How Far Can U.S. Artillery Shoot?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 чер 2022
- The Army’s current howitzers, the towed M-777 and the self-propelled M-109, are reported to shoot just 14 miles with standard rounds and 19 miles with rocket-assisted shells. Russian howitzers, on the other hand, can already fire at a range of up to 43 miles. For these reasons, the US ground-combat branch is now spending billions of dollars improving the firing range of its howitzers and rocket launchers, as well as creating new, long-range rockets in order to match, then exceed, its rivals’ artillery capabilities.
On March 6, 2020, the US Army conducted a fire test at Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. Two 155-millimeter howitzer projectiles were launched out to a range of 40 miles. This howitzer was one of the Army’s prototype Extended-Range Cannon Artillery systems or ERCA. The ERCA is the first in a series of new long-range weapons for the Army, combining the newest M-109A7 chassis with a new 30-feet-long barrel.
In addition, the Yuma test deployed two different shell types, including an Excalibur GPS-guided shell and an XM1113 rocket-assisted projectile. A new ramjet-propelled shell developed by a Norwegian company could extend the ERCA’s range out to 60 or even 80 miles. In addition, the XM1113, which is expected to enter service in the next several years, increases the effective shooting range of earlier M-777s and M-109s howitzers from 19 miles to 24 miles. This test shots, therefore, marked a start of massive modernization of the Army’s artillery, with the first battalions of 18 farther-firing guns expected to be deployed in 2023.
Other videos you might like:
This is How Accurate is $4 Million M777 Howitzer's Shooting ► • This is How Accurate a...
What Makes Caesar self propelled howitzer Truly Special ? ► • What Makes Caesar self...
Why Do Modern Militaries Still Need Artillery ► • Why Do Modern Militari...
How Far Can U.S. Artillery Shoot? ► • How Far Can U.S. Artil...
The British AS90 Self Propelled Howitzer - Artillery Review ► • The British AS90 Self ...
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv
/ militarytv.channel
defense-tv.com/ - Наука та технологія
It ain’t just how far you can shoot, it’s hitting what you’re shooting at.
I suppose they are up to standard. And if so, they will hit. The newest german haubitzers have an average precision of 1 meter on 38 kilometers distance. Guided munition is the answear.
Knowing where is your target may be even more important. There is no point having artillery that outrage your enemy but not been able to spot your target fast and on time.
@@martinsl1979 38km range means roughly a minute of flight time for the shell. You're 100% right about guided, and it's not just about guided to any static location in many cases. We're talking about a highly complex task of putting the guided round onto a moving target.
No shit.
And getting out in time M777 are struggling in ukraine cause they are not mobile unlike french CAESAR hope they get selected for the US army contract
When I was with 1/11 Marines in OIF 155mm arty shot 22 miles using stick 8 powder, and Rocket assisted propellant or RAP rounds
I served on a M-48 tank in vietnam , 90mm main ,a good direct fire cannon range 2 mile. 4th inf div. pleiku 1969.
Me to. A great tank for its time. Easy to operate. Rugged and reliable. Lousy gas mileage. Not many breakdowns and fast repairs. I was stationed at Ft. Knox, Ky during the Korean War. Fortunately our unit was not called up. Loved the 50 cal. machine gun. The 90 mm cannon was accurate for short distances. We would try to set the shells to delay to watch them skip across the range before exploding. (Until we got caught). Fond memories and lots of bruises..
Tu es un criminel
Its amazing that you can actually accurately shoot, what is essentially a big gun, and lob a projectile for 40+ miles.
newton's law - look it up
The maximum firing range is 24.7km with unassisted rounds and 30km with rocket-assisted rounds. The M777A2 can fire the Raytheon / Bofors XM982 Excalibur GPS / Inertial Navigation-guided extended-range 155mm projectiles using the Modular Artillery Charge Systems (MACS). Excalibur has a maximum range of 40km and an accuracy of 10m.
Great information 👍, on point 👉 keep it as classified as possible, there's commies wandering around the United States as sneaky as Putin or Mad Vlad the world's biggest loser ..... toss in Belarus which is about to join the Russian communist to continue attacking Ukraine, a free country that belongs in NATO..... Tuff S if Putin doesn't like it, most people in the world don't like Putin 😒.
