Medium Artillery

Discussion in 'Gunners' started by Mazur_UK, Nov 22, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Is there a reason why in the UK we don't use medium howitzers in the field role (like the old FH-70)?

    I am asking as many other countries still use these howitzers along with SPG's and smaller (light Gun) type ones.
  2. Cos the government/mod are stupid, a good towed 155mm would probably do the bis in Afghanistan, and save them from having to use Javalins as Arty
  3. Didn't you know? According to (former) Lt Lewis Page RN, all artillery is useless and the RAF can do it all for us. :roll:
  4. So it was just a Liarbour cost-cutting exercise?

    Why didn't I guess :roll:
  5. IIRC the definition of 'medium' is calibre 121 - 160 mm, type of carriage doesn't matter, so AS90 is 'medium'.

    The last time I saw the figures declared by UK in accordance with CSCE requirements (2 or 3 yrs ago) UK still had about a regt's worth of FH70 in stock. I had wondered why these hadn't been used in Afghanistan, obviously Chinook can't lift them in the hot and high conditions but also the loss of the Fodens meant a tractor may be a problem (although buying something one-off would have been possible), but with the arrival of the MANs that problem should be solved.

    Looking at the latest edition of Quadrant (this is the Canadian gunners' paper and comes out 3 times per year), an article by C troop E Bty RCHA on their tour in Afghanistan, where they used 155mm M777. They report the tp firing almost 10,000 rds in their tour. This seems to be a lot more than the UK 105mm tps are reporting in Gunner. This suggests that either RCHA are better salesfolk for the gunner service or that 105 isn't powerful enough so the infantry aren't as interested.

    Interestingly the troop also seems to have been dual equipped with 81mm for local defence
  6. Being ignorant of all things Arty, if "medium" is 121 - 160 mm, what is "heavy"?

    And please don't do the predictable "anything over 160mm" What do we have that would be classed as "heavy"?
  7. Hello Aunty Stella,

    today heavy would be Multiple Launch Rocket Systems,in the recent past it would have included the M110 8" self propelled howitzer (designed for air mobility).
    Going further back in history we had some real monsters,including rail guns (the type pulled by locomotives,not those new fangled electrical things!).
    This 18" howitzer for example:

    An interesting tale can be found here:

  8. Cheers Tango.

    Thats some pretty mean looking firepower! What did they use that for, destroying planets? :)
  9. Both 203mm M110 and 175mm M107 were 'heavy'.

    In WW2 there was also super heavy, 18-in was in that category as were 8-in Guns (not Hows) and 240mm Hows. Not sure about the WW1 vintage 9.2 and 12 in that were in use in the first years of WW2.
  10. msr

    msr LE

    Or that they don't have GMLRS on call so need to expend more rounds to neutralise the target?

  11. Although built in UK we cant afford to buy M777. But why aint we bought G5 ammo from South Africa? 155 mm lethality on a 105 chassis
  12. According to published reports it was trialed but was not as effective overal as the new shell from BAE.