Why do americans have such shit artillery?

File: ss (2014-12-06 at 01.11.04).png (131KB, 723x1658px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 723x1658px

>>33937198
They have air force. Russians forced to solve all problems with artillery because of no air supremacy.

Doesn't the paladin still have those stupidly expensive guided shells that can shove a shell up a mouse's pooper at maximum range though?

Do the Russians have anything similar?

File: BP_SNS_07[1].jpg (268KB, 791x1134px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 791x1134px

>>33937210
>Do the Russians have anything similar?
Laser guided shells are in service of Soviet\Russian army since war in Afghanistan. Glonass guided shells are not public released thing.

File: c-130-refuel-news__main.jpg (25KB, 700x510px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 700x510px

>>33937198
Who need artillery then your Marine Corps have more functional air force then entire Russian Air Force?

>>33937208
>BUT MUH SAMs

>>33937288
There is a difference between "you can fly anywhere you want" and "no one can fly"

>>33937210
They have something similar.

It's a JDAM kit on a conventional artillery shell. It's called Dinamika. It costs around $1,000 per kit and does around the same thing as what the Excalibur does.

File: 140425-russia-exercise-515a_a4f2c6e15e62e67dbeadb4bc36093457.jpg (246KB, 2500x1107px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 2500x1107px

>>33937198

>>33937198
Cruise missiles are far more profitable.

>>33937198
And all those guns will be blown to hell by f35s.
>Inb4 s400
The f35 computers determined Russian SAMs were not a threat and automatically filtered them out.
Russian SAMs are not useful against modern stealth

>>33937210
Krasnopol shells are a thing.

Missiles are a thing anon.

>>33937198
because cheney cancel our replacement.

and then the army got a boner for the future combat family of vehicles. and that program sucked.

>>33937198
What a shitty bait thread

I can't wait for summer day/k/are to end

>>33937208
Do you honestly think the air force can fulfill the artillery's role? Are you this retarded? What fucking plane takes 3-5 minutes tops, to arrive on station and fire on the enemy?

>>33937520
OP is right though, for the worlds mightiest military america has shit arty

>>33937509

>missiles
>not multiple orders of magnitude more expensive per explosion on target

Pick one.

>>33937514
It was never going to be a replacement. It was theft by the MIC.

Think about it. How often has congress commissioned some new plane, gun, vehicle, and so on that the armed forces DON'T EVEN WANT half the time, "spent" 8 to 10 digits on R&D, gotten a prototype (if that) and shitcanned the whole project? It's politicians funelling moeny to the MIC for kickbacks. Graft, corruption, treason

>>33937198
>JDAM
>all AGMs
>MLRS
>ATACMS
>Tomahawk
>tactical nuclear warhead

and US has bunch of artillery

>>33937552
Missiles and air ordnance are NOT artillery.

>>33937554
doesn't matter much to the guy getting hit by it

>>33937554
Except for continuous firepower and cost, missiles and air ordance are better than artillery in every aspect
and that's the reason why DoD still has all of them.

>>33937556
It matters a shitload for the side that's paying for it!

Thus far the US has used a lot more CAS and light artillery than 155s. That type of firepower isn't useful when haji is holed up with civilians, or highly mobile and in small bands. Much more practical to bring in an A-10.

>>33937208
Source on report please

>>33937570
not really

nobody cares how much it costs to kill someone so long as they don't have to think about it

>>33937596
not that anon but wrong, heres one example

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpnV0IQUTVo

>>33937613
but how does that affect you?

why concern yourself with the price of an axe if you aren't the headsman

>>33937283

>Who need artillery then your Marine Corps have more functional air force then entire Russian Air Force?
>post pic of F-35s
>laughingniggers.jpeg

File: 2s4 tyulpan near kabul.jpg (145KB, 800x543px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 800x543px

>>33937210
Welcome to the Afghan war.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IQmo6fzOYLwJ:fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/High-precision-tulip.pdf

>>33937552

Yeah, good luck being a grunt on the ground and getting those assets to support your unit actions.

Tube artillery is the infantryman's best friend,

>>33937208

>The soviets has always held that combat can be subjected to scientific analysis(...) What is perceived in the west as inflexibility

The fuck?

Is this implying that in the west we don't apply scientific methods and criteria to combat?

File: 1490505951048.png (147KB, 780x800px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 780x800px

>>33937567
>Except for the aspects where artillery by far excels, missiles and bombs are better "in every aspect"
That's like kindergarten tier fallacy right here.
>>33937596
>nobody cares how much it costs
Behold, an armchair general.