Yeah, but Excalibur production rates (
The usa can easily ramp up production if needed and this would lower the cost.
They have already lowered the rounds cost from over 200k to just 60k and can keep going. Plus the US’s equipment isn’t GARBAGE like the Russians and we’re clearly seeing that. Even their generals are garbage lol.
@@tclanjtopsom4846 Well, no, it can't. That is the problem with these complicated things. The original order from the US government was 35,000 or something. If the industry could have cranked them out, it would have. As it was, production was so slow that the government lowered its order to 6,000-ish.
The US established a record during tests using a CAESAR system and Excalibur rounds at 46km not long ago
MN we have people here in Australia that can throw a boomerang that far.🤣🤣🤣
BS dude, record ??? 🤣🤣 maybe only for US weapons, russians have systems with 2x that range, lol - educate yourself: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV !
Where is the 43mi range figure for Russia from?
They have some 203mm Pions that go 35mi with rocket-assisted shells, but 95% of their arty is
I was wondering that too. I am no expert, but I have never heard of a 43 mile range. I assume they are talking about a rocket assisted shell, but I think even that is 30 to 35 miles. I have also heard the M777 range is 14 to 18 miles with a base shell and 18 - 25 with a rocket assisted shell. So, I am not sure what is factual.
@@hillsane9262 .. One thing is range another thing is precision, According to Ukraine Brigadier General Oleksy Hromov, then because of their modern targeting radars, then one M777 Howitzer can do the damage of 4 of their own Soviet-era artillery, which I'm guessing is also what the Russians now are down to using for the most part.
@@hillsane9262 no 43 miles but 43 kilometer
@@leneanderthalien Thanks! That is about 26 miles. That is in line with what I read and heard for Russia's big guns. I think that is rocker assisted(?).
Sure. 😂😂😂
The reason the artillery was somewhat neglected is that US and NATO strategy more or less requires air superiority, and when that is present, artillery is not needed.
Is there any sign that either US or NATO are considering changing their strategy to fight indefinitely under contested airspace? A lot more than just artillery will have to change then.
What boggles the mind is that the US military doesn't just buy French 52-cal CAESar or German PzH-2000 systems and focuses on the targeting and ammo development/production.
You got that right. I did a year in RVN in an artillery battery and I was grateful on a daily basis we had air superiority and that it wasn't cold. That was over 50 year ago and our 175mm gun could shoot ~35 kM with an effective/deadly radius of 90 m.
@A Perpetual Guardsman with a flashlight Probably because of the smaller crew. The weapon itself is fine, as long as it operates close to maintenance (it's very complex). It's also a lot more expensive than CAESar, I hear.
If they at least just buy a proven design from an ally rather than trying to invent the wheel, I'll be happy.
The US is looking into a mobile system similar to the CAESAR that fits on the back of existing Humvees and trucks like the HIMARS does
US wants an artillery that can hit 70km - 100km range, of which there are developing 3 versions. XM1299 which uses the old M109 chassis, a truck version like the Caesar, and a towed version if I'm not wrong. Besides being cheaper than using aircraft to drop bombs, it's also a direct response to peer threats like Russia particularly China with PLZ-05 and PCL-181 that outranges their current M777 and M109 systems. Even allied artillery outrange current US systems. It's part of a bigger program called ERCA (Extended Range Canon Artillery), which is also under Army's Long Range Precision Fires modernization program that aims to extends ranges of all kinds of artillery including the M270 MLRS, M142 HIMARS and even stand-off weapons.
@@johnsilver9338
Bombing is very cheap (when you have air superiority), and can be extremely accurate with no more than passive flight control (i.e. no rocket) and since the plane is already there, laser guidance is an easy substitute for expensive GPS navigation systems on the munitions.
To get over 40km, the shells need to have some propulsion, i.e. they gradually become rockets. But they are limited in size and length by having to be fired from arty. The result is expensive ammo that can not be produced in great quantities like Excalibur.
A smart bomb costs 20-40K per piece, but a single factory can knock out hundreds per day.
