Apparently many of you got the wrong impression from the title. The M109 is the “gold standard” in that it is the main baseline by which contemporary SPH’s are judged, and by FAR the most widely produced and well known example… not that it’s the best. The PzH 2000 or K9 Thunder for example are superior systems… BECAUSE the M109 is what they’re being compared to. Also keep in mind that what we do on this channel is to look at a piece of hardware within the context of its own timeframe in history, which for the M109 is predominantly the Cold War (in which there were no PzH 2000s roaming around). *edit: the M1299 ERCA has now been fully cancelled (unfortunately!) likely due to the US opting towards a wheeled system
@@ArmorCast Well it now is along with the Norwegian K9/VIDAR in the Swedish tree so it'd be fun to see Koala play them and give some negative/positive comments like that one Challenger 2 vid, they also did some decompression (suspiciously not long after you left WT with that vid, huh....) and repair cost were re done, makes life much more easier for players now and if you do end up coming back good luck with the new experience!
The M110 might be a simple and arguably outdated design but man, something about it is just *right.* Can't fault the M109 for being practical though; and it doesn't look half bad itself.
@Android - I'm an Electrical Engineer for BAE Systems. The company that manufactures the M109. I worked on the prototypes of the current M109A7. Boasting a 600 Volt system that powers an auto loading munitions system with advanced targeting and coordination I'd say the current M109A7 is a far cry from being outdated. Yes, there are tanks with a larger bore main weapon but don't you think that with me mentioning this that there is a solution already in the works? I love the way this throaty tank sounds and performs. Before you sound off, kindly educate yourself so you don't look foolish.
I gained a lot of respect for our artillery in the states over these past few years. Glad to see someone covering the M109 I don’t think it gets enough love.
And yet no one talks about another artillery piece a war hero that very few know about it has served both African and Middle Eastern states well the G6
Regarding the PzH 2000, if anyone wants to know more about it and speaks German, there is a really interesting interview by the German content creator "Säbelzahnmöwe" with the principal designer of the PzH 2000. He talks about the failing of the previous programs and the reasoning for certain design decisions and some of the major innovations made in the vehicle.
@rosomak8244 Well, some people like to drive a 30-year-old car and swear it is the best in the world. So sure there are people that like whatever you like.
Thank you for covering this staple of modern American firepower! My father was an artilleryman in the Colorado National Guard in the late 80s and was initially trained on the 109, however really found his home with its bigger brother the M110A1. A couple fun facts he's shared with me about the piece: "You always wanted to be the driver, because all the lower enlisted, the couple specialists and privates on the gun crew for loading, sat on the left side, right were the exhaust would smack you." "The 113 and 577(shortened from M113 and M577, he does this with all of his vehicles xD) were a lot of fun to drive, like a little jeep that could go anywhere and do anything." "The worst part of drill was that second weekend. See they took me and all the other (pardon his language) retards from the artillery school and put us on the "special" weapons team. So we had to come in a weekend prior to do our standalone certifications for nuclear artillery, and they didn't pay us any more than the going rate for the trouble of the extra training." "We only had a couple pieces in the NG armory, most of the gear we would use was already overseas. If the Russians went over, we would scramble to Germany and grab our gear from prepositioned stock on the Rhine, and if they got too close to us, we'd have to use the nuclear shells. Big mean sunnovabitches."
The Type 74 and 75 SPGs were similar in the idea of a lighter howitzer and a medium howitzer. I had the opportunity to them up close recently at the JGSDF information centre in Wakōshi, Tokyo. Just thought I'd share another example of vehicles with similar logic to the M109 and 108.
The M109 laid the groundwork for modern artillery development. The french AMX AuF1 was the first SPH with an autoloading system. Than the PZH2000, the swiss Upgrade, K9 and all the other variants. And now we have wheeled platforms like the KNDS RCH 155 on the Boxer Chassis. 9 shot per minute, bringing shot and scoot to a new level.
@@raka522 SPH designs and doctrines were further developed from WW2, if you want to even go further, i raise the first and probably the one that started the concept of SPHs is the Gun Carrier Mk.1 by the british, used back in WW1, sporting a 60-Pounder artillery piece on the chassis of the Mark IV tank.
THANK YOU for being the only person that knows the difference between battalion and divisional artillery. Their employment in the field is so different from each other and I’m so glad there’s a youtuber mentioning it. The US enjoys overwhelming fire superiority not because of the number or specs on our artillery but because we give far smaller units far more access to artillery and air power.
