Jump to content


Photo

Not 8 Inch, But Marines Making Their Own Fire Support


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,235 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 08 November 2017 - 0938 AM

From the 'Why Wasn't This Figured Out Sooner?' department; the Marines and Navy successfully fired GMLRS rockets from trucks on LPD decks:

https://www.strategy...s/20171108.aspx

"This had long been advocated by army and marine artillery officers but the navy was more interested in equipping the LPDs with cruise missiles fired from VLS cells. Each LPD of the San Antonio class was originally designed to have 16 VLS cells but that feature was eliminated (to save costs) before construction began."


Edited by shep854, 08 November 2017 - 0940 AM.

  • 0

#2 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FOB Chitcago
  • Interests:Killing, killing is the solution!

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1003 AM

The procurement people want to spend money, the sharp end wants capabilities.  

 

Still waiting on a rocket boosted JDAM on a trailer behind a HUM-V or something.  S/F....Ken M


  • 0

#3 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,235 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1025 AM



The procurement people want to spend money, the sharp end wants capabilities.  

 

Still waiting on a rocket boosted JDAM on a trailer behind a HUM-V or something.  S/F....Ken M

Sweet! :)


  • 0

#4 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,579 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1055 AM

From the 'Why Wasn't This Figured Out Sooner?' department; the Marines and Navy successfully fired GMLRS rockets from trucks on LPD decks:

https://www.strategy...s/20171108.aspx

"This had long been advocated by army and marine artillery officers but the navy was more interested in equipping the LPDs with cruise missiles fired from VLS cells. Each LPD of the San Antonio class was originally designed to have 16 VLS cells but that feature was eliminated (to save costs) before construction began."

 

 

I strongly suggest that the guided nature of GMLRS made the whole affair much more feasible and affordable, since the motion of ship doesn't need be taken into account in the fire control system this way. You simply keep a reserve instead of firing to maximum nominal range and the problem's gone.

It should be said that the German MONARC 155 mm SPG-turret-on-a-frigate thing fired "successfully" as well and still turned out to be lacking in a saltwater environment.


  • 0

#5 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,293 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1106 AM

The procurement people want to spend money, the sharp end wants capabilities.  

 

Still waiting on a rocket boosted JDAM on a trailer behind a HUM-V or something.  S/F....Ken M

Slap some JDAM guideance kits on HAWKs? 


  • 0

#6 FALightFighter

FALightFighter

    Red-Legged Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,377 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1222 PM

The Army did this with M270 MLRS in the 90s. This isn't new.


  • 0

#7 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,205 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1359 PM

Rocket boosted gp bombs were launched at the Japanese from modified 105mm howitzer carriages on Okinawa in 1945.
  • 0

#8 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,579 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1407 PM

 

The procurement people want to spend money, the sharp end wants capabilities.  

 

Still waiting on a rocket boosted JDAM on a trailer behind a HUM-V or something.  S/F....Ken M

Slap some JDAM guideance kits on HAWKs? 

 

 

As so often, Germans kinda did this thing before.

 

http://www.lonesentr...dnance/tag/28cm

 

TOS-1(A) approximates this.


  • 0

#9 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FOB Chitcago
  • Interests:Killing, killing is the solution!

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1747 PM

And how many are in the field with the grunts?

 

ALL hardware is a negative resource until it's in the field in use.  It's just green welfare.  S/F....Ken M


  • 0

#10 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,565 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 08 November 2017 - 2321 PM

I offer these for your consideration.....

 

Czexmz5WIAQFwCZ.jpg

 

The Volcano or Burkan rockets are built off BM-21 Grad rocket motors to left a big lump of explosive. They are neither pretty nor accurate but they are the ticket for when you cannot get an air delivered bomb. I would argue that this sort of heavy short range rocket is an essential tool to crack fortifications and defensives belts.  


  • 0

#11 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,374 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 09 November 2017 - 0517 AM

And how many are in the field with the grunts?

 

ALL hardware is a negative resource until it's in the field in use.  It's just green welfare.  S/F....Ken M

 

IIRC the USMC has like two batallions of HiMARS and change.


  • 0

#12 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FOB Chitcago
  • Interests:Killing, killing is the solution!

Posted 09 November 2017 - 0950 AM

 

And how many are in the field with the grunts?

 

ALL hardware is a negative resource until it's in the field in use.  It's just green welfare.  S/F....Ken M

 

IIRC the USMC has like two batallions of HiMARS and change.

