Okay folks, lets talk about artillery in the future. Not game mechanics wise,
but operational wise. Is it me or has most modern arty gone SP (self
propelled)? Aren't field guns kind of passe? Doubly so once you start making
your tow vehicles AC or grav.
Once you have a grav platform, the war is so much about mobility and a
tank becomes the all around weapon - replacing jets (which are lighter
armoured), VTOLS (same), arty (not mobile enough), and of course doing duty as
a tank.
Until then though, I assume forces wanted a high mobility force and
specifically those operating with an atmosphere (no AC on airless rocks)
will want to be air-cushion. That'd let them move very fast over water,
most land, tundra, ice floes, etc. It makes amphibious assaults a joke.
Additionally, you'll get an AC tank moving faster than a track layer.
And probably better for the ground its running over - more distributed
surface pressure. Works in swamps!
Given this might be the case, wouldn't most artillery be of the form of an
MRLS or a CPR (Chemically Propelled Round) nature mounted on an AC chassis
(which grounds to setup and fire, but to leave just flips on the fans and
motors...). Given the state of Counter Battery today, that would seem like a
darn good plan. Shoot, then scoot. Fast.
You might find field guns in militia and colonial forces (easier to make than
MRLS) similarly to why you'd find IAVRs and RRs there instead of GMS many
times.
Or (if it is actually not an AND) am I raving? Is there some good
justification for towed arty which takes longer to setup and does not have the
mobility?
I'm curious. Speak to me, oh visionaries and luminaries of the list.
T.
BTW, how does one nail artillery anyway what with the scoot n' shoot
capability. Is a CBR worth it seeing as the arty can move an inch, rendering
CBR unworkable. It appears that the only way is if the arty were
off-table where it has to move in a separate activation. Does this make
on-table arty the way to go over off-table, where it can never be
whacked?
Dave t
[quoted original message omitted]
> Thomas Barclay wrote:
> Okay folks, lets talk about artillery in the future. Not game
Modern big guns are usually SP, or at least have a limited SP capability (ie
able to regroup under their own power, but effectively incapable of journeys
longer than a km or so). Light weapons (up to about 80mm mortars) tend not to
be SP (but of course they tend to be reasonably easy to carry in a truck or
APC anyway!). I'm not sure how good today's CBRs really are, but today's
militaries seem to plan for
recieving counter-battery fire within a minute of opening fire
themselves.
> Once you have a grav platform, the war is so much about mobility and
SP artillery =|= tanks... and they'll be around for a long time yet, I
assure you :-/ An artillery (high-trajectory) gun tends to be fairly
different from a tank (direct-fire) gun... and this becomes even more
true if the tanks start using lasers or DPPGs <g>
> Until then though, I assume forces wanted a high mobility force and
Provided you can armour the skirts ('twould be a *bad* think if
artillery shrapnel could M-kill your tanks by tearing a rip in the
skirts...) and can negotiate rough terrain, and has reasonably low dust, noise
and heat signatures, hovertanks look good.
> Given this might be the case, wouldn't most artillery be of the form
AC chassis (which grounds to setup and fire, but to leave just flips on the
> fans and motors...). Given the state of Counter Battery today, that
You don't need AC for that, though. Modern SP guns - including those
mounted on high-mobility lorries - are pretty quick to scoot too :-/
> Or (if it is actually not an AND) am I raving? Is there some good
Not if it is a big weapon, no.
Regards,
One reason for towed guns in DS: cost. It takes a lot less tech, material and
money to produce a simple (relatively) wheeled artillery piece than a high
tech grav mobile AT killer.
A world building an army on the cheap could probably churn out 20-30
towed
artillery pieces + ammo for every self propelled grav that's built.
Neath Southern Skies - http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/
[mkw] Admiral Peter Rollins; Task Force Zulu
> -----Original Message-----
> Once you have a grav platform, the war is so much about mobility and a
Except that the tank isn't a tank any more, 'cause it starts to carry infantry
and all kinds secondary weapon systems. If the grav platform has the
capability to carry the weight of heavy armour, then why not have it
carry troops too - and you get multi purpose vehicles that serve as
orbital dropships and troopcarriers. What's the purpose of having separate
"tanks"
if the apc's can carry tank-size armament anyway... If the role of the
tank is JUST to fight other tanks, there isn't any point in having them.
Infantry hold the ground, and in the end, tanks now are about supporting the
infantry by killing the other guy's tanks, which can kill your apc's. But if
your apc's are as tough and as heavily armed as a tank, why bother having
tanks?