Compared to what though? Before the Ukraine war, the Russians banked a lot on the concept of the "BTG", which contained a SPG battery and a MLRS battery inside a battalion sized formation, meaning about 800 men had their own 6 SPGs and 6 MLRS on top of their own air defense battery, tanks and mechanized infantry. In comparison, a US armored brigade consists of about 4100 men and has 18 SPGs. That means the "density" of artillery systems per personnel is or was way heavier in the Russian army. (1 US Armored Brigade would be the equivalent of 5+ Russian BTGs size- and manpower-wise, which means 4100 Russian soldiers would come with more than 60 artillery pieces, compared to 18 in the US Army.) Of course, the concept of the Russian BTG is one of the victims of the current war because it turned out you need way more infantry to protect all that heavy gear. (x) I'm just saying that your claim that the US Army just gives more big guns to smaller units doesn't really seem to be backed by the available numbers. Looking at the surprisingly small stockpiles of artillery ammo that have been revealed in the context of support for Ukraine, it seems to support what many have been saying, that the US has been looked at its artillery forces as a bit of a red haired stepchild, due to its reliance of air power. Accordingly, as far as I can tell, the use of 120 mm mortar systems on a company level seems to be more prevalent in most armies, inside and outside of NATO, compared to the US Army, meaning even small units like companies usually get their own light indirect fire support in most armed forces, which the US Army seems to deem unnecessary, at least since they pool most of their infantry in Stryker brigades. (x) At least that is the consensus you always hear. I'm not sure though because the concept of infantry protecting tanks seems kind of obsolete to me nowadays and not just because of drones. I think there is precious little a bunch of infantrymen can do to protect a tank against a modern ATGM fired from 2 or more miles away, let alone against accurate artillery fire.
@@TrangleC Russia might have switched from focusing on the battalion tactical group (BTG) to larger, division-centric operations, but all this changes is at what level the larger support network comes in. They'll still deploy battalion sized units independently, but only for shorter length operations, rather than expecting them to be self-sufficient for weeks at a time (and thus needing to give them all the support infrastructure to accomplish that). Russian forces still HAVE the same saturation of artillery to infantry. This is probably worth a video of its own, but the issue with the BTG style of deployment was more so about the failings of Russian logistics than about the shortcomings of the BTG itself. **For anybody else reading this who is confused, a Russian Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) is roughly equivalent to a US brigade combat team (BCT)
@@ArmorCast To me as a old military nerd and armchair general with no actual military experience, the concept of the BTG always felt very familiar. It feels like the kind of thing someone like me would come up with, if you know what I mean. Something that sounds plausible and sound on paper and is very neat and simple from a bird's eye perspective and thus would appeal to some dictator like Putin like it appeals to a "interested layman" like me. That also always made me suspicious though whether it would actually work out where the rubber meets the road. Unfortunately, as you mentioned, bad logistics, a lack of discipline and seemingly unforeseen conditions like the influence of drones and almost total surveillance, make it really hard to gauge how viable the BTG and similar "making a big army out of a bunch of small miniature armies that have everything they need for every situation"-ideas are and could be in the future. Possible that future Active Protection Systems that can protect a vehicle against drones and top attack ATGMs like Javelin, might change everything again and make BTG-style formations a good idea again. As it looks at the moment, the battlefield just seems very messy from a military organizational and hierarchical perspective, with tiny, sub-platoon sized unis or even single vehicles just running around and operating on their own in a form of chaotic long range guerrilla-on-guerrilla warfare. To me, from the outside, the whole thing kind of looks like a real life version of War Thunder, IL-2 or other such MMO PC war games where basically everyone is just running around on their own, looking for a opportunity to shoot some enemies, without much organizational cohesion or overarching strategy. Everything seems to work on a "just go there and see what you can do"-basis, which I suppose would be a extreme version of German "Auftragstaktik".
@TrangleC that just isn't true. Sure maybe on an older doctrinal sense that would be accurate but that's not how the US Army operates today. Heavy Artillery isn't kept integrated with Infantry/Armor/ and Cavalry units because it doesn't make sense from a training and readiness standpoint. When Maneuver units train and deploy they most often have batteries attached at the Brigade levels which are then used to cover various formations and as they conduct operations. And as far as 120s go they are heavily used in Stryker and Heavy BCTs. In my career I have been in 3 SBCTs and 2 ABCT and each one had a mortar section that was organic to the company that was either a M113 MCV or the Stryker MCV. But you won't know most of that looking at the internet, the Army is still in the process of transitioning from COIN operations to LSCO, especially when it comes to doctrine.