Of course, some smart bombs are also fully self-guided and self-propelled (like GBU-53), but then they become just as expensive and slow to produce as all other similar missile systems.
In short, the reason air superiority became the cornerstone of NATO strategy is partly because it allows the use of very cheap, smart munitions that can be produced in relatively high numbers.
If NATO is forced to compete in a long war with Chinese or Russian artillery, without air superiority, it currently stands no chance. In fact, it will never stand a chance, unless it drops its resistance to using cluster munitions or tactical nukes, which compensate for their inaccuracy by hitting large areas.
Note that both cluster munitions and tactical nukes were an integral part of NATO strategy for a land war in Europe during the Cold War.
When I was in the Marine Corps in the late 80's & early 90's I was in a battery with 8" self propelled howitzers. When using a RAP round with the red bag powder, we could put a round inside of a garbage can at 30,000 meters or approx. 18 miles. I was disappointed when we had to turn them in & transitioned to the M198 155mm towed howitzer.
Whatever happened to the 175mm SP M 107 ???
I guess for artillery. The longer a shell travel, the more a shell looks like a missile. So, this is really a cost vs distance question?
The M198 towed Howitzer can fire up to 30 kilometers with rocket assisted projectiles.... they are also capable of delivering Nuclear projectiles at those ranges and further. As a surveyor for the 101st AB division I can tell you they are quite accurate with the right crew and forward observers.
Agreed. I stopped watching after the initial bogus range. Even in the late 80s and 90s we could call in fire 30 clicks away from any 155 or 8 inch. MLRS in the Gulf War was about 100 clicks. Not sure where this video got their numbers.
The Army got rid of all the Nuclear rounds in the early 90's. I think that what is lost is how long the tubes will last reaching out that far. We did a ton of testing using different powders when I was an office at Fort Sill and red bag greatly reduces the number of rounds you can fire per hour and how many rounds before the tube need to be replaced. The Russians could care less about these things but the US Army makes a big deal about it. They understand that once you degrade the lines and grooves you will start hitting your own troops. That is why in training you almost always shoot green bag. The tubes can last 10,000 rounds but maybe only 2000 on red bag.
With the ever increasing ranges of conventional artillery and the convergence of long range shells with guided missiles, the concept of a "front," or of "front line" with clearly defined "rear areas" is becoming meaningless in fights between opponents who are peers or near peers when it comes to battlefield technology.
You still need oil. Lots and lots of oil. Good thing we reduced our SPR to levels not seen since the 80's. It's also a good thing we sent all our hitech weapons to Ukraine. The materials we need to produce them come from Russia.
@@justmeandmeonly2501 we most definitely have not, and will not send all of our most hitech. You're high if you think that
No mention from the test made in the USA from the french Caesar artillery system who prove he's high performances (was able to directly hit and destroy a test tank in one shot at 46km distance with excalibur round) and its very high level of cost-effectiveness (cost "only" 5 million € each): it's very flexible to use, very fast to move (tracked artillery is slow and have a very high fuel consumption) and easy to air transport with a simple C130 (canon lowered trough the cabin wich is designed for this). The US army is seriously considering equipping itself with such a system...ranges from the Caesar: 38km with standard shells, 43km with aerodynamic shells, up to 50km with rocket assisted shells, and up to 70km with the NEXTER Katana shells
@A Perpetual Guardsman with a flashlight --- Yep, that’s what I was going to mention. The Archer is the superior system. I love 🇫🇷 and 🇩🇪 but the 🇸🇪 artillery is the best.
Cesar can also deploy in 20 seconds. Shoot. And 20 seconds later move
@A Perpetual Guardsman with a flashlight very different systems, the archer is way heavier and much more costly.
The size of the system is important when it comes to deployment speed.
Now at the end the US has decided to develop its own system I think?
@A Perpetual Guardsman with a flashlight The US military can sure afford to buy whatever they fancy, and the archer corresponds better to their doctrine, but I thought I read that they had decided to start a new program. Maybe I misread or something.
US wants an artillery that can hit 70km - 100km range, of which there are developing 3 versions. XM1299 which uses the old M109 chassis, a truck version like the Ceasar, and a towed version.
