>Mortar VS Artillery
Assuming roughly the same shell size, is there any benefit of using one over the other?
>>30205382
Yes.
>>30205382
>is there any benefit of using one over the other?
That's why they both exist.
>>30205417
>>30205443
Well I'm an ignoramus so can you tell me what they are?
>>30205448
Mortars can lob shells that are more compact into spaces that can't necessarily be reached by a lateral shot, like what conventional artillery does.
Artillery are bigger and heavier, but shoot a shell very far and pretty accurately.
Different situations call for different tools.
Would you use a chainsaw when you need a scalpel, or vice versa?
OP here.
I see stuff about a "Rounds per minute" on a Mortar and some seem pretty low.
What happens if a crew just kept loading rounds as fast as they could fire them into a mortar?
Loss of accuracy? Catastrophic failure?
>>30205382
Mortars are for dropping a shell from almost straight above at relatively close range. Think shooting over a building or hill.
Artillery is for shooting at much longer ranges, at a much lower trajectory.
>>30205519
>What happens if a crew just kept loading rounds as fast as they could fire them into a mortar?
The barrel will get really hot and the crew will need to take a break.
>>30205519
This
https://youtu.be/XEGM99I0piA
>>30205382
There are 3 types of artillery: mortars, howitzers, and guns. Mortars fire small explosive shells at very steep angles over short ranges. Howitzers fire a large shell at moderate angles over long distances. Guns fire moderate sized shot or shells at flat trajectories directly at the target.
Howitzers are what you think of when you think of artillery. Mortars fire shells of 80-120mm while howitzers fire larger shells of 150mm. You can't really compare them let alone try and use on in place of another.
>>30205558
Damn, what sort of mortar is that?
Looks like a captured M224.
Could that have simply been a booby trapped round?
>>30205587
>>30205558
Wrong. It was CBF, unrelated to the round, tube or operator.
>>30205649
CBF?
>>30205676
>>30205649
Yeah, what's cbf?
>>30205587
That's a soviet M1943 120mm mortar
>>30205382
The explosive size isn't the important factor here, it's the nature of the two sorts of indirect fire machinery.
For this I will be talking about US military doctrine, and referring to modern mortar and artillery systems. YES back in the middle ages they had great big siege mortars that were just gigantic, I'm not talking about those.
GENERALLY:
Mortars and mortar teams are organic to Infantry units. What this means is that they are very dynamic, an infantry commander is very likely to have mortar support. Why? Because GENERALLY mortars are human portable. Some poor fuckers are mortar men and literally each carry a part of the mortar system. Like a machine gun team. So even though mortars GENERALLY have less explosive yield and are GENERALLY able to put less rounds on target, they are available organically. In a military OPORD (how a mission will be carried out) the commander is assigned a certain amount of ordinance JUST FOR HIM. He doesn't need to ask anyone for it, it's his. So his mortars are very valuable to him.
Artillery is GENERALLY a whole separate unit with a whole separate mission. GENERALLY artillery is vehicle towed, or in some limited cases self-propelled, but is almost always more static in nature and providing artillery support for a whole bunch of missions in a very large area. As such artillery is GENERALLY larger and longer ranged than a mortar, it needs to be dug in and very accurate and able to touch an enemy a dozen miles away easily, reliably, and repeatably. So although artillery is GENERALLY able to put vastly more ordinance onto a target in a more reliable casualty causing manner, it has to support many missions and since there are a finite number of shells in existence, it's capabilities must be saved for high priority missions or situations. It is also not very dynamic, an infantry unit might have to push forward and capture and area BEFORE artillery support can be safely moved into that area and dug in.
>>30205742
Well spotted anon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120-PM-43_mortar
Fuck me sideways, it weights over half a tonne.
>>30205757
Useful information, thanks.
>>30205757
(2/2)
Finally, GENERALLY, mortars can fire at a very steep angle, so you might be able to get shells into a trench system fairly close to your position, whereas artillery GENERALLY fires with a more direct trajectory, so very deep fortifications like well dug trenches might be fairly immune to artillery, but very vulnerable to mortars.
In all these cases there are exceptions. YES there ARE gigantic mortars that are only vehicle transportable. YES there was that British artillery unit that broke their gun into parts and climbed a mountain with it. It GENERALLY mortars are desirable because of their low logistical footprint (you just need men to carry the damn thing) and the fact they are organic to Infantry units. Artillery is GENERALLY able to put more ordinance on a target in a more reliable and repeatable way. Allowing, for instance, for fortification reduction or creeping fore to allow for an advance. However, this comes at the cost of larger and logistically more costly guns, and some commanders may have very limited or no access to artillery resources.
