Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
LoooSeR

General artillery, SPGs, MLRS and long range ATGMs thread.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Newtonk said:

 

Another interesting feature are the panels on the hull sides; is that to strengthen the hull or some basic armour?

 

I believe that test vehicle has its extra armor removed, compare the hull side on it to this M109A7.

 

v81t7Jc.jpg

 

Quote

Also, is the turret bustle extended, too?

 

Yes, the autoloader.

 

A notional representation of which.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

   The position from which the medium-range cruise missile was launched on the San Nicholas Island. Let me remind you that the United States officially left the INF Treaty on August 2, 2019, and this satellite image was taken on January 5, 2015, which can be easily checked using the Google Earth application.

Coordinates - 33.259053, -119.572169 (Source twitter ilax202).

fs8RfRP.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ramlaen said:
13 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

fs8RfRP.jpg

 

Ground launched Tomahawk happened.

 

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/703577/dod-conducts-ground-launched-cruise-missile-test

 

edit: bigger picture

zG3mPko.jpg

 

 

 

So the Russians were right when they complained about the land aegis system capability to launch land attack cruise missiles. Great... what a world we live in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, barbaria said:

 

So the Russians were right when they complained about the land aegis system capability to launch land attack cruise missiles. Great... what a world we live in

  I suspect INF was not satisfying for all sides of that treaty for some time and all sides had some form of tests of equipment/weapon systems to insure they can get out of INF with something already brewing or in ready configuration to take advantage of INF not being followed by anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

  I suspect INF was not satisfying for all sides of that treaty for some time and all sides had some form of tests of equipment/weapon systems to insure they can get out of INF with something already brewing or in ready configuration to take advantage of INF not being followed by anyone.

This seems reasonable enough to assume.  China not being a part of the treaty and developing a number of relatable missile systems of their own was probably cause enough for the US to consider messing with GLCMs again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, barbaria said:

 

So the Russians were right when they complained about the land aegis system capability to launch land attack cruise missiles. Great... what a world we live in

 

That isn't an Aegis Ashore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

 

That isn't an Aegis Ashore.

Its a VLS so easily integrated into AEGIS ashore, i think that was his point. AEGIS ashore obviously has a problem because its not mobile so its actually not to well suited for this kind of weapon allthough it has some capabilities to defend itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mork said:

Its a VLS so easily integrated into AEGIS ashore, i think that was his point. AEGIS ashore obviously has a problem because its not mobile so its actually not to well suited for this kind of weapon allthough it has some capabilities to defend itself.

 

I'm aware of the claim being made. The fact of the matter is Aegis Ashore cannot fire Tomahawks, it would be a poor platform to launch Tomahawks from and it would undermine its strategic value if it was modified to be able to fire Tomahawks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, skylancer-3441 said:

article on AUSA 1987 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1987-12

[...]

separately photographed pics

Spoiler

XbPU3Hml.jpg

d4AJHET.jpg

 

[...]

 

EB1e_k5W4AEOpRL?format=jpg&name=small

EB1e_kYXYAErR6o?format=jpg&name=4096x409

 

EB1e_l6WkAAAsYe?format=jpg&name=small

EB1e_lYXUAATNhh?format=jpg&name=4096x409

 

article (in german) on AUSA 1987 exhibition, published in Wehrtechnik 1988-01

[...]

separately photographed pics

Spoiler

EB5om7HXsAATfC-?format=jpg&name=large

EB5ooZXWsAALv_V?format=jpg&name=small

[...]

EB1iJQOXoAAhXJO?format=jpg&name=4096x409

 

article on AUSA 1988 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1988-12

[...]

separately photographed pics

  Hide contents

ECuBTCUXYAAzyGN?format=jpg&name=4096x409ECuBTDCW4AU65s5?format=jpg&name=small

 

ECuBTD0WwAElXd0?format=jpg&name=4096x409ECuBTEmXkAAxl06?format=jpg&name=small

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   View on new North Korean high caliber MRLS. Very likely to be guided missile, which makes it something inbetween long range MRLS and ballistic missile like Iskander.

5B2nq.jpg

 

   Unusual fins, reminds me Ataka ATGM rear fins.

