Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Renegade334

Contributing Members
  • Posts

    357
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    47

Posts posted by Renegade334

  1. I'm seeing some confusion here as to which vehicle it was meant for; I see some sources mentioning the CCVL while others say XM8 (but that one, I know had a vertically-opening breech).

     

    I do know that at some point, Benét did tinker with the XM35, creating (IIRC) four units that had different opening axes but still used the same multilug sliding breech. Two had horizontally-opening breeches while the other two had upwards-opening breeches. I seem to recall those were tentatively mounted on the LAV-AG system, a proposed assault gun for the USMC that was never adopted.

     

    Anyway, the breech block's slope and the shape of the cradle assembly make me say it's a EX35/XM35. That one (see above) was mounted in FMC's XM4 AGS prototype.

    Technical Accomplishments in FY ... - Google Books

  2. Also, in the picture with the M256 there are two unicorns hiding at the very top behind the GBU-28 Paveway (which, as we know, was partially built out of decommissioned 203mm howitzer barrels from the now-retired M110A2 - hence its presence in the room) and the orange scissor lift:

     

    - Either the 58-caliber XM282 or the 39-caliber XM283 (based on the M198's M199) that were trialed in 1985 for the Howitzer Improvement Program (HIP); there were three guns proposed as part of the Advanced Armament System (AAS): the XM282, the XM283 (both 282 and 283 were fitted onto five M109A3E3 testbeds) and the XM284 (fitted onto four M109A3E2 testbeds). They eventually selected the XM284 for what ultimately became the M109A5. The howitzer gun on this picture looks like the XM283, but with the barrel length, it's more like a L58 XM282 (which had a chamber volume of 27.8L/1,700 cubic inches and could lob M549A1 HERA projectiles up to 45km with the XM224 propellant charge). Also note that they also cut a XM282's barrel down to 52 calibers to test liquid propellants; that L52 could also be the one seen here.

     

    - Right next to it is the L56 XM297 (chamber volume of 1,400 cubic inches) that was installed on the Crusader (which also, at one point, dabbled with liquid props before switching back to solid MACS propellant charges). Easily recognizable with its pepperpot muzzle brake.

  3. @Ramlaen

    The one next to the M256 is definitely a XM360.

    3uyZw3t.png 

    Note that wire/cable running alongside and over the breech and the three pistons (for, IIRC, a two-stage recoil) on top.

     

    However, the two guns in the group pictures are most likely M35s for the M10. There are bore evacuators (the M35 should also have an internal evacuator fan to resolve that toxic fumes issue the M10 suffered from during trials) and there are barrel shroud clamp assemblies (I assume they're clamps) right behind the muzzles. The XM360 features a pepperpot muzzle brake (even on the AbramsX, which should've been using a XM360E1 since most of the technical legwork for its installation should've already been done, but they still went with the original XM360), but the Booker's M35 doesn't.

  4. *sigh* And another one bites the dust...

     

    https://www.defensenews.com/land/2024/03/11/us-army-scraps-extended-range-cannon-artillery-prototype-effort/

     

    Quote

    The U.S. Army is changing its approach to acquiring a long-range artillery capability and scrapping its 58-caliber Extended Range Cannon Artillery prototyping effort, according to the service’s acquisition chief.

    “We concluded the prototyping activity last fall,” Doug Bush told reporters at a March 8 briefing on the fiscal 2025 budget request. “Unfortunately, [it was] not successful enough to go straight into production.”

    The new plan — following an “exhaustive” tactical fires study meant to revalidate elements of the extended-range cannon requirement led by Army Futures Command — is to evaluate existing options from industry this summer “to get a sense of the maturity of those systems.”

    Of the 24 new Army systems slated to make it into the hands of soldiers by the end of 2023, only the Extended Range Cannon Artillery program missed that goal. The ERCA system uses a service-developed, 58-caliber gun tube mounted on the chassis of a BAE Systems-made Paladin Integrated Management howitzer.

    The Army was building 20 prototypes of the ERCA system: two for destructive testing and the remaining 18 for a battalion.

    The operational evaluation of ERCA revealed “engineering challenges,” Bush said a year ago. Observations in early testing of prototypes showed excessive wear on the gun tube after firing a relatively low number of rounds.