Hey everyone, ive worked on the M109 for a long time especially on the mechanical side. its my absolute favorite platform. If anyone has questions about maintenance or how things operate on the platform id love to talk about it wih you all, within reason of course. Love the channel, keep up the good work.
There are several moments in the video where we can see M109s with 7 road wheels and then several other moments where we can see M109s with only 6 road wheels. What's that about? Also, the 7 road wheel variant seems to sit much lower than its 6 road wheel cousin.
You are spot on the M109A7 is the newest variant and the hull is loosely based on the Bradley which has 6 road wheels and it also sits much higher as well. It's tall enough that working on it sucks lol. The M109 through M109A6 had the same hull with 7 road wheels and a much lower ride height.
@@fastbreak0073 The army has been after a goal of part commonality. The old hull and engine shared nothing with other platforms such as the Bradley. The engine and transmission were also something that was holding the A6 back. (There are more changes and reasons I just don't want to get to deep in case of OPSEC)
How hot does it get inside the cabin? I recently learned Abrams can get 130F or more inside. Different beasts of course, but that fact kinda blew me away. Curious if it's the same for wheeled artillery.
I worked for United Defense during the development of the Crusader SPH. I remember lots of briefings (with Pentagon officials) where they were gushing over how revolutionary Crusader was going to be, and how outdated the Paladin was. Famous last words, as the program got axed.
From what I've heard, in the end the Crusader was considered not revolutionary ENOUGH. The army wanted something completely new for the 21st century, and they'd be happy to stick with the Paladin while they waited. Now, it's looking like the M1299 or the Next Gen Howitzer program might actually make it to production
@@ArmorCastRealistically post cold War America wasn't going to be getting anything next generation. Too expensive without a foe to justify it - the two wars of the 2000s just made that even more the case sucking up resources on unconventional warfare.
@@ArmorCast I've heard the big issue was that the Pentagon insisted on 100% separation of crew and ammo and back then automation wasn't up to that yet and the fully automatic reloading mechanisms was too complicated, too expensive and too hard to maintain. The idea was stupid anyways. If something sets off up to 60 artillery shells and the according propellant charges, no internal bulk head will protect the crew from the resulting explosion, obviously.
@@TrangleC Modern insensitive explosives are actually extremely difficult to set off by accident (assuming they used them...). So the real risk is a powder fire, which blow out panels etc can keep out of the crew compartment long enough to bail out. Remember that Abrams ammo casing is flammable, so it's a generally similar problem to the M1, just scaled up a lot.
I'm a former M109 crewman (13B10) and field artillery officer (13A5P) and artillery remains so wildly misunderstood in the military vehicle community to the point of being kind of hilarious.
Two notes: (1) M992A3 Carrier Ammunition Tracked isn't an upgrade of the M992A2 FAASV; it's actually a completely new vehicle built on the new PIM chassis, and (2) The XM1299 isn't a BAE product or BAE-integrated product; all of the XM1299 prototypes were built internal to the USG government using the organic depots, arsenals, assembled by the Armaments Center at Picatinny Arsenal using a decontented M109A7 chassis, a modified M109A6 cab, and the 58-cal gun built out of Watervliet Arsenal.
Just when I think I know a fair bit about a certain platform, these amazing videos prove I still have much to learn. Another fantastic video, thank you!
I served on the pre-Paladin M109A6 in the US Army during the late 1990s. The M109A7 variant is actually the Paladin variant, but either way, it was a fun system to train on when you weren't doing maintenance on it. I did get to fire some of the RAP rounds during annual training. I watched one of those get fired from outside the track, and it knocked all the dirt off in a cloud. Fun times.
A6 is the Paladin, always has been. A7 began its life as the "Paladin Integrated Management" program, but that only became the A7 variant much later on, and has only begun mass production in the last few years. The Paladin moniker can be found in plenty of official US Army documentation as well as media correspondence from the late 90s and early 2000s, long before the A7 or even PIM program existed.
@@ArmorCast I'm just saying that none of my Drill Sergeants called the A6 a Paladin, and neither did anyone in my MA National Guard unit either, at least not in 1997. We knew the A7 was coming out, and that definitely was called the Paladin. At the same time, it was the National Guard, but even the Guard gets the same initial training as everyone else.