>>30205786>>30205757
So what's the deal with those GPS guided shells?
I know how GPS works, but with shells?
>>30205833
Normal rounds are completely at the mercy of physics. Meaning tiny little things you can't really control like wind at various points along the shell's flight path, differences in humidity and air pressure along the path, and shit like that, call effect a shell, meaning no dumb arty system can ever really put a round exactly where you want it. Modern gun systems can get it super close, but you are still taking a CEP of dozens of meters in most cases.
A GPS guided shell can steer itself to a very specific point, even if fired in such a way that it normally would not land there. Now you shell has a CEP of only a few meters, drastically reducing the chance of friendly fire in a danger close scenario or collateral damage when targeting something near something else you really don't want to damage.
>>30205833
They work sort of like a JDAM. They have fins that deploy and the shell "glides" on these fins allowing it to correct course in mid-flight. It has its own little computer brain and GPS reciever, even laser guidance, and using smart engineer math can figure out how much to glide to hit the target. Essentially the use of these is to allow already in place artillery guns to fire incredibly accurate shots to reduce collateral damage while being less costly than an aircraft launched bomb of similar accuracy. Normal "dumb" shells will always have a place because they explode and are cheap, but especially in a war in civilian cities you need a smarter more accurate shell.
These are just the next evolution of the artillery concept in modern war, deliver ordinance in a very timely manner, in support of troops, and be able to deliver more ordinance than an aircraft while costing less logistically.
In this case the aircraft would be very dynamic, hitting just about anywhere for any mission, whereas the artillery would provide continuous and affordable support at the main line of effort.
>>30205907
>>30205882
Cool, thanks for that.
So one last question, what are the white "ring" things at the bottom of these shells? I see them on different rounds.
>>30205954
Those are the propellant charges. By changing the angle of the tube and the amount of charge behind the shell, you can get the shell to go where you want it. They are shaped the way they are so that they can easily be "clipped" onto the end of the shell.
>>30205954
Extra propellant.
>>30205979
>>30205983
So is there like the standard distance and you clip on more for every extra 50m or something like that?
>>30205382
Mortars are tow-able by a truck and offer quick indirect heavy fire support in intercity/sieges. The main trait of them is that they are smoothbore and do not really have the capability for greater distance precision strikes unless they have some sort of fin stabilization. Their advantage is that any mortar can be light mechanized for combat compared to field guns.
Artillery field guns need a gun frame, trails, spades and a solid foundation of dirt just so that the gun does not move while it fires a high velocity shell. A lot of meteorology and cartography to predict accuracy with a shorter minimum indirect fire range and longer time on target.
>>30206000
It all depends on what you are trying to do. You can decrease the range by increasing your angle, but this can also increase TOT, so you cut charge to decrease fight time. Or you can just cut the charge but this will cause a shallower AOA depending on tube orientation.
There is a lot of math that goes into getting your round to go where you want it, and there are a lot of things you can change to get it to do so.
>>30205382
Mortars do not have the range, power, or accuracy of howitzers, but are mechanically much simpler and more reliable - you can't really go wrong with what is essentially a tube on a baseplate.
What's more, the pressure generated inside a mortar's barrel is very low. This means they can fire cast-iron shells, which apart from being simpler and cheaper to produce, tend to fragment more densely as opposed to more expensive steel howitzer/gun shells, which are more solidly constructed.
Apart from that, you can't really compare mortars and howitzers and say one is better than the other. Which is why armies nowadays use them both.
Thanks for all the help guys, expanded my knowledge.
I wish civilians could own mortars
I dream of putting effective grouped mortar fire on a herd of sleeping piggies a few miles out and then walking through the mess of mortally wounded and dying piggies dispatching them with my sidearm one at a time.
>>30206028
>Mortars do not have the power
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/280_mm_mortar_M1939_(Br-5)
>>30206255
mmmm smells like summer edge. hope your mother wakes you up nice and early
>>30205382
Yes.
Due to the difference in angle, mortars hvae a better repartition of shrapnell (pic related). Besides, they tend to have a bigger explosive charge for a similar caliber.
However, they tend to be shorter ranged and the comparatively light shell and low velocity gives it worst penetration, meaning it's less usually less effective against entrenchments.
>>30206000
Theorically, by varying the angle and the amount of propellant, you can make i so all the rounds hit the ground simultaneously. Requires a well-trained crew and a lot of maths, though.
>>30205676
>>30205698
Not that anon, but counter-battery fire.