 

 

So what?  That's a corps level asset.  The hardware needs to be at BLT level, RLT level at the highest, where the shit gets done.

 

Read about Dakota Meyer's MoH battle.  When in doubt, the HHQ always says "no."   Centralizing stuff at echelons above reality is EXACTLY the opposite of what we should be doing.  It's as if our .mil has been deliberately evolving away from an effective fighting force.  S/F....Ken M


Edited by EchoFiveMike, 09 November 2017 - 0952 AM.

  • 0

#13 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,565 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 09 November 2017 - 1034 AM

Tiger Forces pretty much decentralizes their fire support to company Groups. A battery or gun section now is worth a battalion in a few hours.
  • 0

#14 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,205 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 09 November 2017 - 1249 PM

I thought one of the key advantages NATO armies thought they had was the ability for essentially any unit to call for fires with those fires being allocated from organic, higher echelon or adjacent units. Concentration of effects, not systems. The key problem with that would tend to be deconfliction but that is generic to all but shortest range IDF.
  • 0

#15 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,002 posts

Posted 09 November 2017 - 1354 PM

250 kg bombs with a rocket booster and TV guidance kit and integral light drone on a truck is the mid tech sweet spot.


  • 0

#16 bd1

bd1

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,830 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:estonia

Posted 09 November 2017 - 1411 PM

Tiger Forces pretty much decentralizes their fire support to company Groups. A battery or gun section now is worth a battalion in a few hours.

but this only works against low-level enemy - as in syria

or you need additionally lots of centrally commanded artillery. like  soviets

 

if you decentralise like this, against any competent enemy, then you´ll be slammed and pulverised  like japanese in ww2


  • 0

#17 bd1

bd1

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,830 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:estonia

Posted 09 November 2017 - 1415 PM

I offer these for your consideration.....

 

Czexmz5WIAQFwCZ.jpg

 

The Volcano or Burkan rockets are built off BM-21 Grad rocket motors to left a big lump of explosive. They are neither pretty nor accurate but they are the ticket for when you cannot get an air delivered bomb. I would argue that this sort of heavy short range rocket is an essential tool to crack fortifications and defensives belts.  

Falaq 2 can´t be that more expensive than that. if the unit has access to that of course

http://www.armamentr...ts-in-Syria.pdf


  • 0

#18 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,565 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 10 November 2017 - 0101 AM

Falaq etc. had to be airlifted to Syria. Shipping is possible just very slow and risky (Red Sea and Suez transit) whereas Borkans can be assembled in country using Grads. Airlifting enough Falaqs to be useful was probably regarded as insufficiently high priority compared to other materiel like BM-14 clones.

 

The Tiger Forces artillery seems quite flexible but they keep it simple. Often you will see a number of systems co-located and these are often elements from different units that have massed up for a tasking. Ultimately, they understand that the purpose is the same, even if the individual tools are different and seem to be able to happily cross support using dissimilar kit. They are probably the most seasoned of the Tiger Forces and would be a fascinating post-conflict debrief. If you look at their 'suggested' ORBATs, they do not really conform to NATO and WarPac norms in most ways, really more resembling the battlegroups in North Africa (unsurprisingly).

 

The assumption is that all Syrians suck dog balls. I do not believe this is the case given their situation. The Tiger Forces in particular have shown a degree of combat capability substantially better than other units. Yes, they are relatively well armed and equipped but not much better than the Republican Guard or 4th MechDiv. Indeed you see a lot of their equipment is beat up and may be considered inferior (BMP-1s vis 2). They clearly have good leadership and staff, otherwise they would not be able to run around as a fire brigade but they also have an effective training and replacement cadre.

 

Militaries wishing to maximize their return on investment would do well to study the lessons paid for so expensively in blood and treasure by others. If you see someone that says that NATO has nothing to learn from the Syrian conflict, I can only heartily recommend him or her  to be SACEUR.


  • 0

#19 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,205 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 10 November 2017 - 0649 AM

Simon, I completely accept your assessment. The fact remains, however, that they are fighting a particular kind of war with its own tempo, geography, culture, RoE etc. Some of this will be applicable to Western armies in some situations. Some of it will not be. The idea of a powered JDAM launched from a truck has a lot of merit for this situation IMHO and others like it, IMHO, and would not cost a lot to implement.


  • 0

#20 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,579 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 10 November 2017 - 0736 AM

There is such a project, tho.

 

http://www.army-tech...ter-bomb-glsdb/


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users