Dedicated self propelled mortar carriers. Y/n? Explain your answer.
>>30369670
Yes, because fuck carrying that thing around and having to dig a mortar-pit for it.
No, because contrarian.
/thread
>>30369670
Question
How does this not fuck the suspension of a wheeled vehicle really fast
they should put them in helicopters so they can launch it by nap of the earth to get quick kills
>>30369670
Integrate SPHs at division level
Integrate SPMs at regiment level
Yes
>>30369862
You have to explain your answer
>>30369867
What's there to explain? If it makes sense for a howitzer, it would make sense for a mortar as well
Yes, but just no on the Stryker platform.
The Cav squadron I was assigned to had a bunch of them, and on our NTC rotation they were actually knocking out more OPFOR armored vehicles than MGSs were.
>>30369715
The pressure is divided among the wheels and it would be like hitting a bump everytime you fired so the wear and tear wouldnt be that bad.
>>30369670
Yes, it will provide fast and effective indirect fire support to complement the direct fire support from MBT's and the indirect fire support from MRLS's and SPG/H's.
Also it means that your mortar teams are motorized or even mechanized which means that advances are even faster and allows for shoot and scoot capabilities, making enemy counter battery fire much less effective.
>>30369715
Probably the same way the 20 tons of steel passively sitting on it doesn't.
>>30369715
Question
How long did it take you to figure how to not choke on your fucking tongue when you speak?
God dammit man, just think about the question before you ask.
>>30369925
How was that scored? What kinds of rounds were they "firing"?
I thought a HE kill on a AFV would require a direct hit, and you can't lasertag indirect fire.
>>30369670
only if the vehicle is tiny and air deployable
>>30369670
Definitely.
Also, we need AMOS. Rapid, computer-aimed fire, allowing tricks like MRSI across a grid square.
>>30369670
yes, because pic related: that's a 120mm mortar, the damn thing itself weighs 280kg. Not pounds, kilograms, and that's only the combined weigh of the pieces that make up the mortar when it's in operation, when in transportation there's another 220kg of additional shit that comes with it, you haul that thing from A to B and ask again if dedicated self-propelled mortar carriers are necessary.
>>30369670
Yes. For a Mechanised Brigade it's a very valuable means to get fast and mobile light artillery without needing actual artillery (howitzers, rocket or missile artillery).
So, yes, 2 to 4 per regiment, if resources are limited.
I'd have them on tracked vehicles.
>>30370127
How many mortar rounds do a 'battery' normally carry?
Counting supply vehicles?
>>30370153
Counting supply vehicles? As much as you can carry.
For example 1 VCTM only (argentine SPM based on the TAM platform, which is based on the Marder platform), carries about 88 120mm mortar rounds.
With dedicated supply vehicles you cound carry far more.
>>30369670
Stand back guys. I got this.
>>30370153
dunno, I am in a rifle company, also mortars are organized in platoons (81mm mortars) or companies (120mm mortars), not batteries, in any case, a mortar company's "daily ration" would be counted in hundreds..
>>30369670
I'd want to see them able to be automated. Able to use GPS coordinates or range and bearing to be quickly plugged in to allow a reduced crew requirement to be able to put warhead on heads.
>>30369670
Hell yes. Mortars are some of the most dangerous weapons on the battlefield. Not only that, but they have great utility as well. Firing a flare or smoke round gives you capabilities you could not otherwise have. Having self propelled mortars means you can have a bigger mortar and carry more rounds for it, not to mention it being more mobile. This is half of what makes the Stryker so great, every infantry company has two 120mm mortars organic to it. For those that don't know, that's a hell of a lot of firepower for that level. Lots of boom. You have a problem location, you have your mortars open up on it. Extremely responsive because they're organic to the company.
>>30370201
mfw FDF only bought 12...
>>30369670
>Dedicated self propelled mortar carriers. Y/n? Explain your answer.
Yes, because mobility and protection but they ought to be breach loading automatic mortars.
>>30370201
Are those fuckin' twin-linked bolters on top of that thing?
>>30370300
No, those are mortars.
>>30370272
>2x mobile 120mm mortars per company
Dick = hard
>>30370300
they are a pair of breech-loaded 120mm mortars in a rotating turret, the system has all kinds of fun features, which I can't really say much about as I don't know much more than I have already said, and I as could be wrong about the things I know of but haven't mentioned, I'll leave it at that.
>>30369772
WTF? No. SPMs are integrated at the Company level and SPHs are integrated at the Brigade level.
I cant think of a standing army that has true regiments and divisions that are autonomous...THe Russians dont even do it anymore.
