autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons, particularly in larger calibres (12.7+mm).

  • 3174
    MEMBERS
  • 180388
    MESSAGES
  • 39
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Stryker 30 mm vs 105 mm?    Army Guns 20+mm

Started 29-Sep by autogun; 3233 views.
autogun

From: autogun

5-Oct

The NEMO, along with other turreted mortars, is dual purpose: it is designed and advertised as suitable for both direct and indirect fire support, whatever the tactical situation demands.

A tank gun is single purpose: better at direct fire, but incapable of effective indirect fire, therefore less versatile.

I have reached about my limit for answering basically the same points with the same response.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

6-Oct

Yep, the mortars can be used for direct fire:

https://youtu.be/jl-h3ZT9le0?t=364

I don't see what the issue is; against anything other then a Tank, a point detonating delay direct shot from a 120mm mortar would be devastating. 

From FM 90-10-1

http://www.wedophones.com/Manuals/Military/united_states_army_fm_90-10x1%20-%2012_may_1993%20-%20part06.pdf

  • Edited 06 October 2020 3:21  by  gatnerd
Red7272

From: Red7272

6-Oct

gatnerd said:

Yep, the mortars can be used for direct fire:

The question is why use a 8 million dollar vehicle with practically no protection for shooting at a house if you have alternatives? There is a reason literally no one does it.

poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

6-Oct

guided mortar munitions are cheaper, since they need less acceleration protection

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

6-Oct

Red7272 said:

The question is why use a 8 million dollar vehicle with practically no protection for shooting at a house if you have alternatives? There is a reason literally no one does it.

I don't really see the issue.

We're currently using Strykers with 30mm and 105mm cannons for direct fire.

Whats really changed then if instead, it uses 120mm for direct fire, especially since it adds the incredibly useful indirect fire capability as well?

Stryker AMOS could easily replace both the 105mm Stryker as well as the shitty Stryker Mortar carrier:

  • Edited 06 October 2020 4:47  by  gatnerd
RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

6-Oct

Red7272 said...

The question is why use a 8 million dollar vehicle with practically no protection for shooting at a house if you have alternatives?

If you are quite happy to do it with a 30mm or 105 mm why should a turreted mortar be any different? 

 

Red7272 said...

There is a reason literally no one does it.

Is that reason that literally no-one has the capability/opportunity yet?

 

 

Red7272

From: Red7272

6-Oct

RovingPedant said:

Is that reason that literally no-one has the capability/opportunity yet?

Russia has hundreds of them and 4 decades experience. China is more recent but yeah, Hundreds of them and likewise direct fire is self defence only.  Direct is entirely a marketing exercise at this point.

RovingPedant said:

If you are quite happy to do it with a 30mm or 105 mm why should a turreted mortar be any different? 

The 30 mm is sitting on the company transport so why not. Bringing in a much more expensive vehicle with much more limited availability and a highly trained crew who do not specialise in direct fire seems a waste. Just get them to shoot indirect from wherever they are. It might happen - I've seen video of a GRAD BM-21 being fired direct across a valley - but it's just not a viable solution when there are 30 mm to do the same job. 

TOP