@@Ostenjager Here's some army documentation from August 2000 referring to the A6 as "Paladin". This was long before the A7 variant www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/amd-us-archive/fm3-09.70%2800%29.pdf This one is TRADOC, from December 1992, referring to the A6 "Paladin" tradocfcoeccafcoepfwprod.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/fires-bulletin-archive/1992/DEC_1992/DEC_1992_FULL_EDITION.pdf And this one is from even earlier, TACOM this time, again using the handle "M109A6 Paladin" officially asc.army.mil/docs/wsh2/1992-wsh.pdf Couple more: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/A_case_study_on_the_relationship_between_OPM-Crusader%2C_UDLP%2C_and_TACOM-ARDEC_in_the_development_of_the_Crusader_Armament_%28IA_casestudyonrelat00cole%29.pdf apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA284474.pdf asc.army.mil/docs/pubs/alt/2003/1_JanFeb/articles/34_M109A6_Paladin-Changing_Face_Of_DOD_Acquisition_200301.pdf There were no plans for an A7 variant of the M109 until the mid 2000s, after the cancellation of the Crusader and FCS programs. The designation "A7" wouldn't even be adopted until even later. www.army-technology.com/projects/paladin/?cf-view
Perhaps because M109 are assigned to replace soviet artillery of mechanized brigades, while small amount of Excaliburs were sent to artillery brigades.
@@ArmorCast I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I really do not remember the A6 being called Paladin by anyone on the line, or any of the other variants which were in service at the time. 1997 was a long time ago now. My memory is that at OSUT and while I was on the line afterwards, there was scuttlebut about a Paladin system being developed. It is possible that the people developing things and the Pentagon were calling it something else that us lowly joes on the line weren't tracking. That happens sometimes. Just because the brass think one thing does not mean that the joes are thinking the same thing.
22:00 FYI a swiss howitzer platoon is normally composed of 6 howitzers, there is an idea of changing it so a battery has two platoons of 3 howitzers but at the moment we're still doing 6
It was an informative and wonderful introduction of all characteristics of M 109 (Paladin)Hawtizer artillery systems designed by US military technology capabilities..that has accurate amid and widely range firepower... Artillery is the backbone of statistic army firepower
This was interesting. Sadly I had to leave couple minutes before the end of the video, but I came back 20 minutes later and watched the rest. As people said - South African G6 is also interesting. I do wonder what it would take to upgrade it's rate of fire - though whether it's worth it now, that I don't know. I do remember the hype for that thing being considered (it never went anywhere and government was considering couple others as well) in my country in early 2000's. It only took 15 years to produce something that... is decent, but maybe not as good. AHS Krab. Shame they couldn't make the darn original chassis to work properly. And Poland still needs to learn how to make better munition.
We do make modern 155mm rounds (and quite a lot actually). Some components are licensed from Slovakia (charges if I recall), but all of the production is done in Poland, and the ammo works well in Ukraine. And the Krab is actually amongst the best artillery systems out there too. It's reliable, resistant to harsh terrain and weather conditions (unlike the PzH 2000), has outstanding fire control system (and electronics in general), but most importantly, it shoots *every single* type of shell and propellant charge there is. No matter what you load the Krab with, it can shoot it with no problem. Not to mention that it comes with all the necessary auxiliary vehicles - platoon, battery and regiment level command vehicles, ammo resupply trucks, repair shop trucks, radar and so on.
I miss being on the gun line. We had the M109A5, a variant just before the Palladian. I was in the FDC and worked with the gun line in the firing point. We led formations and did all of the firing table calculations along with communications with the FO and TOC in our M577. The Paladins were just coming online before I got out. I was lucky to see them in action several times and what a difference they were, yet so similar. Shot Over!
M109 is old but is still being kept up to date. But they also have the new M1299 with an extended L58 155mm calibur gun which almost doubles its range. In a demonstration it had hit a target 65 km away with an Excalibur round and 72 km away with a new XM1113 round. The same gun also fired BAE's XM1155 sub-caliber projectile out to 110 km. A battalion of 18 XM1299 SPH prototypes are to be tested by the US Army this year.
Swiss Arty guy here. Regarding the uncertainty around 21:57. In a Swiss Artillery Batteries there is only one gun platoon of 6 guns. We dont really split a battery between two targets and there is only one active fire mission per battery.