File: Cap 2017-05-12 21-11-19-803.jpg (301KB, 998x682px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 998x682px

>>33937622
>F-35
>except maneuverability issue, being better than F-22
>mentioning maneuverability, F-35 achieved 50° AOA
>and still cheaper

kys wigger

>>33937640
if you say so

>>33937640
>That's like kindergarten tier fallacy right here

then refute it, explain why it's wrong
dumb fag

>>33937222
>http://www.alternatewars.com/WW3/the_war_that_never_was.htm

> Nikolai Vasilyevich Ogarkov released an article in Red Star(:::) that directly challenged the much revered correlations(...)Ogarkov believed future wars would be characterized by a battle area in which precision guided munitions (PGMs) would replace nuclear warheads as the dominant weapons system. Because of their long range, near invisibility to detection, and growing accuracy, Ogarkov reasoned PGMs aimed at command nodes and theater missiles would have precisely the same effect as a nuclear strike, but without the military and political fallout.
>Combat units would find themselves cut off from their higher command structure and completely surrounded by the enemy
>, if Ogarkov were correct, the entire Soviet way of war-and the forces that were to fight in a future war-had become obsolete
> Soviet conventional superiority in numbers was negated by the probable destruction of the centralized command structure needed to manage those formations, as well as by Western control of the information infrastructure

And

>To make things worse, the Soviet military industrial complex simply could not produce the technology to create the weapons and communications to compete with Western armed forces.

Which seems fitting in both time and description of what you say.

>>33937634
Can't any US fireteam call in an air strike?

File: 1494491529264.jpg (41KB, 448x635px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 448x635px

>>33937538
there's not even bait on the hook man

put some effort into it next time

>>33937653
It's a fallacy, retard. It refutes itself. Saying that bombs and missiles "are better in every aspect" after specifically excluding the very aspects at which artillery by far excels automatically means your "better in every aspect" sententia is fucking false. God damn dumb burgers, I fucking swear.

File: 25234534.jpg (22KB, 220x280px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 220x280px

>>33937198
>Why do americans have such shit artillery?
They let Shinji-kun decide their strategy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bjcHqqema0

>>33937210
PGK are not very expensive, Excalibur are comparatively expensive but the cost has dropped dramatically as production increased.

>>33937222
Russia does not have a glonass shell in service, both the US and Russia have laser guided shells and those require someone to lase the target.

OP is a faggot as per usual.....

The M109 "Paladin" has already been superceded by a newer variant, deliverys of the M109A7 began last year, FRP just started.

Russian specialized RAP 155m outranges us 155m by a piddly 6km, meanwhile the US has Jdam like kits that turns ANY 155mm shell into a guided projectile with increased range, which is far, far more important.

I'm triggered.

>>33937641
I remember reading years ago that the F-22's radar signature was the size of a small ball bearing. The F-35's is smaller?

File: 0KAGxOt6Ef4.jpg (84KB, 807x454px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 807x454px

>>33937639
>Is this implying that in the west we don't apply scientific methods and criteria to combat?
Nope. West military education teaches officers to have a tactical and strategical vision, so they can create perfect solution for every problem. It gives them general principles. Art of war, war is unpredictable and commander needs to adapt.
Soviets taught officers to search for pre-made solutions to overcome problems. If you use X amount of force, you'll get Y income, where X and Y re connected by math formulas. Military science, war can be described by formulas, so it's predictable. Commander needs to know and implement that formulas.

>>33937916

then except for what i mentioned (cost, continuous firepower)
PRECISELY WHAT are those fucking ASPECTS "artillery by far excels"????????

you fucking RETARD

>>33938285
>>33938305
>>33938338
>>33938344
Are you okay?

>>33938343
The problem with this is the other guy knows your playbook and can bluff you, or bait you into ambushes, while generally knowing what you will bring to the table.

Correct me if im wrong, but isnt one of the reasons we use mortars so much is that they are organic at a fairly low level, thus being readily available while simultaneously being low-collateral damage devices compared to arty?

That focus on precision and availability alone may be the big reason we dont see big tubes being set up everywhere. Plus its not like there are large amounts of static targets in Afg anyway.

>>33938247
>Russia does not have a glonass shell in service
That is a question, because Russia a big amount of weapon used in Syria was "not in service" and officially dropped because of high price. Right now Russians are deploying artillery systems there are pretty high chances that "cancelled" shells will be there too.

>>33938357
That's a minus, but plus of that doctrine is that you can act much faster and give no time for enemy to think out a solution.
https://20thcenturywargaming.wordpress.com/2013/06/16/why-cold-war-warsaw-pact-tactics-work-in-wargaming/

>>33938343
This.