10-ft extension was implemented for the 5-inch HARP gun by welding a second barrel section to the first, allowing it to launch projectiles at muzzle velocities of 1554 m/s (5,100 ft/sec) to altitudes of 73,100 m (240,000 ft). Now Ukraine has a few captured Russian tanks with 120 mm smooth bore barrels and welders and machinists? Time to design and develop a long range weapon system?
A barrel alone does not a gun make. Let's say they weld together a few pairs of those with sufficient alignment accuracy and strength (and that's saying something - one of the HARP guns failed there). They'll still need the upgraded mount and aiming systems to make the extended range useful, the propellant charges and the projectiles in sufficient quantity (as in, a LOT), and a whole logistical network to procure supplies, fabricate, and deliver to the front line all of those rounds. There's not a square foot of Ukraine that Russians can't hit, and if there were Ukrainian traitors to sell the Russians one of the HIMARS for $1M and two French guns for $120K each, there will certainly be others to sell that infrastructure's key locations for the right price.
artillery is an interesting aspect of warfare, apparently Napolean was well versed on how to effectively make artillery work by shooting the cannon towards the ground of the enemy. The effect would be to take out more of the enemy and insure that the enemy's forward attack was hampered by the surrounding craters
Napoleon started as an artillery officer
And in Napleons time, they were cannons. Cannons were direct fire in line of sight. True artillery shoots at a high arc to targets beyond visual sight, over hills, over forests, and even mountains. Artillery can reach about 24 miles. New missile boosted artillery can reach over 35 miles.
I knew we had given artillery less attention than the rest of the military. Glad to see the focus is still networking everything together in a seamless battle solution. Hua! 🤘
We didn't. Western artillery focus is on ease of deployment and mobility. Long range is no good if you have to rely on a large quantify of unguided munitions because the wind keeps moving your projectiles off course. Their attacks are also more easy to detect and predict by counter battery radar. Medium and short ranged artillery attacks are nearly impossible to detect and assigned a counter battery solution. Counter battery fire is also futile if the battery in question has left their firing position or redeployed by helicopter to a new firing position.
@@ph11p3540 just out of curiosity were you a Forward Observe in the Army or Marines? Were you a Radar Tech that can detect artillery incoming rounds ??.
I was a 13B20R from 78-81 with the
2nd Bn 92nd FA Bn 42nd Group V Corp
Rivers Barracks Gieesn West Germany.
Section 6 M-110-A1 8 Inch Self Propelled Howitzer we fired HE rounds, ICM rounds, WP rounds to name a few.
Maximum Range of the 8 Inch is
25 Miles.
With a good F O and a good FDC crew we would put a 300 pound HE on target within 5 meters of target or closer .
Note there would be 6 rounds on target.
The targets would be destroyed regardless of wind or temperature.
Blame it on Top Gun
@@bladeqmaster I did want to be a pilot immediately after and I did join the Airforce after college. 🤘🇺🇸
@@ph11p3540Good point, the US knows and understands just how important logistics are.
It’s about putting as much steel down range as possible now in mass firepower
awesome video. thanks.
I would like to know more about these ultra long range projectiles. Thank you. Be safe and be kind.
What's that thingy at 6:20? M110 pimped for trials?
M110A2 has entered the chat.....
We were shooting this stuff in Angola in the 1980's. G5 & G6
Shooting at tanks at 40 km and beyond. The Cubans and Russians could not counter that.
It changes the course of a war.
Read about that.... Interesting fight. The Cubans weren't at all happy. :)
@@tinkertailor7385 It was our 'air superiority', the G6 was one of the most mobile vehicles in the sandy terrian.
All these new versions are to some extent copies of these original pieces of equipment.
The gunners told us at the high altitude the were shooting with base bleed ammunition way beyond 50 km, hitting vehicles in convoy, including tanks.
That’s a lie
WHOEVER STARTS USING NUKES FIRST IN THE MIDDLE EAST WILL GAIN SUPERIORITY BUT THAT ALSO
ESCALATE THE WORLD INTO A T HRID WORLD WAR WHICH NO ONE WANTS. SCOOTERDOG KOREAN VET.
