To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
We have a local realtor in my area whose website tries to cater to the military in our area. What does the realtor use to show her patriotism and support to our boys and girls in blue (we live near an AF base)?? A picture of a flight of Sukhoi-30s that happen to be painted in RUS colors (red, white, blue). I emailed the lady and pointed out the irony (if not insult) and she ignored me. I am always sure to share with my military friends who are in the real estate market . . . ??
 
Imo the PzH2000 is not designed for full scale war, but for peacekeeping operations and counter insurgency.

100 rounds a day max, a barrel life of 2500-3500?

In a war against a peer opponent not many pieces will survive that long. You need systems that put out as much firepower as possible in the shortest amount of time before statistics say they will have likely been destroyed.

The German G43 carbine is heavily overgassed and wears out quickly because of it. This wasn't seen as a problem to the Germans because the average life expectancy on the eastern front was something like 21 days. Keep the gun running and put out as much fire during that time before the inevitable happens or if the soldier is lucky enough to survive toss it and get a replacement.

The PzH2000 is a luxury toy not designed for a full scale war and the problem arises when countries have done away with all other systems and solely rely on it for their ground-based fire support because they don't see the problem. After all the last actual war they fought ended in 1945 or 1953, these militaries operate solely on theory based doctrines. It's the artillery equivalent of a sniper rifle, not a machine gun.
Bullshit.
that's what a cannon barrel can do, especially when fully loaded.
The barrel wears out, the chamber is constantly expanding, the initial velocity of the projectile is constantly decreasing, etc. Hydraulic and gas-charged parts give up, so you need the spare parts and repair capacity.

And rest assured, the best Soviet gun barrel won't last much longer. In fact... D-20: cowhide seals in hydraulics...
 
Bullshit.
that's what a cannon barrel can do, especially when fully loaded.
The barrel wears out, the chamber is constantly expanding, the initial velocity of the projectile is constantly decreasing, etc. Hydraulic and gas-charged parts give up, so you need the spare parts and repair capacity.

And rest assured, the best Soviet gun barrel won't last much longer. In fact... D-20: cowhide seals in hydraulics...
What spare parts? Whenever a Dutch howitzer breaks down they have to scavenge parts from another vehicle(s). The way the German army has been screaming about the state of spare parts in the Bundeswehr for years (decade+ ?) with zero improvement forget about it. The Italians can't be off any better.

So it's an over-engineered howitzer requiring frequent highly technical maintenance with little to no spare parts in storage and ramping up production ... nah. Very few built, so scavenging isn't going to last very long either and will radically strip various of the larger NATO member states of fire power. The thing has a reputation for breaking down frequently even among NATO crews, and that's under peace time conditions with few rounds being fired at all never mind in limited time high volume with actual support infrastructure tuned to service the thing.

Soviet/Russian equipment doesn't last very long, that's why they built so much of the stuff. Their equipment doctrine has significant losses factored into both the design and the use of their systems because they knew and know that a large scale war chews up equipment and spares which European bean counters gladly ignored in order to be able to report to their political masters that they had saved another 300 million on "excess" defence spending. Simple mediocre guns in massive numbers that keep firing and are easy to maintain will defeat handfuls of supreme guns that require a thorough overhaul by expert technicians ever couple of hundred rounds. If a howitzer gets properly hit it's destroyed regardless of whether it's a 2S3, 2S5 or PzH2000. The problem is we ain't got the numbers of PzH2000s or the parts in storage to play that game. This is a war of attrition, not lobbing a round or two a day at some jihadist in his mud hut.

Replace with towed artillery? A lot of NATO members got rid of them and stuck/replaced with small numbers of self-propelled pieces. The Russians were smart enough to retain both because the towed piece from 1960 is still better than having no artillery at all after a couple of months of fighting.

During WW2 the allies didn't build Gucci vehicles either, they built the things that could be built in large quantity and be "good enough" whereas the Germans toyed around with unfeasible designs for tanks, tank destroyers and SPGs alike.
 
It came into server post Cold War. It's not a huge surprise that there is a shortage of spares. Anyone who's country flies the NH-90 knows how spares availability affects the ability to keep numbers of them in the air. It's not just a German thing, it's a post cold war pretty much every nation thing. The Russian's can call upon an almost infinite number of ancient clapped out artillery pieces from the USSR days and the USA just buys heaps. Everyone else makes do.
 
It came into server post Cold War. It's not a huge surprise that there is a shortage of spares. Anyone who's country flies the NH-90 knows how spares availability affects the ability to keep numbers of them in the air. It's not just a German thing, it's a post cold war pretty much every nation thing. The Russian's can call upon an almost infinite number of ancient clapped out artillery pieces from the USSR days and the USA just buys heaps. Everyone else makes do.
That's no comfort to the Ukrainians when we're sending them systems with little staying power. But do the western politicians actually know this or have they stuck their head in the sand like they do for our own problems?
 
Luckily for them they also have alternative SPA's like the Norwegian M109's that have pretty much infinite spares.
 