>Enemy uses radar to figure out what direction the shots are coming from
>uses similar math that you used to shoot at the enemy to plot a path for their own mortars/artillery pieces backwards towards the location your mortars or artillery are set up
>proceeds to skullfuck your fire base
>>30206028
>Accuracy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMOS
>>30205786
>YES there was that British artillery unit that broke their gun into parts and climbed a mountain with it.
Where can I find this story?
![Type_41_mountain_gun_-_packhorses[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/oY8KYTp.jpg "Type_41_mountain_gun_-_packhorses[1].jpg")
>>30207167
I know the french, italian and japanese are fond of mountain artillery. Pic related, type 41 gun carried on horses, for mountain trails.
>>30207116
>less effective against OHP
What is DLY in effect.
>>30207191
Which is why I said usually.
And please keep in mind that some of us weren't in the US, military, or both.
>>30205763
Is my sarcasm detector a bit wrong for going of here?
>>30206007
Rifled mortars are a thing, anon.
>>30207128
Literally backtracing because you dun goofed.
>>30207213
Bullshit. If you knew what you were talking about you'd know that.
>>30207247
You're a retard.
>>30205382
Being a mortarman sucks ass.
Whilst being in artillery is pure chocolate welfare.
Regards,
Trained to be a mortar-NCO until a long march caused stress fractures in my right tibia. Was made an office-NCO as a result.
>>30205562
In theory artillery have been divided into those three categories. However nowadays much of remaining field artillery around the world is actually what is technically a gun-howitzer - capable firing both low and usually issued with variety of shells that allow more versatile capability to different ranges.
>>30205676
Chicks before friends.
A 120mm mortar round usually has about the same ammount of explosive filler as a 155mm artillery round.
Artillery rounds travel faster and are inherrently much more accurate at any given range. The typical range for mortars are 0.5 - 10 km and 2 - 50 km for modern howitzers.
The main difference is however that mortars are fielded on company or battailon level and howitzers on regiment or brigade level.
>>30207293
Alright: Delayed fuze. Happy? Did I win my anonymous street cred back?
If I say Alpha-Mike, Nana, Lance-Patate, GV or BMJA to you, does it ring a bell? No? Then fuck off. I've been in briefings where the same acronym was used for two different things. That kind of elitist obfuscation serves nothing.
>>30207426
Thats a chick?
>>30205757
Mortar man here. Thank you for acknowledging how shitty the mortar life is. Had to carry 81s and 120s every time we moved FOBs in Afghanistan and a 60 when on patrol. Mountains are gay
Kandahar Province, Afghanistan 2013
2-22IN, 1BCT, 10th Mountain Division, US Army
Hey question on mortars?
Is there a one size fits all round or what?
can 81mm american mortar round fire in 82 soviet/russian?
120mm same question?
>Some poor fuckers are mortar men and literally each carry a part of the mortar system.
>>30206255
>I wish civilians could own mortars
You can. It's just the $200 tax stamp per explosive shell that fucks up the plans.
>>30207881
Soviet 82mm ammunition will probably not fit a 81mm mortar. 81mm American ammunition will probably fire from a 82mm mortar but I wouldnt want to be close to the gun when it is done.
Most western 120mm ammunition is compatible with most 120mm mortars. The AMOS/NEMO system uses different ammunition that is is sort of a mix between a regular mortar round and a fixed artillery shell.
>>30205519
Non stop warfare
>>30207999
Artillery and heavier mortars are pretty sweet though. Towed everywhere and lots of dakka.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyxzFVgz70M
>>30205519
Is this really so fucking hard to understand?
Just think of the logistics, range, accuracy, deployment, and other shit.
How far can an artillery base strike? How fast? Do they already have the area zero'd? How many guns? How easy is it to stockpile shells? Is the base in-danger of attack? Are the guns already busy?
Now apply those answers to mortars. Are the soldiers out of artillery range? How many shells do your heavy weapons carry around? (much much much much much less than an FOB) What type of shells do you have? What does the mission call for? What's the terrain? WIll your mortars have solid ground? Will they be able to zero? Can you resupply? How many mortars? How far do your heavy weapons have to lug that shit around?
>>30205562
modern artillery can not only fire at any fucking angle it wants, but it can fire at different angles to have it's shells all land at the same time.
>>30208400
It's manufacturers, not users, that publish rate of fire figures. And they don't care about logistics at all. The only thing taken into account is the wear of the weapon.
>>30208400
>tubestrokers leaving the wire
Oh pls inb4 they kicked doors with the 11s.
>>30208487
It's almost like COIN =/= actual warfare.
>>30207190
Wouldn't that just scare the horses and make for poor aim?