The American military is all but a grift. The technology to shoot long distances, as pointed out here, was available in the 80s already. The barrel invented or perfected by William Bull literally blew every other system out of the water at the time, and the Cubans and Russians in Angola had no answer for the G5/G6 range and precision.
They're talking about spending Billions here to perfect this. You'd have thought that the Americans (CIA) would have had the South Africans share the technology with them. They were helping ZA covertly anyway.
As I said, it's a grift to fleece the taxpayers of more money.
what's going on with the fire finder weapons system I see how far the mrls have come but what about 36 and 37 radar system
The US Army should’ve been developing these new long range artillery systems 10 years ago. Also, no mention of the back end production/manufacturing infrastructures necessary to support the use of 10-20,000 shells per day. Why is this missing here?
SAME reason, ' humans' want to goto Mars.....because they can. WE WERE CREATED, TO BE ON ' THIS ' PLANET = home, mother earth ! NO Where else, in the endless eternity of ' space ' (kamala harris ?) is there any other physical LIFE.
Looks cool as heck at night like lasers going through the night
It was about time. US Army's artillery branch was probably the most neglected part of the US military in general. But I don't want to put blame knowing the reason why all this happened. Investing in the next gen artillery systems was seen as the waste of money given the type of warfare US military was involved in in the last 20 years. Firing the M777 howitzer18 miles from forward operating bases (FOBs) against an enemy whose maximum range weapon was Dshka 12,7 mm heavy machine gun and a 5 mile range mortar, was seen not only good enough but an overkill. But times change...
And when times change so does the strategy. Different strategy calls on different weapon systems with which your military can execute that strategy and achieve the goals of foreign policy.. And we haven't seen a more impactful and faster change of the world affairs and the relationships between different big time players, in decades.
Artillery is once again being seen as an incredibly important part of the way the Army wages war. And that change was seen years before the Ukraine invasion, but it was the War in Ukraine that emphesized it even more and pushed the politicians and the military brass to enforce the change more profoundly and with more speed.
How do you transport these vehicles with such long barrels? Some of these look like they’ll have difficulty shipping via rail and won’t fit into a cargo plane. Just curious?
UPS
At what point in the range calculations does curve-of-the-earth start to play a part nowadays? Presumably not for "immediate vicinity" stuff but I know that in WW1 German artillery used it when shelling Paris from distances previously thought impossible and I've recently seen a video showing tables at 40,000 feet for calculating range for naval guns.
In WW2 my late Dad was a PoW in Italy, having been taken by the Germans in North Africa. After the Italian Armistice he walked south down the east of the country, to join up with the advancing Allies as they came north. His notes mention hearing what they used to call "express" artillery rounds "as they didn't stop locally".
The Paris Gun did well to kit Paris - it was a waste of expenditure. Coriolis & Earth curve matter from around 10 miles or 18,000 yards - nobody measures range in feet.
Not only do you have to take in the curvature of the earth, but there is also barometer and weather related data at all the different altitudes that the shell will travel through that have to be taken into account. The wind doesn't blow the same direction at every altitude you know, and artillery rounds can travel through multiple directions in flight. Your dad might be talking about being able to actually see and hear the rounds as they travel overhead, which is normal. You will never hear the one that hits you though.
a very amazing military, a strong military will give a sense of security to the country
They need to bring back the M-110-A1
8 Inch Self Propelled Howitzer.
Max range 25 miles HE 300 pounds.
With a good F O and a good FDC crew everything and everyone would be destroyed. After the first Gulf War the deactivated the 8 Inch for some stupid reason.
2nd Bn 92nd F A Bn 42n Group V Corp.
Rivers Barracks Gieesn West Germany
78-81.
HEY MR COLVIN GLAD YOU ARE ALL GOOD. I WAS IN SERVICE BATTERY AND STAFF SGT LOFTON WAS MY SECTION CHIEF. I WAS THERE 79 AND 80 AFTER BEING IN 3RD 79TH 77 TO 80 . SORRY FOR SCREAMING IT'S JUST GOOD TO SEE SOMEONE ON HERE THAT PROBABLY ATE IN THE CANNONEERS MESS AND GRAFF . I FEEL THE SAME ABOUT THE 8IN .KING OF BATTLE.
