Could we one day see the return of heavy artillery such as the 240mm?

We America-Proof their military hardware; I'm sure that the average, military age American should know how to operate a LeapFrog©.

Attached: MilSpec toughpad US ver..jpeg (1280x720 361.11 KB, 115.54K)

...

You're joking but with modern numerically integrated infantry it's basically that.
The french ATLAS links for artillery is stupidly simple to use. All the soldier does is point and click (literally you do it with the FELIN scope tied to the thumb pad in the forward grip) his LT check the order (or not, it can be automated) , the artillery CP check the order (or not, it can be automated) the system pick which gun has to do the job, the automated CAESAR fire.

No one enters any coordinates at any point.

What if the system goes down?

Then obviously they do it the old fashioned way

the only problems with lockheed martin's aircraft are failure to meet deadlines and absurd costs

prove me wrong

They commit seppuku because they don't know what trigonometry is.

Also promising more than they can deliver.

I'm pretty sure that the only way you can 'America-Proof' a firearm (meaning 'modify it to make friendly fire impossible') would be to remove all moving components, replace the barrel with a solid cylinder, and only issue magazines that have been welded shut at the top. Of course, even with that, there are going to be a few incidents of American troops bludgeoning their comrades and allies with their new M19 'Brick' class rifles, but let's focus on one problem at a time.

Dude, it's France. They'll have have issued an unconditional surrender long before that happens.

What is the point of massive artillery. Why not just CAS carpet bomb it or use precision bombs/bunker busters for shit that survives the carpet bombing?

Because modern AA will shoot down everything from 0 to 25km on a 200km radius.
Planes are dead, even some of the NATO air command brass are admitting it. Even if the F-35 does work, it will be the last plane.

Missile and radar tech are just too good.

CAS requires air superiority, which in a real war may or may not be available (especially if you're advancing into enemy territory). Heavy artillery is much harder to neutralize.
CAS is also many times more expensive per pound of ordinance delivered.

Well in that case we oughta rev up the research on creatin us some MYOMERS

Attached: KhBpesD.jpg (1920x1080, 1.79M)

If they could make rail guns reliable, you could have the guns WAY behind the lines.

That's unfair to hungarianon, he's training to be a gunsmith and does have a much better understanding of what he speak of than pretty much every youtuber ever, Mike "Super Gavin" Sparks only ever trained to be an ass.

Who do you think you are kidding Mister (1) and done
If you think Zig Forums is on the run
We are the anons who will derail your little game
We are the anons who will stop your posts again
Who do you think you are kidding Mister (1) and done if you think old Zig Forums is done
Mister Ausfag passes out drunk at night
But he wakes up and he's shitposting with a grin
Cause who do you think you are kidding Mister (1) and done if you think old Zig Forums is done!

Attached: GetItUpEm.jpg (233x423, 22.7K)

faggot faggot come in here to lie…

Faggot, if you're going to come here and be your normal faggy self then at least put some fucking effort into your faggotry.

I see no point for it, unless we somehow make them weight lighter and we put them on fast SPGs that have a mechanism to load them as fast as they would load a 122mm round.

[RAF LAUGHING]
Reminder that this is your great-granddaddy's fault, bong.

Attached: refugee-column-marching-sized-770x415xt.jpg (770x415, 97.79K)

At least put effort into your shitposting.

Es ist so schön auf Zig Forums zu sein, Froganon!
Nicht jeder Fad' bring Einsicht, nein, Froganon.
Doch du, du bist mein Talisman, Froganon!
Du geht in allem mir voran Froganon.

Streloks sind Streloks,
auf die Zone haben's Bock
Sie kennen keine Lumperei
Und sind nur einer IP treu

You forgot:

Good?

Enjoy getting raped by paki and nigger gangs, angloroach :)

Making them lighter and putting them on a chassis can be done, and making an autoloader is certainly possible. Even if the vehicle and the autoloader aren't that fast, they can make up for it with range. Now, I'm terribly sorry that all I can muster up is kikepedia, but that's the best I can do.

And of course, it's still "just" conventional tech, no crazy new propellants or combustible light-gas guns. The later would be have even more insane ranges. And remember, the individual shells are also a lot more devastating.

Sage

All I need is for it to be able to bombard Ankara
Unfortunately no such artillery exists yet.

Attached: not enough range.png (1219x661, 2.07M)

Ever hear of counter-battery fires?

It's like you never frequented these thread. Here, read: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon
Also, that 240mm gun fired projectiles that weighted more than 150kg, while a 155mm shell is only about 50kg. So you could put one of them in a sabot and fire it from a 240mm gun for greater range. Or you could use gliding projectiles, like the one described in this pdf.

You can half that distance if you use a ballistic missile sub from the black sea. All you would need is a sub that can sneak through the shallow waters of the Bosporus they are on sale right now.

