4b6987 No.582157
Could we one day see the return of heavy artillery such as the 240mm?
553fe7 No.582165
>Hungarian Mike Sparks sperging about things he doesn't understand
>Yids killed Dr Bull
>Yanks don't appreciate artillery
>Russians do
>Anglo-German shit flinging
>muh CLGG, scramjets, voitenko compressors
There anon, four years of artillery threads in a single post.
ad7ce5 No.582179
>>582165
>Yids killed Dr Bull
Don't forget the space guns
0c4648 No.582196
>>582179
And the Iowa class refit proposals.
9195f1 No.582227
>>582165
I feel proud to have contributed hundreds of posts to the second and last lines of that.
1329cc No.582251
>>582157
If it turns out that AAA has indeed such an advantage over aircraft that the skies will be dead, then it's possible.
>>582165
You forgot these:
>railguns are a fucking joke because the barrel burns quickly out and they require fuckhuge capacitators and power banks
>artillery is simpler than cheaper than CAS
>friendly fire incidents are also a lot rare with well-coördinated artillery
04f914 No.582276
>>582157
Russian heavy guns still exist, Russia still has heavy artillery brigades (203mm gun, 240mm mortars) and has issued a contract to refurbish and modernize all existing ones (not just the few in use, the full stock).
They've proven extremely useful in Chechnya, Syria and Ukraine.
NATO kind of admit it's missing something like that by discovering the joys of the ground-ground missile strike with the ATACMS.
50ecf0 No.582306
be621b No.582331
>>582165
>muh scramjets
this tbh fam
>>582251
I think it is gonna be railguns, though. Lockheed martin(and a bunch of other, smaller research companies working towards fusion power) seems to have made a breakthrough related to a high-temp(~ -150 C) superconductor recently entering the research/high-end commercial market.
Not only is fission power suddenly commercially viable, but it can be made small enough to fit on a goddamn fighter jet.
They're saying a reactor small enough to fit on a truck shits out 100 megawatts. The Navy's current railgun prototype takes 5.3 megawatts firing at max fire rate.
I'd say the power issue is all but solved, if truck-sized reactors start powering long-ranged railgun batteries.
df8acb No.582372
>>582328
>Of course, but how do we make it useful for the Burgers?
We America-Proof their military hardware; I'm sure that the average, military age American should know how to operate a LeapFrog©.
53e97b No.582386
04f914 No.582391
>>582372
You're joking but with modern numerically integrated infantry it's basically that.
The french ATLAS links for artillery is stupidly simple to use. All the soldier does is point and click (literally you do it with the FELIN scope tied to the thumb pad in the forward grip) his LT check the order (or not, it can be automated) , the artillery CP check the order (or not, it can be automated) the system pick which gun has to do the job, the automated CAESAR fire.
No one enters any coordinates at any point.
97c092 No.582396
>>582391
>No one enters any coordinates at any point.
What if the system goes down?
2518c3 No.582403
>>582396
Then obviously they do it the old fashioned way
be621b No.582441
>>582386
the only problems with lockheed martin's aircraft are failure to meet deadlines and absurd costs
prove me wrong
9e0753 No.582476
>>582396
They commit seppuku because they don't know what trigonometry is.
9e0753 No.582477
>>582441
Also promising more than they can deliver.
932673 No.582514
What is the point of massive artillery. Why not just CAS carpet bomb it or use precision bombs/bunker busters for shit that survives the carpet bombing?
04f914 No.582517
>>582514
Because modern AA will shoot down everything from 0 to 25km on a 200km radius.
Planes are dead, even some of the NATO air command brass are admitting it. Even if the F-35 does work, it will be the last plane.
Missile and radar tech are just too good.
9686d4 No.582525
>>582514
CAS requires air superiority, which in a real war may or may not be available (especially if you're advancing into enemy territory). Heavy artillery is much harder to neutralize.
CAS is also many times more expensive per pound of ordinance delivered.
aa5f22 No.582561
>>582331
Well in that case we oughta rev up the research on creatin us some MYOMERS
c8eab1 No.582572
>>582525
If they could make rail guns reliable, you could have the guns WAY behind the lines.
04f914 No.582598
>>582165
>Hungarian Mike Sparks
That's unfair to hungarianon, he's training to be a gunsmith and does have a much better understanding of what he speak of than pretty much every youtuber ever, Mike "Super Gavin" Sparks only ever trained to be an ass.
d89511 No.582617
Who do you think you are kidding Mister (1) and done
If you think /k/ is on the run
We are the anons who will derail your little game
We are the anons who will stop your posts again
Who do you think you are kidding Mister (1) and done if you think old /k/ is done
Mister Ausfag passes out drunk at night
But he wakes up and he's shitposting with a grin
Cause who do you think you are kidding Mister (1) and done if you think old /k/ is done!
1a373a No.582624
>>582617
faggot faggot come in here to lie…
ab55c1 No.582637
I see no point for it, unless we somehow make them weight lighter and we put them on fast SPGs that have a mechanism to load them as fast as they would load a 122mm round.
1d32a5 No.582641
>>582617
[RAF LAUGHING]
Reminder that this is your great-granddaddy's fault, bong.
0a628d No.582642
>>582617
At least put effort into your shitposting.
Es ist so schön auf /k/ zu sein, Froganon!
Nicht jeder Fad' bring Einsicht, nein, Froganon.
Doch du, du bist mein Talisman, Froganon!
Du geht in allem mir voran Froganon.
Streloks sind Streloks,
auf die Zone haben's Bock
Sie kennen keine Lumperei
Und sind nur einer IP treu
>>582165
You forgot:
>someone invariably masturbates over the contents of a well articulated French post without sources
3b08f0 No.582644
>>582641
>oh grrrrr! your grandfather caused the destruction of germany! how dare you!?
Good?
e97b9a No.582646
>>582644
Enjoy getting raped by paki and nigger gangs, angloroach :)
fd59ed No.582647
HookTube embed. Click on thumbnail to play.
>>582637
Making them lighter and putting them on a chassis can be done, and making an autoloader is certainly possible. Even if the vehicle and the autoloader aren't that fast, they can make up for it with range. Now, I'm terribly sorry that all I can muster up is kikepedia, but that's the best I can do.
<155mm L/45 gun from the 1930s
>maximum range is 22km
>muzzle velocity is 853m/s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/155_mm_Gun_M1
<modern 155mm L/52 gun
>maximum range is 73km
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G6_howitzer
<French 240mm L/51 gun from the 1920s
>maximum range is 50km
>muzzle velocity is 1050m/s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_90_240_mm_railway_gun
If you can triple the range of a 240mm gun, then it will be able to engage targets 150km away. At that point you could place them 50km behind the front line and still reach the second line of the enemy. Damn, a single battery could give you fire support anywhere in a small country.
fd59ed No.582648
>>582647
And of course, it's still "just" conventional tech, no crazy new propellants or combustible light-gas guns. The later would be have even more insane ranges. And remember, the individual shells are also a lot more devastating.
649e36 No.582651
ab55c1 No.582652
>>582647
All I need is for it to be able to bombard Ankara
Unfortunately no such artillery exists yet.
649e36 No.582654
>>582525
>>Heavy artillery is much harder to neutralize.
Ever hear of counter-battery fires?
fd59ed No.582656
>>582652
It's like you never frequented these thread. Here, read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon
Also, that 240mm gun fired projectiles that weighted more than 150kg, while a 155mm shell is only about 50kg. So you could put one of them in a sabot and fire it from a 240mm gun for greater range. Or you could use gliding projectiles, like the one described in this pdf.
0a628d No.582657
>>582652
You can half that distance if you use a ballistic missile sub from the black sea. All you would need is a sub that can sneak through the shallow waters of the Bosporus they are on sale right now.
e4b049 No.582661
>>582656
>guided mortars with 20km range
>guided tank rounds tested against moving targets at 8km
>those guided sniper rounds
Welp
ab55c1 No.582663
>>582657
>they are on sale right now
Fuck off Germany, you won't sell me any more submarines.
And as for your plan, it sounds interesting
>>582656
>The first was to have a bore of 350 mm (13.8 inches) and a barrel length of about 30 metres (100 feet), and it was expected to have a range of up to 1000 kilometers
I WANT IT! I WANT IT I WANT IT I WANT IT!
0a628d No.582665
>>582663
We can probably make some modifications to some old designs, make it truly mobile using a nuclear reactor, and increase the payload by a fuckton for a premium price.
My point is: it can be easily done. It's going to cost you a pretty fortune though.
0a628d No.582670
>>582667
YOU KNOW YOU WANT IT
If you run out of ammo it can probably wade through the med and crush tanks under it's treads.
6c54ff No.582674
>>582670
[greatest allying intensifies]
bb9bb2 No.582690
>>582670
was the thing slow to load because it was essentially a battleship gun without the turret automation?
ea87eb No.582695
>>582690
No. Its bigger than any battleship gun. 32" shells.
bb9bb2 No.582696
>>582695
Why? What bunker couldn't you bust with a 16 or 18 inch?
Why didn't the French try to stick a bunch of battleship turrets in their Maginot line?
Would it be possible to design a "quick" replaceable barrel for something like a 16inch gun, by using rails to move barrels in & out of the mount?
678e09 No.582699
>>582670
but railguns aren't even the biggest (or krautiest) gun your folk ever built. a bagger chassis could easily support a V3 type device, like that one canadian guy and his space cannon/jew bombard.
ea87eb No.582701
>>582696
Because Krupp designed something that could honestly fuck anything up at the time, in particular the Maginot line, but it wasn't finished in time so plan B of go around and bypass everything went through. Gustav fucked Sevastopol up damn good though.
>French try to stick a bunch of battleship turrets
Because the frogs were broke and they don't think like that. Besides that Gustav would have fucked them to an inoperable state in a shot much like it did in Sevastopol.
>"quick" replaceable barrel
Easier and cheaper to reline the barrel the moment its burned out.
>>582699
The Paris gun had to take the rotation of the earth into its firing equation.
bb9bb2 No.582710
>>582701
how do you reline a cannon barrel?
9686d4 No.582743
>>582710
Most big guns have a separate liner that can be easily replaced when it starts to get worn out. The really heavy guns (>8") generally aren't field-replaceable, but if your heavy guns are firing over a hundred rounds in a single engagement then you have bigger problems.
9059ef No.582746
>>582598
>he's training to be a gunsmith
Which is of questionable utility imo. EE, IE, physics or matsci with some courses in mechanics would be much more useful. It's possible he is studying to be a gunsmith for legal reasons though, if he is a registered gunsmith it may make it easier for him to build/tinker.
ea87eb No.582853
>>582743
Gustav needed a relining every 200 or so, by the time it went back to Essen it had rained 300 shells down, most of which were from testing.
1a0f8d No.582869
>>582701
Gustav was later deployed in the Soviet Union during the Battle of Sevastopol, part of Operation Barbarossa, where among other things, it destroyed a munitions depot located roughly 30 meters below ground level.[2]
JESUS CHRIST
FUCK BUNKER BUSTERS I WANT A HEAVY GUSTAV
0fdf7c No.582875
>>582869
I would have hoped that 'deployed in' meant 'pointed at' rather than 'relocated to', but no. Apparently the thing breaks down into about twenty five pieces to be transported by rail.
Then not only do they have to build the circle of double-track to aim and fire the thing, but also the crane to put it back together in the first place.
Germans, man.
d0e29d No.582885
>>582654
still harder than shooting down some planes.
ea87eb No.582894
>>582869
You forgot the part about it being under the sea bed, and having eleven yards of reinforced concrete protecting it. Not to mention it sunk a ship nearby too. Hell it was planned to have a rocket propelled projectile to launch one of those shells something like a good hundred miles or so but that would have required an additional football field of barrel. Also the Germans knocked out a fort with five shells after they deemed trying to take it was a waste of time.
Requires a crew of 4000 to set up and 500 or so to fire at a good pace.
f98005 No.583861
>>582157
>Return
>imblying
>227mm caliber
>70 km range
>10m CEP
Try to beat this piece of artillery.
fd59ed No.583864
>>583861
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2B1_Oka
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2A3_Kondensator_2P
Just upgrade one of these with modern propellants and Gerald Bull's magic, and it's done. You see, a gun can deliver a lot more ordnance than a MRLS because you don't have to stop after every salvo to reload it, instead you can keep pounding the enemy for weeks at a time.
b43012 No.583866
>>583069
Anon stop it. Please, stop it. I can't stop giggling at the idea.
>>583861
Rocket artillery is all fine and good, but isn't it rather inefficient against built up areas like we've seen in Syria? Smaller artillery pieces aren't doing diddley against buildings. Sure, they're smashing the uppermost floor of a apartment building but it's just not getting the job done. You end up needing direct fire weaponry to deal with those strong-points, and you're not affecting tunnels running beneath the steers and buildings. This ofcourse means losses in manpower and equipment.
>>583864
>420mm
>406mm
I guess it could work, though 600mm Karl-Gerät's have been proven to work, to a degree.
>mfw I found this picture and the fucking building seems to be fine enough after getting hit by a 600mm grenade
589e88 No.583868
>>583861
Best Korean guns aren't that far (60+ km), also the last design of Bull for Iraq could hit at 56km with REGULAR rounds.
There is a reason why he was assassinated.
