Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1477
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by mr.fred »

Tempest414 wrote: 11 Nov 2023, 17:00 As I said before for me I would change the infantry Battalion maneuver group to have a 120mm mortar platoon and a Brimstone overwatch platoon and then give each rifle company 2 x 60mm mortars this would allow the infantry to fight from 100 meters to 30 Km's in turn allowing the Artillery to get on with the deep fight and if needed backing up units as needed

If we take a Light Mech battalion it should have IMO

Infantry weapons working from 0 to 800 meters
company support group = 12.7mm , 40mm GMG , javelin , 60mm mortar working from 1 to 3 Km's
Battalion maneuver group = 120mm mortar , Brimstone working from 3 to 30 km's

Artillery = 155mm and M270A2 working from 20 to 500 km's
I can see the sense in more firepower organic to the infantry freeing up the artillery to prosecute longer range targets, while retaining the ability of the heavier guns (and missiles) to support the infantry where needed. Even back in WW2 there were the 25pdr regiments providing close support and the larger guns for longer ranged work, but both could turn their efforts to other roles when needed and possible.
Being a picky type, I'd suggest the infantry fight is from 0m to 5km from the forward infantry platoons with those assets. Further would be either extending the mortars too far forward or purely Brimstone.
Brimstone in the infantry battalion I'm always torn on because it's range is so much greater than all the other assets and likely the ISTAR assets available to the unit. On the other hand it's still effective at short ranges (up to always including all values below) and modern data links allow higher level ISTAR assets to provide concentration of lower level assets.
(as an aside, I figured I'd link this as the WW2 method for concentrations, which was in my head when thinking about artillery support in general: https://britishartillery.co.uk/maindoc. ... %20Targets)
I guess the minimum ranges cited are about desirable ranges and from the asset itself? Since there will always be a scenario where firing at targets less than those value can crop up.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

mr.fred wrote: 11 Nov 2023, 18:11 You brought up the range for both, giving an assisted range for one and a unassisted one for the other. If you didn't mean for that to be a comparison, it didn't come across that way.
And yet I didn't compare them. If anything I spoke about L118 range in relation to 155...

Whatever little conversation you've had in your head, that's on you. The forum speaks for itself, well, to everyone that can read English.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5601
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

mr.fred wrote: 11 Nov 2023, 18:37
Tempest414 wrote: 11 Nov 2023, 17:00 As I said before for me I would change the infantry Battalion maneuver group to have a 120mm mortar platoon and a Brimstone overwatch platoon and then give each rifle company 2 x 60mm mortars this would allow the infantry to fight from 100 meters to 30 Km's in turn allowing the Artillery to get on with the deep fight and if needed backing up units as needed

If we take a Light Mech battalion it should have IMO

Infantry weapons working from 0 to 800 meters
company support group = 12.7mm , 40mm GMG , javelin , 60mm mortar working from 1 to 3 Km's
Battalion maneuver group = 120mm mortar , Brimstone working from 3 to 30 km's

Artillery = 155mm and M270A2 working from 20 to 500 km's
I can see the sense in more firepower organic to the infantry freeing up the artillery to prosecute longer range targets, while retaining the ability of the heavier guns (and missiles) to support the infantry where needed. Even back in WW2 there were the 25pdr regiments providing close support and the larger guns for longer ranged work, but both could turn their efforts to other roles when needed and possible.
Being a picky type, I'd suggest the infantry fight is from 0m to 5km from the forward infantry platoons with those assets. Further would be either extending the mortars too far forward or purely Brimstone.
Brimstone in the infantry battalion I'm always torn on because it's range is so much greater than all the other assets and likely the ISTAR assets available to the unit. On the other hand it's still effective at short ranges (up to always including all values below) and modern data links allow higher level ISTAR assets to provide concentration of lower level assets.
(as an aside, I figured I'd link this as the WW2 method for concentrations, which was in my head when thinking about artillery support in general: https://britishartillery.co.uk/maindoc. ... %20Targets)
I guess the minimum ranges cited are about desirable ranges and from the asset itself? Since there will always be a scenario where firing at targets less than those value can crop up.
For me Brimstone is a weapon that is key I would if money allowed also drop in a lortor weapon section within the maneuver group for what i would call (for want of better name) the Infantry deep fight which I would mark at 45Km's from the firing point. The main combat area would be 0 to 10 km's with say brimstone and Hero 120 allowing the battalion commander to remove targets in the enemy rear like command and support units

