Artillery provides the heavy firepower of modern land warfare. Visit the US Army's artillery center at Ft. Sill, Oklahoma to see a demonstration of the awesome firepower of today's artillery. www.defencetalk.com Military Channel
I love this Firepower series. It is a fast provider of basic information for anybody who is interested in military technology and tactics. Great job Defense talk for putting it on YT..
1. Thanks for the interesting video. 2. I am German. 3. Thank you for freeing us from this dictator Hitler in WWII. 4. I am glad that we are together in NATO and I hope we continue working together in a good way in the 21st century. 5. Sadly the Panzerhaubitze 2000 is not mentioned which is replacing our old M109s. Best Regards&Happy New Year!
Materials and supplies via lend-lease were a huge part of the American effort in the war. A lot of the Allies went broke buying arms from the U.S. prior to lend-lease, The British finally paid it off in 2006. There was not much applicable lend/lease as of the end of Oct, 1940 when the Germans lost the battle of Battle of Britain and turned on the USSR. As of early Dec 1941 the USSR had the Germans in retreat prior to the majority of lend-lease. Those were pivotal events in the war.
Back in the mid 70's and early 80's the M109 terrorised the battlefield. It was a tank destroyer and would effectively renovate any urban local.Once our gun area was effectively surveyed.We could drop rounds on a dime.Same with the M105 and pack howitzer.But on todays battlefield you have seconds to get rounds down range not minutes.On todays battlefield we'd have gotten our asses sorely kicked.
The first world war saw some of the most terrifying artillery barrages in human history. I would NOT want to be in a trench during the first world war, and have thousands of shells landing all around me.. Fuck man, that is absolute shell shock.
Man I miss the 2-17th, I was a 109 mechanic with them in Korea from 02-04. Looks like most of the footage is from Ft Sill in OK after they left Korea for Iraq. I was in 2-5th at Ft sill after Korea so I was probably there when this was filmed when they became a training battalion.
i was a crew chief on a M109 ..we had the old M548 as a ammo carrier ..maybe thats why my back is so fucked up now . i wasnt always a chief . chief or not you "Humped " ammo ...good times in Germany & FT Sill blowing shit up ..King of Battle .steel on target ! still love the smell of burnt powder .they ought to make a mens colonge that smells like that .
101st and 82nd are Airborne Divisions, Air Assult is a training program teaching GIs about sling load operations for different types of equipment and vehicles and repelling from different types of aircrafts 101st Airborn/Air Assult is the location for this training. 82nd provides Airborne training schools but both are Airborne Divisions. I am not Airborne but I am Air Assult qualified. Qualified to display the Air Assult badge on my uniform. Some people don't know what they are talking about.
The 101st Airborne Division is an Air Assault Division. It has no Airborne assets or slots. Why it is still called an airborne unit, I can not say. But, as a current member of the 101st, I can tell you with certainty, it is airborne in name alone. All training, exercises and planning are based around the ability to quickly and easily move units via helicopter. Which is what Air Assault is based on.
One huge difference between the two was that the German Ferdinand turret was a mostly rigid metal box that could hardly traverse at all. To point the tube the entire gun had to be moved. A distinct disadvantage in hot combat, especially if you lost a track. It was cumbersome and frequently broke down. It had the fearsome 88mm gun and also had the MG34 for defense. Yes, at first glance they do look similar, but functionally they are not. Palladin, with years more innovative ideas, rules. JOHN
"Each MLRS launcher is equiped with 12 rockets, the rockets are armed with 644 submunition grenades. A single rocket from a MLRS can devastate an area the size of a football field." Isn't this a WMD?
Btw, if found this interresting piece of info: ''The howitzer does not have a multiple round simultaneous impact (MRSI) capability because firing multiple rounds too quickly can overheat the tube.'' With the howitzer they mean the PIM. You working on it, I guess you know what it means. So either you were wrong or I'm not getting the article I took the quote from.
Another huge difference is the date of first use. The M109A6 Paladin was first used in 1992. The Ferdinand in 1943. The Paladin is outdated however. Though the M109A6 has a very good and reliable system the new PzH2000 is far better on many points. Faster rate of fire (autoloader), range !56! km (M109A6 40 km max with special rocket ammo, 20 km normal shell), better armor, better mobility and can withstand chemical attacks.
The USA looks like good guys because we are. Courtesy of America the world saw an end to WWII and peace in Europe through most of the 20th century. Courtesy of America more people are free in the middle east than in time during my lifetime. The USA is one of the most free countries in the world and we strive to help others achieve that same freedom. We're not perfect but we try to help people so that they can choose their own destiny.
Easy and the Paladin can do the same thing. You fire one high angle round, meaning the tube is at a steep angle upwards. You fire that with a strong charge to give it max air time, you then fire a second round at a lower angle than the first with a slightly less charge for less hang time and the third is at an even lower angle with slightly less charge than previous. If done right, all 3 rounds should splash at about the same time. FDC does all of the data for this and is normally AMC missions.
Good question, i was interested in that too. I don't think it is considered artillery, probably just considered a missile. Like those ones that were used in libya recently.
It's being developed for a coupple of different armys, not just the U.S army onb a 50/50 basis by United States-based Raytheon Missile Systemsand the Swedish BAE Systems Bofors . It also came into service in 07 so 'being developed' is a little off. I'd say this show is kinda old too so that probably explains it.