Hello G, glad to hear from a fellow redleg from the Zoo. SSgt Fred Jones was our Section Chief. Hope things are going good for you.
I can't believe all the bullshit that they are doing to the Artillery. They are waisting billions of days on these 155's. If they are smart they should bring back the 8 Inch.
Depends what’s loaded in weapon.
With Russia unprovoked land grabbing sprees, America needs these bad boys.
Ahh the amount if burning M777 the last days is awesome they burn very well though
@@johnreaper4452 Yeah, that fuel tank really lights up lol!
"Unprovoked"? LOL That's a good one. The US told Russia if it removed all the nukes from Ukraine, NATO would quote/unquote not move one inch toward Russia. Russia complied and the US and NATO did not. Russia is completely justified in its attack on Ukraine. Shame on the US and its torrent of duplicitous Neocons.
They cannot compete with the South African record breaking artillery. SA artillery got the longest range, and placing multiple rockets on the exact same spot.
Really good weapons systems guys
Great video
Great video, have a wonderful day everyone.✌
Hey there Ninja... I needed that.. thanks man. I had no clue.
Humans are essentially still throwing rocks at each other.
Pathetic!
Imagine showing this to a revolutionary war soldier
Russians may be able to deploy large artillery unit, but Americans have the advantage over precision strike. By far it is deadlier
Nah us only best on propaganda tech news .
During the Great War, the Germans developed several long range cannons which were collectively called the Paris Gun. It (they) could hurl projectiles about 75 miles. The objective was to shell Paris with these guns - and 75 miles was as close as the gun crews could get . I don't think that record distance has been equaled. They did indeed hit Paris with some shells, but damage was not significant. It did, however unsettle some of the citizens on the receiving end.
crappy arty, are you aware how long they need for a reload ?? not to comment, was a huge mountain, easy to spot and destroy from the air...
The army had 2 Swedish Archer, for a couple of months. I'm guessing that's what they will end up buying.
How far can you hit what you're aiming at?
Miles will be useless in Europe, they will need to fire Kilometers!
picky picky
Dude your info is way off base on the russia side......
The Issue with longer range Artillery is the Barrel wear.. As most barrels last 400-500 rds. before they need to be replaced. Russia can shoot 40 miles. But at the cost of barrel wear. Which makes them less accurate. It's why they built so many. They use them as an Area saturation projectile. But now they have to produce 100 of thousand rds..
5 years on a M198 in the reserves. We thought the copper head round was titts. Would love a refresher . Tried to get the next generation155 to be full 360 in foreign with out relaying the gun .was working with Rock Island Arsenal on it . at least got the hydrologic wheel raise on the late M198's
nice explanation
US artillery looks a lot like their Japanese counterpart, Neo Armstrong Cyclone Jet Armstrong Cannon.
Get the rank correct. His rank is Major General NOT Command Colonel (which does not exist in the U.S. Army).
This is how they are able to get ahead of us
Indian Army conducting trial of ramjet shell, which is crossing 100 km. Need to see how many miles that should be.
It doesn’t matter if it has longer range (that’s what their claiming) but if you can’t hit your target its basically useless.
the problem is that those new artillery rounds will be extremely expensive. We might lose the ability to level areas like we used to.
They actually dropped the cost from $258,000 to only $68,000.
@@wildeninja2836 aint no way! wow
"How Far Can U.S. Artillery Shoot?"
Once I got a ride along in a B-52H and when flying over military ranges they warned all aircraft to not fly over areas where artillery was being fired. So it must go pretty high in altitude.
Can these be used as Falk guns ? like in WW2 ?
Targeting drones have changed the game big time
Thanks to Norwegian scientists that develops these great weapons systems
As far as it dont get destroyed by counter battery like the last posted videos where M777 are burning 🥵
Which Russian howitzer fires up to 43 miles? Are you talking about the Coalition-SV howitzer, that was in 2021 announced to begin testing this year? Manned by 9 foot tall mutated bears with flaming eyes?