Now if we could get all the Mach infantry battalions to a point where they had

0 to 1km = 5.56 , 7.62 . 40mm GL , NLAW , Carl Gustaf M4
1 to 3 Km's = 12.7 mm , 30mm , 40mm GMG , javelin , 60 mm mortar
3 to 45 Km's 120 mm mortar , Brimstone , Hero 120

any infantry unit arriving on the battlefield will be a handful and a Mech infantry brigade with a Artillery support unit of SP 155mm and M270A2 will be well placed to fight the cose , medium and deep battle

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

I can't understand why any infantry commander would b concerning themselves with something 45km away...

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5601
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

RunningStrong wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 11:32 I can't understand why any infantry commander would b concerning themselves with something 45km away...
I would agree that the first 15 km's is of the up most concern and that is why the greatest concentration of fire power is based within this zone however I believe ( and I may well be wrong ) that on the modern battlefield having organic ability to effect an area of 40 odd km's is going to become key also even though weapons like Brimstone and Hero 120 are effective at ranges upto 40 km's they are also very effective within and just outside the area of most concern and there for give the commander on the ground greater organic freedom to effect the best out come

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

Tempest414 wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 12:10
RunningStrong wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 11:32 I can't understand why any infantry commander would b concerning themselves with something 45km away...
I would agree that the first 15 km's is of the up most concern and that is why the greatest concentration of fire power is based within this zone however I believe ( and I may well be wrong ) that on the modern battlefield having organic ability to effect an area of 40 odd km's is going to become key also even though weapons like Brimstone and Hero 120 are effective at ranges upto 40 km's they are also very effective within and just outside the area of most concern and there for give the commander on the ground greater organic freedom to effect the best out come
Hero120 is also an STA asset, so I can understand that. But how or why an infantry commander would be finding and hitting targets 10km+ I really don't know.

It also brings in huge questions about air deconfliction if we start putting such weapons at that level. That's a significant task in itself.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5601
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

RunningStrong wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 12:20
Tempest414 wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 12:10
RunningStrong wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 11:32 I can't understand why any infantry commander would b concerning themselves with something 45km away...
I would agree that the first 15 km's is of the up most concern and that is why the greatest concentration of fire power is based within this zone however I believe ( and I may well be wrong ) that on the modern battlefield having organic ability to effect an area of 40 odd km's is going to become key also even though weapons like Brimstone and Hero 120 are effective at ranges upto 40 km's they are also very effective within and just outside the area of most concern and there for give the commander on the ground greater organic freedom to effect the best out come
Hero120 is also an STA asset, so I can understand that. But how or why an infantry commander would be finding and hitting targets 10km+ I really don't know.

It also brings in huge questions about air deconfliction if we start putting such weapons at that level. That's a significant task in itself.
For me having the ability to find and fix targets before moving up to contact would be of benefit then having the ability to effect the battlespace behind the enemy would also give the enemy commander more to think about

I concede that it would need a lot more thinking about and that my thinking is about how we could fill the battlespace between 10 and 20 km's to allow the 105 gun to go and the RA to get on with the deep fight

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1477
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by mr.fred »

Tempest414 wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 10:13 For me Brimstone is a weapon that is key I would if money allowed also drop in a lortor weapon section within the maneuver group for what i would call (for want of better name) the Infantry deep fight which I would mark at 45Km's from the firing point. The main combat area would be 0 to 10 km's with say brimstone and Hero 120 allowing the battalion commander to remove targets in the enemy rear like command and support units
Why do these weapons need to be organic to the infantry? As an independent company they could still prosecute the longer ranged fight without them compromising the infantry positions or the infantry compromising their positions.
Why should infantry be concerned with interdiction and counter battery fires when the Artillery are already doing that?