Velocity remains the same, but when fired at a great angle, the time it takes for a shall to hit the same spot as 1 shall that's fired at a very low angle is the same. Shoot a rubber band up in the air, slightly towards the target and shoot one directly at the target (slight curve). It's about the same. It's why the MRSI capability does have limited range. The south african Denel G6-52 has a 25km range. The German Phz2000 a 17km range. With standard rounds in "normal mode" it can reach 30km.
And yet artillery proved ineffective against the trenches... They literally wore out several gunbarrels to get one kill. After years of fighting, it was the tanks, and the infantry that they protected that ended the stalemate. 6000 years of war, tanks, chariots, elephants, and its still the poor bloody infantry that win or lose the wars. But still, a barrage lasting a week without pause, that drives men crazy, literally.
A modern hi-tech artillery teams have alot of pieces (control center, radars, artillery pieces themselves) which must work in unison . . . to me it seems like alot of stuff to shoot at or jam electronically, henceforth, rendering it useless.
No, the Paladin can not do the same thing. The Crusader program was slated to have MRSI capability but it was canceled. Weapons that do have MRSI capability: Denel G6-52, Panzerhaubitze 2000 (5 rounds), ShKH Zuzana 2, the Archer and the AMOS mortar system.
We can fire a maximum of 4 rounds per minute for 3 minutes. It doesnt take a minute to get 3 rounds out of the tube if we have the proper missions. Like any weapon system in the world, firing too quickly can over heat any barrel. But with 4 rounds per minute for 3 minutes we have the capability.
I was talking about the cold war! How actually "brave" the individual soldiers were, I have varied impressions of. :P And who did the most work is also hard to tell. There was many important battles. Even the resistance in my own country might have stopped the Nazis from getting nuclear weapons, with one of their historical sabotage missions! Nazis with nukes would have drastically changed the war. Your english is excused.
Well thanks for the explenation. Everyone deserves respect, until the person abuses it. That's how we do it, very simple. I didn't bash your job, you were the one who started insulting. So please, stop trying to make this look right for yourself.
When executing MRSI the ranges are 25km and 17km. When firing without that special tactic, the Phz can reach 30km. With special rounds up to 40km. You don't read, do you? We work in km.
I know what you said. Just do the maths, if more men are killed in Europe, how did the US fight the most in the Pacific? Plus, in the Pacific, the main US Force was US Marines and US Navy. In Europe, US Army and US Air Force. The Army is the largest branch in the US Military, and the Air Force is not small either. That means more US soldiers fought in Europe than in the Pacific.
João P. Barata In WWII there was no US Air Force. It was the US Army Air Corps which means it was part of the Army. The USAAC (United States Army Air Corps) was in both the European and Pacific theaters. So in the Pacific we had the Marines, the Army, and the Navy. In the European theater we had the Army and a small part of the Navy. Do the math.
Like the BRITISH in Ireland? Can you see my point of view? Why are we just walking around being TARGETS with limited rules of engagement that won't even let you chamber a round while every kid in sight is Viet Nam like leaping into your helicopter with a primed grenade! THIS "NO MISSION GOAL" style of occupation is STUPID and resulting in the demoralization we are experiencing at the present time! I was stationed in Germany for a Year(1975)driving a Duece+Half for the 3rd INF! I LOVED IT!
I don't know if you know this, but hitler actually was loved by his people, so how were they freed if they wanted him to start ww2 and create a german empire?
3:00 - You hear that games like Battlefield V? Remove any and all formed of artillery a player could've used I am telling you, planes and tanks are next
what if the panthers and tigers brought time for the Germans and they managed to re define the Ferdinand and that case another time will be brought for the German army think about it but they don't need to make a tech tree for the 88's sturmgeschutz is a succesful, the Marder is also a succesful tank
I heard that the scandinavian archer artillery system can fire up to three rounds at different angles in order to hit a target simultaneously with those rounds. Could anyone here tell me how that is done? Obviously the velocity of the projectiles have to be different. so such a system can adjust the v0? On another issue: This is a clip about artillery systems and how they work, not about countries, so please stop arguing about politics and countries. It`s got nothing to do with the subject.
Germany won despite losing the war. Thanks to the Marshal Plan, Democracy and Freedom West Europe recovered and the EU is becoming a major power in the world. And I want to see another country that recovered from two catastrophic defeats like Germany did last century.
Because its not a program built into the gun. FDC runs the data and gives us three TOT missions and just calls it down that we need to be balls to the wall fast. Its easy to do its simple math not some high speed computer. And in "my Army", they do teach us respect to those who deserve. But when you go bashing my job telling the expert that he is wrong, then you lose all respect from me.
@Soirkloid9 In ten years with the guns I saw a lot of smashed fingers, crushed feet, blown out eardrums. Now & then a really serious mistake got someone killed. That was all in ordinary training. I combat a lot of people can get killed really fast.
cont. to the bitter end--even with defeat staring them in the face. The Americans and her allies did the same. I agree with you that Russia did more to defeat Germany than the other Allies. Germany lost well over 80% of her armed forces in the East, however, Russia had lots of help from American Lend Lease, etc. In terms of human cost, Russia lost more than any other nation. In all other aspects, Germany lost the most. As you know, or should know, "bravery" is a relative term. JOHN
"101st air assault division"...."82nd airborne division" THEY'RE THE SAME FUCKING THING THEY BOTH USE HELICOPTERS OR AC130's TO ENTER COMBAT AND IN WORLD WAR TWO THEY PRACTICALLY FOUGHT THE SAME BATTLES THE SAME WAY!
Don't reply to the guy who disagrees with me. They just love being hipsters and criticise America as much as possible, blaming my views on medias and propaganda.