I might have missed it, but would the Russian artillery shooting 43 miles be as accurate as the M777 shooting 13 miles?
Both are beyond any real visible range, though spotters, drones, etc enhance targeting, but still, you would have to think a standard shell going that much farther would be subject to a lot more that would affect its accuracy?
43 miles is rocket artillery. Any current field artillery can't shoot at such distance. Only Paris gun WW1 can shoot.
@@blackorange5676
It’s possible to reach such distances.
The PzH2000 reached a distance of 41,5 miles (66943 meters) with Assegai M2005 V-LAP ammunition during trials of Rheinmetall.
A modified G6 reached 47,4 miles (76280 meters) with M9703 Prac Inert V-LAP ammunition.
@@HingerlAlois Most modern and reactive assistant. And definitely not Russian
@@blackorange5676
Well there are claims that for example 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV
can reach 80 kilometers (49 miles) with guided rounds.
To counter such long-range artillery Rheinmetall is working on a howitzer that can reach 83 kilometers or around 75 kilometers (46,6 miles) when the shell is guided.
@@HingerlAlois Of course. The same situation as with all Russia equipment. But in reality we see t-62 , not plastic Armata.
30ft barrel?!! I guess these don't ever need to be transported via low-boys or rail-head.
Sounds like we are playing catch-up
That 30 feet long barrel can literally hit 30 feet away...
I think the Americans have found themselves way behind the Russians and Chinese. Those M777 are good for Afghanistan where they needed to be light weight to move them in the mountains and where fire mission are short. In Ukraine they can't maintain long fire missions as it breaks
Not just how far can you shoot, but how big is your target?
I think American artillery would be fine. However, they should consider purchasing the French Caesar gun. The US relies so much on internal production, its insane. The Germans also have an extremely powerful gun that looks like a giant tiger tank.
it's all about pork barrelling for all the senators . that's why defense companies make stuff all over the us . to spread the money. other countries buy systems from other countries because they can't afford the huge expenditures .
Artillery doesn't matter when you have air and sea superiority. A plane flying overhead can deliver as much punch as an artillery piece. The limit being number of rounds delivery. .
Air/sea superiority in ALL areas isn't guaranteed
EMPS around the world rubbing their hands together like Birdman lol
It was always strange to me how anyone could think that artillery was obsolescent because of strike aircraft.
So long as it's supported by an effective air defense there is nothing more potent
They'll never replace the artillery. They will keep trying though.
@@phil20_20 the only thing I can think of that might have a shot at replacing artillery is orbital bombardment
@@phil20_20 actually even that would probably be prohibitively expensive for sustained use.
The resources required to get tungsten rods into orbit would be massive, so artillery would still be useful for smaller more precise less apocalyptic work
Seems a bit much as we do have an air-force
U.S. Military shoots munitions 35 to 40 KM at most. Russia shoots it 50 KM with one weapons, and now with the just in service artillery, 75 to 80 KM. Worse yet for the Americans, they are now using the Krasnapov munition, which can put a shell in a parking spot from 50 miles away, 75 KM, and hit moving vehicles like tanks going 20 mph.
If the U.S. , Russian, or any military is letting loose the data on just how far their artillery _really_ can shoot............dumb.
Russian artillery can't fire to 43 miles. You meant kilometers? 43 miles is only for MLRS systems and maybe new ramjet shells.
I would think that stating how much range these weapons have would be confidential.
Most of this stuff is up for export sales so range is no big secret.
The M109A7 Excalibur Range is better than 25miles ..
Its all about accuracy men Accuracy!
Why has usa got the biggest amount of money spent on weapons but the shortest range
Because artillery is the least effective way of killing a target that is 60 miles away. Now throw in attack helicopters, jets, bombers, drones, cruise missiles etc etc. Somewhat ironic, but the war in Ukraine points this out. Without the use of our main weaponry, Ukraine is at a stalemate against Russian artillery. Now imagine how useless russian artillery would be if we had our aircraft involved or even our full artillery involved.
Because the Army is neglected.
