It looks like the old M198 155mm is on the way out and the new lightweight M777A1 155mm howitzer is on the way in:
http://www4.army.mil/news/article.php?story=7264
It will be used to provide fire support to the Stryker Brigades in Army use.
Hosted by Darren Baker
New US Army/USMC 155mm howitzer
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 08:00 AM UTC
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 08:09 AM UTC
Yup, looks to be a good piece of gear. Big improvement over the old M198, especially with the digital package, it is also supposed to eventually have a self-laying capability like the Paladin.
Now that the M198 is being replaced, maybe we will see a model of it come out in plastic.
Now that the M198 is being replaced, maybe we will see a model of it come out in plastic.
thathaway3
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 08:35 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Excaliber will be fired out to a range of 40 kilometers from the M777A1, and because of its GPS and inertial navigation guidance, will deliver precision-strike capability (less than 10 meters Circular Error of Probability) at all ranges.
This is the part that I find amazing. When I went to OBC, we were still "charts and darts" as primary, with FADAC, as backup. And due to the unreliability of "Freddie", most of the time we ran two charts in the FDC. The capability to "reach out and touch somebody" at 40 KM with a 10 meter CEP is absolutely amazing in comparison!!
Tom
Mech-Maniac
Joined: April 16, 2004
KitMaker: 2,240 posts
Armorama: 1,319 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 09:16 AM UTC
very cool, can it still do the scoot and shoot thing the Marine Corps does with its current 155s?
If you're not familiar with what I'm talking about, they load ammo and gun crew in a CH-53E and strap on the 155 with a howitzer, fly to a poition, drop howitzer and crew, fire a few rounds, then scoot away. Pretty cool tactic for artillery
If you're not familiar with what I'm talking about, they load ammo and gun crew in a CH-53E and strap on the 155 with a howitzer, fly to a poition, drop howitzer and crew, fire a few rounds, then scoot away. Pretty cool tactic for artillery
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 09:42 AM UTC
Quoted Text
very cool, can it still do the scoot and shoot thing the Marine Corps does with its current 155s?
If you're not familiar with what I'm talking about, they load ammo and gun crew in a CH-53E and strap on the 155 with a howitzer, fly to a poition, drop howitzer and crew, fire a few rounds, then scoot away. Pretty cool tactic for artillery
Sure can, especially since it is 7,000 lbs lighter. Can probably be lifted by a CH-46 or new MH-60S now that it is lighter too.
darkstar
Joined: July 22, 2002
KitMaker: 209 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 06:57 AM UTC
ok looks kewl..now all we need is some better pics and measurements and we can get started scratch building
Tankleader
Joined: April 29, 2003
KitMaker: 718 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 01:42 PM UTC
Nah, that thing is old. It's the British LW 155. They are even going to be produced there. Don't ask me how I know I just do. I work with someone on the project team for the Marine Corps.
SF
Andy
SF
Andy
USArmy2534
Joined: January 28, 2004
KitMaker: 2,716 posts
Armorama: 1,864 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 02:43 PM UTC
Was there any reason why the 101st was doing the Operational Test? The first picture shows 101st soldiers doing the test. Is it just me, but for the leap that this provides to our units, but is 589 pieces enough considering it is being split between USMC and Army units? You guys would know better, so I ask.
Jeff
Jeff
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 11:39 PM UTC
Quoted Text
They are next to get a Stryker Brigade. Remember, this is replacing the M198 in US Army use. Only our light divisions use towed artillery (101, 82, 10). We still have many more M109 variants that equip our mechanized/armor divisions.Was there any reason why the 101st was doing the Operational Test? The first picture shows 101st soldiers doing the test. Is it just me, but for the leap that this provides to our units, but is 589 pieces enough considering it is being split between USMC and Army units? You guys would know better, so I ask.
Jeff
LemonJello
Joined: January 29, 2004
KitMaker: 177 posts
Armorama: 86 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 01:12 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Now that the M198 is being replaced, maybe we will see a model of it come out in plastic.
Ah, Gino, that would only make sense. I'll keep my fingers crossed that one finally gets done in plastic. And while their at it, they can make the molds for the new M777, too!
Quoted Text
can it still do the scoot and shoot thing the Marine Corps does with its current 155s?
The arty raid is a pretty impressive mission, that's for sure. The few times I've hung around with the "cannon cockers" I've been amazed at the teamwork and coordination they have developed to feed the gun.
USArmy2534
Joined: January 28, 2004
KitMaker: 2,716 posts
Armorama: 1,864 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 08:42 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextThey are next to get a Stryker Brigade. Remember, this is replacing the M198 in US Army use. Only our light divisions use towed artillery (101, 82, 10). We still have many more M109 variants that equip our mechanized/armor divisions.Was there any reason why the 101st was doing the Operational Test? The first picture shows 101st soldiers doing the test. Is it just me, but for the leap that this provides to our units, but is 589 pieces enough considering it is being split between USMC and Army units? You guys would know better, so I ask.
Jeff
Okay so this piece is replacing all of the towed artillery in the Army (excluding National Guard, Reserves)?
I did not know that the 101st is getting Strykers. News to me. Thanks.
Jeff
Red4
Joined: April 01, 2002
KitMaker: 4,287 posts
Armorama: 1,867 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 09:30 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Was there any reason why the 101st was doing the Operational Test? The first picture shows 101st soldiers doing the test. Is it just me, but for the leap that this provides to our units, but is 589 pieces enough considering it is being split between USMC and Army units? You guys would know better, so I ask.
Jeff
Jeff I think the guys you saw were wearing 101 combat patches. I don't recall any left arm patches, but I did see a few right arms in there with the eagle head on it. "Q"
Red4
Joined: April 01, 2002
KitMaker: 4,287 posts
Armorama: 1,867 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 09:36 AM UTC
Speaking on the shoot and scoot drill, I watched some of our gun-guys when I was with the 82nd ABN several years back work what was called a "two-hoop" configuration. Basically two light howitzers on a single drop platform. I wasn't able to time them, but from the tme the package hit the ground, it wasn't too awefull long before both guns were rocking the DZ. An amazing sight of coordination and team work that left me going "wow!" Its almost like a ballet when you get the team work and coordination down. Like watching a well rehearsed CQB takedown in real time. Beautiful and deadly all rolled into one. "Q"
"Q" 
Trisaw
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 10:31 AM UTC
This is a USMC howitzer all the way; the Army just latched on because the Crusader got cancelled and the Army had no other replacement for the time being until FCS-Non-Line-of-Sight---Cannon in 2015, which uses the M777 as the cannon, BTW.
The USMC just wanted a howitzer with the performance of the M198 but at about half the weight. That's it. Nothing really special or fancy about this gun except the extensive use of titanium (minus the digital fire-control unit, which of course is separate).
So bear in mind that the range is the same as the M198 whereas Crusader with Rocket Assisted Projectile (RAP) can achieve 40KM. With RAP on the M198 and M777, the range is 30KM, still about 10KM short of European artillery like the PZH2000, GIAT, and AS90 with RAP.
The USMC just wanted a howitzer with the performance of the M198 but at about half the weight. That's it. Nothing really special or fancy about this gun except the extensive use of titanium (minus the digital fire-control unit, which of course is separate).
So bear in mind that the range is the same as the M198 whereas Crusader with Rocket Assisted Projectile (RAP) can achieve 40KM. With RAP on the M198 and M777, the range is 30KM, still about 10KM short of European artillery like the PZH2000, GIAT, and AS90 with RAP.
Alpenflage
Joined: May 21, 2003
KitMaker: 1,120 posts
Armorama: 1,002 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 10:56 AM UTC
Maj G. Interesting weapon system. Thanks for the post !
Cheers !!
Robert
SEMPER FI, MARINES !!
Cheers !!
Robert
SEMPER FI, MARINES !!
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 11:07 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It is replacing the towed 155mm guns, light units still will have 105mm towed guns as well. Active Army will get fielded first followed by National Guard units. One Stryker Brigade will be a National Guard unit, they will get them before most National Guard units. The Army Reserves do not have any field artillery units, and very few combat arms units. I believe the only combat arms unit in the USAR is an AH-64 battalion here at Ft. Knox.Okay so this piece is replacing all of the towed artillery in the Army (excluding National Guard, Reserves)?
I did not know that the 101st is getting Strykers. News to me. Thanks.
Tankleader
Joined: April 29, 2003
KitMaker: 718 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 10:10 PM UTC
Quoted Text
This is a USMC howitzer all the way; the Army just latched on because the Crusader got cancelled and the Army had no other replacement for the time being until FCS-Non-Line-of-Sight---Cannon in 2015, which uses the M777 as the cannon, BTW.
