 |
| The M109A7 program is a significant upgrade over the vehicle’s predecessor, the M109A6 Paladin Self-Propelled Howitzer, restoring space, weight, and power-cooling, while providing growth potential for emerging technologies. The design includes a Bradley-common chassis, engine, transmission, suspension, steering system, and improved survivability, while leveraging technologies developed during the Non-Line-of-Sight Cannon program such as a 600 volt on-board power system. The state-of-the-art “digital-backbone” and power generation capability provides significant growth potential for future payloads as well as accommodating existing battlefield network requirements. |
Its subtle and could point to where armor is going. If a future medium tank is built using the Bradley chassis then its a huge win for the Army.
Great upgrade over the A6, just wish it had MRSI (multiple round simultaneous impact) which allows one gun to have the fire for effect of 4 to 6 guns. In an era of declining numbers of fire support assets, MRSI could be a force multiplier
ReplyDeletei know what you're talking about but i heard that was severely range limited.
DeleteThe German Panzerhaubitze 2000 claims 5 round MRSI at 17k and the Swedish Archer claims 7 round MRSI at the same range. The range can be increased somewhat by using 3 or 4 round MRSI. Unless in a FOB type situation, the Paladin PIM mobility allows it to displace to keep up with the supported units and minimize the effects of short range somewhat.
DeleteYou are right that 17k is less than half of the advertised max range for both systems, though.
That's the problem with the round, not with the gun. RAP or base bleed 155mm hit 30km. Someone must have been cutting cost with the ammo. 17km is a "standard" round which only people on a budget use.
DeleteUS Army is working on extremely long range projectile. Using 155/39 caliber gun, the new round can reach up to 70km, outclassing any 155/52 tubes using existing ammo, even GPS guided variant. That's being said, I sure would like to see the new cannon + auto loader developed under NLOS program to be integrated into Paladin chassis some days. That would be awesome.
ReplyDeleteAs far as adapting Bradley chassis for a future fighting vehicle, my primary concern is space limitation. I saw photos shown Bradley lined up next to newer IFV models: K21, CV90, etc. I can't help but to notice the size difference. Bradley is just too damn small, very little margin is left for future growth.
A 52 cal should have only about 40km range +/-, 80km is 227mm territory.
DeleteUgh, that aluminum chassis is horrid. It's 60's technology and when it catches fire, it melts the aluminum (not to mention kills the people inside).
ReplyDeleteThey need to do something about protection for it before they do anything more with the chassis.
Yes I concur that this is a horrible idea, also the bradley is supposedly approaching EOL with the GCV program, a better alternative however would have been to develop a brand new family of heavy fighting vehicles, i.e. MBT, Artillery, Tracked troop carrier, and base this on a single common chassis like the russians are supposedly doing.
ReplyDeleteA Paladin can do a "High/Low" mission which is the simplest form of multiple round simultaneous impact with only two projectiles.
ReplyDeleteNot as sexy as the European options, but we have a lot more Paladin turrets we can upgrade to A7 configuration on Bradley chassis for a lot cheaper than a new acquisition program. The Gods of The Copybook Headings will not be denied.
In reality, it eliminated a lot of the maintenance costs with the older versions. Now they have a common track, roadwheel, and power pack which are the largest maintenance costs.