What's new

Italy delivering surplus self-propelled howitzers to Pakistan Army

PA has evaluated some foreign offerings which includes this HE ERFB-BB ammo from a Slovakian company. Don't know about Vulcano.

155%20mm%20HE-ER-FB-BB_474_x_668.jpg


https://www.msm.sk/en/msm-group/zvs/ammunition/medium-and-big-caliber-ammunition/155-mm-ammunition/



You can say PA wants to buy as many Italy can sell.
But Slovakian options range is less than Volcano 42 km vs 70 km.
 
.
Last edited:
.
IA requirement can be fulfilled with tanks and truck MGS, so 100-150 tracked SPH is enough. Nowadays even towed artillery have very long ranges like ATAGS. PA doesn't have such capability. One should ask how these SPG will be used on cuz mountain, semi-desert terrains.

Self propelled artillery has been used successfully for decades in desert and semi-desert terrain. Two Gulf wars, Syria etc.


Mountains, what about Afghanistan?


The 155 SPG is potent in both types of terrain.
 
.
But Slovakian options range is less than Volcano 42 km vs 70 km.

Range is not the only consideration when buying new ammo. Army has huge requirements, desires local production; if that isn't possible, the supplier is asked to provide kits for assembly at POF.

Vulcano 155mm max range is 40km (for BER) and 60km (for GLR). The guided version is certainly impressive but may not be affordable for all.

Self propelled artillery has been used successfully for decades in desert and semi-desert terrain. Two Gulf wars, Syria etc.


Mountains, what about Afghanistan?


The 155 SPG is potent in both types of terrain.

PA has shut the door for new towed systems.
155mm wheeled SPH required for formations in GB/AJK and other areas.
 
.
PA has shut the door for new towed systems.
155mm wheeled SPH required for formations in GB/AJK and other areas.

They also have their own logistical issues as well i.e. the artillery has to be transported....Good luck with that in a theatre of war and in rough terrain.

Here's a post I read on a forum full of serving soliders and a guy from a US artillery unit talks about both;

Since I’ve served in both, I can sum it up as following:

When talking about the same caliber guns (155mm) and not some toys you can mount on a helicopter, self propelled is better in any aspect related to the mission: it moves faster, deploys faster, less sensitive to rough terrain, can be ready for fire faster, [usually] have better supporting devices such as gyroscopes and GPS, can relocate faster, can deploy in a better protected locations or in small and dense locations and it is basically better in any other parameter I can think of when it comes to conventional warfare which involves intense firing and moving.

So why use towed artillery, you ask?

Because everything I mentioned above comes with high cost:

  • Cost in developing and producing the self-propelled guns.
  • Cost of maintenance - 500hp+ diesel engines, complex hydraulics, wiring, Continuous track, skilled mechanics and technicians for all these sub-systems and other aspects which cost a fortune to maintain compared to towed guns.
  • Cost and long-term availability of parts which most are produced specifically for this type of vehicles, as opposed to towing trucks which can be easily replaced.
  • Cost of training - I can’t testify for every military in the world, but where I come from, properly training a team of self-propelled gun took 2 months while towed gun crew could be trained in 2–3 weeks, not to mention that engine-hours for training cost more in orders of magnitude. This also means a faster turn around time to replace missing men, if needed. On top of that, operating SP guns required special skills for each member of the crew, skills that you lost if you haven’t done it often enough (extremely important for reserve units). With towed units you simply have one team leader, one guy responsible for aiming and all the rest are performing roles which are easily refreshed after 1–2 hours in the field.
I’m sure there are some things I missed. The bottom line is that towed artillery is something many countries can afford obtaining in large numbers without draining their defense budget. However, while towed guns are great on static battle, i.e. standing in one place for days and providing firepower, they are a nightmare (compared to self propelled) when they need to move away from paved roads and travel around sand dunes or rocky terrains. Try just once to take a U-turn with a towed guns battery over such road and you’ll understand what I’m talking about.
 
Last edited:
.
Could you clear my confusion on this picture. We all know that 21st Arty Div is HQed in Malakand, but this M110 SPH seems to belong to the Div, even though it's a useless asset in that terrain. Is the whole division deployed in Malakand or only a brigade or so? And the rest elsewhere? View attachment 536186
Thats Formation sign of SFC.
 