The USMC just wanted a howitzer with the performance of the M198 but at about half the weight. That's it. Nothing really special or fancy about this gun except the extensive use of titanium (minus the digital fire-control unit, which of course is separate).
So bear in mind that the range is the same as the M198 whereas Crusader with Rocket Assisted Projectile (RAP) can achieve 40KM. With RAP on the M198 and M777, the range is 30KM, still about 10KM short of European artillery like the PZH2000, GIAT, and AS90 with RAP.
Hello Peter,
You must have worked on the project at one time or the other. A funny thing happened to teh Marine Corps, they are getting a LW155, but someone bought them the 7ton prime mover, so it was a net gain in weight.
SF
Andy
Trisaw
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 10:24 PM UTC
Hi Andreas,
From what I've heard, the MTVR runs rings around nearly any other truck in SWA. Sure, at 7-tons, it's heavier than the 5-Ton FMTV and M939, but OshKosh leads the way in airport crash rescue, construction trucks, military trucks, and off-terrain trucks. OshKosh is a well-known name and the company knows how to make trucks.
Many books report that while the M198 is a good gun, it's a bear to emplace and move by hand.
The Army looked at the XM777 with some interest, but more so once the Crusader got cancelled.
There is even an idea to mount the M777 on the bed of the MTVR to make a French "Ceasar" LW155 SPH. In fact, the Ceasar is trying to overthrow the M777 for the Strykers. Why tow M777s when you can haul them on the bed of trucks and don't have to emplace them, just get out and fire?
The Marines towed the XM777 over hill and dale at Aberdeen. The results were very positive. I mean the Marines towed that darn thing all over the place for a very long time, and fired many rounds through it, so it's a winner---so I read in the defense mags.
The Marines sure got what they wanted, not sure if the Army did since the Army didn't want it to make it---the Marines did.
From what I've heard, the MTVR runs rings around nearly any other truck in SWA. Sure, at 7-tons, it's heavier than the 5-Ton FMTV and M939, but OshKosh leads the way in airport crash rescue, construction trucks, military trucks, and off-terrain trucks. OshKosh is a well-known name and the company knows how to make trucks.
Many books report that while the M198 is a good gun, it's a bear to emplace and move by hand.
The Army looked at the XM777 with some interest, but more so once the Crusader got cancelled.
There is even an idea to mount the M777 on the bed of the MTVR to make a French "Ceasar" LW155 SPH. In fact, the Ceasar is trying to overthrow the M777 for the Strykers. Why tow M777s when you can haul them on the bed of trucks and don't have to emplace them, just get out and fire?
The Marines towed the XM777 over hill and dale at Aberdeen. The results were very positive. I mean the Marines towed that darn thing all over the place for a very long time, and fired many rounds through it, so it's a winner---so I read in the defense mags.
The Marines sure got what they wanted, not sure if the Army did since the Army didn't want it to make it---the Marines did.
Tankleader
Joined: April 29, 2003
KitMaker: 718 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Friday, May 06, 2005 - 01:26 AM UTC
Hello Peter,
The problem with the seven ton as a prime mover is that it negated the reason for going to the LW155 in the first place and it takes up loads of room aboard the ships. This is one of those classic examples where the right hand wasn't talking to the left. I do have it on good authority though that we are looking at a new LW prime mover as well.
SF
Andy
The problem with the seven ton as a prime mover is that it negated the reason for going to the LW155 in the first place and it takes up loads of room aboard the ships. This is one of those classic examples where the right hand wasn't talking to the left. I do have it on good authority though that we are looking at a new LW prime mover as well.
SF
Andy
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Friday, May 06, 2005 - 01:37 AM UTC
Quoted Text
The Crusader played a different role in the fire support arena than a towed 155mm howitzer does. The Crusader was designed to replace the M109A6 Paladin (still a 1960s era chassis despite upgrades) which has troubles keeping up with the Abrams, Bradley and MLRS forces in traditional movements to contact.The Army looked at the XM777 with some interest, but more so once the Crusader got cancelled.....The Marines sure got what they wanted, not sure if the Army did since the Army didn't want it to make it---the Marines did.
With limited R&D budgets, the Army is focusing its money on the FCS or future combat system. Why pay for something that someone else is already developing. The Army jumping on the M777 bandwagon just reduces the overall cost per artillery piece that the Marines would have had to pay. It was in their best interest to get the Army to want to buy the gun.