Cheers for the info lad 👍 A previous commenter did say that a Swiss howitzer battery was six PzHb 74s, but a battery is usually made up of two platoons. Interesting that the Swiss army don’t seperate them again the way other nations do.
there is an idea floating around for 2-3 years now that calls for the gun platoon to be split in two 3 gun platoons. The idea is to give the battery commander more freedom of choice having one platoon get more ammo or update its NAPOS while the other covers the fire mission. Hasn't been applied yet but it might be coming soon
@@sangay9361 Intressting, it would increase the flexibility in ammo resupply and updating the NAPOS. But you could only have one active fire mission due to the limitations of the FARGO. And i don't really see the need for a second platoon here you could do it like the austrians 6 gun platoon but only 4 are active while 2 are resupplying or updating. A second platoon would also need an other officer and an additional M113 + crew for him.
@@Leggo-jm2tp you only need a second M113 if you plan on shooting two fire missions at once. This would rarely be the case irl since fire missions (without the whole security checks we do in peace times) take a lot less time and you don't correct shots (so you only shoot once then you scoot) and you don't have to wait for intaff to tell you to end the fire mission. With the FARGO you can easily switch between one platoon and the other and don't have to wait for the guns to have reached their next fire position as the second platoon will already be there so you can virtually keep constantly shooting out of different fire positions with little to no downtime in between. Also for important missions you can shoot with both platoons at the same time
@@sangay9361 I am happy to disscus this somewhere else. I am not too comfortable going in to greater details here in a public space. Idk what kind of information of FARGO is publicly available anyway but i dont want to risk it. Better safe then sorry. But i think you missed my point. I didnt mean a second fire direction center or Flst. I meant a second M113 for the platoon leader of the second gun platoon. I know not really a huge problem but still worth considering.
When I see one of those I,think of rebuilding the elevation cylinder, situated on the ceiling. Getting the front pin to line up was always a pleasure when reinstalling.
Are you planning to make a similarly detailed video about the Krab in the future? I think it would be a nice topic, especially that its history is quite interesting.
Krab might be a difficult one to make such a video about, since it’s just a K9 turret on an AS-90 hull. We’ll definitely do a video about the K9 Thunder very soon, and in that we’ll talk about Krab as well
@@ArmorCast The thing is that the Krab SPG is not really just the AS-90 turret on a K9 hull. It sure looks like it is, but to say so is like to call the Stryker "just a Piranha III". The chassis itself is heavily modified to the point that it can't accept the original K9 turret - for example, its height was increased by about 30 cm to accommodate APU and air filtration system, it's equipped with fire suppression system (which even the K9A1 doesn't have in the crew compartment) and so on. And while there weren't many technical changes to the turret itself (except of the L/52 gun), these are built entirely in Poland, based on the technical documentation owned by HSW. According to unofficial sources*, HSW doesn't even need to pay license fees for the turret anymore. (Unfortunately, transparency isn't a strong suit of our MoD, so there are always some semi-official/unofficial sources when talking about Polish military equipment.) I could write a wall of text here about how Krab came to be, what exactly is Polish in it and what isn't, but not here as YT doesn't allow links (at least for me). Btw, speaking of the K9 video you're making, if you're planning to mention plans to replace the Krab with so called "K9PL", I'd just say that it's not certain yet - there no executive contract signed at this point even though it was supposed to be signed at the end of 2022 (and so called "framework agreement" is not binding), there are plans to increase the production of the Krab and now there are also some political factors as well. In short, the future of the K9 in Poland is not certain.
Pzh 2000 breaks quickly in war conditions.The autoloader is not durable enough when used intensively. Manual loading seems to be outdated but still more trustworthy.
@@tommygun333uhm, you know that ukraine uses them quite a lot woth the autoloader working just fine? Yes, there are some issues with it beeing a bit finnickyin some cases, but the ukrainian artillerymen have apparently adjusted to that just fine. And there were even absurd cases like the one that went through 20000 (yes, twenty thousa d) shot fired before returning to the depot for notable maintenance and a barrel change.
"Nukes, I suppose." My brother led a Special Weapons group that specialized in them back in 1991. The W48 was discontinued in 1992, though I don't know if it was replaced or the capability simply dropped.
The original M109 was built by Food Machinery Corporation (FMC). United Defense was created in 1994 by a merger, and the first version built by them would have been the M109A6, which had gone into service in 1991.
23:22 : You are familiar with the thought experiment 'the M109 of Theseus' in the field of artillery metaphysics ? Naturally. The M109 of Theseus is an artifact in an army. Over time its components rot and are replaced with new components. When no original component remains, is it still the M109 of Theseus ? Secondly. If those removed components are restored and reassembled, free of the rot, is that the M109 of Theseus ? Neither is the true howitzer. Both are the true howitzer.
I knew it as a M109 Howitzer. I was a mechanic on these for nearly 10 years. 3:55 We also had M548 as well for the first 7 years or so. Wich were replaced by the M992 in my later years around 1988.
Gotta respect the fact that besides various updates and overhauls, the basic design is still the same since Vietnam. The designers made a stellar vehicle and it shows in its staying power.
I was an M109 Gun Chief right before Paladin came along (82-2008). Loved it though I always thought the tracks needed to be doubled in width, way too narrow for this heavy beast. That was our motto btw "the beast" Nothing beats the German SP Arty though in my opinion
Glad to hear from you mate! Always a pleasure to have veterans watching and commenting. The German PzH 2000 looks fantastic on paper, though in practise, its autoloader has been experiencing major reliability issues in Ukraine, and it's actually the French CAESAR that the Ukrainian forces have found to be the best system. K9 Thunder is also up there as one of the best arty platforms today, but with all its upgrades the M109A7 certainly isn't far behind. Slap an L/52 or even the L/58 gun on the thing, call it M109A8, and we're golden! Interesting to hear about track width being an issue. Was it getting bogged down easily?
Hearing about the incremental model numbers’ increasing lethality, it is easy to imagine a Dr. Strangelove character in our military engineering a new conflict specifically to enjoy the latest model.
When I was staioned in Graf, Germany in the Army, (8th ID) they used to shoot over our heads to their downrange. You could hear those rounds overhead passing us by.
One thing I don't understand are those boxes that seemingly are always fixed to the sides of the turret during transfer, but then swiveled back during firing. What are those for and why do they need to be swiveled back and forth?
It’s probably the Army’s best option to adapt the M109 with the L52 gun from the M777. That could be a faster, more cost-effective and logistics friendly way of extending the M109 platform’s range
Could we be seeing a war thunder video soon? Especially considering how much has changed and how much has happened I would like to hear your thoughts on it
We'll be coming back to War Thunder pretty soon, and one of the first videos I intend to make will be about all the things that have changed recently, for anybody ELSE who, like me, left the game for a substantial amount of time and is coming back to it now after all the changes
Was the one of the last classes at Sill to train up on the ol M110 8in spent the majority of my time on the 109 17 yrs to be exact then I went into the Trans Corps and retired
these things astound me with the accuracy and range they apparently achieve from a pipe and some gunpowder, I presume GPS location of weapon and target then some enviromentals a bit of trajectory mathematics, bang and good bye. Anybody out there able to correct or elaborate, would be interested to know. thanks for the vid.
Yes u are correct OK so every round has its specific weight which means it has a specific amount of gunpowder you can put behind the round to send it a certain distance. Now our distance is determined based on how much powder we put behind the round now the people that determine that are called FDC so when somebody calls for fire or calls for our help, and they give coordinates over the radio, it goes to a battalion FC from battalion it goes to the battery level which is where the guns are so which battery of guns is closest to target or range the target better Battalion will choose that battery now based on where that target is with the battery we have an FDC, which will do mathematical equations based off of distance, air air, humidity weather, sometimes the circumference of the earth the time of day because believe it or not hot air or cold air determines how the round flies then after all of that is determined, will send us the fire mission. Once it gets to us, we will load around based off of what FDC send us we will load whatever round it requires for the fire mission and we will put the amount of powder it is required based on how far, the target is away from us along with all of the other mathematical equations so field artillery is not as dumb down as many people think there is actually a lot of mathematics that goes into it
It's really a shame that the XM2001 got cancelled Eric Shinseki made a bad call by assuming the US would only ever find itself in low intensity conflicts rather than large scale conventional wars.
Good video covering all of the variants and it’s peers, but no mention of the actual weapon of artillery, namely the shell/round/projectile. I worked with the M109 as a British soldier, we quite often got US ammunition in the 80s, that had stickers with Uncle Sam on them and dates from the 70s. But by far the biggest advantage with the introduction of the AS90 was the British 155mm ammunition. It was by far a much better quality shell, the US ammunition fragmented in to pieces sometimes as big as your hand, while this looks impressive, the British shell fragmentation no bigger than a thumbnail, just think about the increased efficiency… granted you don’t want a piece the same size as your hand hitting you, but the chances of getting your own little ray of sunshine reduces. Anecdotally I have been told that British 155 ammunition is folded more times during production. Burst firing is not limited mechanically, it is limited by the heat of the breach, after firing rapidly you start to run the risk of igniting the charge bags before you have even closed the breach= bad! Most casualties are caused in the first 10 seconds anyway so sustained fire becomes ineffective as everyone has taken cover. Joined with a Multi Role Fuze that bursts at the optimum height for causing a casualties @9 metres and small fragmentation equals much better efficiency. The other big advantage of the AS90s introduction was the accuracy of its own location, being averaged between inertia, gps and actual track movement. Introducing simple windows based software allowed guns to deploy in totally dispersed locations.
K -4-12 was the test bed for the M-109 in the Vietnam War! We had them in Okinawa when we were sent in country so we took them with us! Marine Corps 55 howitzer!
Loved watching these fire at night during OIF. Always gave me chills how you can hear that 155 whistle down range. Don't call it "King of Battle" for no reason.
You state that with the upgrade to the A1 variant, the Detroit 71 series engine (wiki claims it's an 8V71T, 8 cylinders, V configuration, 71 cubic inches per cylinder, Turbocharged - turbo is in addition to a roots blower needed for operation of any 2 stroke diesel and doesn't qualify as forced induction, it won't scavenge without it) received a "greater capacity", I disagree with that phrasing. The output was increased from 345hp to 405hp for A1-A4, 440hp A5-A6, but engine capacity is synonymous with engine displacement and that didn't change. I'm not sure what was changed on the engine, whether it's cam, porting, boost level, or just fueling. Displacement did not change.
You're absolutely right. I assume by your language that you work with engines to some degree? "Capacity" definitely wasn't the best word to use from a technical standpoint, but without knowing specifically what was changed about the engine I honestly couldn't think of a better one. Not only is it the same engine, but it's the same VARIANT of that engine, so there was obviously no change in number of pistons, the piston size or angle, or the crankshaft etcetera. I initially supposed that only on the M109A1 was the engine then turbocharged to gain power, but that is not the case, it was turbocharged from the beginning. Perhaps just a larger turbo? Either way, it had a greater "capacity" for producing power, but not a larger displacement.
Why Excalibur rounds arent used with M109 in Ukraine? As you said earlier in the video Ukraine received multiple versions of the M109... Not all of them are able to use that round - basically their targeting computer doesnt recognise the ammo.
That doesn't necessarily explain why Ukrainian donated M109A6s haven't used Excalibur shells, though in that case it's likely because the M109A6s are integrated into the same units as A3s and A5s, and the unit ITSELF isn't being supplied with those rounds at all
Probably because of the range. If you have to choose between the L/39 and L/52 barrel, you'd go for the longer one, so the Krab and the PzH 2000, both of which would give you the same, longer range than the L/39. Btw, it doesn't really have to recognise the ammo - Krab wasn't integrated with any kind of smart ammunition, yet in Ukraine it was seen firing almost every type of round, from DPICM to Excalibur, SADARM, SMArt, Bonus, with the possible exception of the Vulcano. You just need a programmer and an FCS that gives you all the necessary information.
Awesome video as usual, i just want to point out the background music used in the into is the same as The NetNarrator uses for his Humanity Fuck Ya stories...10/10 pick
1:40 My God ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! Look how low their barrels are and how far the targets are????? How far can these things shoot with the barrel elevated for max range? ???
Apparently many of you got the wrong impression from the title. The M109 is the “gold standard” in that it is the main baseline by which contemporary SPH’s are judged, and by FAR the most widely produced and well known example… not that it’s the best. The PzH 2000 or K9 Thunder for example are superior systems… BECAUSE the M109 is what they’re being compared to. Also keep in mind that what we do on this channel is to look at a piece of hardware within the context of its own timeframe in history, which for the M109 is predominantly the Cold War (in which there were no PzH 2000s roaming around).
*edit: the M1299 ERCA has now been fully cancelled (unfortunately!) likely due to the US opting towards a wheeled system
That's not typically how the term is used. You could say it's the standard for comparison. But gold standard implies that it leads the class
This video suspiciously came after Gaijin added the M109 to War Thunder...
TSK/The Scottish Koala will return to War Thunder or no!?
@@i4i1008soon yes. But when I first wrote up this video I had absolutely no idea the M109 was coming to War Thunder
@@ArmorCast Well it now is along with the Norwegian K9/VIDAR in the Swedish tree so it'd be fun to see Koala play them and give some negative/positive comments like that one Challenger 2 vid, they also did some decompression (suspiciously not long after you left WT with that vid, huh....) and repair cost were re done, makes life much more easier for players now and if you do end up coming back good luck with the new experience!