Attached: Type_212.jpg (1024x768, 227.03K)

Welp

Attached: 120mm-mrm-image01.jpg (754x554, 106.47K)

Fuck off Germany, you won't sell me any more submarines.
And as for your plan, it sounds interesting

I WANT IT! I WANT IT I WANT IT I WANT IT!

Attached: 345.jpg (335x188, 12K)

We can probably make some modifications to some old designs, make it truly mobile using a nuclear reactor, and increase the payload by a fuckton for a premium price.
My point is: it can be easily done. It's going to cost you a pretty fortune though.

Attached: serveimage0.jpeg (900x1137 984.79 KB, 252.6K)

No

Attached: 1494423572052.png (631x503, 308.25K)

YOU KNOW YOU WANT IT
If you run out of ammo it can probably wade through the med and crush tanks under it's treads.

Attached: serveimage2.jpeg (590x685 414.05 KB, 31.32K)

[greatest allying intensifies]

Attached: classic sweating .jpg (600x600, 104.89K)

was the thing slow to load because it was essentially a battleship gun without the turret automation?

No. Its bigger than any battleship gun. 32" shells.

Why? What bunker couldn't you bust with a 16 or 18 inch?

Why didn't the French try to stick a bunch of battleship turrets in their Maginot line?

Would it be possible to design a "quick" replaceable barrel for something like a 16inch gun, by using rails to move barrels in & out of the mount?

but railguns aren't even the biggest (or krautiest) gun your folk ever built. a bagger chassis could easily support a V3 type device, like that one canadian guy and his space cannon/jew bombard.

Because Krupp designed something that could honestly fuck anything up at the time, in particular the Maginot line, but it wasn't finished in time so plan B of go around and bypass everything went through. Gustav fucked Sevastopol up damn good though.
Because the frogs were broke and they don't think like that. Besides that Gustav would have fucked them to an inoperable state in a shot much like it did in Sevastopol.
Easier and cheaper to reline the barrel the moment its burned out.

The Paris gun had to take the rotation of the earth into its firing equation.

how do you reline a cannon barrel?

Kraut magic

Attached: 0_d7046_b6b30cbf_orig.jpg (477x646, 56.27K)

Most big guns have a separate liner that can be easily replaced when it starts to get worn out. The really heavy guns (>8") generally aren't field-replaceable, but if your heavy guns are firing over a hundred rounds in a single engagement then you have bigger problems.

Which is of questionable utility imo. EE, IE, physics or matsci with some courses in mechanics would be much more useful. It's possible he is studying to be a gunsmith for legal reasons though, if he is a registered gunsmith it may make it easier for him to build/tinker.

Gustav needed a relining every 200 or so, by the time it went back to Essen it had rained 300 shells down, most of which were from testing.

Gustav was later deployed in the Soviet Union during the Battle of Sevastopol, part of Operation Barbarossa, where among other things, it destroyed a munitions depot located roughly 30 meters below ground level.[2] 

JESUS CHRIST

FUCK BUNKER BUSTERS I WANT A HEAVY GUSTAV

I would have hoped that 'deployed in' meant 'pointed at' rather than 'relocated to', but no. Apparently the thing breaks down into about twenty five pieces to be transported by rail.
Then not only do they have to build the circle of double-track to aim and fire the thing, but also the crane to put it back together in the first place.

Germans, man.

Attached: image.jpeg (1200x709, 240.33K)

still harder than shooting down some planes.

You forgot the part about it being under the sea bed, and having eleven yards of reinforced concrete protecting it. Not to mention it sunk a ship nearby too. Hell it was planned to have a rocket propelled projectile to launch one of those shells something like a good hundred miles or so but that would have required an additional football field of barrel. Also the Germans knocked out a fort with five shells after they deemed trying to take it was a waste of time.

Requires a crew of 4000 to set up and 500 or so to fire at a good pace.

Attached: fcc3508ebd196ccc353d21776fb0b067cbe04829f8c8e4cc4610c4c86dfb0d49.jpg (375x503, 41.77K)

Attached: the-violence-has-escalated.png (160x160 19.24 KB, 8.83K)

Try to beat this piece of artillery.

Attached: 24324.jpg (1799x871, 361.15K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2B1_Oka
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2A3_Kondensator_2P
Just upgrade one of these with modern propellants and Gerald Bull's magic, and it's done. You see, a gun can deliver a lot more ordnance than a MRLS because you don't have to stop after every salvo to reload it, instead you can keep pounding the enemy for weeks at a time.

user stop it. Please, stop it. I can't stop giggling at the idea.