Towed artillery is just not a major player in the Army's strategic vision. Much like the Stryker, the M777A1 is probably only an interim artillery piece until a self-propelled howitzer is developed. The Non-Line-of-Sight Cannon (NLOS-C) is what may equip our future medium weight forces.
As I eluded to earlier, some of our light divisions (25th Infantry, 101st ABN) are beginning the transition into Stryker Brigades. Here is a story on the Hawaii based 25th Infantry Division's Stryker Brigade: http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-826303.php. Right now, the M109 series is too heavy to play the rapid deployment piece and a Stryker based SPH is not available. The only thing readily available to fill the rapid deployment fire support mission is a towed howitzer and with a prime mover.
Trisaw
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Friday, May 06, 2005 - 02:10 PM UTC
Of course the Army should buy the M777, no question about that. A lot boils down to inter-service rivalry such as the Army not wanting the USMC to have the MLRS. The USMC instead is looking to buy several HiMARS.
What I meant was that the USMC found a need and fulfilled it. The same goes with the V-22 and EFV--tried to cancel but the Marines still have them going. In many ways, I wished the Army could have such success with its AFV programs.
As for the MTVR, I think the USMC made the correct choice in chosing the MTVR over the FMTV. For one thing, the MTVR is more survivable with the engine and hood layout in front compared to the "cab-over wheel" design. The Army chose the FMTV for its better RO/RO off a C-130 and being a 5-Tonner. A lot is politics, of course.
Too bad the Crusader got cancelled. Besides its weakness of high rate-of-fire and the fact that there was no manual upload in case the autoloader broke, nothing can match the performance of Crusader at 10-15 rds a minute max to 40KM with RAP and storing 48 rds. M777 can probably do 5 rds a minute max and 2 rds a minute sustained. King of SPH in performance still remains the PZH2000.
The Army wants 686 M777s, so says a book I have.
I think the USMC may mount the M777 on the bed of the MTVR. The M777 weights 8,256 lbs = 4.1 tons = plenty of cargo haul left over for a truck with a seven-ton capacity....not to mention recoil and all that.
What I meant was that the USMC found a need and fulfilled it. The same goes with the V-22 and EFV--tried to cancel but the Marines still have them going. In many ways, I wished the Army could have such success with its AFV programs.
As for the MTVR, I think the USMC made the correct choice in chosing the MTVR over the FMTV. For one thing, the MTVR is more survivable with the engine and hood layout in front compared to the "cab-over wheel" design. The Army chose the FMTV for its better RO/RO off a C-130 and being a 5-Tonner. A lot is politics, of course.
Too bad the Crusader got cancelled. Besides its weakness of high rate-of-fire and the fact that there was no manual upload in case the autoloader broke, nothing can match the performance of Crusader at 10-15 rds a minute max to 40KM with RAP and storing 48 rds. M777 can probably do 5 rds a minute max and 2 rds a minute sustained. King of SPH in performance still remains the PZH2000.
The Army wants 686 M777s, so says a book I have.
I think the USMC may mount the M777 on the bed of the MTVR. The M777 weights 8,256 lbs = 4.1 tons = plenty of cargo haul left over for a truck with a seven-ton capacity....not to mention recoil and all that.
Tankleader
Joined: April 29, 2003
KitMaker: 718 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 02:30 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I think the USMC may mount the M777 on the bed of the MTVR. The M777 weights 8,256 lbs = 4.1 tons = plenty of cargo haul left over for a truck with a seven-ton capacity....not to mention recoil and all that.
Peter,
This is a bad arguement. The MTVR is almost too big to fit aboard ship as it is, so I don't think that the will mount anything on it. Yes, the Marine Corps is buying HIMARS as well. We will only have two HIMARS battalions, that is whats planned unless the budget axes falls once again. I've been involved in arguements/discussions and briefs were equipment loadout and equipment mixes aboard ship have been an issue. The main issue is that the Navy ships aren't getting any bigger, but the equipment is. For every MTVR that went aboard ship, a truck and something else had to come off. After coming back from Iraq all I can say is that going light weight is killing us. By this I mean that everyone is developing light weight gear but they are unwilling to eliminate the gear that is replaces. Take for example our vests, if you wear it with all of it's gadgets you come close to 30 pounds and that's before you hang the ammo.. Ok enough of my rant and digression.
SF
Andy
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.