And if you're fighting with these sorts of zoomie high tech flying apc's,
"ground" warfare will probably be about short, sharp, small fights between
dispersed forces that manoever for position to sieze strategic bits of land
or get the other guy's depots. No percentage in mass-battle type
fighting, 'cause the other guy will just slam you with ortillery if you
concentrate too heavily. I don't see too much place for "conventioal"
artillery at anything larger than the platoon mortar size when you can do it
from orbit. If you don't have some forces in orbit, then you're toast anyway
'cause he ortilleries you into the stone age whenever you concentrate....
> Until then though, I assume forces wanted a high mobility force and
Sure. Forces nowadays are getting smaller but more highly lethal, and I think
that trend will continue. Artillery will get smarter, so you'll need
less of it and equipment not as BIG to do the same job - which means
easier logistic support, manoeverability, etc. If the arty shells are all
guided by an AI, you won't need to shoot off bazillions of them to get the
other
guy - and that brings in the whole ew/counter-ew thing 'cause each side
will try to spoof the others' arty shells, etc etc.
But the arty you DO have will HAVE to be quick to move. No point in any kind
of towed stuff at all, unless it is being used by a low tech force.
We know there'll be conflicts at different tech levels (NSL regulars vs ESU
regulars is HIGH tech, but NAC farmers' militia vs. marauding PAU irregular
militia will be much lower tech. In the case of extremely long lines of
communication, major powers may choose to send lower-tech equipment on
purpose, so that the local infrastructure can support the repair, maintenance,
and ammo resupply requirements of a long campaign. The NAC may not take it's
best equipment if the enemy force isn't equipped with
high-tech stuff and it is FAR away from NAC core worlds... So then you
get the lower tech arty being used because of it's inherent reliability and
ease of maintenance - and maybe it is towed - or wheeled SP.
> Given this might be the case, wouldn't most artillery be of the form of
Yep. Gotta be that way or they'll be counterbatteried right pronto. And I'd
have the counterbattery stuff set up as MLRS with guided hypersonic scramjet
(or equiv) rounds, so the return fire arrives REALLY fast. This ammo would be
more expensive than a simple explosive round, but the counterbattery mission
is about the most important one that arty can undertake, so they use the good
stuff. And everybody knows it, so you move
your arty FAST when you shoot - that would be a no-brainer standard for
every army (except, perhaps, as I indicated above in the "lower tech"
scenario)
> You might find field guns in militia and colonial forces (easier to
And that gives we gamers an excuse to use arty as a mission hook, and use
them as off-table support... I have added three of the Heavy Gear arty
pieces to my SG collection, and they are great to use as an objective in
scenarios. I use that one as a demo game at con's quite often, and it's lots
of fun. One side has to get on and capture or "spike" the guns, and the other
has to defend them... Simple.
> Or (if it is actually not an AND) am I raving? Is there some good
Scenario driven reasons. PSB (and PSHB -
Pseudo-SocioHistorical-Bull....)
can justify nearly anything:)
> I'm curious. Speak to me, oh visionaries and luminaries of the list.
well, tripping bling and confused list member here, maybe:)
Ah, but CBR is near-worthless even today if you do not have artillery
assets tasked with CB as a priority role. Guns rarely ever sit waiting for
just any old target.
So given our wonderous future; before the first enemy rounds hit the ground
the CBR has vectored your CB guns and their first rounds are in the air too!
So what if the enemy fires 1 salvo and scoots? 6 guns firing 1 round each is
NOT a good arty support fire. So by making him scoot with such little fire is
actually doing the CB job; neutralising the enemy artillery fire.
Swings and round abouts.
As someone else has pointed out SP arty doesn't just have to be Grav or
hover; wheeled is a good lo-tech approach too. And don't forget the
employment of your Main Battle Tanks in an Indirect Role too. Something like
this is described in some of teh Hammer's Slammers stories. Of course teh
issue there is limited ammo; if a tank carries 60 rounds and devotes 20 to HE
it is really a limited Fire Support platform and it means it carries 20 rounds
less of some other tank killing ammo.....
Owen G
> -----Original Message-----
> David Tan wrote:
> You might find field guns in militia and colonial forces (easier to
I thought the entire point of the primitive MRLS (such as used in WWII)
systems is that they're easier to make than tube artillery. They don't need
the specialised foundries and work with much lower tolerances - at the
basic level they are simply advanced firework rockets with a warhead attached.
Should be fairly easy for a low-tech planet to build them and fit them
to farming or construction vehicles. Heck, it might even be part of the
standard local militia training.
---
[quoted original message omitted]
Good points Tom. The only possible reason for Towed Artillery might bethe cost
gain of towed piece on some world of lesser financial means. Remember there
are all kinds of wars and all kinds of forces, not everyone's a
maline ;-). It's also time dependant. 2183, mayb e ethre won't be any.
2083? 2050? porbabblys till prevallent in a lot of less modern forces.
Hey, anybody know where I could see/order some Heavy Gear arty on-line?