Rocket artillery is all fine and good, but isn't it rather inefficient against built up areas like we've seen in Syria? Smaller artillery pieces aren't doing diddley against buildings. Sure, they're smashing the uppermost floor of a apartment building but it's just not getting the job done. You end up needing direct fire weaponry to deal with those strong-points, and you're not affecting tunnels running beneath the steers and buildings. This ofcourse means losses in manpower and equipment.

I guess it could work, though 600mm Karl-Gerät's have been proven to work, to a degree.

Attached: varangian envrey.png (550x480 119.47 KB, 47.3K)

Best Korean guns aren't that far (60+ km), also the last design of Bull for Iraq could hit at 56km with REGULAR rounds.
There is a reason why he was assassinated.

Also about any non-burger heavy MLRS, hell even any recent GMLRS are in the ball park.

Attached: Iraqi AL_Fao_210mm_SP.jpg (800x619 63.69 KB, 196.24K)

lul

how did he do that?

So every French infantryman has a dedicated button for artillery strikes? Or is this some kind of a multifunctional thing? Also, do they see it in a digital map to make sure they didn't accidentally order an artillery strike to a branch in front of them? Or is there some kind of a safety that doesn't deliver the order if they choose a point that is too close?

Both of those are self-propelled guns, so there is nothing to tow here.
Without an autoloader.
You deliberately choose the inferior weapon. And again, with modern technology I'm sure it could be tripled, and then it would outrange your MRLS.
Where did you get that? Anyway, there is vid related. It can hit a tank, even slowly moving ones. Now imagine what can a direct hit from a 420mm cannon do.

youtube.com/watch?v=R7kl_IGpD3I
youtube.com/watch?v=kBeAFLKcj9c
youtube.com/watch?v=8IiPuzj1OXA

And again, with modern technology I'm sure MRLS range could be tripled up 300 km range , and then it would outrange your outdated tubes.

That's not how it works. Gerald Bull invented a new alternative for rifling that made tube artillery a lot more efficient. Propellants also imporved since the early Cold War. And guided munitions do solve the problem of CEP, which also increases the range. In the case of rockets, the only way forward is developing better propellants. But then you could use those better propellants in rocket-assisted shells too. Truth to be told, you can increase the range of a rocket a lot easier, as you just have to make it longer and fill it with more propellant. But those rockets are already quite long, and making them even longer would make reloading even more complicated.

Attached: Manchukuo_army_artillery_training.png (393x361, 166.72K)

Yeah. Looks cool and all that. Where's the BDA though?

did he use progressive rifling?

No, he invented the extended range, full bore concept. As far as I understand the rifling is virtually the same, and the difference is in the projectile. Instead of applying an oversized copper ring it has a few fins that follow the rifling, and so there is less drag from the barrel. You can see them in pic related.

Attached: G6_shells_and_charges-001.jpg (3264x2448, 2.03M)

ERFB has nothing to do with rifling, stop using Wikipedia for research. The real purpose of the fins is to act as a low-drag bourrelet. In order to prevent yawing in the chamber a conventional shell needs to be cylindrical from its driving band to just ahead of its CoM (pic related), which obviously is not terribly aerodynamic at Mach 3. ERFB shells only need to have a 155mm diameter at the driving band, allowing the use of a much finer projectile shape.

Attached: 155mm shells.jpg (1024x683, 197.32K)

I want siege mortars and siege howitzers.

Attached: 1200px-Skoda_305_mm_Model_1911_side.jpg (1024x576 280.98 KB, 149.95K)

That's basically what he said.

Yes, well a designation button, in the front grip.
Yes.
Yes.
Or is there some kind of a safety that doesn't deliver the order if they choose a point that is too close?
Yes, if it runs on auto.

Attached: FELIN data terminal.jpg (2112x2816 19.19 KB, 2.4M)

so what range could your typical destroyer gun get with such a upgrade?

wow this is actually cool as fuck. is that a non backlit lcd or e-ink or something that that display works on?
Imagine the awesome battery life if they had a high contrast e ink display

I've been preaching the glory of FELIN for years now. It's such an amazing feat of military tech. French military gives me a hard on. Nuclear power diesel assisted engines for Leclerc 2020 confirmed?

Attached: 8Yr6BDh.png (488x695, 520.43K)

Attached: 800px-T-1_HE_914_mm_shell_1.jpg (800x600, 143.81K)

I'm not 100% sure but think it's just a regular lcd but with a filter on top of it and minimal back-lighting to be NV friendly.

I'd say a 240mm breech-loading trench mortar is close enough.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/240_mm_mortar_M240

I see, thanks. But what are the other buttons for? And does the scope offer magnification, or is it "just" a camera with night vision and (I assume) a range finder?

The main problem of the French military tech is that they are always early adapters, and so when the rest of the world catches up they are stuck with what is by then slightly outdated equipment. Of course it woulnd't be a problem if the French governments had the willingness to finance the constant R&D and reequpment.

The icons are pretty self-explanatory: