The War Diary

Post A Reply

Edit Profile | Register | Search | FAQ | Forum Home

»	The War Diary » Artillery » M-109 replacement... » Post A Reply

Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message: HTML is not enabled. UBB Code is enabled.	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Brock: [QB]I am actually the person that started the LAV III replacement debate. In it I argued that the LAV III was a suitable vehicle to mount a 105mm cannon. Several people have argued that it is not suitable. In fact, it is. It is only able to due with a vastly different 155mm howitzer than presently used. Jane's Defence Weekly had a reveiw on it about a year and a half ago. It is a very different self-propelled howitzer than our current system. First of all the howizter is not mounted in a turret. It is howitzer without a turret and it has a limited left and right traverse. It is mounted much like the Russian 2S5, but in an under amour fahion (see Jane's Tank Recognition guide). The reason it does not have a turret is because the LAV III can not mount turreted 155mm howitzer. Although the lack of a 360 degree traverse limits it to having to change positions to fire at drastically different arcs when firing, it must be noted that artillery tactics are "shoot and scoot" not "stay and be killed by counter-battery." Self-propelled artillery units are very vulnerable to counter battery fire, attack helicopters, air strikes, etc... . As such, the battery will normally change location before switching targets. The LAV III 155mm self-propelled howitzer is also highly automated with a three person crew and an auto-loader and precision first round hit by utilizing advance GPS. The article in Janes's also mentioned how it worked. The howitzer recoil is absorbed mostly by the ground, like a mortar, as it has base plates that allow the gunt to channel the recoil into the ground and make for a more stable platform. The 155mm howtzer is being integrated by Royal Ordanance, a British Aerospace subsidiary, who also designed and developed the, soon to be in service with the USMC, M177 ultra-lightweight 155mm towed howtizer with a weight of around 3,500kg. An alternative to purchasing a new 155mm howizer would be to purchase the LAV III with a 120mm heavy mortar turret and the truck mounted rocket system or HIMARS. Both options have advantages and disadvantages. The 155mm option is less effective when the vehicles are in built up areas as they are unable to shoot as safely due to the high rise buildings. They can however deliver fire to 30,000m extremely accurately. The second option is more versatile. in built up areas. The mortars with their armoured turrets can deliver fire in almost any location, but are limited by their range. Counter battery fire with the rockets is much more effective than with 155s, but they are not well armoured and must operate away from the main group. Both options are extremely flexible. Thesecond option is available immediately while the first option might not be available until 2005. Either one is good in my opinion.[/QB][/QUOTE]

Smilies	Instant UBB Code
	What is UBB Code?

Options

Disable smilies in this post.

Contact Us | CdnArmy.ca | Privacy Statement

� 2001 CdnArmy.ca. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board^TM 6.1.0 Beta Release 2.0-pre3