If you've got the range to hit something and get targetting data from another formation then by all means, but I don't think that adding to the infantry battalion commander's workload with managing ISTAR work to long ranges is necessarily a good idea. Give him that data from supporting assets, sure, but don't expect the infantry to be responsible for everything.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5601
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

mr.fred wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 13:11
Tempest414 wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 10:13 For me Brimstone is a weapon that is key I would if money allowed also drop in a lortor weapon section within the maneuver group for what i would call (for want of better name) the Infantry deep fight which I would mark at 45Km's from the firing point. The main combat area would be 0 to 10 km's with say brimstone and Hero 120 allowing the battalion commander to remove targets in the enemy rear like command and support units
Why do these weapons need to be organic to the infantry? As an independent company they could still prosecute the longer ranged fight without them compromising the infantry positions or the infantry compromising their positions.
Why should infantry be concerned with interdiction and counter battery fires when the Artillery are already doing that?

If you've got the range to hit something and get targetting data from another formation then by all means, but I don't think that adding to the infantry battalion commander's workload with managing ISTAR work to long ranges is necessarily a good idea. Give him that data from supporting assets, sure, but don't expect the infantry to be responsible for everything.
If we had more Artillery regiments great and maybe Hero 120 is to much and just sticking to 120mm and brimstone is enough for Battalion battle groups as brimstone allows targets out 20km's to be hit if needed

So my thinking is we have so few Artillery units which need to be taking on the deep fight maybe if we moved to 6 x brigades each with 3 infantry units in them that under FS would leve 2 x infantry unit which could change role to formation overwatch regts

as I said I am happy to be wrong

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1477
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by mr.fred »

Tempest414 wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 14:09 If we had more Artillery regiments great and maybe Hero 120 is to much and just sticking to 120mm and brimstone is enough for Battalion battle groups as brimstone allows targets out 20km's to be hit if needed
That's the thing. If we've got resources to create weapons companies armed as such in each of the infantry battalions then we ought to have them to create batteries in artillery regiments that get doled out or concentrated as needed. There's no reason that there should be a limited number of artillery regiments.
That said, Brimstone and 120mm mortars make sense for the mechanised infantry as their greater range will be better able to cover the more widely dispersed vehicle based formations - ranges for them, from the point of view of the formation, might more sensibly be measured from the front line of the rifle sections rather from the centre of a spherical platoon.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5601
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

mr.fred wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 14:31
Tempest414 wrote: 12 Nov 2023, 14:09 If we had more Artillery regiments great and maybe Hero 120 is to much and just sticking to 120mm and brimstone is enough for Battalion battle groups as brimstone allows targets out 20km's to be hit if needed
That's the thing. If we've got resources to create weapons companies armed as such in each of the infantry battalions then we ought to have them to create batteries in artillery regiments that get doled out or concentrated as needed. There's no reason that there should be a limited number of artillery regiments.
That said, Brimstone and 120mm mortars make sense for the mechanised infantry as their greater range will be better able to cover the more widely dispersed vehicle based formations - ranges for them, from the point of view of the formation, might more sensibly be measured from the front line of the rifle sections rather from the centre of a spherical platoon.
All I am doing is changing the 81mm for the 120mm mortar in the mortar platoon and the AT Platoon for a Brimstone overwatch platoon in the embedded infantry maneuver company and in the case of the Mech infantry moving the Javelins to the RWS's around the battalion so I am not creating new formations

As said under FS there is 20 infantry units by having 6 x brigades with 3 battalions each we would need 18 leaving 2 to change role to formation overwatch regiments with 2 x Loitor weapon companies and 2 x Brimstone companies

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by marktigger »

