Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask An Expert- Naval Forces

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post

    Gunny, by the M198 I assume you mean in service in other nations cause the M777 has replaced it in US service.
    Thanks for making me feel even more ancient

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post

      Thanks for making me feel even more ancient
      Happy to help.

      And hell, 3 different uniforms I wore are in the US Army Quartermaster Museum so how do you think I feel?!?!?
      “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
      Mark Twain

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post

        We are still using the 105mm M119 (L118 to you probably) in light, airborne and air assault units.
        Yes but for how long? Everything I see tells me the 105 is on borrowed time. After all even by your own admission what does the 105 represent as a % of most western nations indirect fire support throw weight?
        Last edited by Monash; 07 Feb 22,, 11:24.
        If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post

          Happy to help.

          And hell, 3 different uniforms I wore are in the US Army Quartermaster Museum so how do you think I feel?!?!?
          Let me guess (from personnel experience). Like you should be stuffed and mounted in the museum alongside the uniforms. Under the category 'Old Soldier'?
          If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

          Comment


          • Ah, you don't need to be old to feel the generations.

            The MAN SE 7-ton trucks i served on in the army were basically as old as i was (i think the four in my squad were all built around my birthday +-1 year). They were decommissioned as surplus a few years later and sold to the civilian Technical Assistance Corps civil-protection outfit.

            Over here they began retiring their entire fleet of these trucks for a new model last year...

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Monash View Post

              Yes but for how long? Everything I see tells me the 105 is on borrowed time. After all even by your own admission what does the 105 represent as a % of most western nations indirect fire support throw weight?
              For light, airborne & air assault forces? For quite sometime, actually. The issue is not the size and weight of the howitzer...though at 9,500 pounds with all gear the M777 is almost twice the weight of the M119A3's 5100 pounds...is the size of the prime mover needed and the size & weight of the shell.

              A UH-60 can sling load an M119...it cannot do so on to M777. You need a CH-47 for that. A HMMWV can tow an M119 with crew...you need an FMTV to pull an M777. And the 105mm shells are lot lighter and smaller than the 155mm. So until you can overcome the prime mover requirements, the mobility requirements, ammunition size & weight the 105mm will continue to give service in the US military for at least 20 more years.

              And the increases in accuracy and lethality of the 105mm round makes it still relevant. The 155 already has the GPS guided EXCALIBUR HE shell. There is a 105mm version in development today.
              “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
              Mark Twain

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Monash View Post

                Let me guess (from personnel experience). Like you should be stuffed and mounted in the museum alongside the uniforms. Under the category 'Old Soldier'?
                Yeah...Valley Forge sucked!
                “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                Mark Twain

                Comment


                • Couple WWII questions:

                  1) Why was the 10" naval gun not popular?

                  2) There's a big speed difference between corvettes, frigates, and destroyer escorts (20 knots); destroyers (37 knots), and cruisers (32 knots). What drove the requirements? I assume the smaller ships could be slow as they were primarily running with convoys and engagements with submarines would be at close range. I assume destroyers were built fast to chase down subs. I assume everything else was designed to be as fast as practical? Am I close?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
                    Couple WWII questions:

                    2) There's a big speed difference between corvettes, frigates, and destroyer escorts (20 knots); destroyers (37 knots), and cruisers (32 knots). What drove the requirements? I assume the smaller ships could be slow as they were primarily running with convoys and engagements with submarines would be at close range. I assume destroyers were built fast to chase down subs. I assume everything else was designed to be as fast as practical? Am I close?
                    Quick & dirty, and assuming a post 19th century world:
                    "corvettes, frigates, and destroyer escorts" were designed as cheap(ish), easy to build convoy escorts, tasked mainly with ASW, with a latter secondary duty as AAA. With most WWII subs having a top speed, on the surface, of 17-20 knots, and a submerged of 7-9, you don't need a high speed hull, just fast enough. This is immediatly a massive cut on production cost & time. Full fleet destroyers, otoh, evolved from the old 19th century torpedo boats, and had two primary missions: to either zoom in and salvo a load of torpedoes, or to zoom in and hunt down said enemy torpedo boats. For either mission you need to be fast, really fast. Cruisers, in the latter half of the 19th century, evolved from missions related to commerce, either hunting or protection. Some nations *coff* France *coff* (mainly) came out with the idea of ships with the main task of hunting down enemy trade, to cause economic failure, For that you didn't need an ironclad, you needed a ship with range (to hunt) and speed (to avoid said ironclads). The other side *coff* UK *coff* then built cruisers to patrol the sea lines and hunt those cruisers down, and the race is on... latter, cruisers took on more duties, like leading destroyers, or guarding the flanks of the fleet, all of which required range and speed.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X