Golf Hotel Quebec de Sierra Whiskey Mike

[Belisarius]

K2 is a South Korean tank... but that's besides the point. GHQ does need some more national variety of tanks and APCs, like the K2, Type 90, and Patria AMV, CV-90, and BV-206.

[chrisswim]

Belisarius,
Woud be great to have some more vehicles, although I am behind in my acquistion of various models, including Chinese and a few other models.

I use scotia leclerc for K2.

I also would like to see the AMV Patina, and the CV90 series, with different turret options. CV9040 & CV9030 and perhaps an AA turret 40mm bofors. Maybe CV9035.

Oh, the North Koreans would be happy, they would have more targets to shoot at.

[Zippy]

i took all my scotia models and jammed them into a mayo jar, which is a waste of a mayo jar.

mike

[chrisswim]

Why do u say copperhead is a waste of time?

[TAMMY]

I have always thought that the copperhead was an advantage: the battery could change target/mission as soon as the shells are in flight. It has not to wait for the arrival of shots to make the relevant adjustments (if any).

Why do you say it has to wait for the completion of the mission?

[Mk 1]

I have always thought that the copperhead was an advantage: the battery could change target/mission as soon as the shells are in flight.

I think that is correct IF you have only one target that you wish to engage. So for example if YOU want to hit one bunker, one tank, one building, you can paint the target, call your copperhead, and the battery can be off on other business (but only with another FO, as YOU are busy until the round impacts).

But if you have multiple targets (several tanks, bunkers, a trenchline, a complex of buildings) that is no longer the case.

Most artillery batteries can put a second (or even third) salvo into the air before the first one strikes the target. With Copperhead that was/is not the case. It is not salvo fired to begin with, and the general practice is not to fire the round until the FO confirms that he has painted his target. So the sequence would be: Paint the target, FIRE, wait until strike, paint a new target, FIRE, wait ....

This is in part because the Copperhead rounds cost many times more than conventional rounds. Having "silver bullets" dropping randomly into the target area because the FO wasn't focussed on painting the target (had to take cover, was fussnig with his radio, whatever), or the target moved out of the FO's vision, or whatever, would just not do.

At least that is how I understand it. Would be pleased to be corrected by any of our redlegs.

[TAMMY]

IActually I considered the possibility oif more than one idesignator. If this can be done only by the FO and he has to ipaint the target before firing, it is really a strong limit.

On the other hand this may be true also for conventional fire if you have only one FO, even if less limiting. I mean, you may engage one target at a time in any case. Whatever is your speed in changing target you have to wait for adjustment by FO before firing for effect the required number of salvoes and I doubt that the same FO would signal a new target while the previous one is still receiving fire

I have to say that my direct experience on the matter is quite old. I served in the artillery during my compulsory military service 40 years ago, so more near WWII systems then modern ones, but at my time one battery had three FO's.

[redleg]

A Paladin platoon can multitask to a certain extent, the limitations come with the fire direction software (or they did as of a few years ago). Each Copperhead round homes in on a specific laser code (pulse repetition frequency or PRF Code). The code is set on the round before firing and matches the code on the G/VLLD that the FO is using to designate the target. The code is set in the digital fire mission that the Fire Direction Center sends to the gun. BUT Copperhead missions are usually only 1 gun missions, so the other guns on the platoon are free to fire on other targets. If I recall correctly the computer on the Paladin will not allow it to fire 2 missions simultaneously – the FO must send End Of Mission (or it can be forced by the FDC) before the Copperhead gun can cycler through to another fire mission.

From the FO side, the G/VLLD can only be used on a single Copperhead mission at once. An FO can call for multiple conventional missions at once if he can see the targets and the guns are free. I’ve done this several times, but it is a real handful for both the FO and the FDC. Adjusting fire was really frowned upon when I was an FSO – there was no reason why you couldn’t know exactly where the bad guys were.

I stopped being an artilleryman in 2005 so some of this may have changed. I’ll check my references when I get a chance.

-Mike

[TAMMY]

Thanks for the details redleg. With this procedure I fully understand whiy the copperhead is frowned upon by sfcmac.

On the FO task, I may understand that there is no more need for adjustment (fire computer etc.) against a static target but I do not undestand how you can calli fire on multiple targets at the same time. I suppose you mean one target immediately after the other.

This because you will in any case designate them one after the other (position, type of target and evenually type of mission) snd they will be engaged one at a time. Or could s modern battery divide its fire? Of course this depends on the type pf target and on the efficiency of the shells.

[redleg]

I had similar experiences as an FDO in Korea, SFCMAC! I got to shoot some Copperhead there and there was more brass on firing point than in Seoul! The peace time firing restrictions really are ridiculous there. It is impossible to use Paladin to its full capability and live fire at the same time. I was in 2/17 FA (Camp Hovey) Jan 98 – Jan 99.

Tammy, the G/VLLD is (was anyway) rarely used for fire missions except for Copperhead. If you were in a FIST-V you would often use it to laze a target and get an exact target location, but this was rare for a number of reasons. There are other devises like MELIOS to assist FOs in getting exact target locations, and even with the naked eye and a map it isn’t that hard for a trained FO unless you are in flat featureless terrain.

The reason the G/VLLD was rarely used in my day was because it was rarely carried by light infantry FOs (too heavy) and the FIST-V was rarely where the G/VLLD was needed. It couldn’t keep up with tanks and Brads, broke down a lot, and the FOs with infantry platoons were on foot anyway. Not to badmouth either the G/VLLD or FIST-V (I’m sure they were both great in their day) but they were past their prime when I was on them. They’ve both been replaced I think but I don’t have any experience with the new gear.

As to running multiple fire mission – most calls for fire are sent voice or digital. The FO sends the CFF to an FSE (who clears the request) and sometimes several FSEs depending on the situation. The CFF then goes to the FDC who does the tactical fire direction (who will shoot, what to shoot, how many rounds, etc). These guys juggle which units are firing, which are moving, who has what munitions, etc. The FDC also assigns a target number to the mission which goes back to the FO. The FO can send another CFF if he has another target and the same process is used. The FO just has to make sure that he uses the correct target number when sending corrections or data to the FDC. The FDC is able to manage multiple FOs in the same way – they just have to keep the target numbers straight. I’ve fired FA and mortar missions at the same time as well.

Paladin units in my day had 6 firing platoons in 3 batteries so they could fire up to 6 simultaneous platoon size missions. Obviously some targets required battery or even battalion fires depending on target priority, firing duration, and size. Then there are reinforcing, general support, and GSR fires…..

Hope this answers your question. This doesn’t even get into the technical fire direction and firing unit management!

[TAMMY]

I think to have misundestood what you intended for "multiple" targets.

The proceduire you inidcate was more or less the same at my time, except that the info were by voice.only and the FO had to give adjustment when necessary. The calll for fire where managed by the group (battalion) HQ which decided the priorities, etc.

I served in a field artillery (105mm) unit organised on 3 batteries of 6 pieces each. The fire unit was the battery. In some cases you could fire with half battery to different targets but it was very rare not so much for the FDC but due to the dispersion of fire that required at least a battery concentration to fire for effect.

The group was in force to the Artilley School so we did a lot of live firing and demotration/tests for new equipment. In one occasion we tested a computer system (by Litton if I remember well) that included a complete network from FO,up. The problem were:: it was heavy because it needed car batteries. Moreover it was very sensible to voltage variation.