I must have missed the Memo...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
Most importantly, it cannot compensate for the huge shortcomings of the basic gun. That gun is 100% obsolete by modern conventional warfare standards. It's a mere fig leaf in comparison to what's in production for mechanised brigades these days.
Even the mainland Chinese have a SPH that outclasses the M777 so much it's not funny.
It does also outclass the Paladin, Braveheart and GCT.
Uh, you do know that we're not really that concerned about conventional warfare in the near term, that the thinking is that the mobility of the 777 compensates for capability shortfalls in the roles envisioned for the near term, right? And that we're working on Son of Paladin? That, if necessary, we could even buy or license build some PzH 2000s or rapidly resurrect the Crusader or -- more likely -- FCS NLOS-C?
All of which have their own problems... :wry:
There is no perfect weapon, all are compromises and each accepts certain shortfalls as payment for certain capabilities. The 777 offers mobility for adequate capability in the fire support role for some units. There is no intent for US heavy guys to give up their SPs and there's an upgrade working. LINK. At least we aren't contemplating buying Caesars...:D
However, the fact that you disagree with the UK, US and Canada on the 777 is noted. :rolleyes:
I'd buy the Archer personally but then, I'm not an Artillerist. Nor do I have to move in assaults from the sea nowadays -- or be supported by a 75mm pack howitzer. Life is better... ;)