Chinese Supergun?

C

chuck731

Banned Idiot
Bltizo said:
@skywatcher: sorry I was never particularly advocating for putting these in tunnels I was primarily considering whether a system could be made mobile. But if chinas tunnel system can handle ICBMs I can't see what it can't handle similarly large TELs with a gun.
Also, while I agree that self propelled/TEL cannons are better than towed, it may not matter very much if the cannons are under IADS (the cannons in a single battery could be dispersed over a wide area too). In any case I cannot see this system being used in a scoot and shoot way.


@chuck
What? You're saying to target a missile system you need to take out just the missile on the TEL, whereas for a gun system you only need to take out the gun? I'm not sure which you are advocating as more vulnerable. Both a gun and missile system/battery includes more than one TEL/truck and there are a variety o support vehicles too. And all can of course be dispersed over an area. The only advantage I'd offer missiles is that they don't need reload vehicles I accompany each individual gun in the company (or them again, they might, considering we've seen reload vehicles follow PLA SRBMs around). Of course the difference is a gun reloading vehicle can carry far more rounds given each round is smaller than an SRBM
Click to expand...


I am saying with a missile system, of course youe would disperse the TELs. So in effect, the enemy has to target every booster separately to terminate the threat. If there is no MIRV, that means you have to target every warhead separately.

With a gun, the gun is a big capital investment, and obviously you won't have as many guns as you can have missile boosters, and any gun 110 foot long would be hard to make mobile and disperse. So you only have to take out the guns.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
I don't see the difference. I don't think China has plentiful back-up launchers for its missiles. Destroy the launcher... destroy the supergun... same effect.
 
S

Skywatcher

Captain
Bltizo said:
@skywatcher: sorry I was never particularly advocating for putting these in tunnels I was primarily considering whether a system could be made mobile. But if chinas tunnel system can handle ICBMs I can't see what it can't handle similarly large TELs with a gun.
Also, while I agree that self propelled/TEL cannons are better than towed, it may not matter very much if the cannons are under IADS (the cannons in a single battery could be dispersed over a wide area too). In any case I cannot see this system being used in a scoot and shoot way.


@chuck
What? You're saying to target a missile system you need to take out just the missile on the TEL, whereas for a gun system you only need to take out the gun? I'm not sure which you are advocating as more vulnerable. Both a gun and missile system/battery includes more than one TEL/truck and there are a variety o support vehicles too. And all can of course be dispersed over an area. The only advantage I'd offer missiles is that they don't need reload vehicles I accompany each individual gun in the company (or them again, they might, considering we've seen reload vehicles follow PLA SRBMs around). Of course the difference is a gun reloading vehicle can carry far more rounds given each round is smaller than an SRBM
Click to expand...

You definitely can put the supergun on TEL.

You'd probably want a few prepared launch sites, but SAMs already have those, so that shouldn't be a problem.
 
C

chuck731

Banned Idiot
AssassinsMace said:
I don't see the difference. I don't think China has plentiful back-up launchers for its missiles. Destroy the launcher... destroy the supergun... same effect.
Click to expand...

It is much harder to get all the missiles than to get the few guns,

Guns are a a loser for survivability.
 
C

chuck731

Banned Idiot
Skywatcher said:
You definitely can put the supergun on TEL.

You'd probably want a few prepared launch sites, but SAMs already have those, so that shouldn't be a problem.
Click to expand...


Uh, no. A 110 foot gun barrel alone would likely weight >>200 tons. Any mobile will also have to absorb the tremendous recoil, and handle the munition.

There was a reason major caliber gun mounts in total are so heavy, comparable guns like German Gustuv 80cm guns needed mounts that weighed more than 2000 tons. Mobile supergun is just not plausible.
 
C

chuck731

Banned Idiot
AssassinsMace said:
Still don't see the difference. You can't launch missiles without a launcher.
Click to expand...

A missile launcher is a hell of alot cheaper, smaller and more mobile for a given warhead size than a super gun. You can and will have a lot more launchers than you would have guns if you want to deliver a given number of warheads.

Therefore, it would be much more difficult to preemptively stop the all missiles from being launched than it would be to blow up the few guns.
 
Equation

Equation

Lieutenant General
chuck731 said:
A missile launcher is a hell of alot cheaper, smaller and more mobile for a given warhead size than a super gun. You can and will have a lot more launchers than you would have guns if you want to deliver a given number of warheads.

Therefore, it would be much more difficult to preemptively stop the all missiles from being launched than it would be to blow up the few guns.
Click to expand...

True, but missiles has a set number in it's launcher to launch. Meanwhile a gun can be fired multiple times with multiple different shells and range. Guns has the advantage to be fired rapidly and continue firing as long as there are ammo.
 
C

chuck731

Banned Idiot
Equation said:
True, but missiles has a set number in it's launcher to launch. Meanwhile a gun can be fired multiple times with multiple different shells and range. Guns has the advantage to be fired rapidly and continue firing as long as there are ammo.
Click to expand...

But you only need to take out a few guns to sideline all the ammo.

You need to take out many missiles to sideline all the warheads.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
chuck731 said:
A missile launcher is a hell of alot cheaper, smaller and more mobile for a given warhead size than a super gun. You can and will have a lot more launchers than you would have guns if you want to deliver a given number of warheads.

Therefore, it would be much more difficult to preemptively stop the all missiles from being launched than it would be to blow up the few guns.
Click to expand...

A missile is easier to shoot down. If you have the range of this supergun, a lot harder to locate where it was fired from and lot harder to intercept the round coming down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top