>>30205448
mortars go up and over shit better, but are all around more dangerous to use
artillery is safer and more accurate but isn't as nimble
>>30208487
uhhh I mean... the US and allies haven't been in a real war for a long ass time.
>>30208497
You're supposed to reassemble it before firing, and war horses are trained not to be too scared of loud noises.
During the napleonic war, you had the "tir à la prolonge", where you keep the horses coupled to the gun carriage, so you'd be able to relocate quickly.
>>30205506
What is going on in this picture?
If it was a planned space fight, you'd think they'd bring something other than knives and hatchets. Also, armor of some sort to protect against space shanks.
>>30209005
well if you're trying to take over the spaceship the last thing you want is to shoot it all to hell on accident right?
So clearly your sharpened tooth brush is the best weapon to use.
>>30209005
It's space, all you need to do is punch a hole in someones suit and its game over. Plus, projectiles might miss and go through a spacecraft.
>>30208318
>Soviet 82mm ammunition will probably not fit a 81mm mortar
apparently the vietcong used 82mm ammo in captured 81mm mortars.
kinda scary.
>>30208349
60mm mortar is what you could expect of a platoon-sized unit for fire support. Like the other guy said, it's a bitch to haul around but it's about the most portable piece of artillery you could carry for patrol
Heavier mortars are usually attached to bigger infantry unit (usually a battalion) while howitzers are belonged to entirely different unit
>>30209713
forgot pic
>>30208318
American 81mm was designed to also use german 8cm mortar rounds
>>30207864
Oh shit my nigga.
81 section sgt here, 2005-08
FDF uses three kinds of mortars. 81mm light mortar deployed in company level, 120mm heavy mortar in battalion level and 120mm AMOS deployed in Karelian Jaeger Brigade and other Mechanized Battlegroups.
3x81mm mortars in infantry company and 12x120mm heavy mortars in battalion form the backbone of indirect fire in company level thanks to their versatility.
Artillery is nowadays mainly D-30s in battlegroup level and 155 K 83 (and its newer variants) in more offensive battlegroups and in their own formations. Older Soviet 130mm and 152mm artillery is getting taken from service, but their will find their place in more second line artillery batteries.
Basically normal Regional Battlegroup (basically battalion reinforced with other units to be able to fight independently) has 12x81mm mortars in Jaeger Companies, 12x120mm mortars in Mortar Company in battalion and 12x122mm D-30s in battlegroup. So we have quite lot of organic indirect fire in our battlegroups. Then we of course have more artillery in Brigade level in Artillery Regiments and in other independent batteries.
Self-propelled artillery serves their role in Mechanized Battlegroups and rocket artillery is reserved for strategic use.
t. artillery reservist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3IabdfQ4kA
>>30205742
These things are so fucking OP in company of heroes
>>30210294
Thanks, that clears up a lot of the questions I was wondering about.
Isn't D-30 a bit light for towed artillery?
Why the lack of lack of self propelled artillery? Most modern militaries tend to have more self propelled than towed guns. Is it just a budget issue?
Sorry if these are dumb questions.
>>30207835
>le death and destruction from above meme
Our battalion was 60s on the company level, 81s on the battalion level. This was in an airborne unit
>>30210383
fuck
mortarspam
>>30210294
That is a hell of a lot of firepower for that level.
>>30210455
D-30 is perfect for basic towed artillery. It has enough range and punch to be useful against most targets. Only thing it is lacking is range, but its main job is tactical usage, that meaning pounding enemy forces near our own.
Yeah the reason why we have shit ton of towed artillery is literally money. We just don't have enough resources to maintain large fleet of SPGs.
>>30210769
Yes, yes it is.
best sounding mortar, that metal ding
>>30211376
>you will never ride the baseplate on that
>>30205558
why do they say the same thing every second? like, for every single thing they do.
>>30205506
Is the guy at center left wielding a spatula?
>>30207116
>Theorically, by varying the angle and the amount of propellant, you can make i so all the rounds hit the ground simultaneously. Requires a well-trained crew and a lot of maths, though.
Yeah, time-on-target. Not terribly difficult with modern fire-control computers, thankfully. Back in WWII it was a neat trick to manage that with fire from multiple batteries, they worked out the math and shit on mechanical calculators. In the modern era some self-propelled gun systems can actually do this *from a single fucking gun,* it alters the angle as it fires so the shells fired later can "catch up" with shells fired first and they all land around the same time. Some fuckin crazy shit.
>>30205698
cock and ball torture?
>>30207864
Thank you for your service
>>30210186
Thank you for your service
