Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 1/10/2003 5:29:18 PM EST
This 155mm self-propelled artillery piece is amazing. It is (and likely will remain) a prototype. - aircraft type cockpit with three cannoneers sitting side by side with individual computer controls - robotic loading of both shells and powder - 8-12 rounds per minute ROF - liquid radiator cooled chamber/barrel to allow this high ROF - computer syncronized fire controls including the ability to have one artillery piece put 8 rounds in the air for a syncronized impact - max range of 33 miles While I was in the USAR they were testing the Paladin, which is apparently an outstanding piece. [url]http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m109a6.htm[/url] Here's a link to the Crusader: [url]http://www.army-technology.com/projects/crusader/[/url] Apparently the Crusader has been killed [:(]: [url]http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/sasia/afghan/text/0519rmfd.htm[/url] If anyone has any other info about these systems I'd love to hear about it. Oooosha! Artillery!
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:36:27 PM EST
Yeah, the 'new' army only likes light vehicles, the restriction being able to fit three of them in a C-17. Bye bye main battle tanks since they don't make the weight cut, bye bye artilery. If you ask me the army isn't designing vehicles to fight, they are desgining vehicles that can get to *insert distant country here* in 12 hours.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:39:10 PM EST
The end of the Soviet Union killed a lot of cool toys. But, I guess they're the tools, not the [i]reason[/i]. I went active in 1988, just as MLRS and some tube improvements were coming on line. I was focused on missiles/rockets (Lance and MLRS) the entire time. Missiles that changed direction as they broke above the horizon in order to fool radar, GPS, etc. The Crusader was technologically cool, but it's time (heavy, slow, non-deployable) is past.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:41:05 PM EST
Another kewl thing I forgot to mention about the Crusader is that it was origionally going to use liquid propellant to propel the rounds, the idea being you could carry alot more rounds and have easier control over the size of the charges. The system worked by using a hypergloic bi-propellant that instantly ignited on contact with each other. The rounds were automatically feed into the gun tube, and behind it in the combustion chamber were two fuel sprayers that would spray the propper amount of propellant and bang, off goes the round. That system was shevled during one of the early budget cuts, so they went back to a more conventional auto-loading system, and tender vehicle. I have a fealing that the Crusader will be one of those programs that gets resurected.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:52:36 PM EST
You can't tell me that artillery doesn't need it's "main battle piece." Sure, there will always be a use for mobile 105's. But there will also always be a use for self-propelled 155's. Maybe not in every conflict, but there will always be a need. Therefore development needs to continue. FWIW I don't know the full capability of the Paladin. We had self-propelled 155's that were muscle fed. But to cut off the next generation of self-propelled artillery just doens't make sense. After all, isn't artillery the infantry's best friend? Fighter/bombers run out of fuel, but artillery will always be there.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:56:51 PM EST
Oh, sure, there will always be the need for heavy tube artillery, but heavy equipment that's stored in place, like Germany was for so long, is not gonna happen. Deployability is key. If you can't get it to the battle, what good is it. A version of the M109XX will be around for a while, because it's proven and upgradeable (Paladin and follow on improvements). The Crusader was just too big.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:02:55 PM EST
Originally Posted By SJSAMPLE: .... A version of the M109XX will be around for a while, because it's proven and upgradeable (Paladin and follow on improvements). The Crusader was just too big.
View Quote
Is the Crusader [i]that[/i] much bigger/heavier than Paladin?
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:11:16 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 6:15:48 PM EST by Phil_in_Seattle]
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:25:33 PM EST
The cancellation of the Crusader is the result of the political shift in powers and diverting dollars from this program into the star wars defense system. No money is being saved here, contrary what they are leading people to believe. It is the Air Force fighting the Army for DOD budget money. Nothing new. Prior to the Crusader there was the liquid propellent gun that was more trouble that it was worth. That was also cancelled. In addition to the self propelled, there are also the towed Howitzers. You have the standard 198? carriage and some other type. There is also a 155mm light weight towed Howitzer( British) being tested... pause while I finish laughing.... the Bradley and Sgt. York keep coming to mind here. Overall, I keep holding optimism for a sequel to "The Pentagon Wars". There certainly is enough material out there for it. Enough to surpass even the Rocky series.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:39:06 PM EST
I can't remember the tonnage (and I'm too drunk for a Google search [;)]), but I believe it's a LOT bigger. All in all, the Crusader will probably become a de-facto "technology demonstrater' (albiet an extremely expensive one). Significant portions of the technology will find its way into future (lighter) systems.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 7:25:07 PM EST
Originally Posted By SJSAMPLE: .... All in all, the Crusader will probably become a de-facto "technology demonstrater' (albiet an extremely expensive one). Significant portions of the technology will find its way into future (lighter) systems.
View Quote
Now I understand your point. But computerized control of a syncronized impact of 8 rounds from one gun is very impressive. (Humans can probably do 3 rounds simultaneous impact.) We will need this type of heavy artillery in our next major ground engagement.
Top Top