>>30369925
Nah, it has a blast radius of about 25-50 meters depending on the terrain you hit and how its fuzed. Plus those "lawn mower blades" of shrapnel could fuck up some road wheel, treads and engine housings. One has some play with how close one has to go. Also the digital fire control systems are pretty nice. If you have an LRAS3 or other system, you can precise coordinates to 1m2. With the Mk1 eyeball, one can be on target in probably 2 rounds.
>>30370277
Those things are ungodly inaccurate.
>>30369670
Yes and no. They have their place, but don't accomplish too much more than air and arty.
Waste of money
What advantage does it have over carrying your mortars in a light vehicle, if you have to have them mounted?
None. Your mortar teams shouldn't need armor or ever come under direct fire unless you're in a bad spot. It's a waste of money and fuel.
>>30370286
I was thinking more along the same lines as the ones above, when its on the move it looks like any other eight wheeled vehicle.
>>30370485
a 120mm mortar does about the same amount of damage as a 155mm howitzer, if not more, the difference is a 120mm mortar is more mobile.
>>30370537
This is correct, somewhat. 120mm does have a better blast pattern than 155mm, but less range and uh...options
>>30370485
We're talking about the purpose of mounting mortars on vehicles, not that mortars are useless.
If you think that mortars save the same purpose as artillery and air support you are fucking retard. So fucking stupid it makes me angry.
The function of mortars is to have indirect fire support that is much more mobile and able to set up quickly. It is cheaper and more versatile than dedicated artillery, WAY cheaper than air support and also has the benefit of being closer in the chain of command. With artillery you usually have to talk to a different batallion, while mortars will often be in the same company. If you don't know what that means then you can fuck off and stop talking about military matters.
>>30370505
see
>>30370127
that's practically unarmored, is barely slowed down by marshes and/or deep snow, and the mortar isn't intergated into the vehicle so if you want you could just remove it and carry it where you want (though if you willingly remove the 280kg mortar to carry it into a position when it's not necessary you are too crazy to be allowed anywhere near firearms, left alone mortars...)
>>30370569
Whoa, somebody's mad.
I'll admit, I have a bias against Strykers with mortars because I hate Strykers.
>>30369925
>Cav squadron
>MGS
uh
Should make a 155mm mortar too
The range advantage for howitzers is lost due to the fact it has less explosive in it, costs an order of magnitude more, and takes way more men to operate.
In a pinch you could fire standard 155mm howitzer rounds out of a 155mm breach loading mortar
>>30370880
I was in a Stryker BDE that had MGSs assigned to infantry BNs as support weapons.
>>30370070
I don't know, I wasn't one of the Scout OC's.
That is what I heard at least.
>>30370937
It was more of the fact that MGS are assigned to rifle companies, not cavalry.
>>30370070
not sure how US military does things, but FDF's "lasertag" has a GPS locator on each vest & when indirect fire is simulated, a computer calculates exact coordinates for each round in a 100m x 100m box & anyone who's wearing one of those vests within the blast radius of a simulated round is killed or wounded.
>>30369895
It some ways it makes a lot more sense for a mortar, as they operate closer to contact and can have to displace very quickly in the face of counterbattery fire.
Howitzers can be put in place by a prime mover and put in a relatively safe fire-base.
>>30370733
Then you have no clue of the advantages the Stryker infantry company has over a leg infantry company.
>>30371076
>Howitzers can be put in place by a prime mover and put in a relatively safe fire-base.
Not against any peer level opponent who can put counter battery fire on them faster than they can pack up & move
>>30370127
Nobody's talking about carrying around a 120mm. 81mm are already enough to make you try to remember why you didn't become an assault-man that only has to haul a nice, light 110 pounds of bullshit.
The 60mm mortar remains a great way to provide dismounted infantry their very own baby artillery, those don't have to be put on a truck.
>>30371023
addition: FDF has laser tag units to be fitted on armoured vehicles as well & naturally there are also AT -simulators (dummy M72 LAW, APILAS and NLAW launchers with a laser and speaker telling the operator where the rocket/missile hit) that are compatible with the system as well.
>>30371121
the mortars carried in dedicated vehicles aren't going to be 81mm, now are they?
>>30371119
Yeah, that's more an asymmetrical warfare assumption then symmetrical warfare assumption.
>>30369670
Of course
>>30370611
Hush now anon, you do not know of the super sikrit sweish armor known as
>tarpaulin
And
>addition armor MK.1 Johansson
Isn't the point of mortars to give Artillery support to non-mechanized/light infantry?
>>30371462
It's just to give low down units some indirect fire support. This is in addition to those larger ones farther back. They're complementary.
>>30369670
It's a very technical and practical solution to weight and transportation issues normally associated with mortars, so yes.
