Especially when it's fighting mobile, not shoot & scoothttps://www.hartpunkt.de/rch-155-simulation-zeigt-ueberraschendes-panzervernichtungspotenzial-der-radhaubitze/How long until other Euro MIC copycat this? These things should see their first deliveries and trial by fire at the end of the year.
>manufacturer funds a study claiming their product is better
>>62790873Caesarbros... Are we obsolete?
>>62790909Meanwhile in the article>The results of the KNDS combat simulations certainly do not meet the requirements of an independent study and also focus on a very specific scenario. However, the fluctuations in the values give clear indications of the potential of the wheeled howitzer, which certainly justifies a closer look by specialized bodies.>Whether the wheeled howitzer becomes a real "tank hunter" or not, the combat simulation shows that significant advantages on the battlefield can be achieved with the means available today, if the available forces and resources are used slightly differently. Von Westerman uses the example of the tank weapon to point out that the idea of a "different operational use" of existing weapon systems has already led to success in the past. The fact alone that during the Second World War battle tanks were no longer used individually as infantry support elements, but in closed formations as highly mobile and fire-powerful maneuver elements, was the reason for the success of the modern tank weapon.The simulation was basically about testing special ammo, mobile fire and etcetera.
Yeah but the RCH-155 also looks over 3 times as stupid as other SPG's so it cancels it out.
>>62790926Is utilitarian
Shoot and scoot is dead
>>62790873>...panzervernichtungspotential...aaaaand you can immediately disregard the article
>>62790909>KNDS funds a study saying that they product is better than their other productwow
>>62791072?
>>62790873Did study have Lancet drones?
So the point is that this mobile artillery is a better tank destroyer than some other mobile artillery?
>>62791139The point is that it can fight in different, more effective ways than the current best-in-class artillery system, with like half the losses when trying the same objectiveThese things have the potential to be unmanned in the future too, I believe.
>>62791137You could simulate those with paper airplanes.
>>62791072Please understand, germans are trained from birth to have bigger working memories and can understand such words.
>>62791139The point is that shooting on the move is unexpectedly better than shooting stationary.
>still no info on its CEP while moving and shootingi'm guessing its measured in triple digits which is katyusha territory
>>62791241It's a gimmick. It can't even fire with a maximum charge while its moving.
>>62791241I'm sure it achieved the simulated effectiveness over its predecessor both with and without smart ammo while having a lower CEP, makes sense vladimir kun
>>62791241>According to von Westerman's interpretation, the runs show that the RCH 155, which is practically always ready to fire, can bring at least twice as much fire to the enemy as the Panzerhaubitze 2000 under realistic combat conditions (enemy threat) in the same time period, because the RCH is always ready to fire in real time. Compared to conventional artillery systems, which, for example, have to fire from a supported position and therefore need even longer to start firing, the effect would be even more pronounced. In addition, the simulation shows the "protection aspect" of mobile use. The fact that the RCH 155 can fire precisely even at speeds of around 10 m/s (equivalent to around 36 km/h) contributes significantly to the low losses of the systems in combat.>can fire precisely even at 36km/hSeems good enough
>>62791261>without smart ammoi call bullshitnot with such a spongy platform like the boxerthe whole thing is moving around like a volvo from the 70'sno way that shell has left the barrel before the chassi underneath it has moved enough to make accuracy dogshitit would've made more sense mounting that gun to the Lynx instead
>>62791123It's not about conventional application in the role of indirect firesupport, but in anti-tank application.>>62791194Gemeinschaftsflächennutzungskomiteeversammlungsprotokollschreiber.compound words are ez, but you can already tell from the url that the article is not related to its effectiveness as artillery piece.
>>62790922>special ammoI know what you're getting at, but you really don't need special ammo ito destroy a vehcile if your standard ammo is 155 HE.OK it's ze Germans so tehy'll probably make a guided tandem HEAT version.The French version will also doxx the target TC's sister's OF account before impact.
>>62791301Just hit the target area with 3 or 5 MRSI SMArt
>>62791373>to its effectiveness as artillery piece.So, an effective artillery piece will NOT kill tanks?
>>62791373It‘s not about compound words but sentence structure. They can slap nested sentences together like no tomorrow. And as cherry on top the verb for the outer sentence will be the last word.
>>62791528Mr. Twain pls. You know the verb is in the end, and not being a brownoid enables you to parse nested sentences.
What’s the status on Ukraine’s order?
>>62791667To be delivered start of 2025.
>>62790873Already posted about this in the "Ordnance Thread", but here we go again.Newer 155mm HE can quite reliably disable even MBT's with fragmentation. Direct hits are not required.