> them as off-table support... I have added three of the Heavy Gear arty
Glover, Owen wrote in a strongly formatted (and therefore unnecessarily
big, and hard-to-reply-to) post:
> Ah, but CBR is near-worthless even today if you do not have artillery
> assets tasked with CB as a priority role. Guns rarely ever sit
neutralising the enemy artillery > fire.
6 guns firing 1 round each before they scoot is not a good arty support fire
with *today's* ammunition, no. 6 guns firing 3 rounds each (ie, a
10-15 second burst) is currently becoming UK Army doctrine - after the
third shell lands, the target is considered likely to have taken cover
anyway :-/
In addition, the smart rounds available today (and even more so the
ones under development today) make first-round kills fairly likely -
ie, with smart rounds, 6 guns firing 1 round each every ten-fifteen
minutes or so is a very effective way of using those guns... as well as being
the safest possible option.
> And don't forget the employment of your Main Battle Tanks in an
Provided, of course, that your MBTs *can* be used for indirect fire. Yes, I'm
aware that the US army used M48A3's for indirect fire support on at least one
occasion in Vietnam, but it isn't trivial to build a tank in such a way that
it is able to raise its gun to high elevations.
Not without making the tank rather high (and therefore easily-spotted),
at least.
> Magic wrote:
> Another thing to think about...
Could probably be done with rockets, but *don't* try this with tube artillery
unless you have a really good recoil absorbing system.
Especially not with a fast-moving GEV... being slammed into the ground
at high speeds does bad things for your drive line, like :-/
Regards,
Steve Gill wrote in reply to Thomas Barclay:
> > You might find field guns in militia and colonial forces (easier to
IAVR = GMS/P in... probably about 5 years. RR = GMS/P within 25 years.
Of course, the GMS/P is a Stargrunt weapon, not DSII <g>
> I thought the entire point of the primitive MRLS (such as used in
Easier to make, usually longer-ranged, but most importantly easier to
fire *lots* of in a very short period of time. Of course, after that short
period you have one hell of a logistical problem to get
resupplied :-/
Regards,
> On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> 6 guns firing 1 round each before they scoot is not a good arty
Which is why things like Panzer Haubitz 2000 is geared to fire 10 rounds
in 60 seconds. Their trajectory is progressively altered during the
firemission to splash them all at the same time. ie Higher slow trajectory
down to fast low trajectory. 60 second mission, then scoot.
The gun is laid automatically using GPS/Navigation. The Travel locks
release autmatically. The powdercharges and projectiles are rammed
automatically. The only thing the crew has to do is drive to the fire point,
tell the system to execute and then drive off.
see www.pzh2000.com for more info...
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> Steve Gill wrote in reply to Thomas Barclay:
Agreed, but your colonial militia would probably have just as much, if not
more, trouble getting hold of 250mm active seeking multi warhead RAM shells
while the planet's under attack.
---
> Ryan M Gill wrote:
> > 6 guns firing 1 round each before they scoot is not a good arty
Yes, the PzH2000 is pretty impressive. The Crusader would be even more so, if
the US Congress ever gets its collective thumb out and approves funding for
the final development and production.
The main problem with the Time-On-Target fire pattern is that the
maximum range gets severely restricted for large numbers of
projectiles. Not a big problem with a 3-round burst (12 seconds), but
IIRC you lose about 10 km maximum range with a 10-round TOT salvo
compared to a the maximum range of a single round - that's 20-25% off
the range of the PzH2000.
And, of course... there's the CB aspect too. The inital rounds of a large TOT
salvo need to go in a very high trajectory, which makes them
comparatively easy for CBRs to spot - so firing from a single location
for one full minute might not always be a very good idea :-/
OTOH, it should be more difficult for the upcoming ADS defences to counter a
TOT salvo than it would be to stop individual shells.
Later,
Good luck, friend... I hate to say it, but that's going to be a tough one.
These are out of production, as the scale changed for the Heavy Gear models
AND the company making them lost their licence from DP9. The ones that were
made (and there were 2 types: "Northern" and "Southern" as per the HG universe
storyline) are PERFECT scale for SG. I have some of each and will
endeavour to get some pics available - but that means borrowing a
friend's digital camera and having someone else post the pics... You'll be
looking for old stock, so try distributors...
I don't know if this will help much, but the last time I bought some, it was
at:
The Hairy Tarantula 354 Yonge Street, second floor Toronto, Ontario M5B 1S5
Canada
416-596-8002
us@hairyt.com
they have a web page at: http://www.hairyt.com/
but I checked it out and it is still being built as a catalogue/order
site so there isn't much up yet. You could call them and ask??? I know at one
point, they had orderd a ton of the old-scale HG stuff in 'cause they
new ahead of time that production in that scale was ending.
> Hey, anybody know where I could see/order some Heavy Gear arty on-line?