    Army Futures Command leader Gen. James Rainey told Defense News last summer the service was working on a new conventional fires strategy expected by the end of the calendar year. The strategy would determine both capability and capacity of what exists and what the Army may need, Rainey said.

    The strategy considered new technology to enhance conventional fires on the battlefield, such as advances in propellant that make it possible for midrange cannons to shoot as far as longer-range systems.

    Depending on the artillery strategy’s conclusions, there are a variety of options the service could consider in order to fulfill the Army’s requirement for an extended-range cannon, Bush said.

    The Army was able to conduct a variety of successful tests with ERCA prototypes, including hitting a target on the nose 70 kilometers (43 miles) away at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, in December 2020 using an Excalibur extended-range guided artillery shell.

    The problems with the cannon were mostly related to the length of the gun tube and its ability to withstand a large number of projectiles without excessive wear to the gun tube.

    The Army is racing to extend artillery ranges on the battlefield to take away advantages of high-end adversaries like Russia and China. The ERCA weapon was intended to be able to fire at and destroy targets from a position out of the range of enemy systems.

    That requirement remains, Bush stressed last week.

    The hope now is to find systems that currently exist and are capable. The Army would then choose one for production if it proves promising, Bush said.

    “There [are] things people say, and then we need to actually do testing to make sure it’s true,” he explained.

    “It’s a shift from developing something new to working with what is available both domestically and internationally to get the range,” he added, “because the fires study validated the range and volume are still needed, so we want to find a different way to get there.”

    The Army is asking for $55 million in its FY25 budget to pursue the new effort to find an extended-range cannon capability.

    The service also plans to continue developing new munitions it was already working on as part of the ERCA program, Bush noted.

     

    BAE and Rheinmetall are probably dancing in the aisles now...

  5. Got a response from The Chieftain:

     

    Quote

    It's not really a subject I've looked into. I wouldn't be shocked to see a vehicle put into some trials around Fort Bliss, either, as it's adjacent to the White Sands Missile Range, and also has stupidly long lines of fire.

    However, the 'contracting' agency would probably be PEO Ground Systems or PM Fires. 

     

    A pre-existing system already present at APG, then?

  6. Wouldn't Yuma Proving Ground be the contracting entity instead, then? That's where the XM1299 is also tested, since YPG has the longest overland artillery firing range in the entire continent and is the ideal place for long-range testing (especially for the ERCA trials).

    Aberdeen Proving Ground, on the other hand, would be the better stomping grounds for prototype/testbed MBTs and other AFVs (including Russian T90s "donated" by Ukraine for testing).

     

    I'll see if I can get Nick Moran to give his two cents on this (not confirm the identity of the mystery system; simply the YPG vs APG preference).

  7. Quote

    Rheinmetall Waffe Munition GMBH, Trittau, Germany, was awarded a $9,400,000 firm-fixed-price contract for high-energy cannon system parts and maintenance. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 30, 2028. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W911QX-24-D-0002).

    > U.S. Department of Defense > Contract

     

    What would the "high-energy cannon system" be? Rh130 samples for testing?

  8. Yeah, all three crew members are in a capsule at the front of the hull - it's not like the PzH2000 where a loader is still needed inside the turret to manually load propellant charge(s). That autoloader arm swings 90° downwards to fetch the shell (positioned vertically on the centerline by a robotic cradle that collects rounds from the left- and right-side hull vertical carousels), aligns itself with the breech, rams the shell into the chamber then shifts downwards so that the MACS propellant charge(s) can be rammed in, too.

     

    On the XM2001, the 26 or so storage tubes in the turret bustle contained 208 MACS propellant charges, i.e. 8 per tube. Those could be robotically resupplied by the feeding boom of the XM2002 RSV, which connected to a hatch built into the back of the turret and fed the ammo through it without the need for a crewmember to step out for assistance and/or supervision. All of that could be done with both vehicle crews buttoned down.

  9. A pity the Crusader was cancelled by bloody Rumsfeld, though. It was a nifty piece of automation with a sizable ammo capacity.

    I'm surprised BAE didn't hang onto the XM2001 the same way it hung onto the M8 AGS, to work out its kinks and offer an updated/upgraded version. There is a huge global market for artillery systems, and I'd like to think that no one has to make a detailed case for rapid-firing SPHs, whereas one has to argue for the role of light tanks on a battlefield.

×
×
  • Create New...