>>627916672 more weeks and they're gonna turn the tide
Highlight>The basic scenario of the simulation envisages a defending combat unit in blue - essentially consisting of a tank battalion - which is attacked by an enemy with three times the strength (corresponds to the usual exercise structure in red). As an additional requirement for the simulation, it was specified that the own combat unit has a second artillery battery as well as “many cheap disposable reconnaissance drones”.>Both artillery batteries were ammunitioned with a typical combat load - as is also common in the Bundeswehr. This meant that the howitzers also had a certain amount of SMArt ammunition (search fuse artillery ammunition). While the first battery was tasked with fighting in depth (e.g. holding down advancing forces, combating enemy artillery), the second battery was to focus exclusively on combating mechanized forces using precise indirect fire. The reconnaissance of the targets was carried out using a large number of inexpensive small drones.>According to him, the RCH 155 “was able to fire so much and so early that dramatic effects occurred from the enemy's point of view”. While the classic “shoot & scoot” runs resulted in the loss of around ten wheeled howitzers or self-propelled howitzers and around 31 enemy combat vehicles were eliminated, an average of 35 enemy systems were destroyed during the “mobile” mission, with only 5.6 RCH 155s being knocked out.
>>62792560>According to von Westerman's interpretation, the runs show that under realistic combat conditions (enemy threat), the RCH 155, which is practically always ready to fire, can deliver at least twice as much fire to the enemy in the same period of time as the Panzerhaubitze 2000, because the RCH is virtually always ready to fire in real time. Compared to conventional artillery systems, for example, which have to fire while supported and therefore take even longer to start the firefight, the effect would be even greater. The simulation also demonstrates the “protective aspect” of mobile deployment. The fact that the RCH 155 can fire precisely even at speeds of around 10 m/s (equivalent to around 36 km/h) contributes significantly to the low losses of the systems in combat.>>If one considers that even the flight time of an enemy return fire is around one minute, the mobile deployment would make an artillery counter-attack against the RCH 155 virtually impossible. This is because a speed of the wheeled howitzer of 10 m/s and a flight time of the enemy artillery shell of one minute means nothing other than that the wheeled howitzer has already traveled 600 m by the time the shell hits and is therefore far away from any fragmentation effect of an artillery shell. With appropriate air defense to rule out an enemy threat from drones and loitering ammunition, the wheeled howitzers would be de facto unreachable for the enemy.
>>62792219Dear assigned resident rheinmetall rep, what does "MEA" mean?
>>62792606Basically, the advantage of fire on the move is both that the howitzer can react much faster to fire missions and that it's immune to counter battery fire. With SMART munition (or equivalent BONUS I guess) it can effectively fight enemy armor at range to the point an armored push can be defeated before it even reaches friendly direct fire units.What the simulation apparently didn't consider was enemy loitering munitions fighting friendly artillery or enemy countermeasures against SMART (which could, IMO, be fought against with anti-drone weaponry in its descending stage). They admit the former shortcoming though, and the latter might be alleviated with more modern anti-tank artillery munitions.Either way, this is an interesting finding that supports the decisions of various european states to procure RCH155 over other systems. I also think that this might be of great interest to south korea, who are faced with a large number of north korean artillery. They might want want to put some effort into bringing fire-on-the-move capabilities to their K9 howitzer if possible.
>>62792647RCH155 with its AGM module doesn't just have the fire-on-the-move but it also has 360 degree targeting. So not needing to set up, it can also engage and disengage readily and act way more aggressively than any previous artillery platform. No wonder it's doing much better in hunting tanks or other heavy vehicles.
>>62792647>>62792606>What the simulation apparently didn't consider was enemy loitering munitions fighting friendly artillery or enemy countermeasures against SMART >make simulation that doesn't include main modern counter battery system (loitering munitions)>make system that has no improvements against main modern counter battery system (loitering munitions)
>>62790873threadigger BTFO
>>62791137Lol.Lanclets have failed to destroy cars.They are probably the worst loitering drone currently in service.
>>62793054Show me any other arty piece that has that. Boxer at least has some armor. Meanwhile your vaunted Caesar and Archer have bulletproofed cabins and M777 has nothing.RCH155 has already been equipped with RCWS, you can probably get one suitably for drone defense too. Maybe you can slap on some APS too.
>>62790910The good thing about the CAESAR is that's it's like 4 time cheaper than the PZH and it seems like it's 3 time cheaper than the RCH155
>>62793054Why would a basic artillery system be designed to fight loitering munitions or drones? Just use SHORAD for that.
>>62793505Half the point about those newfangled howitzers is that they don't need to operate in batteries, but as single detached vehicles. Needing to escort of them with a SHORAD vehicle makes no sense. Rather give them integrated drone defenses.
