Found this images from 2CR Stryker to be tested a prime movers for M777 howitzer.

https://www.dvidshub.net/image/4165244/2cr-discusses-stryker-modification-howitzer-crews

I wonder if they will get all the howitzer ammo and tools into the Stryker?

Interesting. The towing adapter looks like a PITA to use. I wonder how many Strykers it will take to carry the ammo, gear, and crew for the howitzer compared to an M1083 FMTV 5-ton that usually pulls them. A lot less space in a Stryker compared to the 5-ton.

What a waste of an expensive vehicle; assuming this idea was implemented. But, I guess "thinking outside the box" is not a bad idea...

The US Army wants to get rid of the M777...of course seeing the replacement is believing.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18550/us-army-eyes-replacing-its-105mm-and-155mm-towed-howitzers-with-one-new-cannon

I think the US Army should have fielded the FCS NLOS-Cannon. Even at 27 tons, that thing worked and fired out to the range of a M777 WITH STANDARD AMMO (not rocket assist). Instead, the entire Future Combat System family was cancelled, including the NLOS-Cannon, which was the only (full vehicle) thing in the FCS family that worked. I mean the US Army could still theoretically field the NLOS-Cannon...why tow when you can drive the 155mm cannon yourself at 27 tons with two men and fire 10 rounds per minute (NLOS-C) compared to five rounds max and two rounds sustained for the M777 AND still fire farther without rocket assisted projectiles?

http://www.military-today.com/artillery/nlos_c.htm

The US Army could also theoretically build the 105mm Stryker Howitzer although some commentators said that the recoil was too much for the chassis, just like the Stryker Mobile Gun System (true? Not true?). Do note that the 105mm can fire a round out to 31KM, same range as the 155mm M777, ironically enough.

https://www.armyrecognition.com/south_africa_african_artillery_vehicles_systems_uk/lav_iii_stryker_t7_105_mm_self-propelled_howitzer_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures.html

So there you have it...two replacements for the 105mm and 155mm M777 howitzer already studied, tested, under armor, self-propelled and both capable to throwing out shells to the range of the 155mm M777---even before the replacement study started...and.......yeah.

Self propelled artillery is heavy and can't be slung from a helicopter like towed pieces and that was a design requirement.

That is not what the article says. The M777 was only fielded a few years ago and is the preferred 155mm howitzer for light forces. It is a great piece and is really liked by the crews. But, as we see above, it doesn't do well with Strykers. The Army is looking for a new howitzer specifically for Stryker BDEs that can be easily transported by a Stryker and provide the same firepower as current howitzers. The idea is to have a common Stryker family vehicle to tow the new howitzer so Stryker BDEs don't have to carry repair parts for FMTVs as well, thus reducing their logistal footprint.




The NLOS was a bad idea. It was really no improvement over the M109A7 Paladin PIM (latest version being fielded). It also left the crew exposed if the auto-loader failed, it reduced the crew so you have less guys to do other jobs; radio watch, perimiter guard, etc. You still need soldiers to do all the other things when not manning the gun.




You are still missing the point. The Army is not looking to replace anything, but to obtain a new howitzer just for Stryker BDEs. Also, they want a towed howitzer, not an SP howitzer.

Reminds me of this :



H.P.