One of the key differences between NATO and Soviet doctrine was just how much authority and initiative was given to lower ranks. In the Soviet system a Lt was given the same responsibilities that a squad sergeant had in the west and hierarchy was rigidly maintained. Initiative was discouraged to the point where units were expected to maintain their position once they got there no matter the situation and asking for fire support that wasn't pre-planned had to go all the way up to the chain of command until it got to a Mayor (Major) who would then give the OK.

Thankfully the Russians have seen the error in their ways and have made great strides in creating an actual NCO corps and encouraging initiative since the fall of the USSR.

>>33938382
I always liked that article. It's an interesting read and shows the value in simply going "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" I really like the bit about explaining general advances where it's essentially "advance in column until contact with enemy, then spend a few minutes getting into line formation and then advance."

>>33938382
> because Russia a big amount of weapon used in Syria was "not in service"

and those would be ?

>>33938446
KAB-500S, for instance.

>>33938459
a version of soviet era bomb that was used in 2015 and entered service in 2014


ohhh, ok

>>33938459
I think they just bought a few export kab-500s

http://www.ktrv.ru/production/68/685/900/

>>33937621
Because you're paying for the axe still

File: BUK-M2E.jpg (3MB, 2329x4874px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2329x4874px

>>33938499
>>33938500
It's not working like that, Ru MoD claimed that they will not buy that weapon because of high price and later no other info was released. Suddenly - that weapon is in Ru arsenal and ready to be used. A little diffirent thing with few AA missiles, Kalibr and Kh-101 missiles which were shown by seller many times but no official orders from MoD ever published. Russians have shitload of projects in that "ready for sale but MoD don't want it" state from famous BMPT and firearms to hard-kill anti-SEAD systems and ridiculously powerful radars.

>>33938578
>>33938578
They claimed they would not buy the weapon when they didn't need it two years ago.

They bought a few export ones when they did need it. It's not a conspiracy.

>>33938596
It's not supermarket. With Russian (pretty shitty) microelectronic you need time to produce that kits. Since they're expensive it's not like they've got a prepared stockpile of them "just in case".
Anyway, by your logic nothing holds them from buying smart artillery shells same way. Weapon system itself is ready.

>>33938626
>Russian (pretty shitty) microelectronic
Bitch, please.

>>33938626
No, they definitely would lack strategic depth, hence why every bomb is not guided.

It would be worse with artillery, where you launch more than one with every barrage, GPS guided or not.

But that's pretty obvious what happened. US has done the same type of thing before during war time as well.

>>33937283
dats sum nice airforce pitty they need carriers that are fairly sinkable by russian tactical nukes.

>>33937498

yep that sims are 100% accurate, lol russian sams and airforce.

can you even grasp sarcasm?

>>33938677
Airbases are pretty sinkable with tactical nukes too. Pity.

>>33938578
>1200km/h max target speed

Holy shit, that couldnt even hit a harrier. Ruskies cant even build fucking missiles anymore

>>33938942
You're blind, it's m/s, not km/h.

>>33938439
I don't wanna advocate video games, but you see this kind of shit all the time in large scale conquest maps.

>Watching a door for 30 seconds (Which is a long time in a MMFPS) check your rear to see if you're getting flanked
>Someone comes through the door

>Sometimes catch tanks off-guard with a flanking maneuvre
>Other times you'll accidentally drive right in front of two tanks

Shitty examples, but same-ish idea

America spends all their money on light infantry & motorized infantry
The rest is spent on an obsolete maintenance heavy tank design

Due to the US's retarded procurement strategy of setting impossible standards and hoping technology materializes during the program, they have failed to replace all their vehicles for decades now.

>>33937198

Large-caliber conventional artillery is being phased out for missiles. It's too short ranged: missile counterbatteries would murder it. Same thing that killed the battleship.

>>33937198
why does OP have such shit threads?

>>33938677
Wait until you hear about America's missile defense system

>>33939581
But US have even bigger gap in their ground tactical missiles arsenal.

File: 195jp15p8w5u9jpg.jpg (73KB, 800x643px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 800x643px

>>33939729
There is never going to be a large conventional ground war in history again to use MLRSs. With that said in the 1980s the Soviet Union might as well been a race of space aliens the US so over estimated their capabilities.

http://gizmodo.com/10-cold-war-weapons-that-terrified-u-s-military-intell-1459669357

>>33939729
Has a lot to do with how critical BDA is and that missiles can't do it. It's why tomahawk strikes are generally timed so that a sat passes over the target area shortly after the strike.