Spoiler

KcVui.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, heretic88 said:

That thing begs for a GPS/Glonass guided round! It would be a fantastic support weapon! (It already is, but it would be even better) Could be massively useful in Syria. 

   It was already used there, probably with laser guided mortar rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

 It was already used there, probably with laser guided mortar rounds.

Tyulpans? I saw only M-240. Although 2S19s were reported in syria, so nothing is impossible then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LoooSeR said:

   It was already used there, probably with laser guided mortar rounds.

 

Is there a video of Tulpans exploding jihadi scum? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lord_James said:

 

Is there a video of Tulpans exploding jihadi scum? 

   No, nothing other than some of remains of different 240 mm rounds (including one that SAA usually don't use) and rumors it was in Syria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
    • By LoooSeR
      T-14 ARMATA 
      (edited)
              This thread is about glorious russian MBT T-14, known as "Armada", "T-95", "black eagle", "T-99" and other stupid Western names given to Object 148 (T-14 in some recent documents). Here is number of images connected to that vehicle.
       

      Official model of unknown "artillery vehicle". Yeah, Putin, we know that this is T-14. Note Gatling gun on turret right side.
       
      Artist impression of T-14 based on known model, by Fyodor Podporin. 
       

      T-14 will use Relikt ERA, which is considerable improvement over Kontakt-5 in resisting to tandem HEAT warheads and EFPs.

       
      Side skirts would be thicker on a real vehicle, i think. Relikt have AFAIK bigger size than Kontakt-5 ERA build-in blocks.

       
       
       
       
       
      Whole album with renders: 
      http://imgur.com/a/8Tn9b
       
      Video of same render from same artist:

       
       
            People expect that tank would have turret weapon system like what you see on the BMP-3 "Bakhcha-U" turret - a lot of weapons in one turret for one gunner to work with. T-14 is rumored to be equipped with 30 (or even 57) mm autocannon, 4-6 barrel gatling type MG/HMG, new 125 (2A82) or even 152 mm (2A83) smoothbore cannons. Turret is unmanned, crew of 3 would be located in frontal part of hull, behind very serious frontal armor inside of compartment, well protected from all directions. Cannon would be loaded by new autoloading device. I hope that Burevestnik is working on them, those guys managed to make 100 mm Naval gun with RoF of 300 shots per minute.
       
            I really like how turret looks, but i don't understand why there is such a big turret "busket" for unmanned turret with all ammo placed inside of hull in special armored housing. Also, i don't see gunner sight and proposed FSC radar on 3D model (i assume that panoramic sight is for commander). Laser sensors on 3D model are from T-90A variant of "Shtora".
       
            Some officials mentioned works on new active protection system, that consist of powerfull radar station, that can work on "long ranges" and engage incoming projectiles (missiles) with that gatling MG. Will this system survive development stage and be presented on serial tanks is unknown. Although turret for T-15 Armata-based IFV already was shown with new APS "Afganit".
       
            If you pay attention you may see that artist used T-80 rollers for Armata chassis, and this is not a mistake - according to some sources Armata heavy chassis will use T-80 or T-80-like rollers to save weight. And looking at rear part of that tank you may notice a engine deck from gas-turbine equipped version of the T-80, which can be mistake becuase MoD want Armata with new ~1500 HP diesel engine. 
    • By CrashbotUS
      I'm doing some research on cold war era Soviet artillery doctrine and was wondering if anyone had any actual Soviet resources. No need for translations, I can read Russian. 
       
      Right now I have the FM 100-2.1 The Soviet Army:Operations and Tactics from my Army days and some NATO books that really only talk about what we knew from "observational reports". 
       
      I also have some Soviet artillery survivabilty manuals and Soviet artillery order of battle data but I'm have some trouble with actual artillery unit manuals and the like. 
       
      Anyone have a good source? 
    • By Marsh
      The Magach based Spike launcher, the Pereh or Wild has been officially revealed. Thanks to "Camera" at the Mess for the heads up. The vehicle has been in service for 30 years!
      Links currently available in Hebrew only. 
       
      Cheers
      Marsh
       
      http://www.fresh.co.il/vBulletin/t-5...�לי_תמוז
       
      http://www.israeldefense.co.il/he/co...�רא-נחשף
       
      https://www.facebook.com/mazidf/phot...type=1&theater
×
×
  • Create New...