However, it depends on the vehicle in question they you're modifying. If you're using the Stryker platform like in your pic, wouldn't it be more practical to simply use the variant with the M68 105mm gun? Outside of using the arc to place the ordnance over adverse terrain. the 105mm gun has it beat on both time on target and on accuracy, as well as being more resistant to small arms fire due to the turret instead of the open top.
>>30371462
even a mechanized unit is not going to carry a howitzer around.
>>30371535
Concept is good, in reality its just more parts to maintain and more shit that can break.
>>30371568
>However, it depends on the vehicle in question they you're modifying. If you're using the Stryker platform like in your pic, wouldn't it be more practical to simply use the variant with the M68 105mm gun? Outside of using the arc to place the ordnance over adverse terrain. the 105mm gun has it beat on both time on target and on accuracy, as well as being more resistant to small arms fire due to the turret instead of the open top.
what is indirect fire vs direct fire?
>>30371656
I even said that mortars are better at getting ordnance over terrain. What are the benefits of indirect fire over direct fire when on open terrain? Serious question.
>>30371639
But you're wrong. Each stryker brigade brings 3 155mm towed artillery batteries
>>30371462
There is a build up from platoon level up to brigade level (and now divisional) in firepower. Platoons get 60mm. Company scales up to 81mm. Battalion scales to 120mm. Then you get into field artillery at the brigade level with 155mm sustained fire teams.
>>30371648
But that's true of most new innovations.
Once upon a time Tanks broke down more often than they didn't, and planes used paper.
Now we have stealth bombers.
It's just a matter of waiting until technology and economy has advanced enough to support more advanced parts in vehicles.
>>30371713
Direct fire in open terrains means you are exposed directly to the enemy, even over a distance. Indirect you can do from a pit concealed from direct enemy counter-fire.
>>30371736
you bring mortars for company and platoon level firepower, and howitzer for battalion and above. It's not practical for a company level unit to carry their own howitzer.
>>30371713
indirect fire is still usable over closed terrain, direct fire not so much.
>>30370201
>correct answer
a wheeled, turreted 120mm SPMs in the battalion mortar platoon, one can dream
>>30371713
Open terrain isn't a thing. There is always terrain deviation and things to hide behind. Indirect fire can reach into defilades, behind obstacles. It can safely fire over the heads of your soldiers and hit farther than most direct fire weapons. It also lets you achieve certain effects otherwise impossible. Not to mention a lower velocity round means a smaller shell meaning more can be carried.
>>30371801
plus you can also hit enemies who are also in pits
>>30371814
Howitzers are not assigned to an infantry battalion. 81/120mm mortars are in the weapons company.
>>30370569
>It is cheaper and more versatile than dedicated artillery
mortars are dedicated artillery. you seem to be confused about something.
>>30370912
>The range advantage for howitzers is lost
Well, it's not lost if you actually have to hit your enemy at range. Which is often a desirable thing to do.
You could easily argue that the lack of range in a mortar is a disadvantage in the same manner.
It's best to have both if you can.
>>30371713
what if you're not on open terrain? serious question.
>>30370912
>In a pinch you could fire standard 155mm howitzer rounds out of a 155mm breach loading mortar
Nope. Well, not really. A 155 round is spin stabilized, it doesn't have fins.
So you -could- shoot one out of a smoothbore, it would be wildly inaccurate if you did so.
>>30371165
The only 81mm mortar carriers I know of is the Toyota Hi Lux: Middle East Limited Edition.
>>30369895
i has a question:
i was under the impression that what defines a mortar was how the projectile was dropped down the tube, and its own weight hitting a pin is what fires it. wouldn't a breech-loaded mortar just be a howitzer??
picture unrelated to post content.
>>30372164
in other words the same guys who think pic related is a good idea
>>30372231
as i understand it it's more to do with trajectory and the type of round (fin stabilized bomb rather than spin/velocity stabilised shell).
>>30372231
>>30372345
Mortars fire fin-stabilized bombs out of smooth bore tubes at comparatively low pressure. The bombs are thin and hold proportionally more explosive then a spin-stabilized howitzer round fired from a rifled barrel.
This is why a 12cm mortar has explosive power greater then a 15.5cm howitzer.
>>30371165
>>30372164
They do exist
see>>30369862
>>30372412
Well, 'did' might be more accurate. Dose anyone still have the M113's with 81's in service? I know the strykers carry them, but it's cargo, not mounted.
>>30371165
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNBFq-v32Ro
>>30370353
>>30370376
Features include a rapid-fire mode from a small ready magazine, which, along with its computerized aiming system (yes, there are manual backups in case in breaks), gives it full MRSI capability--a single vehicle can put something like 7 rounds TOT in any kind of dispersal pattern the fire control computer can be programmed with.
I'm not sure if it talks to anybody's GPS-guided rounds yet, though. MRSI with those would give you perfect, instantaneous coverage of a certain patch of terrain, every time.