Isn't the basic problem we re configured for the wrong type of warfare. Thinking the future would be counter insurgency in the 3rd world. With no air threat and no threat of major counter battery operations. Despite many of the older voices saying maintain credible strengths it was all dismissed.
Then ukraine happened. and the realisation happened that what the cold war warriors said was true. You need Air Defence, You Need Depth fire you need locating you need Guns that can land bigger weights of missions that have protection and are mobile. You don't have chinooks on tap to move them. You need replenishment capability and you need big stocks of ammunition.
You now need highly active targeting, drones that can spot and designate. You need to protect your own positions from drones both passively and actively. You need secure realtime communications. on top of sorting out the rest.
The Artillery war in Ukraine is teaching some very very old lessons many we initally failed to learn the first and the second time round and now hopefully we learn again till next time.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5601
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

marktigger wrote: 13 Nov 2023, 18:16 Isn't the basic problem we re configured for the wrong type of warfare. Thinking the future would be counter insurgency in the 3rd world. With no air threat and no threat of major counter battery operations. Despite many of the older voices saying maintain credible strengths it was all dismissed.
Then ukraine happened. and the realisation happened that what the cold war warriors said was true. You need Air Defence, You Need Depth fire you need locating you need Guns that can land bigger weights of missions that have protection and are mobile. You don't have chinooks on tap to move them. You need replenishment capability and you need big stocks of ammunition.
You now need highly active targeting, drones that can spot and designate. You need to protect your own positions from drones both passively and actively. You need secure realtime communications. on top of sorting out the rest.
The Artillery war in Ukraine is teaching some very very old lessons many we initally failed to learn the first and the second time round and now hopefully we learn again till next time.
Yes in many ways but we need to free up the Artillery units we have to carry out the deep fight plus we need more Logstices

The 3rd division will have 1 x DRF BCT and 2 x Armoured BCT's

How would a Armoured brigade with say 1 x cavalry rgt , 1 x Armoured rgt , 2 x infantry battalions and a Overwatch battalion work if the Overwatch battalion was made up of 2 x Brimstone companies , 1 x loitor weapon company and 1 x Air defence company in effect replacing the RA close support gun regiments

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2698
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by bobp »

The 4th Archer is now in the UK ten more in the new year. Babcock and BAE bid for more.....


https://www.defensenews.com/global/euro ... -howitzer/
These users liked the author bobp for the post:
Jackstar

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

Interesting that they are offering 8x8 archer but RDUK Elbit turret is on 10x10 chassis.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

Interesting thread on Caesar....turns out its not all that.

I've never been a fan of Caesar. Useful for firefighting, expeditionary type warfare. But seems to have a lot of the drawbacks of SPG's (size, cost) but few of the advantages (little armour, reliance on manual loading and exposed crew, even on the more automated 8x8 variants).....

Archer or RCH155 have the advantages that Caesar has, wheeled, more strategic mobility than tracked. But the addition of fewer crew and automated loading (and as a result quicker into action, quicker to fire and out of action)....

Archer with a 55cal barrel and M777ER with the 55cal barrel (cheap, easy way to bulk out artillery numbers) are the way to go for me....

These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post (total 2):
new guywargame_insomniac

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1449
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by NickC »

FT recently reported MOD buying Japanese L15 155 mm HE shells to replace Army stock shipped to Ukraine, BAE has a production capacity shortfall to meet current high demand, mention MOD has also been buying L15 from Rheinmetall, BAE funded by MoD with £410 million July contract including funding for an additional 155mm machining line in Washington, Tyne & Wear and a new explosive filling facility at Glascoed, South Wales for a plan to increase production eight fold, timescale 2 years to come online?

Re the new BAES Next Generation Adaptable Ammunition, NGAA, modular shell to replace the L15 will be substantially cheaper and easier to manufacture, mentioned a further announcement to come re the energetics, the explosives to be resonance acoustically/vibration mixed not the tried and tested melted cast explosives which time consuming, currently both explosives and propellant imported for the L15.

These users liked the author NickC for the post:
Jackstar

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

Some good news....

BAE in Barrow in Furness back in M777 business....all the complex Titanium stuff is at Barrow...

Now all we need is barrel manufacture and artillery propellant....suspect both will happen in due course...



BAE Press Release

New contract presents optimum conditions for a likely restart of M777 production
BAE Systems has signed an agreement with the U.S Army for M777 lightweight howitzer major structures, under an Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA), which is currently limited to $50 million. This allows BAE Systems to start delivering on the programme, while finalizing the details of the contract and its total value with the customer.

BAE Systems will work with its supply chain in the UK and the US to produce the major M777 titanium structures, which form the basis of the gun. The first major structures are due to be delivered in 2025.