>>33939833
>There is never going to be a large conventional ground war in history again to use MLRSs
There are three of them at least going on right now. Ukraine, Syria and Yemen.

>>33939833
>There is never going to be a large conventional ground war in history again

This is a stupid thing to say, the US is already white minority among the young, things will get a lot worse there

And once the US is gone, then large shooting wars is easily possible throughout the world, who is going to stop it?

>>33937198

Nigger what the fuck are you on about? The Paladin has undergone extensive upgrades since the first iteration of the M109.

That's not even counting our MLRS systems or counter battery detection capabilities.

Our Air force is better anyway.

Air superiority>artillery fire superiority

Because back in the 80's and 90's the US went full retard and tried to make everything transportable via C-130. We're still feeling the pain of trying to cut that much weight off artillery and the Stryker.

>>33940062
>counter battery detection capabilities.
>US made anti-artillery radars were blown up in Ukraine by artillery.

>>33940111

Because they were used by Ukrainians, who don't know jack shit about winning wars.

>>33937549

Basically. And on the off chance they start developing something useful they have to cover it up or squish it.

I fear for the future of the LSAT, I expect that the Army will let it get ALMOST finished and then can it.

>>33940183
>not true american

>>33940444

No, I'm saying that they were most likely used improperly according to doctrine.

Not unlike most arab armies using soviet hardware outside of soviet doctrine and expecting to win.

Or Iraqis who despite being trained by US forces and given US hardware failed spectacularly because, you know, arabs.

>>33940457

http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars

File: Achmed Al Trollhabi.jpg (4KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 125x125px

>>33940483

Good shit.

>>33940111
This is one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen.

>>33937641
tl:dr
"we have crappy AA radars"

>>33939833
>There is never going to be a large conventional ground war in history again to use MLRSs
Except for the wars that are going on now where MRLS are used.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R167dnx0Y7s

>>33941576
Syria isn't a large conventional war by any measure. For example a large conventional war would be if Syria launched an invasion on Israel, which will never happen.
>>33940032
This isn't about the US. It's about technology and the way future wars will be fought. Ever since the advent of nuclear weapons there will never again be lines of MBTs followed by millions of troops and artillery marching against equally equipped foes between the US, China, Russia and Europe.

It's all been proxy wars since and it's not changing. Get used to it.

>>33937521
A B-1B Lancer in orbit over the target area with a bomb bay full of JDAMs.

>>33942154
>a giant truck full of explosives
Wonderful for sandniggers.
Not so hot against anyone with competent ADNs.

>>33937198
1) Crusader was cancelled because it was "too heavy" for the late-'90s CONOPS that called for a brigade to be delivered anywhere in the world in 72 hours, with the rest of the division arriving 24 hours after that. It was 40 tons, plus a 40-ton resupply vehicle.

2) NLOS-C cut the weight in half to 20+20 by cutting down the barrel (less range), reducing the ammo bin (less ammo), and using every trick in the book to save weight. It was the only part of FCS to come close to completion; it died with the rest of the program.

Crusader was designed from the ground up as a modern SPG, with an autoloader feeding from a moving magazine that knew what each shell was and could select and load it rapidly, along with a variable number of powder bags, all tied to an advanced FDC. It had MRSI, automated battery ToT, pretty much the works. Even reloading the magazine from the resupply vehicle was mostly automated.

Almost all of that was lost when NLOS-C was cancelled. Most of the tech cannot (or at least will not) be backfitted into the M109A7.

The one piece of good news is that PGK (and the related PGMM) is doing for smart shells what JDAM did for smart bombs--making them relatively cheap and easy to use.

That said, if you were to combine (relatively) cheap smart shells with rapid fire/MRSI, you could put a "pattern" very accurately over a small area target (less than 1 sq km) very rapidly and without warning, for possibly less than the price of most ATGMs. That would have been a really nice capability to have, both against current opponents and to throw cold water on Russia's current shake'n'bake artillery barrages.

>>33942109
>Syria isn't a large conventional war by any measure
It is by any modern measure. "Large conventional war" does not specifically refer to WWIII.

>>33942168
Good luck operating an air defense network with growlers, prowlers, or BUFFs in the air.

>>33940457
Actually, part of the reason was because Obama refused to let them have anti-artillery radars--they were sent shorter-ranged, older radars used for mortar counter-battery instead.

>>33942179
I just gave you a example of a real war. Israel vs Syria. A civil war isn't a conventional war between nations. You can't just change what words mean, fucking idiot.