. .
They also have their own logistical issues as well i.e. the artillery has to be transported....Good luck with that in a theatre of war and in rough terrain.

Here's a post I read on a forum full of serving soliders and a guy from a US artillery unit talks about both;

Since I’ve served in both, I can sum it up as following:

When talking about the same caliber guns (155mm) and not some toys you can mount on a helicopter, self propelled is better in any aspect related to the mission: it moves faster, deploys faster, less sensitive to rough terrain, can be ready for fire faster, [usually] have better supporting devices such as gyroscopes and GPS, can relocate faster, can deploy in a better protected locations or in small and dense locations and it is basically better in any other parameter I can think of when it comes to conventional warfare which involves intense firing and moving.

So why use towed artillery, you ask?

Because everything I mentioned above comes with high cost:

  • Cost in developing and producing the self-propelled guns.
  • Cost of maintenance - 500hp+ diesel engines, complex hydraulics, wiring, Continuous track, skilled mechanics and technicians for all these sub-systems and other aspects which cost a fortune to maintain compared to towed guns.
  • Cost and long-term availability of parts which most are produced specifically for this type of vehicles, as opposed to towing trucks which can be easily replaced.
  • Cost of training - I can’t testify for every military in the world, but where I come from, properly training a team of self-propelled gun took 2 months while towed gun crew could be trained in 2–3 weeks, not to mention that engine-hours for training cost more in orders of magnitude. This also means a faster turn around time to replace missing men, if needed. On top of that, operating SP guns required special skills for each member of the crew, skills that you lost if you haven’t done it often enough (extremely important for reserve units). With towed units you simply have one team leader, one guy responsible for aiming and all the rest are performing roles which are easily refreshed after 1–2 hours in the field.
I’m sure there are some things I missed. The bottom line is that towed artillery is something many countries can afford obtaining in large numbers without draining their defense budget. However, while towed guns are great on static battle, i.e. standing in one place for days and providing firepower, they are a nightmare (compared to self propelled) when they need to move away from paved roads and travel around sand dunes or rocky terrains. Try just once to take a U-turn with a towed guns battery over such road and you’ll understand what I’m talking about.

Towed guns are a great target for counter battery, something that needs to be taken into account because in our scenario both sides will have the ability to counter battery.
 
.
IA requirement can be fulfilled with tanks and truck MGS, so 100-150 tracked SPH is enough. Nowadays even towed artillery have very long ranges like ATAGS. PA doesn't have such capability. One should ask how these SPG will be used on cuz mountain, semi-desert terrains.
There are no mountain in sindh/punjab..no tanks cant fill art role ..and exactly one should ask how is India going to use truck /towed art in desert region ..tracked SPH is "tracked self propelled " isnt it obvious !
 
.
There are no mountain in sindh/punjab..no tanks cant fill art role ..and exactly one should ask how is India going to use truck /towed art in desert region ..tracked SPH is "tracked self propelled " isnt it obvious !

they are under the context anything they have is automatically superior. I think trucked SP will be used more on the western front.

Range is not the only consideration when buying new ammo. Army has huge requirements, desires local production; if that isn't possible, the supplier is asked to provide kits for assembly at POF.

Vulcano 155mm max range is 40km (for BER) and 60km (for GLR). The guided version is certainly impressive but may not be affordable for all.



PA has shut the door for new towed systems.
155mm wheeled SPH required for formations in GB/AJK and other areas.

What about, Chinese guided ammo?
 
Last edited:
.
Did anybody here mention counter battery fire? A radar detects the trajectory of the shell, back plots it and fires on that location. SP artillery is more survivable as it fires a salvo and moves.
 
.
Did anybody here mention counter battery fire? A radar detects the trajectory of the shell, back plots it and fires on that location. SP artillery is more survivable as it fires a salvo and moves.
yes..so its odd why indian think otherwise..towed art is very vulnerable to counter battery fire...the reason why SPH/truck art is getting very popular now
 
. . .
Pakistan has Freshly acqiired batch of 31 M109L 155mm SPA from Italy.
Total no of M109L acquired in past two years has reached 96! (122 as per some sources)
These all units will be upgraded later on.
Despite of induction of K9 Vajra [emoji1128], [emoji1191] still enjoy dominance in domain of SPA https://t.co/SBL8d69pYT
IMG_20190202_175521.jpeg
 
.
Back
Top Bottom