BAE Systems has seen an increase in interest from across Europe, Asia, and the Americas in the M777 gun system. This new contract creates the optimum conditions for a restart of M777 production in the UK, and presents an opportunity to new and existing users to join a new M777 production initiative and take advantage of the benefits from a hot production line and economies of scale. The U.S., as well as Canada and Australia, has donated M777s to Ukraine.

“This restart of production of the major structures for the U.S. Army’s M777s comes at a critical time, with howitzers deployed on operations in Ukraine. The U.S., as well as Canada and Australia, has donated M777s to Ukraine. We understand that they are performing well and we are very proud of our role in supporting our allies”, said John Borton, vice president and general manager of BAE Systems Weapons Systems UK, which manages the manufacture and assembly of the M777 lightweight howitzers. “The M777 will remain at the forefront of artillery technology well into the future through the use of technical insertions, long-range precision guided munition developments, and flexible mobility options.”

At half the weight of other 155mm towed howitzers, the M777 provides a rapid reaction capability and a proven pedigree that delivers decisive firepower when needed most in sustained combat conditions. With more than 1,250 M777s in service with ground forces in the United States, Ukraine, the Americas, Australia and India, the M777 is the only battle-proven 155mm lightweight howitzer in the world.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

Any guarantee the work will take place at Barrow?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

RunningStrong wrote: 04 Jan 2024, 16:18 Any guarantee the work will take place at Barrow?
Thats where it was done previously and where all of the experience in the titanium fabrication is. Pretty much nailed on.

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by RunningStrong »

Timmymagic wrote: 05 Jan 2024, 09:33
RunningStrong wrote: 04 Jan 2024, 16:18 Any guarantee the work will take place at Barrow?
Thats where it was done previously and where all of the experience in the titanium fabrication is. Pretty much nailed on.
I guess the equipment is still there but how much of that knowledge and skill has gone to the wind over the years?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

RunningStrong wrote: 05 Jan 2024, 10:46
Timmymagic wrote: 05 Jan 2024, 09:33
RunningStrong wrote: 04 Jan 2024, 16:18 Any guarantee the work will take place at Barrow?
Thats where it was done previously and where all of the experience in the titanium fabrication is. Pretty much nailed on.
I guess the equipment is still there but how much of that knowledge and skill has gone to the wind over the years?
It only ended last year so is still pretty current.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

Completely missed this....

The Thales Nederland GM200 Radar has been selected as the Deep Find part of Project Serpens...no idea on numbers but delivery is apparently in 2029 with IOC in the early 2030's. These also have a significant air surveillance capability. Presumably they'll be mounted on MAN trucks. It might be the MM-C version rather than the elevating mast version.

There is still 'Close Find' radars to come and other sensors. The need for this is that Mamba, whilst good, will need replacement and Cobra was sold off (as it was unsatisfactory, despite how advanced it was).

If the Army have a braincell they'll purchase 2 Decoy systems for every Real one...

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... find-radar





These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
new guy

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5601
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Tempest414 »

Timmymagic wrote: 14 Jan 2024, 09:52 Completely missed this....

The Thales Nederland GM200 Radar has been selected as the Deep Find part of Project Serpens...no idea on numbers but delivery is apparently in 2029 with IOC in the early 2030's. These also have a significant air surveillance capability. Presumably they'll be mounted on MAN trucks. It might be the MM-C version rather than the elevating mast version.

There is still 'Close Find' radars to come and other sensors. The need for this is that Mamba, whilst good, will need replacement and Cobra was sold off (as it was unsatisfactory, despite how advanced it was).

If the Army have a braincell they'll purchase 2 Decoy systems for every Real one...

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... find-radar





Did we not just buy SAAB Giraffe X1 for close radar

https://www.saab.com/newsroom/press-rel ... nce-orders

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Royal Artillery/Royal Horse Artillery future developments

Post by Timmymagic »

Tempest414 wrote: 14 Jan 2024, 10:05 Did we not just buy SAAB Giraffe X1 for close radar
Not for weapons locating, they appear to be for AD gap filling and UAV detection.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
Tempest414

Post Reply