>>62793509Well as seen in >>62793191 it can probably defend itself, or at least be modified to defend itselfit's also more well defended than a caesar or an archer due to the boxer platform already without further mods
>>62793374That's only a fair comparison if it's simulated against the CAESAR. Given the Pzh 2000 is already more effective than the Caesar, more armored and all, and the RCH is more armored than CAESAR and more mobile and probably with broadly similar accuracy, it's at least 2x more effective for only about 3x the buck.The simulation even mentions that vehicles that need setup against the terrain like for shoot & scoot missions and can't do it like the Pzh 2000 would probably do even worse against the RCH in the sim, so the value seems to somewhat check out. The rest should be economy of scale.
>>62790926>*hits pipe*>OK Hans, hör mich aus>Ferdinand>But mach ihn 50% width und 200% height>Also wheeled
now put the turret on the tracked boxer
>>62793505Defend not fight.Because primary causality agent of artillery and AFVs are fucking drones today.If you don't address that right fucking now everything else is pointless.
>>62793940I honestly don't think this will ever get sales. Everyone else already has purpose built IFVs. And retards like UK and France have switched to wheels for their IFVs. They use AFVs as their IFVs now.
>>62793940Stop trying to make that a thing, it needs to die
>>62791195>The point is that shooting on the move is unexpectedly better than shooting stationary.You tell counterbattery radar not only of your position, but also your current travel direction. Next!
>>62792606>the runs show that under realistic combat conditions (enemy threat),Under realistic combat conditions the enemy will use tube or rocket artillery to drop toe popper bomblets that will blow up the tires of the RCH155, rendering it incapable of moving on anything but solid asphalt or concrete. We could see something similar but different happen when the ukies used american supplied artillery laid mines during their counteroffensive attempt in order to cut of russian reinforcements. These didnt use toe poppers but small mines intended to break tracks.
>>62794285Only if you shoot several shells while driving in a straight line.
>>62791053ok now 155mm full NATO right in your face is cool
USA should get those
>>62794321Good luck to effectively counter-fire in the first place.
>>62790926Looks like something out of a Battletech TRO.
the actual artillery system can be put on everything
>>62794285>shoot shell>turn wheel a few degrees>shoot shell>turn wheel a few degrees>counterbattery can no longer tell where you are>even if they could tell where you were travelling the chance of timing their exact location over 60 seconds later with counterbattery alone is much less than hitting them while stationary>this is if they don't just steer slightly off course as part of basic operations
>>62794321it's a good thing this is mainly a NATO armament
Put a millimeter wave radar on the roof and use it to detect and engage drones using air-bursting smart shells from the main gun. There’s no reason that functionality would be particularly hard to implement. Data networking to tie into the battlefield system to extend the range — could also be used to perform instant counter-battery, ie, battlefield net feeds counter-battery radar data and fire solution into an RCH to immediately counter-fire even while on the move. That level of data networking is beyond Ukraine’s C4 integration but having an anti-drone / air capability using a low-power millimeter radar and software control of the gun and smart shells could be packaged all-in-one on each unit.
>>62792627Mean Area of Effect.Killing Zone size.
>>62796071>Germans started using fussball fields for measurewe are doomed
>>62796032Counterbattery radar is datalinked to drone control center, drone control looks at the map, look the RCH 155 is moving southwards on this road that goes this way, a drone is sent to intercept, RCH 155 gets bombed into a burning wreck. Or enemy counter artillery lays bomblet mines north and south of RCH 155 position on a north south going road, the RCH 155 runs over the mines, loses its tires, has to run on the solid internal rims, the unpaved road is too soft, it sinks into muck and is abandoned. Western MIC produces weapons intented for colonial warfare, not for warfare against a serious peer. Western officer corps consists of liberal arts majors indoctrinated with marxist make believe thought who are completely focused on colonial warfare against irregular guerillas.
>>62796060We have a figure of speech in germany "shooting at sparrows with cannons".>>62796366Always have.>>62797849>drone control looks at the map, look the RCH 155 is moving southwardsDrone gets shot down by AAA or friendly drones because it's well into friendly territory.>a drone is sent to interceptDrone gets shot down by the onboard RCWS.>enemy counter artillery lays bomblet mines north and south of RCH 155 positionBomblet shell detected by counter battery radar, bomblet detected by drone and avoided by going offroad.
would be based if Switzerland and the US adopt it too
>>62797849Total retard post. A drone spying to guide artillery would kill a Pzh 2000 faster than it would kill a RCH-155 because the RCH-155 will always move before the next shot can come off. All it really needs to do to make itself safe to all but the largest edge cases and flukes is to steer around every once in a while to throw an incoming shot off. Basically the same as with the Nighthawk in Serbia: Don't be lazy and you win.You'd need a suicide drone to have a good chance against an RCH-155, especially since Russians don't have "bomblet mines" delivered by artillery, that is a NATO exclusive weapon.If you went to school you'd know fully well that not only are weapons not one-size-fits-all solutions most of the time but you'd also know that Russia is not the USA, they don't have RAAMS or ADAM.
