@@RePlayBoy101 Mjölner is a cheaper and simpler solution, it is not as capable as the AMOS system however. It's still a good implementation though and adds a lot of capability compared to current systems.
The 120mm or 4.2" mortar are very reliable simple easy to fire mortar. It can be dismounted and fired on the ground. These semi-automatic mortars are accurate. The Haglunds system mounted in the CV90 has 2 mortar tubes my guess is to achieve a higher rate of fire. The advantage of manually fired mortars over semi-automatic mortars is the rate of fire. I would rater have a Fire-for-effect mission out in 30-60 seconds rather than wait on the semi-automatic mortar.
The CV90 system uses the Swedish digitized battle management platform C4I LSS Mark artillery command and control system. It can acquire target coordinates from many different types of electronic recon information equipment including tanks, mobile command centers, field personnel, sensors, drones and satellites.
Why waste so much money develop a new under carrier that is not as good as the CV90 hull.? US Army are kind of old thinking, it have to be made in US, otherwise US Army can't use it.! Why can't BAE start to produce CV 90 hull in USA and use that as a platform.?
@@herptek finland mounted it on wheeled vehicles, patria 6x6. Which is going to be common in europe. Users are Germany, Poland, Sweden, Finland and many more
Its how we keep a robust military production network. The more stuff you build yourself the better it keeps those companies modern and well-funded. And the US does use a lot of stuff made outside the country (BAE stuff is a British company, but also have a plant in Pennsylvania). The AMPV shares commonality with the Bradley and M109 Paladin, so it makes sense to use it instead of the CV90
@@RJM1011 all tough NEMO uses only one barel unlike AMOS that has two of them. Simce it was designed in away that it can lounch around 18 grenades to the air with differend trajector so they would land to the target area simultaniosly at same time since the system would count the trajector to each individual grenades shooting first one in the highest trajector and each grenades is little lower than the first shot would be so those grenades would land on the target area all at once. The system was evolved after Finland joined to Ottawa agreament and banned the use of infantry land mines to replace them. NEMO is basically same system useing only one barel of 120mm grenade instead of two like AMOS. But since all those companies are more or less same company since they all share the same systems. And since Finland was not member of NATO untill 4.4.2023 it could not sell these systems to NATO members before that by it self there need to be company that can to get them in to the NATO countries market.
Patria: When if is no option. Negotiations for the Nemo system between Patria and the U.S. Army began in 2014. You can find more information on Patria's website. Patria and BAE Systems companies are partners that have collaborated on various defense projects. For example, they jointly offered the AMV35 armored reconnaissance vehicle to the Australian Army for the Land 400 Phase 2 program. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xpdIAcqaYtE.html
This is a nice vehicle mounted system. Nice to see our military is watching the European use of the NEMO. With this system, you get a great mortar with a direct fire capability. I do wonder if 120mm vs 81mm mortar is no longer a use discussion. Can a 81mm meet or come close to weight on target with the 81mm compared the the 120mm? That is important if you can't interject the larger vehicle into the battle area. If it comes down to the M1 Grunt carrying mortar rounds, the 60mm was easier to issue out than a 81mm versus a heavier 120mm during light equipped unit operations.
BAE is provides the carrier and does the systems integration. Besides, Patria is mentioned up there, in the description. Let's not get overly nationalistic.
Nemo name came from finnish general Vilho Nenonen he was arty general who invented firecontrol system witch allow multiple mortar fire to same position.
These look very promising! Also, given the limitation of making millions of 155mm artillery shells, one might be able to more rapidly and cheaply scale up the manufacture of 120mm mortar rounds to help fill any gaps that might come from running low on 155mm rounds in all all out conflict such as the war in Ukraine. That said, these might need some anti UAV provisions as well.
In a recent statement and I suspect as a result of listening to Ukrainian advice the British Army is now moving to a 120mm replacement for the current 81mm. Previous thinking has been the 105mm light gun gives everything the 120mm mortar can plus more besides. I believe the 81mm mortars are to be given to the Royal Marines and Air assault units (paras) as with them weight is all. The remainder of the army will have both the 120mm and 105 light gun to support them. I further suspect BAE being a British entity it will with great interest British procuremment view the US trials as well as the Swedish Mjolner turret system. I think we can expect to see a Rheinmetall designed box feature these two systems for trial purposes onto the excellent Boxer chassis and maybe what should be the eventual excellent (Given the ammount of money thrown at the disaster to make it viable) Ajax chassis. Interesting to watch that one. I also reckon we might be seeing a throwback to the old ABBOT 105mm SPH being considered also again for the Boxer and/or Ajax. Also interesting to watch for any sign of that one. Standardization of NATO equipt and munitions just makes sense no matter who's making it. Doubt the US would agree on that one however.
Sir, maybe soon you must also put anti missile or drone capability, that is more able to counter modern warfare as we see on todays war in Ukraine or in Israel, more power to you.
I wonder how the Patria Nemo would perform if it were mounted on a 6x6 or 8x8 Amphibious Vehicle while crossing a deep water river like the Dnipro River in Ukraine?
