Talk about artillery and shells is slowly fading away.New military drone companies popping up like mushrooms after rain.Less and less arty noises heard in the background of Ukraine war videos.
Drones aren't here to make anything obsolete. They will complement existing hardware.
>>64603717>Ukraine war videosNot every war will be fought like in Ukraine, Like when the Spanish Civil War fought a few years before WW2, Most military advisors in Spain concluded the next major war would be fought nothing like how it was fought in Spain outside of some new concepts like terror bombing, etc.
artillery indeed did the most killing in Ukraine, and the only reason why so many fpv missions are needed is because Ukraine has a massive shell and gun shortage drone corrected artillery can stop an infantry patrol much more decisively than a bunch of fpv drones can
>>64603717No, not going away. Not even fading. Artillery is still one of the most important elements of a ground war. Artillery is inherently required for peer conflict. From an industrial standpoint, artillery manufacturing is much more niche and “heavy” than drone manufacturing. You don’t have startups of college grads advertising new howitzer manufacturing plants/shell production facilities because the process is a logistical mountain. Shell/Tube production has more than tripled the past 4 years. It’s still not enough, it will never be enough. There is actually a hard limit to how much artillery can be produced and used. The US ran out of 155mm ammunition during the European theater of WW2, at the height of mass industrial wartime production in 1943/44. It’s just not as flashy or accessible as drone manufacture/development. Smart shells exist, IMO as a former arty guy they are pretty uninspiring and impractical given the strategic role of artillery in any given peer conflict. It’s expensive and counterintuitive to mass produce something like Excalibur, the effect on target is actually not incredible given the complexity of the shell/limitations regarding its use. If anything, like >>64603737 said, drones actually dramatically enhance the effectiveness of artillery. Instant, accurate and safe spotting has completely frozen entire fronts of Ukraine for months at a time. I think the way forward with artillery is developing a heavier towed cannon, there are limitations to the range and durability of things like the M777 and other extremely lightweight cannons.
M109 is forever
>>64603717French stuff is always so unique looking, I love it
>>64603792Arty shells are still cheaper than drones. And the production has been automated entirely in some places. I think in the US the only manual process in making 155mm artillery shells is hammering the driving band on.Artillery is cheap, easily mass produced, flexible, and very long ranged.
>>64603830Yeah I don’t know the exact details, but per munition you have a much higher effect on target with drones than with dumb artillery, and while the cost of projectiles are very cheap, the cost of the entire logistical process is NOT. Drones are good, both systems have a purpose.It’s important to consider that dumb artillery cannot be jammed, is weather independent, and can do much more damage to defensive infrastructure and fortifications than drones could hope to achieve in any reasonable use case.
>>64603830>the only manual process in making 155mm artillery shells is hammering the driving band on.They're hydraulically swaged on.
>>64603850indeed, drones are better for targeting things with precision, though artillery can do the same with guided projectiles (unsure of the cost of guided projectiles vs drones though)But if anything, drones augment artillery very well, by, offering a view to the operators of where the artillery is hitting and allowing the crew to make adjustments to the targeting solution on the fly. They could even be used to mark targets with a laser for guided artillery shells.Either way, neither drones or artillery are going anywhere anytime soon.
We’ll probably never hear about this, but I’d imagine the amount of boomer retardation GD had to undo to get shell production numbers up in a meaningful way was asinine. That plant was a literal retirement home jobs project.
artillery can be used even when the weather is bad or when there is jamming (guided shells can be affected by jamming I guess but still)
My Republican brother, Auf1 is not in service anymore.
>>64603717>Less and less arty noises heard in the background of Ukraine war videos.The war has become a much less target rich environment. Artillery (mainly unguided shells btw) excel in areas with many clustered, softer targets. Guided artillery will be used more and more as a short tot way to get precision fires on high priority targets.Massed artillery is a tactic of the past. Eventually 'dumb' artillery will disappear as the ranges increase even further.
>>64603877its certainly something I was wondering. Before we started shipping stuff to Ukraine, the US shell manufacturing capabilities were abysmal. Glad to see they have been modernized, and are in the process of opening new plants.
Artillery will never die.
>>64603850>per munition you have a much higher effect on target with drones than with dumb artilleryThat's bullshit, shells get you way more bang per buck (If you can fire accurately)
>>64603927The US hasn't used massed artillery as a doctrine for decades. They were firing cold war surplus in GWOT. Of course shell production was low, it was kept at a level needed to preserve instutitonal knowledge and allow testing of improved production methods. Now that there's a demand production spins back up to fill it. It's like browns going "ha ha the US said 20% of stockpile of interceptors was used up destroying all those Iranian missiles!" As if it's some sort of great victory that twenty years of full speed Iranian production got wiped out from what the US just had lying around ready to go, and could have done it four more times without firing any new missiles. Now that there's demand they're producing missiles in large quantities again.
