ukdefencejournal.org.uk
defence-industry.eu
www.amc.com.au
www.defenceconnect.com.au
breakingdefense.com
armyrecognition.com
armyrecognition.com
defence-industry.eu
www.telegraph.co.uk
defence-industry.eu
defence-industry.eu
www.destinus.com
www.destinus.com
defence-industry.eu
www.nasa.gov
www.machinedesign.com
As you'd expect, I disagree completely albeit one can argue at length as to what "predominate" means. Does it apply to launcher systems or projectiles?
As you'd expect, I disagree completely albeit one can argue at length as to what "predominate" means. Does it apply to launcher systems or projectiles?
You are focussed on the means of delivery rather than the projectile itself. True it takes more manufacturing effort to create a modern SP than a HIMARS launcher or container launcher (for example) but once the gun is in service, the ammunition can be created quickly and in mass. You are also undervaluing the all-weather capability of gun fired projectiles and their virtual invulnerability to air defence.
The only trick, if I can call it that, is to have enough guns online at the beginning of hostilities to handle the job and that a manufacturing capability exists to expand holdings and replace losses at a required rate. True- this takes planning which the CAF does not excel at, but so does stocking other munitions.
Long story short - you need a mix of systems. I'll go this far. I don't think that the Canadian army has really gotten its head around weapon systems at this point. The fact that the artillery is thinking in terms of three 18-gun regiments, a single HIMARS regiment and relegating a few UAV/loitering resources to the tactical groups, shows me that it isn't preparing for medium range missile and loitering munitions systems at scale. hand-held drones with the infantry is one thing. Medium to long range to support a divisional close and deep fight are quite another. I'm hoping that at some point there will be a "come to Jesus" moment where the lightbulb comes on. I just don't see it happening yet.
www.army-technology.com
en.defence-ua.com
thedefensepost.com
en.defence-ua.com
defence-industry.eu
tvpworld.com
militarnyi.com
missilematters.substack.com
arnolddefense.com
The word isn't "limited" but "effected" and yes they can be depending on the weather. It's a function of size and guidance systems. Even tube launched artillery is effected by weather which is why we have met dets to calculate non standard conditions that our computers compensate for.
And the following articles that you cite show how production is ramping up - you left out the Koreans and Indians and South Africans all of whom have capabilities.
That's a question relating to the size of the conflict.
The lack of "reliable" guns and later ammunition at a time when stocks were low to start with. That is changing dramatically across the world. Ukraine had a defence manufacturing industry in 2014 with well over 100,000 employees. Artillery was part of their portfolio albeit they still stocked many old Soviet systems in reserve which proved inadequate. The "other thing" was coming around regardless because of the viability of such systems became abundantly clear in the interval 2014 to 2022.
The word isn't "limited" but "effected" and yes they can be depending on the weather. It's a function of size and guidance systems. Even tube launched artillery is effected by weather which is why we have met dets to calculate non standard conditions that our computers compensate for.
And the following articles that you cite show how production is ramping up - you left out the Koreans and Indians and South Africans all of whom have capabilities.
That's a question relating to the size of the conflict.
The lack of "reliable" guns and later ammunition at a time when stocks were low to start with. That is changing dramatically across the world. Ukraine had a defence manufacturing industry in 2014 with well over 100,000 employees. Artillery was part of their portfolio albeit they still stocked many old Soviet systems in reserve which proved inadequate. The "other thing" was coming around regardless because of the viability of such systems became abundantly clear in the interval 2014 to 2022.
And just to get it through again so that you'll stop posting links to every missile system in the world. I'm not against missiles and rockets and LMs, I'm in favour of a balanced force while you seem to be indicating its time to turn all tubed systems into monuments.
