ron@mlfarm.com (Ronald Florence) (02/14/91)
From: ron@mlfarm.com (Ronald Florence) According to popular journalistic sources, the Gerry Bull-designed 155mm and 210mm howitzers -- which are used by the Iraqi artillery -- have greater range and accuracy than any other weapon of comparable caliber, including the artillery available to U.S. and other Coalition forces. How much better are these bull-designed artillery pieces, and what accounts for their superiority? -- Ronald Florence ron@mlfarm.com
davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) (02/15/91)
From: davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) ron@mlfarm.com (Ronald Florence) writes: [...] How much better are these bull-designed artillery pieces, and | what accounts for their superiority? The improvement is between 10km and 10mi (:-)), based on public quotes in a country which changed to the metric system right around that time. The means of improving the range is called ``base bleed''. A conventional shell has a flat or boat-shaped base (tail), which produces drag and turbulence through air flowing chaotically into the vacuum behind the shell. A base-bleed shell has a quite small, slow-burning rocket motor in its base, which fills the vacuum with exhaust gases. This substantially smoothes out the flow in the immediate vicinity of the shell's base, and prevents turbulence from trying to steer the shell. It obviously reduces the drag, too, making it practical to try for targets out at or past the maximum range of a conventional shell. Please note that this is quite different from a rocket-assisted shell: they have a significant amount of the volume taken up with a motor, and the accuracy of the shell is approximately that of the equivalent unguided rocket: **not** very good. --dave sources: Toronto Globe and Mail (via a leaky memory) and a CBC special last night. -- David Collier-Brown, | davecb@Nexus.YorkU.CA | lethe!dave 72 Abitibi Ave., | Willowdale, Ontario, | Even cannibals don't usually eat their CANADA. 416-223-8968 | friends.
major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) (02/15/91)
From: bcstec!shuksan!major@uunet.UU.NET (Mike Schmitt) > From: ron@mlfarm.com (Ronald Florence) > > According to popular journalistic sources, the Gerry Bull-designed > 155mm and 210mm howitzers -- which are used by the Iraqi artillery -- > have greater range and accuracy than any other weapon of comparable > caliber, including the artillery available to U.S. and other Coalition > forces. How much better are these bull-designed artillery pieces, and > what accounts for their superiority? US: M102 105mm Towed. Max Range - 11.5km 15km w/RAP round. Standard DS artillery for airborne, airmobile, and light. M198 155mm Towed. Max Range - 18km 30km w/RAP round. Standard GS artillery for airbonre, airmobilve, and light. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- M109A3 155mm SP. Max Range - 14.6km w/charge 7 24km w/RAP round 18.0km w/charge 8 Standard DS artillery for mechanized and armor divisions. M110A2 8" SP. Max Range - 30km w/RAP round Standard GS artillery for mech and armor divisions. MLRS (SP). 12 round launcher - one at a time or ripple fire. Max Range - 30+ km. Primary mission - counterfire and suppression of airdefense (SEAD). Each Divarty has a battery of MLRS. ATACMS (SP). Army Tactical Missile System. Designed to be a replacement of the Lance. ATACMS is fired from the same platform system as the MLRS. 'Army Times' reports a battery of ATACMS deployed with the 1st Infantry Division. (note: I was on the Boeing Aerospace ATACMS proposal team - we lost out to LTV - who makes the MLRS). Lance Missile. Fired from a tracked self-propelled carrier Range - approx 75km Corps GS artillery. There were 5 Lance battalions in Europe and 2 in CONUS. No longer in production - LTV was the contractor. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyone know why the US Army took the 175mm SP gun out of the inventory? I don't think we should concern ourselves so much with "ranges" or being "outranged" as with the sum total of the "Fire Support System". How responsive the system is to "place steel on target" to support manuever is the key. Coordinated and integrated "fires" with A-10 and helo gunships and missile/tube artillery will be the deciding factor. But, Dave Emory could probably explain the Fire Support System better than I - but I think, generally, that our "system" will beat theirs. mike schmitt "FIRE MISSION, OVER!"