>>30370912
Not really, the propulsive system for a mortar is completely different from that of a howitzer, requiring a different breach design (even for a breach-loaded mortar), different tube specifications, etc. There's just no point in trying to mix the two together; if there was, it would have been done back in WWI.
Artillery is for range; mortars are for volume fire. Yes, that's a bit too broad, but apart from some quibbles, that stereotype holds up pretty well.
>>30371856
To follow up on this guy, in addition to all of those advantages, arcing fire generally attacks the weakest point of any unit, infantry or afv--from above. Proximity fuses can do bad, bad things to large numbers of people out in the open.
>>30371878
No, he's just using the word "artillery" to refer to howitzers and rockets, as opposed to mortars. They may have almost-identical effects on the receiving end, but their employment is different enough to be considered separately.
>>30372231
It has to do more with where the propellant is stored, how it is released, and what the operating pressure is.
If you have a breach-loaded weapon that fires a single, whole round, with no separate propellant case (extra prop blocks or wedges wrapped around the fin section don't count for this) at low-medium pressures from a relatively thin-walled barrel, then you have a mortar.
If you have propellant that is entirely external to the shell, either loose in bags or contained within a larger cartridge that does *not* go downrange with the shell, and fires at higher pressures with a heavier barrel, you have a howitzer.
Of course, the Russians have made some oddball weapons over the years that blurred the lines between the two, but this should still be a good set of general guidelines for differentiating between the two.
>>30374129
So, each squad either has M-249+Javelin OR 2xM-240?
Very much yes. I believe the attached video says it all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O_CirtaJdA
>>30370201
>>30375280
I am kinda amazed that no-one has claimed that the people talking about Patria products in this thread are Patria's employees/paid by Patria to hype their products or some shit...
>>30375262
Do you know absolutely nothing about how things are organized? Open up a Field Manual! Seriously. You shouldn't be talking about military affairs if you don't know how they're organized, as organization plays a huge part in employment.
The Stryker Brigade Combat Team follows a triangular organization throughout its structure. This means that there are three maneuver elements in each level of unit above squad. The Rifle Platoon is made up of three rifle squads, a weapons squad, and the command element, not to mention vehicles.
Each rifle squad consists of 9 men. Two fireteams of 4 men each, and the squad leader. Each fireteam consists of the following- A Team Leader, an Automatic Rifleman with an M249, a Grenadier who has an M203 or M320, and a Rifleman. One fireteam's rifleman carries a Javelin, the other is the Squad Designated Marksman.
The Weapons Squad consists of two teams, each focused around a single M240.
Command element has your Platoon Leader, the attached medic, Forwards Observer, and RTO. Also the Platoon Sergeant, but now they want him commanding the platoon's vehicles, so he doesn't really count in there anymore.
Finally, since this is a Stryker Platoon, you have the Strykers themselves, each with a crew of two: a driver and a commander/gunner. There are four of them. One for each squad, with the weapons squad and the command element riding in the same vehicle.
>>30371851
Polandball reporting in
>>30376622
... if that is breech loaded, wouldn't that be called a howitzer?
>>30376633
>what is a breech loaded mortar
>>30372524
I think us Norwegians have them. M113's with a 120mm as primary and a 81mm as secondary. Or they might work like the Strykers that you mentioned.
We used to only have Bv206 with 81mm until a few years ago, then we went back to M113's for some reason
>>30376633
Mortars areall about dem trajectories
>>30369698
This. Holy shit.
>>30376447
Patria-shills? I dont think i've ever heard such a term thb
>>30369670
Nona, my favorite
the only mortar carrier with HEAT shell
>>30370201
too barrel isnot that cool
the real answer is full auto mortar
>>30373700
that thing look really shitty
here is the China 81mm mortar carrier the PCP 001
>>30371851
>>30376622
Russian have one too
>>30376633
no
and breech load mortar are faster, more reliable and make more sense self propelled mortar
>>30370275
Actually 18
>>30377303
meh, close enough...
>>30370040
kek
>>30376447
If they did, they'd be wrong. I posted the video of the mortar system mounted on the boat, and yet I work for BAE Systems not Patria.
>>30372278
To be fair, I think it's a good idea for them to use them, too.
>>30379215
d-dd-do you guys hire canadians with bachelors of nuclear engineering?
>>30375262
>So, each squad either has M-249+Javelin OR 2xM-240?
Plus one with a Carl Gustav now.
>>30377209
They usually show up when a thread argues about 8x8's.
>>30380664
Nope. I suggest you reread the press releases. It's not going to be squad level. It's platoon or company.
>>30380725
One per platoon, meaning one squad.
>>30380859
Ah, I misread what you said. You meant one squad out of a platoon rather than one man out of a squad. Carry on.