5 месяцев назад
Says BAE but it is Patria? BAE vehicle with Patria turret? Seem better if Sweden had gone with NEMO or AMOS rather than the manual one on CV90. Kinda lame?
Indeed it is. The NEMO is the turret system installed in the patria vehicles. NEMO was designed to be the cheaper and more diverse version of AMOS. And it is becoming a success i think.
@@RJM1011 BAE Systems plc is a British multinational aerospace, defence and information security company, based in London, England.[4][5] It is the biggest manufacturer in Britain as of 2017.[6] It is the largest defence contractor in Europe[7] and the seventh-largest in the world based on applicable 2021 revenues.[8] Its largest operations are in the United Kingdom and in the United States, where its BAE Systems Inc. subsidiary is one of the six largest suppliers to the US Department of Defense.
Latest competition for this - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-B3AYJl9baIw.html I believe this has already been accepted into the Swedish inventory but could be wrong. IMHO this is better option. Take note of the price.
Wait what??? They always strive to equip the men with the best possible gear??? LOL>.....No sir, its lowest bidder for those contracts. You can find dozens of articles wherein soldiers say they arent properly equipped or have had to fund their own gear....
Air conditioning 😮... If this would have been "Made in Russia" it would have a distillery, that was capable of making 1, 1/2 liter of Moonshine in about 2 hours...
USA have been using the M 113 for a long time so it must clearly be the cheapest option. The Swedes just think that CV 90 is the best in the world. Hubris everything is relative!
Well ,...imagine 40 or 50 as the top layer in a container ship, "modular firepower" the Pentigoners are heavy pants excited for it. A much better fiasco than those terrible uniforms. It's the armed sea can to defend the drone bases, and laundry units : we need 2000 before the next fiscal budget !
The comment " they always strive to equip soldiers with the best possible gear" is the biggest lie I ever heard. Is that why soldiers had to practically strike to get body armor or humvees that would not blow up if you dropped a grenade by them? Or was it the best gear when they issued m16s in Vietnam that jammed every few rounds?
For the most part the U.S. Military has always been the best equipped. Have they made mistakes absolutely, it takes time in the middle of a war to turn the giant ship that is the DOJ. Look at the loses in Afghanistan over 20 years? Under 15k, Russia is losing more soldiers every month.
why a new one, the Dragonfly was presented to the US army years ago, modified Stryker, very effective. Also, the Swedes have the AMOS which is what this is, except the AMOS is twin barelled. Duplicated effort.
FROM NOW ON, IF THESE WEAPON SYSTEM DON'T HAVE ANTI DRONE TECHNOLOGY TO DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM KAMIKAZE STYLE WEAPONS, IS SIMPLY A COFFIN WITH WHEELS AND WORST IF IT IS A CONTAINER, UKRAINE DEMONSTRATED HOW A CHEAP DRONE CAN CAUSE SUCH DEVASTATING ATTACK. TANKS, IFVs and just about every type of combat vehicle have to be equipped with anti drone defense capabilities. as simple as that.
Well those drones destroy only russian made junk. They can stop these from moving but destroying is another story. Also there is other weapon systems around these if west goes to war. You dont put one of these in a open field alone. Use your head mate.
Are we not taking notes on the battles and wars that are taking place today??? What about incoming projectiles like drones, rockets not even a smoke screen or automatic machine gun for close protection of the vehicle along with the others protecting it!!! But if the pentagon likes it, well then I love it!!!
Not every single peice of equipment needs integrated drone protection. There are other systems specifically for that role that will be used in conjunction with other vehicles.
until your fancy drones get taken out by a little thing called ELECTRONIC WARFARE all of this vehicles electronics are inside it and shielded against e.w. then you'd suddenly want this mobile shoot on the move accurate long range mortar vehicle dropping deadly 120mm explosives on your enemies😲
Memo container is doome for two reasons 1)you cannot brew a cuppa for the lads in between fire missions v.poor humint design there and 2) no anti drone capability so once off loaded it’s a sitting duck, boom.
You miss the point. The containers will be off loaded in a semi-permanent location, like a FOB or HQ. There will almost certainly be other systems there for UAV protection.
There was a "canister" round which is like a giant shotgun shell..this with a sensor/guidance package would be useful against aircraft and drones, and would be very effective in direct fire against personnel.
There's already a 20mm Gatling gun mounted they same type of way which has been in use for years it's shot down many drones and other in Iraq and other places.
THE CONTAINER SYSTEM SHOULD HAVE MUTLI- SIGHT SYSTEMS AND A SMALL ARMS WEAPON TURRET FOR A CLOSE DEFENCE SYSTEM WITH AN M-134 DILLION IN A TURRET WITH HARD FEED LINKS TO THE WEAPON IN 7.62MM NATO CALIBER. THEN YOU MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING?
First of all.. Your capslock button needs fixin. and thse vehicles are not supposed to drive around in the front line.. They mainly shoot from behind the line and can use direct fire if needed. also they are always escorted with other systems to keep them safe. Wake up buddy.