>>33937942
man was a moron

>>33942202
Oh, so now it has to be strictly between nations? Put down these goalposts and just walk away.

>>33941576
It was also used in the Gulf war.

>>33937198
>Paladin is old as fuck and hasnt even received upgrades

You know how I know that you're so dumb you can't even read a wiki entry or defense blog? Yeah.

>>33942178
> That would have been a really nice capability to have, both against current opponents and to throw cold water on Russia's current shake'n'bake artillery barrages.
Do you know that Russians do their own PGK? In Glonass and radio command version that works in the GPS denied environment?

>>33943313
That's why they use Garmins as strike fighter aids eh?

learn something new erryday.

>>33943313
i love it how sat com jamming/spoofing/flooding works on usa and eu shit but doesn't work on russian

>>33943386
Personally I still like how they claimed that they had a special all new super accurate toss bombing method so they didn't need PGMs.. Then the videos came out and it has worse CEPs that the old LOBS that NATO has been using since the 70s

>>33939833
>There is never going to be a large conventional ground war in history again to use MLRSs.
So you can see into the future; AND you're retarded?

>>33943313
Did you know Americans have M-code GPS that works in GPS-denied environment?

A little bird told me Americans have INS that works in GPS-denied environments too.

>>33943386
It works on everyone. This is why Koalitsiya-SV has its own fire control radar and radio command corrected rounds.

>>33942824
It's the definition of conventional war. You can make up your own definition in your own fantasy world. A world where North Korea isn't desperately trying build up their nuclear arsenal because their conventional artillery pieces are good enough to win a war.

>>33938677
Every F-35 and similar attack aircraft in US inventory is now capable of strategic nuclear attack.

>>33939340
those are examples of dumb mistakes and not at all what the other poster was talking about.
a better metaphor would be peace through superior firepower

>>33938340
The F-35's RCS is ~10 times the size of the Raptor's, there's legal limits on the stelthiness of American aircraft on the export market.

>american artillery
>bad
Paladin may be old, but it's not like it's the work horse of the field artillery anyways. We've got plenty of regular towed guns and a shitload of rocket artillery as well.

And the world's first and third largest airforce.

>>33937198
how is it shit? also a lot of our tech is older, like 30+years yet other countries buy the shit out of it including first worlders

>>33942178
>Almost all of that was lost when NLOS-C was cancelled. Most of the tech cannot (or at least will not) be backfitted into the M109A7.

Except the A7 has lots of tech from the FCS program, and the Crusader was cancelled because the US didn't need a 40 ton SPH to fight in Afghanistan/Iraq.

>>33937581
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/home idk if foreign countries can use said site (i assume so) anywho just type whichever word into the bar and documents that have been 'declassified" will be there

>>33944676
>things pulled out of anons ass

>>33943573
F-35 has not had B61 integration yet.

>>33944809
does not mean US arsenal doesnt hold strategic nuclear weaponry capable of single bunker/building destruction able to be mounted on nearly every US fighter or bomber

>>33944809
Yet being they key word, it is scheduled for ~2020.

>>33938658
All the major fabs are... not in Russia.
You're buying your defense grade chips from your potential adversaries. Think they're going to give you the best shit?

>>33937198
he have shit artillery becasue we dont need it. CAS is more effective when you have air superiority all the fucking time. why waste the extra money when somebody flying a sortie can in and out and be on their way.

>>33937198
Cite them claims OP.

>>33943313
That's not their current doctrine, though. In mechanized combat, they currently use a combination of submunitions and FAE to saturate an area with fragmentation and overpressure damage.

Guided munitions would be saved for much more special occasions, whereas the US is using them much more readily in an effort to reduce collateral damage in built-up areas.

Guided munitions are also more useful in an expeditionary role, where they reduce the logistical footprint. As long as Russia is only invading its neighbors, that's not as much of an issue compared to flying every round into Kabul on C-17 and then out to a firebase by C-130/helo/convoy.

>>33944789
It sure would have been nice to have had on a few of the larger firebases, where a small number of vehicles (thanks to the RoF) could have covered a large area by themselves.

In addition, planning to only ever fight insurgencies again is foolish in the extreme.

>>33944873
The only Reason the production of Russian processors is not in Russia is that building your own 28-16 nm production lines from scratch is infinitely more time and money consuming than ordering their production in China. It doesn't change the fact that they are Russian.
>You're buying your defense grade chips from your potential adversaries
No.

>>33946206
Kind of a non starter because they would not even be issued to smaller bases.

>>33939900
>large