How on earth do they know what they're pointing at if you're shooting 30 km away
I n t e l l i g e n c e. All you need is the lat/long of the target from forward units or aircraft/drone.
we be shootin mini jets now💀
អរគុណអត្ថាធិប្បាយបានល្អ👍
Please make a video on missile tracking ships. ❤️
How far were WW2 Artillery shoots?
What happened to the 105? Not expensive enough?
Whole different purpose. Direct and general support artillery are two completely different animals. 105's are purely direct support and don't have near the range or accuracy of larger direct support guns.
I’m trying to wrap my head around Russian artillery doubling. The distance that US is currently using that information has got to be wrong. Straight up that would be an embarrassment.
He who controls the sky will control the ground. Troops hold terrain but if the sky above them is hostile then they won't be there long.
HIMARS CAN SHOOT UPTO 300km.
depend from the rocket use
Один пуск ракеты стоит 1 000 000 - 1 500 000 долларов.
Снаряд стоит в 100 раз меньше.
You want to talk about miles without kilometers? I'm gone.
The longer the barrel is, in relation to the bore diameter, tells you how far the shell will fly.
rocket assisted ammo wants a word with you... 🤣
@@mirandela777 Rocket assisted ammo will travel farther from a long-barreled gun, than from a short- barreled gun.
The 112 foot long barreled "Paris Gun", used in WWI, could throw a shell 75 miles.
Not true dude, the barrel have length have little to do with the rocket assisted range, lol, use more than a braincell and understand the range is given by the rocket fuel inside the projectile ! You put MORE fuel ( longer projectile) you get MORE range ! MORE, even with a long barrel, you cannot use a full pressure propellant charge, to avoid crashing the delicate electronics inside.
And anytime you can ignore the barrel completely and shot from a rail - and yet get more range ! An arty shell can NEVER compete with a missile, when we talk about range. The only advantage of arty system over missiles is the RoF, who translate in area saturation, and obvious, the much lower costs. But if you chose to go, mainly, like the muricans, with the "rocked assisted" arty shells, you will lose warhead size (payload) in exchange for range. All these fancy "rocket assisted" shells are very expensive, hard to manufacture, hard to store ( need a lot of extra maintenance) and, when it come to payload, to the warhead size, they get much less HE than a conventional shell ( you take out explosives to put there electronics and rocked engine and fuel for it..) .
@@billkallas1762 "The 112 foot long barreled "Paris Gun", used in WWI, could throw a shell 75 miles." sure, they spent billions and years to build that dumb monstrosity, they need thousands of peoples to make that crap work, and could fire 2 shells ... per DAY !!! in general direction of the enemy ! Vulnerable to air attacks 24/7, since couldn't move.
Give idiots time and money, and they will come with such stupid aberrations.
With 1% of what they spent on that dumb gun, they could build 100 bombers, each carrying 1 ton bomb, and they could build those 100 times faster than they need to build the gun... not to mention the bombers had a 100x bigger range and could hit the target 100 times / day... realize now how stupid was the project ?
@@mirandela777 Can any rocket assisted shell travel 75 miles, like the Paris Gun did, 100 years ago?
Yedi Feed or Pygmies Feed? NATO use metric system
Let me spare you the 8 minutes.
24,901.461 miles.
At the moment when sir 2014 you said
if they were smart. not everybody in the army is smart. they can invest in the archer system for a good shoot and scoot system. if a longer barrel will suffice for now just do that. longer barrels are cheaper than a system that will take 10 years to build.
it's because the us is in no danger of being attacked. when we fight airpower is the primary attack vector. we use artillery much less than russia.
I hope they will all be tested on orcs soon.
I hope they will in this fairytale go gays🤣🤣🤣
This new ERCA seems way better
To answer your question: pretty damned far!
THE US ARMY BETTER GET IT'S ACT TOGETHER.
It is less about how FAR, more about hitting what you wanted to. Long range with an error circle bigger than the effective blast radius = shoot more, hit less!
The goal of modern artillery should be the same as a sniper, "One shot, One kill". With today's counterbattery equipment and tactics, you only get "One chance, to make a Final impression"!
spin launch can shoot into space
Nice!
Stop telling every thing
Stop telling every thing
Lollmfao
Two-star is a Command Colonel?