own loitering munition https://www.thenationalnews.com/worl...ed-in-ukraine/

[DRG]

Looks like my June 2022 estimate for the Ukrainian PzH 2000 was pessimistic by a couple of weeks. Reports are saying they are in use now and some suggest there *May* be over 100 of them delivered ( eventually...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TApSej8Meic

[DRG]

Also suggested is that the few 2S35 Koalitsiya the Russians have are based on the T-90 chassis not the Armata and this proves to be a valid point and the wheels are the clue

Armata


T-90m



2S35 Koalitsiya



Armata has 7 solid wheels--no indents, T90 6 wheels with 6 indents per wheel

Original info suggested this was to be built on the T-14 but it appears not or there just where not enough T-14 chassis to fill the order so the early versions are hybrids........ time will tell but I will "adjust" the Icon

[MarkSheppard]

US Army's Directed Energy Maneuver Short Range Air Defense system (or DE M-SHORAD for short)

LINK

LAS CRUCES, N.M., May 16, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- In four weeks of continuous live-fire exercises, an industry team led by Raytheon Intelligence & Space, a Raytheon Technologies (NYSE: RTX) business, and Kord, a wholly owned subsidiary of KBR, defeated multiple 60mm mortar rounds with a 50kW-class high energy laser integrated on a Stryker combat vehicle.

The directed energy weapon system — part of the U.S. Army's Directed Energy Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense, or DE M-SHORAD — acquired, tracked, targeted and defeated multiple mortars and successfully accomplished multiple tests simulating real-world scenarios.

Continuing to put the DE M-SHORAD system to the test, the recent operational assessment at White Sands Missile Range also included defeating several small, medium and large drones.

...

The joint industry team, which includes Rocky Research for power and thermal management, General Dynamics Land Systems for the Stryker platform, and Applied Technology Associates for additional sensors, is preparing to deliver four DE M-SHORAD units to Army Brigade Combat Teams in 2022.

===============================

I'm just wondering how battlefield lasers could be handled within the game; you would need special code to handle them; as they'd have different effect levels:

Anti Drone/Mortar/Rocket (50 kW)
Anti-Artillery (150kW)
Anti-Aircraft (300 kW)

i.e. an anti drone 50 kW laser wouldn't be capable of defeating incoming artillery or enemy aircraft; etc

But all three would be able to operate in "blinding" mode -- i.e. be able to degrade a target's FCS -- it's been 30 years since Desert Storm and 25~ since the Chinese/Russians permanently blinded a helicopter pilot; so I'd imagine all modern FCS have anti-laser blocks built in now...

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Mark you would be correct about the anti-lasing tech on FCS and more. Like a radio wave it has a frequency range, pulse rate etc. and like a radio wave if you figure out the above (And more.) you can jam it or interrupt the signal. The Russian Shtora-1 system for example, employs its own laser across the frequency spectrum to disrupt the same from an incoming ATGW.
https://defense-update.com/20051012_shtora-1.html
https://bklein.ece.gatech.edu/laser-...-light-source/

This is like the "classic" battle between people buying radar detectors and the police developing radars that can defeat them so the driver will get that speeding ticket.

I used the Shtora-1 to illustrate how long this has been going on even previous to it. So, using a ATGW of a different sort, the STRIX which uses a multi band radar along with a "backup" optical targeting device.

With lasers we're talking frequency shifts in nano seconds. The targeting against things like FCS in the "space of time" is a newer area in use of lasers to defeat those systems however, like the police, counters are in place against that.

You don't need a war to figure that out. The advanced countries and based on their technologies are all developing offensive counter measures while at the same time developing defensive ones at the same time. That's just simple R&D.

We are seeing this in the practical sense now with the JAVELIN and others versus some of the Russian protection systems.

I've seen the video on mainstream news of this concerning one of Russia's most advanced jets, you judge for yourselves who's winning the technology war.
https://www.businessinsider.com/russ...ards-uk-2022-5
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...strike-fighter
(And several have been shot down.)

I would have to think this would be a tall order to get this to work in the game. Also, nobody yet has successfully fielded a practical system yet and for us the USN is further along than the rest I believe. I also believe those systems at this time and into the near future would have a hard time against multiply targets.

"Don Sherlock Holmes" that was a fine piece of detective work!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well, it appears the M777A2 artillery systems we sent DID NOT COME WITH THE COMPUTER AIDED TARGETING SYSTEM. So it can't for instance fire EXCALIBUR with the precision the computer would've allowed for. But as the article notes they are getting precision fires because they're getting GPS targeting data from drones and spotters.

If we didn't send them you should understand by now nobody else did either.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...out&li=BBnbfcL

Regards,
Pat