>>62798239Depends how both evaluate the cost vs. protection equationReally curious to see how it's gonna play out
>>62798392For a place like the USA where they can just airforce anything to death i'm going to guess something that can take an earlier step in the protection onion would interest them a lot (and for the RCH-155 that is "don't be there"), currently the US is trialing new artillery systems and I believe Archer and RCH155 were some of the few they're looking at.
>>62798392>>62798415Swiss trials are: RCH155 (on Boxer) vs AGM (on Piranha 10x10) vs ArcherUS trials are: RCH 155 (on Boxer) vs AGM (on Piranha 10x10) vs Archer vs Elbit SIGMA vs K9A1my favorite is the AGM on Piranha 10x10
>>62790873lancet bait
>>62798452yes we know empty fields are lancetbait
>>62798432needs tracks
>>62798273>You'd need a suicide drone to have a good chance against an RCH-155, especially since Russians don't have "bomblet mines" delivered by artillery, that is a NATO exclusive weapon.They have toe poppers delievered by artillery rocket which is what would kill the RCH 155s wheels. A track would just drive over them without suffering any impairment.
>>62799598Did that stop the Caesars?
>>62790926But I like 'em top-heavy
>>62790873>panzervernichtungspotenzialGott verdammt liebe ich die deutsche Sprache>>62794285how would they know its 1 moving system ? not multiple guns or a few doing shooty-scooty?
tdlr me about KNDS, what was the point of the merging when it feels that it's still 2 separated entities (french vs german) competing against each other. Also what about productivity? It's one thing to showcase a shinny toy it's another to mass produce it.
>>62792544You still yet have to destroy a single pzh
>>62793551some things ascend language barriers
>>62800611They want to be the Airbus of ground systems in Europe. >when it feels that it's still 2 separated entities (french vs german) competing against each other.For now, but it's because both countries are still using legacy equipment so they have to cater to different product lines. But as integration progresses France and Germany will for example acquire the MGCS, and that's a KNDS product from the ground up. You can tell the rest of the industry is scared of being left out as KNDS consolidates because Leonardo (who got cucked out of the civilian airplanes market by Airbus) and Rheinmetall (cucked out of the MGCS by KNDS) have formed an alliance to also start developing ground systems. It's hard to cope against economies of scale.
>>62797849German counter battery radar detects counter battery fire and calculate trajectory of it and tells the RCH155 through datalink to change direction and to start own counter-counter battery fire. There is no world where movable artillery isn't a net plus.
>tall box better than squat boxBut can it direct fire?
>>62800645Apparently they damaged one but it had the spirit of the Fuhrer himself and limped back to Poland for repairs.
>>62802336yes
>>62790926>"how you want your artillery">"mmm.. rollerblade">"say no more"
>>62800693Huh? That’s not a good comparison, Airbus is basically French since all planes and helicopters are assembled there, same with all R&D done. Germans has zero knowledge about anything aircraft or helicopter related
>>62802834Gotta respond, Nice try :^)
>>62802834(you)
>>62802909>>62802916>no counter argument Classic. What jet engines, planes, avionics etc does Germany make that are not just license production?
>>62790926>least coping poolak online gook tranny cope bot
>>62790873if you have functional VSHORAD and hardkilll APS shoot and scoot tactic is sufficientif you don't have that even driving around all the time won't help you, large number of guns in fortified and camouflaged positions are the only alternative
>>62796060>There’s no reason that functionality would be particularly hard to implement.This has to be one of the all-time best indicators someone has no idea what they're talking about.
>>62805130Northrop is currently working on making 155mm an anti-air round using a new guidance kit as a part of their Cannon-Based Air Defense product. They plan on turning artillery platforms into anti-drone systems.
I don't really see how it's any more protected.Most of the spotting being done is from being spotted outside of tree cover, and this is stuck in the open firing on the move. It's better protected against PGMs and counterbattery, but not drones.It's cool, but I don't really see how shoot and scoot is any different, at least in terms of threats being sent at it, it'll still have to stop to reload.
>>62802368Love that video, it has glorious fuck you energy
>>62805598https://youtu.be/MNgcgBaOZeQ?si=y4xbNRYFUsxzgv9E