>>64603890>Eventually 'dumb' artillery will disappear as the ranges increase even furtherNow that's an interesting take, since both rocket-assist, base-bleed and ramjet rounds are currently being acquired through mass-acquisition by the US Army under a program that began in the late twenty-teens and is due for standard MTOE deployment by the end of 2027.Sometimes I see some hilariously inaccurate shit on here. Pretty sure you won this week. LOL
>>64604022>Sometimes I see some hilariously inaccurate shit on here. Pretty sure you won this week. LOLYea, whatever. Picrel was created for a reason dumbass fucker. Dont forget such systems can also be taken advantage of by base bleed, ramjet, and rocket assisted propulsion. Precision will matter more and more as ranges increase.This is especially true if artillery is used almost exclusively at the end of their engagement envelope, its CEP (for 'dumb' shells especially) becomes quite bad and ill suited for accurate strikes. Its bad enough we use a meh artillery system (M109A6/7) compared to other contemporaries.War is becoming longer ranged and more precision focused, with targets spaced further apart and with the same protection (e.g. trenches and other emplacements). A salvo of dumb artillery is fine, but it will become a relatively niche requirement in the future because combat is almost sure to become more focused on smaller groups operating with greater independence, necessitating the use of higher accuracy strikes.
>>64603717Nah I'd rather talk about Rheinmetall now outproducing Russia in artillery shells. And how zigger shills are trying to swerve to declre that artillery is obsolete, after three years of them bragging about how Russia was totally outmatching DA WEST in artillery.
>>64603717>le internet algorithm is not showing me videos of or articles about artillery now>has artillery stopped existing?i swear most of the people on this board suffer from lack of object permanence.
>>64603717>Talk about artillery and shells is slowly fading away.russia no longer has an overwhelming artillery advantage, so they don't like talking about itBut it's still king of the battlefield
>>64603988Again, cost of artillery isn’t just shell cost. Dumb rounds start to get very insufficient at longer ranges, like what they are experiencing in Ukraine.
>>64604051Ah. One of those who like to move the goal post after getting bitch-slapped, I see.Changing the subject is how a woman argues when she's losing, sport. And you've made it clear you didn't grow up with a dad in your house.
>>64603717>Lmao OP forgot about Ukrainian Arty + Bayraktar Combo.
>>64604325What goalposts were moved retard? I doubled down on the fact precision munitions will be used more, not less. If anything, I explain ed it better so retards like (you) can understand. Dumb artillery isn't the future, even if it still has a future.>Changing the subject is how a woman argues when she's losing, sport. And you've made it clear you didn't grow up with a dad in your house.Kek, you know nothing and came to argue like a child. I guess you dont enjoy being told you're wrong.
it still has a niche because of throw weight, penetration, and getting to the target faster
Remember that video from the first weeks of the war of artillery hitting that stalled column of Russian tanks?
>>64603717The German one looks more artillery-ish so I'll go with that, it's very artillery postured, like it's edging to blast a load
>>64603717>Less and less arty noises heard in the background of Ukraine war videos.that's more due to Russia running out of artillery shells and spare barrels than anything getting obsoleted. I swear you niggers would watch a drunk slav get in a fist fight with a lamppost and break a finger and would proudly announce that according to your analysis, fingers are obsolete
>>64604013>As if it's some sort of great victory that twenty years of full speed Iranian production got wiped out from what the US just had lying around ready to go, and could have done it four more times without firing any new missiles.thirdies (correctly) believe that white people are untouchable aliens as far as military tech goes. They will never admit it because muh face culture, but this is the reason why they celebrate shooting down 1 (one) stealth jet, making a carrier take evasive maneuvers, seeing rust on iron-based RAM that gets sprayed with seawater 24/7, surviving a 20 year occupation by hiding in caves and so on. They know deep down that this is the closest to an actual victory that they're ever going to get
>>64604051155mm is optimized for dumb area fires. Once you accept the need for guidance, rockets make more sense than tubes. More range, more payload, the logistic penalty of physical size is cancelled out by better precision while the logistical advantage of distance from the front is magnified.
>>64604655>rockets make more sense than tubesOnly if your military is already prepared to replace tube artillery with rockets. Otherwise, the fact you still use traditional artillery makes the guidance system much more attractive. Especially since traditional artillery already provides many benefits compared to rocket artillery.
>>64604345Arty is ironically becoming relevant again due to drones. With drone spotters, dumb arty suddenly become smart arty.
>>64603717I agrued with such statesment. Mikey O'Donalds from Oryegon oblast. Let us talk to duma to end this wastful funding of arty shells. Instead solv heating crisis. Without Russiam gas is cold here in Astoriarsk even with warm water port.
>>64604655>155mm is optimized for dumb area fires.By that logic, all artillery is. Blocking off avenues of improvement because 'we didn't want to use it that way when we originally made it' is fucking stupid.
>>64603877But thats what develops anytime someone talks about "keeping institutional knowledge" around with procurement Turns into jobs programs Same shit with the idea of buying one ship every 2 years to keep a shipyard in business forever
>>64603717Nobody knows but artillery is damn expensive for the gained effec and requires massive stockpiles of barrels and shells which will always be a problem for any country currently at peace. I'm guessing it will go the same route as bomber planes meaning less mass and more accuracy.