Also about any non-burger heavy MLRS, hell even any recent GMLRS are in the ball park.
f98005 No.583875
>>583864
>60 tones towed
>1 round per 5 minutes
>26 km range
>250 m CEP
lul
43d0d0 No.583877
>>583868
how did he do that?
fd59ed No.583879
HookTube embed. Click on thumbnail to play.
>>582391
>All the soldier does is point and click (literally you do it with the FELIN scope tied to the thumb pad in the forward grip)
So every French infantryman has a dedicated button for artillery strikes? Or is this some kind of a multifunctional thing? Also, do they see it in a digital map to make sure they didn't accidentally order an artillery strike to a branch in front of them? Or is there some kind of a safety that doesn't deliver the order if they choose a point that is too close?
>>583875
>60 tones towed
Both of those are self-propelled guns, so there is nothing to tow here.
>1 round per 5 minutes
Without an autoloader.
>26 km range
You deliberately choose the inferior weapon. And again, with modern technology I'm sure it could be tripled, and then it would outrange your MRLS.
>250 m CEP
Where did you get that? Anyway, there is vid related. It can hit a tank, even slowly moving ones. Now imagine what can a direct hit from a 420mm cannon do.
f98005 No.583880
f98005 No.583881
>>583879
And again, with modern technology I'm sure MRLS range could be tripled up 300 km range , and then it would outrange your outdated tubes.
fd59ed No.583887
>>583881
That's not how it works. Gerald Bull invented a new alternative for rifling that made tube artillery a lot more efficient. Propellants also imporved since the early Cold War. And guided munitions do solve the problem of CEP, which also increases the range. In the case of rockets, the only way forward is developing better propellants. But then you could use those better propellants in rocket-assisted shells too. Truth to be told, you can increase the range of a rocket a lot easier, as you just have to make it longer and fill it with more propellant. But those rockets are already quite long, and making them even longer would make reloading even more complicated.
b43012 No.583888
>>583880
Yeah. Looks cool and all that. Where's the BDA though?
f6fcfd No.583889
>>583887
did he use progressive rifling?
fd59ed No.583895
>>583889
No, he invented the extended range, full bore concept. As far as I understand the rifling is virtually the same, and the difference is in the projectile. Instead of applying an oversized copper ring it has a few fins that follow the rifling, and so there is less drag from the barrel. You can see them in pic related.
9686d4 No.583934
>>583887
>>583895
ERFB has nothing to do with rifling, stop using Wikipedia for research. The real purpose of the fins is to act as a low-drag bourrelet. In order to prevent yawing in the chamber a conventional shell needs to be cylindrical from its driving band to just ahead of its CoM (pic related), which obviously is not terribly aerodynamic at Mach 3. ERFB shells only need to have a 155mm diameter at the driving band, allowing the use of a much finer projectile shape.
d0e29d No.583944
I want siege mortars and siege howitzers.
056dd5 No.584004
>>583934
That's basically what he said.
589e88 No.584006
>>583879
>So every French infantryman has a dedicated button for artillery strikes?
Yes, well a designation button, in the front grip.
>Or is this some kind of a multifunctional thing?
Yes.
>Also, do they see it in a digital map to make sure they didn't accidentally order an artillery strike to a branch in front of them?
Yes.
Or is there some kind of a safety that doesn't deliver the order if they choose a point that is too close?
Yes, if it runs on auto.
a04e1a No.585111
>>583895
so what range could your typical destroyer gun get with such a upgrade?
c1bd62 No.585123
>>584006
wow this is actually cool as fuck. is that a non backlit lcd or e-ink or something that that display works on?
Imagine the awesome battery life if they had a high contrast e ink display
d529e0 No.585133
>>584006
I've been preaching the glory of FELIN for years now. It's such an amazing feat of military tech. French military gives me a hard on. Nuclear power diesel assisted engines for Leclerc 2020 confirmed?
bc0023 No.585199
>>585123
I'm not 100% sure but think it's just a regular lcd but with a filter on top of it and minimal back-lighting to be NV friendly.
fd59ed No.585246
>>583944
I'd say a 240mm breech-loading trench mortar is close enough.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/240_mm_mortar_M240
>>584006
I see, thanks. But what are the other buttons for? And does the scope offer magnification, or is it "just" a camera with night vision and (I assume) a range finder?
>>585133
The main problem of the French military tech is that they are always early adapters, and so when the rest of the world catches up they are stuck with what is by then slightly outdated equipment. Of course it woulnd't be a problem if the French governments had the willingness to finance the constant R&D and reequpment.
9686d4 No.585272
>>585246
The icons are pretty self-explanatory:
>push-to-talk
>take a picture
>toggle zoom
>toggle night-vision
>activate designator