Luckily for them they also have alternative SPA's like the Norwegian M109's that have pretty much infinite spares.
Yeah, but those have shorter range and that means having to fight artillery duels with Russian artillery that vastly outnumbers them. The entire point of the PzH2000 and CAESAR is that they outrange most Russian pieces.

I wonder how CAESAR is holding up in the wear and tear department.
 
The CAESAR seems to be holding up or I just havent heard the complaints online yet. It could be a matter of "keeping it simple" as its a trcuk based one like the ATMOS. Ukraine is a testing ground for weapons in an actual war scenario rather than peacekeeping or minor entanglements with the local goat lovers.
 
Production capacity is a key indicator. It takes 450 hours to make a cannon for a Caesar.

Yearly production was and probably still is at 14 Caesar units per year. One per month...

Macron has asked production to be ramped up at 44. But easier said than done. These cannons seem to be done more by hand than anything else.

Of course, production capacity would have been bigger if the French army did not all in all have only 77 of them before the war in Ukraine.
 
Production capacity is a key indicator. It takes 450 hours to make a cannon for a Caesar.

Yearly production was and probably still is at 14 Caesar units per year. One per month...

Macron has asked production to be ramped up at 44. But easier said than done. These cannons seem to be done more by hand than anything else.

Of course, production capacity would have been bigger if the French army did not all in all have only 77 of them before the war in Ukraine.
It seems that it is the Poles that saw it coming, either by sheer luck or proper intel. They setout to upgrade their industry to build an SPG from scratch and had an interesting journey as they plan to build everything themselves down to the barrels. I guess the Krabs had barrels premade by a different Euro company. My guess is the french Aubert & Duval which makes those en masse... probably why the Caesar has had no issues so far.
 
What spare parts? Whenever a Dutch howitzer breaks down they have to scavenge parts from another vehicle(s). The way the German army has been screaming about the state of spare parts in the Bundeswehr for years (decade+ ?) with zero improvement forget about it. The Italians can't be off any better.

So it's an over-engineered howitzer requiring frequent highly technical maintenance with little to no spare parts in storage and ramping up production ... nah. Very few built, so scavenging isn't going to last very long either and will radically strip various of the larger NATO member states of fire power. The thing has a reputation for breaking down frequently even among NATO crews, and that's under peace time conditions with few rounds being fired at all never mind in limited time high volume with actual support infrastructure tuned to service the thing.

Soviet/Russian equipment doesn't last very long, that's why they built so much of the stuff. Their equipment doctrine has significant losses factored into both the design and the use of their systems because they knew and know that a large scale war chews up equipment and spares which European bean counters gladly ignored in order to be able to report to their political masters that they had saved another 300 million on "excess" defence spending. Simple mediocre guns in massive numbers that keep firing and are easy to maintain will defeat handfuls of supreme guns that require a thorough overhaul by expert technicians ever couple of hundred rounds. If a howitzer gets properly hit it's destroyed regardless of whether it's a 2S3, 2S5 or PzH2000. The problem is we ain't got the numbers of PzH2000s or the parts in storage to play that game. This is a war of attrition, not lobbing a round or two a day at some jihadist in his mud hut.

Replace with towed artillery? A lot of NATO members got rid of them and stuck/replaced with small numbers of self-propelled pieces. The Russians were smart enough to retain both because the towed piece from 1960 is still better than having no artillery at all after a couple of months of fighting.

During WW2 the allies didn't build Gucci vehicles either, they built the things that could be built in large quantity and be "good enough" whereas the Germans toyed around with unfeasible designs for tanks, tank destroyers and SPGs alike.
excuse me, but I think this is a total misinterpretation of the facts.

German Gucci stuff: it was just that modern technology and German morale and training had brought a bloody harvest to the Russian ranks.
And the western stuff, with a few exceptions (heavy tanks, V-2 Me-262) was much more Gucci than the German stuff, and was made in their thousands. War economy, right.
Temporary superiority was achieved by the Germans, but already in 1944 many development projects that would have surpassed them were cancelled: there was no need for them, and then came the generational leap in military technology.
In Ukraine, on the Kiev front, partly because of military geography, the more modern equipment, which was only part of the armament of the Western armies (Nlaw, Javelin, drones, combined with the remaining Ukrainian equipment), drove the Russians out of Ukraine.
The presence of a minimal amount of more modern anti-ship systems and precision weapons has cancelled the siege of Odessa, now they have had to give up their plans to block grain shipments.

Donbass: the Russian doctrine so beloved of the two-bit Russian fans: in a matter of weeks they managed to take control of an area about the size of a Hungarian county, using an incredible amount of munitions (logistics hello, this is the only place where they could bring the Russian plans to transport munitions by rail to the front)
- the Ukrainian defenders didn't get the systems they needed until july, because first the western leadership thought it was still 2014, then they believed the Russian blackmail about the deployment of WMD.

Last month, truly modern Western heavy weapons technology arrived in small numbers, the event is known.
And no , the Russians don't have infinite reserves either, the real capacity of their military complex is a fraction of that of South Korea.

Taiwan: .i'm sure if the yellows tried it and America decided to get in on the act, the Chinese fleet, feared in the media, would be subject to the same as the Russian armoured columns under Kiev
 

Similar threads

Back
Top