>>64604176Because a gun can fire a great many shells, the cost of the gun per shell fired is so low that it vanishes into the cost of the shell
>>64603988But you can't fire accurately unless you only fire shells with guidance like Excalibur which cost 80k a pop. "Accurate" in artillery terms is counted in 100m x 100m squares, not pinpoint "drop a nade on his forehead" levels of accurate. If you want to defeat something with artillery you will need to fire volleys, they are inherently an area-denial weapon where as drones are point-denial.Drones do have a cost advantage over artillery and are a lot more accurate, but they don't have even a fraction of the effect on a properly spaced out formation that artillery does, and most importantly of all, they take an infinite longer ammount of time to catch up in effect. For each drone between 10-20% actually end up having an effect on target per both Ukraine and Russia due to jamming, missing, crashing etc. For each of these drones the pilot has to fly his drone for say 5 minutes to get from the launch point to the target. That gives an average of between 100 and 50 minutes to get a drone to have an effect on a target, or about 75 minutes on average. Of course this is only if you only have a single pilot, but even with 10 pilots you are only cutting it down to between 5 and 10 minutes. That's acceptable and even good if you are dealing with single soldiers or vehicles, but if you are dealing with large formations all that time between strikes is going to result in the rest of formation spreading out and regrouping. Drones are great for attrition but not for large battles. Compare that to a single artillery barrage. Within 5 minutes you can have multiple tubes pointed at the enemy and be ready to open fire, with them being able to send up to a hundred 155mm shells striking in their staging area in 2 minutes. With how little time you give the enemy they wont be able to pull out as easily as the forest around them will be exploding as they try to escape.Drones do have their use cases, but they can by no means replace artillery.
>>64604894And how many guys, to have your dozen tubes firing all their available ammo, at a target identified by your drone spotters...
>>64603792>>64603781>Artillery is still one of the most important elements of a ground war. Artillery is inherently required for peer conflict.But Ukrainians reports: Russian tank losses wre 90% drones.By Russians medical report including 4000 casualties: 80% personnel casualties are drones
>OP>'am I a 10-yr-old faggot posting on a site with 18 year old minimum age?'
>>64603830>>64603830>Arty shells are still cheaper than drones155mm shells prewar were $1000, now $4000.Basic FPV drones are $600.Important notice arti is horrendously not accurate.
>>64603717Russia and Ukraine are roughly equal with artillery now so why bother talking about it at the moment?You still need it to suppress moderately large swaths of land. Give it another six months of Russian economic implosion and we'll start talking about artillery again (assuming the Ukes aren't stupid) as they start using it to mass bombard russkie occupied lands to keep them from doing their piecemeal move forwards anymore.A day will probably come where artillery is obsolete, but that would require a massive increase in land based movement where you can cover miles and miles of ground in just a minute or two and not have to worry about supply lines becoming too thing behind you. It's a fun sci-fi thought but not something we'll see in our lifetimes.
>>64605941its the opposite, Russia has a better artillery advantage than a while
>>64605944holy esl
>>64605944>its the opposite, Russia has a better artillery advantage than a whileThe current standing is that Russia only has about a third more field artillery, and said artillery is generally of lesser quality and older than much of Ukraine's donor shit. There is a reason artillery has faded from view in this war, Russia lacks proper equipment to even make marginal use of their advantage, and their tactics are lacking, even after nearly 3 years of war.I still remember the total artillery death phase, aka there was more artillery to hit than most other equipment, now most of their artillery is well hidden and quite far behind the lines. One could claim they are scared to use it.
>>64605944da, of comrade.Doomings become wect, all of the NATO blocs vassal cannot getting the win on Manypolor World.
>>64605911>Russian tank losses wre 90% drones.Most of those were immobilized by mines or artillery and then they send drones out to finish them off.>By Russians medical report including 4000 casualties: 80% personnel casualties are dronesBecause getting hit by artillery means you're on the front lines, and ziggers who get hit on the front lines get left to rot. Drones can hit behind the front lines, where it's relatively safe for someone to carry the wounded to the hospital.
>>64605944Russia has already lost all of their artillery, what they have now is "repaired" guns with the barrels either cut off behind the point where they were spiked or welded up.
>>64606010>Most of those were immobilized by mines or artillery>*citation needed*
>>64605965>There is a reason artillery has faded from view in this waronly among bloggers who get all their news from drone footage and then wonder why all they see are drone strikesartillery was the number threat at the start of the war and it still is
>>64606036Ukraine doesn't do blind artillery strikes. Whatever they shoot they have recon drone filming it.There were plenty of arty strikes videos from beginning of the war, there was spike of such videos when US send large shipment of written off cluster 155mm shells to Ukraine, but eventually all shell sticks run out and arty videos ended.
>>64606041>Ukraine doesn't do blind artillery strikes.yeah, they aim themthey still do
>>64603717No. Artillery remains the God of War.
>>64606044Point is stupid boomers think that therenis reporting bias because "arty shells don't have cameras on them drones do". Well Ukrainian arty shells do in fact "have cameras in them" (on recon drones). Stupid boomers are wrong again.
>>64606048>Point is stupid boomers think that therenis reporting bias because "arty shells don't have cameras on them drones do"because its trueartillery frequenlty hits targets without any direct footage
>>64606050>artillery frequenlty hits targets without any direct footageNo it's not for Ukraine since first day of the war.
>>64606051>No it's not for Ukraine since first day of the war.yes it is, often the only footage we see of the artillery strikes were the aftermathukranians still mostly rely on their artillery over their drones, which are just there to strike isolated targets, whereas artillery actually does the heavy lifting
>>64606052>whereas artillery actually does the heavy liftingBoomers delusions not supported by any evidence >Muh Desert Storm!>>64605911Wake up this comfy time would never come back. It's only dystopian cyberpunk future from now on.
>>64604778>requires massive stockpiles of barrels and shells which will always be a problem for any country currently at peace.Depends, for example there are countries in Europe with mountains of both
>>64604778>I'm guessing it will go the same route as bomber planes meaning less mass and more accuracy.Both went the way of less mass in the West. But not due to increased accuracy but because the West hasn't engaged in total war for more than 7 decades. If that returns, so does mass. In bith bombers and artillery.
>>64604894>Drones do have a cost advantage over artilleryNope.They regularly need 20+ drones to destroy a tank, in some cases up to 70. With about 400$ per drone (assembled from kits with Ukrainian wages) that's like $8k+ per tank, in some cases up to $28k. And that's against tanks without any APS or protection by SPAAGs, and drone production lines scaled to 4 million units per year.If you set up an artillery shell production plant for 4 million units per year, the individual shell will probably cost below $1k with American wages. Each individual shell has vastly more destructive power than a FPV drone to such an extent that it only needs to land within a certain distance to a tank in order to destroy it.
>>64606218>that it only needs to land within a certain distance to a tank in order to destroy it.you need to land within <10m to have a chance at knocking out its more vulnerable componentsand even if you do knock out some optics, its not likely to actually disable the tank since it has backup viewing devices
>>64606225You will most likely get a mobility kill, which is an easy set up for follow-up destruction shots.
>>64606225>Hitting a 20m diameter circle around the target once for a mission kill>20 direct hits with human guidance needed for a mission killYou're right, those two situations are completely equivalent
>>64606233>You will most likely get a mobility kill,not really likely, tracks are incredibly tough and by their very nature very thin and unlikely to be hit>>64606259more like 20 straddling shots within a 20m circle for a chance to hit something important or sending 20 drones one after the other and hoping one of them can knock it outneither are really reliable ways to knock it out
>>64606225The 10m threshold is against destrucion. You get mobility kills with less accuracy than that.>>64606269>not really likely, tracks are incredibly tough and by their very nature very thin and unlikely to be hitIf mobility kills were so difficult to achieve, we'd almost never see any. You make it sound like it's more probable to destroy a tank with artillery than to achieve a mobility kill with artillery. The opposite is true.Also, tracks are only thin from a very specific angle, they're not at all thin from all other angles. Furthermore, mobility kills can also be achieved by other means than separating the track links, like e.g. messing up the engine's radiator or drive sprocket.
>>64606294>If mobility kills were so difficult to achieve, we'd almost never see anythey occasionally happen, but its not something that you can count on to happenýou need to get multiple straddling shots just for a chance to hit something worth immobilizing>You make it sound like it's more probable to destroy a tank with artillery than to achieve a mobility kill with artilleryboth are unlikely>Also, tracks are only thin from a very specific angle, they're not at all thin from all other angles.its thin from any side-wards angleangles from which it appears wide are angles where the trajectory is blockedif its coming in from the top, then its being blocked by the bulk of the tank itselfif its coming from below, then the shell would be underground> like e.g. messing up the engine's radiator or drive sprocket.tank radiators are protected against MG fire minimum to prevent tanks from being strafed by aircrafta shell could penetrate it, but it would have to burst directly above the tank and within 20m to do so
>>64606233>You will most likely get a mobility killAbsolutely fake news anon.
>>64606300>they occasionally happen, but its not something that you can count on to happenPretty much every vehicle you see getting destroyed in Ukraine was immobilized first.>both are unlikelySo unlikely that using artillery against tanks is part of doctrine for more than half a century and continues to be.>its thin from any side-wards angleAlready this is not true, because reality doesn't do parallel projections>angles from which it appears wide are angles where the trajectory is blocked>if its coming in from the top, then its being blocked by the bulk of the tank itself>if its coming from below, then the shell would be undergroundYou know you can actually see the tracks on tanks, yes? picrel>tank radiators are protected against MG fire minimum to prevent tanks from being strafed by aircraft>a shell could penetrate it, but it would have to burst directly above the tank and within 20m to do soYou know airbursting artillery shells have been common since the first world war, more than a century ago, right?
>>64606334Fragments hits against tracks don't lead to immobilisation.
>>64606334>Pretty much every vehicle you see getting destroyed in Ukraine was immobilized first.observational bias, since no one is taking a photo of vehicles shrugging off storms of artillery fire exactly as intended>So unlikely that using artillery against tanks is part of doctrine for more than half a centurybecause its better than doing nothing at all, but doctrine actually is to engage tanks with dedicated anti-tank weapons to actually do the anti-tank work>You know you can actually see the tracks on tanks, yes? picrelfrom that angle, you are more likely to hit the track, but still a small chancetracks are highly resilient, they can be hit by 30mm cannon rounds without snappingit takes a grenade bundle placed directly on top of the track to reliably cut the trackartillery requires multiple close range straddling shots to actually guarantee a mobility kill>You know airbursting artillery shells have been common since the first world war, more than a century ago, right?the thin top armor is protected against plunging fire from aircraft, which makes it resilient to artillery as wellthe artillery fragments are not falling perpendicular to the tank, and their non-aerodynamic shape makes them very short rangedwhile it is possible to get a shell to detonate exactly 10m above a tank and at a perpendicular angle, it is not likely to actually happen in practice
Can artillery fanbois ever recover from this?
>Most powerful>doesn't specific what equals powerfulIs it the shell? Is it the bore? Is it fire rate? Is it...
>>64606368Or this?
No, it's not.
>>64606332>>64606368>>64606373What relevance does the Air Force's incompetence have on the effectiveness of artillery vs tanks?https://dupuyinstitute.org/2018/10/15/artillery-effectiveness-vs-armor-part-1/https://de.scribd.com/doc/151124802/Who-Says-Dumb-Artillery-Rounds-Can-t-Kill-Armor
>>64606480>What relevance does the Air Force's incompetence have on the effectiveness of artillery vs tanksa 500lb bomb is vastly more powerful than an artillery shellif that doesnt knock out a tank, then neither will an artillery shell
>>64606483Why do you chose to ignore evidence, which contradicts you? Are you a cultist or something?
>>64606480>hull charred by explosion >"near hit"
>>64606490That damage was done by direct hits not "10 meters away misses"
>>64603758>ost military advisors in Spain concluded the next major war would be fought nothing like how it was fought in Spain outside of some new concepts like terror bombing, etc.The relevant question would be then why every major nation except Germany drew the wrong conclusions about tank designs from it then.
>>64606498>one test claims that artillery is actually devastating to tanks>another test claims that they would only lose 1% k-kill losses, 10% m-kill losses, and the tanks can easily close 20km+ to the rear lines and engage artillery without taking additional losseswell, which one?
>>64606501lrn2read
>>64606510Good that you agree that these were direct artillery hit.
>>64606513lrn2read
>>64606515Run out of arguments? Good.
>>64606522lrn2readit's right there in pic
>>64606525Photos themselves have evidence that rounds impacted road wheels.Gaslighting text is irrelevant.
>>64606529Your refusal to believe it doesn't magically undo it.
>>64606531Ther is nothing to undo. Authors of this trah report posted photos of direct hits and lied about it.Even more cover photo of this report has T-54 Iraq tank destroyed by GBU bomb when report is about artillery.It's all you need to know about this trash tier report.
>>64606535I know this is the standard Russian tactic, but you really can't discard the other side's evidence on account of "nuh-uh". Because then _every_ discussion becomes completely pointless.
>>64606544Explain highlighted parts >>64606522
>>64606546Stop trying to act as if the evidence wasn't presented. Stop trying to get me to argue over evidence, after I just explained how silly it is of you to do this.
>>64606552You cannot explain? Just as I thought.
>>64606554ffs you provide zero substance to the discussion. All you do is trying to wiggle your way around the evidence presented. Start de-emphasizing reply speed and start emphasizing substance. Your one-liners and quips don't magically undo the evidence. Write an email to the Army if you think they lie. But stop this threadhogging "no u"-behavior.
>>64606562You cannot explain these photos.
>>64603717>New military drone companies popping up like mushrooms after rain.Probably because you can't build and test self-propelled artillery in your garage.
>>64606652nta, but i'll accept your concession on his behalf, you're probably underage.
>>64606652This is pointless. I don't need to explain these photos. The Army already did that.You can keep shitting up this thread. I see no further reason to continue talking to you. Bye.
>>64606676Because you can't explain.You can't explain how round supposedly hitting 30 meters away charred small portion of the side hull but left rest intact.You can't explain how round supposedly hitting 30 meters bend small portion of the mudguard up but spared the rest.This damage is consistent if rounds hit road wheels directly.But you say don't believe your eyes but "trust the experts" (c).Nope.
>>64606505how do you mean?
>>64605911>Literal survivor biasTHINK>>64605922That conventional CEP at max range is still within casualty radius.
>>64606535Shut the fuck up.
>>64606712You are an ESL subhuman with a sub85 I.Q.
>>64605911Post proof then
>>64604717Hasn't your president and his vp lapdog made sure no more US military aid is sent to the Ukraine, it's still funny seeing him trying to arm wrestle Zelya into giving up while you are giving away your empire, than you for electing him I guess?
>>64606733Germany was the only nation which looked at the tank warfare in Spain and went "yeah, this won't be particularly relevant for a real war."
>>64603717>most powerful arty>PUSSR shitboxlol cope more zigur
>>64603717Self-propelled guns are consistently *inside* the counterbattery range of drones today. You need guided rockets to outrange FPVs if you want to continue using traditional artillery tactics.The results in Ukraine speak for themselves. HIMARS has an excellent kill rate and excellent survival rate. 155s have a middling kill rate and a terrible survival rate.
>>64606332>picWas this against 155mm artillery? Got any more pages of the document?
>>64603819As the oft-repeated adage goes:The French copy nobody, and nobody copies the French
>>64607185It's working good enough to ensure your president give us Dombass.
>>64603758arty was the most decisive part of Ukraine GPS guided shells are what killed the vast majority of the initial modern armor Russia usedthat blunted the crucial initiative and gave us what we see now just a retarded stalemate slog without Russia probably wouldve cut the country in two instead of slicing off 1/5th
>>64605922there were tons of videos in the first year of 6 PGKs being fired and scoring 5 direct hits on AFVs with one missing by like 3 feetthey are way more accurate than this infographic you can't fly a FPV 18 miles to its target
>>6460727718 miles is 28kmFiber optic FPVs fly farther than that
>>64607038no you.
>>64607267>GPS guided shells are what killed the vast majority of the initial modern armor Russia used>that blunted the crucial initiative and gave us what we see now just a retarded stalemate slogComplete fake news, first M982 Excalibur were delivered in August 2022. Russian withdraw from Kyiv in April 2022
>>64607191Drones can't do counterbattery, dumbfuck.
>>64607041Cool that you agree with my arguments.
>>64607285And they need half an hour to get there.
>>64603792>Smart shells exist, IMO as a former arty guy they are pretty uninspiring and impractical given the strategic role of artillery in any given peer conflict. It’s expensive and counterintuitive to mass produce something like Excalibur, the effect on target is actually not incredible given the complexity of the shell/limitations regarding its use. Funny how we share the same perspective, I used to work on the engineering team for Excalibur. Its a fantastic shell against ISIS or some other backwards terrorist group as a first strike but GPS jamming has massively reduced its capabilities and effectiveness in the Ukr-Rus war which would be expected in any near peer conflict. Ridiculously complicated and lots of tight tolerances/design/testing requirements too, the manufacturing for subcomponents is all over the USA, Canada, and Europe. So each shell ends up costing 80-100x what a standard M795 costs, in near peer I'd rather have 100 standard shell than 1 precision shell. Arty was good because it cheaply destroys lots of property and kills lots of soldiers. Excalibur isn't cheap and sacrifices payload potential. >I think the way forward with artillery is developing a heavier towed cannon, there are limitations to the range and durability of things like the M777 and other extremely lightweight cannons.Military has been internally talking about obsoleteing most towed artillery systems for over a decade now and replacing them with self propelled replacements. Drones can take out stationary units much easier so shoot and scoot is the way the army seemed to be looking. Also we tried to increase range two ways: bigger gun and redesigned munitions. The bigger gun doesn't help as much as you would think, too much wear and force annihilated rifling in the barrel and the brass rotating bands shear (thus no rotational stability) above a certain pressure. Munition 2-3x the cost per shot and adds manufacturing complexities like new materials and rocket boosters.
>>64607411Lancets drones were and remain main Russian counter battery tool.
>>64607446And how effective were they actually? That's right, piss fucking poor.You can't do counter battery with something that takes 30 minutes to reach the target, dumbfuck.
>>64607440>so shoot and scoot is the way the army seemed to be looking.Shoots and scoot aren't working against long range drones like Lancets and recon drones loitering over you area of operations.In Ukraine there is new meta. Artillery is installed inside fortification and all ammo is stored far away towed guns and SPG. Ammo delivered by hand one shell at a time. Regarding SPG ammo never stored inside and is follows SPGs in a separate truck that stays away.
>>64603830>155mm artillery shells is hammering the driving band on. No rotating bands are welded on, fully autonomous.
>>64607453Much better than Russian arty. When Russians relied on "The God of War" their counter battery fire was irrelevant.
>>64607473The fact Russians are incompetent doesn't change the laws of physics. Shells that fly at +500 m/s while drones can maybe do 30 m/s.Their counter-battery fire wasn't irrelevant either, you're just much less likely to see it in video because, unlike lancet strikes, they're not recorded unless directed by observation drones.
>>64607453You can if you launch it 30 minutes early and then send some mobiks out in a lada to bait it into to firing.
>>64607573You seriously underestimate the scale of the front and the surface area that needs to be covered. We're talking an area of hundreds if not thousands of sq kilometers where the fire might come from, its not a battlefield 2 map.
>>64607463>Shoots and scoot aren't working against long range drones like Lancets and recon drones loitering over you area of operations. >>In Ukraine there is new meta. Artillery is installed inside fortification and all ammo is stored far away towed guns and SPG. Ammo delivered by hand one shell at a time. Regarding SPG ammo never stored inside and is follows SPGs in a separate truck that stays away.That sounds reasonable. I haven't worked for them since 2022 when I left NJ so I don't know. In 2019 there were talks about scaling M109 production and reducing/eliminating M119 and M777.
