Self Propelled Gun/Rocket Launcher

Franklin

Captain
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Should China introduce and mass-adopt ultra-long range artillery shells like the LRMP? If the technicalities and costs involved can be managed to acceptable levels, then such ultra-long range artillery shells would be very useful in war that involves longer distances.

Besides, most of the west coast of Taiwan is a mere 200-250 kilometers from the Fujian coastline.
China has the King dragon 300 (610mm rocket 300km range) and the Fire Dragon 480 (750mm rocket 480 km range) that can be fired from a modular PHL-16 vehicle. Those rockets puts the whole of Taiwan in range.
 

BoraTas

Captain
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Should China introduce and mass-adopt ultra-long range artillery shells like the LRMP? If the technicalities and costs involved can be managed to acceptable levels, then such ultra-long range artillery shells would be very useful in war that involves longer distances.

Besides, most of the west coast of Taiwan is a mere 200-250 kilometers from the Fujian coastline.
I see no advantages to that system except compactness. In the US military, 155 mm gun artillery is already over tasked and rocket artillery is under tasked. 155 mm guys are tasked with everything. Attacking point targets, suppressive fire, mine laying, illumination, smoke laying, anti-tank, counter-battery etc... Even for area fires they just mass 155 mm guns. The rocket artillery on the other hand has a singular purpose. Engaging at point targets that 155 mm guns can't reach.

This round would enable 155 mm guns to match incoming GMLRS-ER in range. I wonder its payload and cost. We are probably talking about hideous figures for both. I don't know if it is just me but I see ultra-long range guns as vanity pieces. Guns are not very efficient if you are trying to achieve velocities above 900 m/s with full bore projectiles. American LRLAP round was an abject failure. It was more expensive than Tomahawk but flew at a more vulnerable trajectory, had a much lower range, was less precise and its payload was just 40 kg. It required a massive and ultra-expensive specialized gun to fire it.

For long range shelling, China has this:
1665864316956.png
 

by78

General
120mm automated mortar. I think at least one export customer has bought the system. That's a guided mortar round in the first image.

52438814375_8dc4c97c4e_k.jpg

52438359336_d822a65439_k.jpg
52437853622_ba75f0399b_k.jpg
52438882093_cff446cb43_k.jpg
52438634344_e054136f53_k.jpg
 

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
At this size, is there much of a difference between a 120mm mortar or 122mm/105mm howitzer? I'd imagine they'd have a similar logistics tail when operating at full capacity. Is the mortar system just cheaper?
 

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
At this size, is there much of a difference between a 120mm mortar or 122mm/105mm howitzer? I'd imagine they'd have a similar logistics tail when operating at full capacity. Is the mortar system just cheaper?

Mortar is restricted to high angle attack, so range will be less than a gun.
Gun is also capable of direct fire application and anti-vehicle with capable rounds (ie HESH).

Mortar is also usually lighter and more compact (ammo included), this can also be helpful in deployment speed, although since this is SP, probably not much of a deployment advantage.

To me, more curious is what the advantage is of gun-mortar vs just a gun besides maybe ammo storage.
 

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
To me, more curious is what the advantage is of gun-mortar vs just a gun besides maybe ammo storage.
I've read somewhere that due to lower velocity/pressure of mortar vs guns, they are simpler to setup and are less prone to catastrophic failure during high tempo ops. However with a wheeled system I don't see much of a difference on that front.
 
Top