This one only takes a 5 man crew.
Posted on 02/06/2015 8:43:22 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
Early in 1996, the Marine Corps started a new organization called the Commandant’s Warfighting Laboratory, later changed to the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, which had the charter to lead the Corps in experimentation with new technologies, techniques, tactics and procedures. It was led by Colonel Tony Wood who was already established as one of the Corps’ most brilliant forward-thinkers and fuelled by a healthy science and technology budget and the full support of the Commandant, General Charles Krulak. The “Lab” quickly set out to test a broad range of emerging technologies along with advanced warfighting experiments.
One of those experiments was the automation of artillery. Artillery had not kept up with the newest technologies and the Corps had adopted a large, heavy, and labor-intense 155mm behemoth as its only fire support system. It takes a 10-man gun crew and it needs to be supported by well-manned Fire Direction Centers and many more additional mouths to feed for logistics and security and so one.
Col. Wood proposed that a completely new approach to expeditionary fire support was needed and I was tasked to assemble a team and build a technology demonstrator weapon based on the 120mm mortar. I had just retired from the Corps and was a Mechanical Engineer as well as a career artillery officer, so I was ready for the challenge. Teaming with the Army Research, Development, and Engineering Command (ARDEC) at Picatinny Arsenal we designed a completely self-contained weapon based on the French 120mm rifled mortar tube and ammunition because of its superior range and accuracy and after 17 months of intense work, it was ready for testing. General Krulak named it the “Dragon Fire” and it immediately demonstrated its capabilities. Instead of a Fire Direction Center, the gun had its own built-in fire control computer...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Damn the old farts for refusing to keep up with technology!
Finland and Sweden jointly developed the AMOS 120 MM mortar system. That system has a high degree of automation. There are cool YouTube videos of the system on boats, tracked and wheeled vehicles.
Semper Fi!
Needless to say, there was resistance. The old-timers in the artillery community attacked the concept from every direction and their biggest fear was the reduction of manpower. Fewer artillerymen mean smaller battalions. Smaller battalions mean fewer officers needed to lead them and so on. Promotion gets tough when there are fewer colonel’s spots.
Hopefully those warriors will be Americans.
I loathe to think of a future where our refusal to adapt causes Americans to militarily disadvantaged.
I really hate the terms, “Warfighter” and “Warfighting”.
They have such a commie politically correct sound to them. It like someone was afraid to use the term soldier or military.
The Army was working a program like this called Crusader.
Crusader was supposed to replace the M-109A6 Paladin 155mm self propeled artillery system. It was a self loading gun that reduced the crew to two. It was cancelled in 2004 by Rumsfeld for being to heavy. A year later United Defense who was absorbed by BAE Systems created the NLOS Cannon and Mortar systems using the same technology they used on Crusader. The NLOS was lighter and faster. In 2007 when I retired from the Marine Corps I was recruited by BAE Systems to work on the NLOS Cannon program as part of the test team at Yuma Proving Ground. This gun was awesome! It ran circles around the Paladin is side by side testing. It could out shoot and out run the Paladin on every test. We built and tested 5 guns by June of 2009, and were about to go into limited production at BAE’s facility in Oklahoma.
On 29 June 2009 we got the Stop Work Order from our bosses in Minnesota because the Obama admin cancelled the program.
6 years later the Army still doesn’t have a suitable replacement for the Paladin, and the technology for NLOS is sitting in a warehouse in Aberdeen MD just rusting away.
I wonder how many more lives could have been saved in the past and in future battles with this weapon.
People who suppressed this should be tried for treason and hung.
This one only takes a 5 man crew.
Better would be to incorporate it into an unmanned vehicle, so it can shoot and scoot, and not put human artillery personnel at risk of counter-battery fire.
Wasn’t United Defense the outfit that came up with the M-8 AGS and the spinoff 120mm Thunderbolt?
Apparently UD didn’t payoff the right General (Shinseki) or the right President (Clinton).
What a shame, those were really sweet vehicles. I had my name on crosstraining to the M-8 because my enhanced NG Brigade was supposed to be getting them.
United Defense also dveloped and built the Bradley and the M-113. The M-777 towed 155mm gun that the Marine Corps uses now was built by BAE Systems. I tried to get on that program when NLOS was cancelled but I ended up on the JLTV (Joint Light Tactical Vehicle)program instead.
“Needless to say, there was resistance. The old-timers in the artillery community attacked the concept from every direction and their biggest fear was the reduction of manpower. Fewer artillerymen mean smaller battalions. Smaller battalions mean fewer officers needed to lead them and so on. Promotion gets tough when there are fewer colonel’s spots.”
Had the same experience in the 1970s while working on an air defense development system. The air defense guys kept telling us that their analysis showed the crew would be over worked but could never provide their analysis. Finally, they admitted they had no analysis but wanted to add unnecessary crew in order to avoid losing slots in the air defense battalions. Finally added the slots since they would not support the system if they lost slots.
That’s always going to be the nut they can’t cover because there are too many “communities” that have to be satisfied. Thanks for pulling that quote out of the article.
We are already at a military disadvantage considering that we are fighting muzzies while our CIC is a muzzie, himself.
Nothing changes. Billy Mitchell was forced out of the service for pushing the idea that aircraft carriers might be supper to battleships. His demonstration of sinking a battleship with airpower only infuriated the upper brass.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.