>>64607463>>64607607He's a retarded zigger making shit up and trying to hype lancets. SPG artillery is basically all shoot and scoot, not fucking foritifications. Likewise everyone is abandoning towed artillery and focusing on SPG's.
>>64603717>Is arty dying?russias certainly is
>>64607605pokrovsk is a small town with not that many roads leading to it, the area where ukie artillery can shoot and scoot at it is pretty well defined and not that large.
>>64607660>pokrosvsk is a small townThe range of modern artillery systems is upwards of 50km. Not a signle artillery piece is actually in Pokrovs. Oh, by the way, they can go off-road.You're basically retarded.
>>64607605Are you implying that counterbattery fire is impossible? There's a limited number of positions one lada can get shot by artillery from. If you can get a drone halfway to that area by the time the artillery starts firing, it's just a matter of locating the batteries (which you would have had to do regardless of what you're planning to shoot at them) and then sending the drone that way. Even if they've already finished packing up by the time it gets there, the area it needs to scout is not that large.I'm not even a dronefag, I just don't see why you're trying to claim it can't be done when there's video evidence of both sides doing it.
>>64606041They absolutely do "blind" artillery strikes without drones when needed, retard.
>>64605911>Russian tank losses wre 90% drones.90% of drone kills against armor is them finishing off vehicles immobilized by mines or artillery.
>>64604894>Drones do have a cost advantage over artillery and are a lot more accurateRetard take. The vast majority of cheap drones used in Ukraine never make it even close to the target.
>>64605922Cool asspull numbers. Meanwhile, artillery shells will arrive within that CEP 50% of the time. Basic FPVs never make it even close to their target like 75-90% of the time nowadays.
>>64607684>wdym modern self propelled guns can fire off several rounds and GTFO in under a minute?Since 2022 Ukraine lost 16 Ceasars 6x6, with 11 confirmed destroyed out of over 100 delivered. Clearly its not fucking working, retard.
>>64607675every single thing you said is false, arty range is 20-25 km and as you said no arty will be directly at the frontline. then obviously ukie artillery will not be south or east of the town where russian troops are so basically you will find the ukie artillery that is firing at pokrovs northwest of the town in the area 15-25km away from the town. and if they want to shoot a lot they will obviously need roads that bring in supplies and even offroad that will leave a trail that can be easily spotted by surveillance drones.
>>64607198nta. I think I saw this once in a T&E report of the A-10's main gun.
>>64607724>what is rocket assisted shells?>what is basebleed shells?>wdum the potential location of SPG's would be literally in the thousand sq kilometer range!?Artillery would be capable of hitting Pokrovsk from so far away it won't even be on your fucking map.Stop replying to me you absolute fucking retard
>>64606529>My outright lies about the photos have "evidence" that rounds impacted road wheels.FTFY. Rope yourself, dronefag.Protip: Wrecking a mudguard like that can be done just via shockwave from a close miss. They're not particularily hardy things for reasons anyone with at least two working braincells to put together can figure out with a minimum of thinking this through. So not (You) I guess.
>>64606712Shell fragment hits can cause charring, retard.Shockwaves can bend light components like a mudguard, retard. And, unsurprisingly, they can be inconsistent in doing that, you absolute mongoloid retard.I'm going to not believe your armchair retqard claims based on you trying to interprete photographs through the lens of your total ignorance of the topic you're trying to talk about, just as anyone else who isn't a living embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger Effect like (You).
>>64607719>It can't be done>Except for those 11 times when it was doneWhat the fuck is your point? Clearly counterbattery is possible even against modern SPGs, and even if drones aren't the optimal way to conduct it (which is not a claim I ever made, btw), it's apparent that nothing else in the Russian arsenal is particularly effective at it, either.
>>64606031it's litterally trench warfare you reddit nigger ? do you need a citation for something so fucking obvious and dumb ? Holy shit get the fuck off my website
>>64607738>>what is rocket assisted shells?>>what is basebleed shells?not available yet? completely untested in a real conflict? easily jammed? and wtf thousands of square kilometers? i think you dont know what a kilometer is.
>>64606505What conclusion about tank design did the Germans exactly take from Spain and how did it impact the development of their tanks? Because, you know, the Panzer III and IV were already mostly finalized designs by the time the Spanish Civil War started.
>>64607759In over 3 fucking years. That means it's not fucking working.
>>64607463Cool story, bro.>>64607607Also don't samefag, Mr. "I was totally on the Excalibur engineering team, trust me!"
>>64607765Lmao, now you're pretending somehow ammunition that's being used is untested and that shells that use it can somehow be jammed. We're not talking about guided shells, retard.Here's your (You) and fuck off.
>>64607779“Excalibur precision artillery rounds initially had a 70% efficiency rate hitting targets when first used in Ukraine. However, after six weeks, efficiency declined to only 6% as the Russians adapted their electronic warfare"https://www.twz.com/air/jdam-er-winged-bombs-with-seekers-that-home-in-on-gps-jammers-headed-to-ukraine
>>64607800>We're not talking about guided shellsyoure not going to hit shit without guidance when your target is 50km away.
>>64607820>what is volume of fireJust give up.
>>64607769It also means that nothing else is working. So unless your argument is that counterbattery doesn't exist, I don't see how the information you've posted shows that drones are less effective than anything else.
>>64607855Nothing is working and Russian artillery is dogshit with poor accuracy so why would you expect it to wrok? Moreover they lost them both to counter-battery fire and to drones. Why do you apriori assume they were all lost to drones? We're going in circles here. Drones simply can not reach the target area in time for them to be a reliable counter-battery asset. The math is not mathing.
>>64607836>>what is volume of firehard to pull of when you shoot and scoot. you would need more guns or dont scoot and stay and just blast until the barrel warps, which will reduce your accuracy even more and obviously increase the risk of getting droned.
>>64607605You seem to miss difference between pre drones and post drones meta.Before drones counter battery relied on quick reaction fire.But after drones you are not detected by fire detectors (radar, flash/sound sensors). You are detected by recon drone flying overhead. Then drone tracks you continuously and guilds attack drones on your position until impact.
>>64607929>hard to pull of when you shoot and scootStop talking about shit you know nothing about. Modern SPG's can set up, fire 6 rounds and be on the move again in 2 minutes.Here's the Archer, seting up, firing 3 round and leaving in under a minute and a half.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8x8ITwd4Vg>what is a battery>what is dispersion
>>64607622>SPG artillery is basically all shoot and scoot, not fucking foritifications.https://en.defence-ua.com/events/artillery_goes_underground_or_how_polish_military_learns_fortification_building_from_ukrainian_war_experience-14789.html
>>64607910>Why do you apriori assume they were all lost to drones?I'm not. But clearly artillery has been lost to drones because there's footage of it, and clearly counterbattery is possible because they've lost artillery.>Drones simply can not reach the target area in timeExcept they can, since there's footage of it. And the obvious counterpoint would be that other systems are not effective at it, except that you've already posted evidence of other systems not being effective at it.
>>64607967>But after drones you are not detected by fire detectors (radar, flash/sound sensors).Yes, they are. Both Russian counter-battery radards and sounding systems are major targets. >You are detected by recon drone flying overheadIf that was actually the case then Ukraine would lose more than 11 Ceasars in over 3 years of warfare.
>>64607992>the obvious counterpoint would be that other systems are not effective at itMore effective at it*
>>64607971I wonder if the driver feels nervous having an armed howitzer point as his back the whole drive
>>64607992>since it happened it must be effectiveAnd attacking enemy trenches with a knife is likewise effective, since we've seen it happen.
>>64607985https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2025/ukraines-use-of-120-caesars-marks-artillery-breakthrough-in-counter-battery-warfareHere, for you.
>Tactics for employing artillery have evolved considerably in response to the pervasive threat from UAVs. Both Russian and Ukrainian gunners separate guns by more than 500 m and keep ammunition caches concealed and separated from the firing position. Firing positions are dug in with protection on the sides and above, netting, and in some cases, plates mounted as a sheath around exposed components like barrels. Guns operate from hides with a cluster of prepared firing positions and associated decoy positions. The decoys are also redeployed when weather or other conditions allow. Guns tend to fire for a protracted period as the dug-in positions offer significant protection from counter-battery fire, the volume of which is itself reduced by the dispersion of guns. However, the guns move periodically to avoid being engaged by glide bombs, which are powerful enough to obviate the defences. Gunners note that the small payloads of UAVs can cause damage to their pieces, but they are usually repairable. This has led to a faster rate of barrel replacement than would arise from firing alone. Ukrainian forces have found it necessary to keep resupply vehicles much further back than pre-war doctrine suggests and to resupply ammunition when conditions are favourable, rather than in response to consumption.
>>64608083>soviet shitboxes from the cold war can't do what western artillery systems doNote the distinct lack of dug in positions
>>64608157what a cringy goy-tattooed noodle armed basedlennial
>>64603717Drones are good pickets and recon, probably the best we have seen. Why do drone footage always show it attacks some dude in fox hole or a single vehicle and having so much cuts? It takes drones ten or twenty minutes to fly to the edge of the tube artillery's range to pop one or two accurate shots. Sure you can fly and park them midway to cut down the time and a drone team can deploy much further away than artillery typically behind the line of troop but that is still a lot of time and a lot less volume. Most of the footage has been just recon probe and guard screening where time is abundant and intensity low.Without rockets and tube artillery throwing cluster shells in large volume, and the mines they lay beforehand, tank columns can break through easily by suffering acceptable casualty from drones against even the stronghold.The actual issue with cost and longevity of traditional heavy armament is dying heavy industry and tooling & die making. They were built in the time of mass production of infrastructure, mechanization, internal combustion engine and electrification decades ago. Once the setup is gold, the demand won't come until all has suddenly failed or scale boom. A niggerfied generation will accept and ignore failed industry and infrastructure like ceiling chirps. Drones show the potential of light industry or even workshop.