It do be the best tho
The M110 might be a simple and arguably outdated design but man, something about it is just *right.* Can't fault the M109 for being practical though; and it doesn't look half bad itself.
@Android - I'm an Electrical Engineer for BAE Systems. The company that manufactures the M109. I worked on the prototypes of the current M109A7. Boasting a 600 Volt system that powers an auto loading munitions system with advanced targeting and coordination I'd say the current M109A7 is a far cry from being outdated. Yes, there are tanks with a larger bore main weapon but don't you think that with me mentioning this that there is a solution already in the works? I love the way this throaty tank sounds and performs.
Before you sound off, kindly educate yourself so you don't look foolish.
How tf did you comment 8 hours ago?? The video was uploaded 1 ago
@@sya_7489 please proof read before posting. You look foolish when your post is riddled with grammatical errors and omissions.
@@sya_7489Android is a Patreon supporter. All our videos go out for Patrons 24hrs early
@@stephen6640 buddy you do know the 110 was what we replaced with the 109 right?
I gained a lot of respect for our artillery in the states over these past few years. Glad to see someone covering the M109 I don’t think it gets enough love.
And yet no one talks about another artillery piece a war hero that very few know about it has served both African and Middle Eastern states well the G6
Nevermind tracks are decades old and unreliable and every single country has moved to 8 by 8's for accuracy and modern artillery. 😂😂
@@tylerdurden4006 the G6 Rhino is a 6×6 vehicle
It gets plenty of love at Ft. Campbell, KY
Air Assault!
@@tylerdurden4006 for SPGs? or light tanks/armored cars?
Regarding the PzH 2000, if anyone wants to know more about it and speaks German, there is a really interesting interview by the German content creator "Säbelzahnmöwe" with the principal designer of the PzH 2000. He talks about the failing of the previous programs and the reasoning for certain design decisions and some of the major innovations made in the vehicle.
Panzerhaubitze 2000 showed in Ukraine what the ingenuity of Ukrainians merged with Gernan engineering can do.
Does the video have translations?
PzH 2000 is one mean piece of kit. Give me a platoon of these over a platoon of tanks anytime.
@@TorianTammas Are you sure about that? Real soldiers where rather disappointed. As a system the M109 is far superior still.
@rosomak8244 Well, some people like to drive a 30-year-old car and swear it is the best in the world. So sure there are people that like whatever you like.
Thank you for covering this staple of modern American firepower! My father was an artilleryman in the Colorado National Guard in the late 80s and was initially trained on the 109, however really found his home with its bigger brother the M110A1. A couple fun facts he's shared with me about the piece:
"You always wanted to be the driver, because all the lower enlisted, the couple specialists and privates on the gun crew for loading, sat on the left side, right were the exhaust would smack you."
"The 113 and 577(shortened from M113 and M577, he does this with all of his vehicles xD) were a lot of fun to drive, like a little jeep that could go anywhere and do anything."
"The worst part of drill was that second weekend. See they took me and all the other (pardon his language) retards from the artillery school and put us on the "special" weapons team. So we had to come in a weekend prior to do our standalone certifications for nuclear artillery, and they didn't pay us any more than the going rate for the trouble of the extra training."
"We only had a couple pieces in the NG armory, most of the gear we would use was already overseas. If the Russians went over, we would scramble to Germany and grab our gear from prepositioned stock on the Rhine, and if they got too close to us, we'd have to use the nuclear shells. Big mean sunnovabitches."
I drove a ‘577. Never knew there was such a thing as a 2 stroke diesel before that. They are fun to drive!
The Type 74 and 75 SPGs were similar in the idea of a lighter howitzer and a medium howitzer. I had the opportunity to them up close recently at the JGSDF information centre in Wakōshi, Tokyo.
Just thought I'd share another example of vehicles with similar logic to the M109 and 108.
The M109 laid the groundwork for modern artillery development.
The french AMX AuF1 was the first SPH with an autoloading system.
Than the PZH2000, the swiss Upgrade, K9 and all the other variants.
And now we have wheeled platforms like the KNDS RCH 155 on the Boxer Chassis. 9 shot per minute, bringing shot and scoot to a new level.
I see the foundation for the development of modern artillery in the "Hummel" or "Wespe" in World War II...
@@raka522 SPH designs and doctrines were further developed from WW2, if you want to even go further, i raise the first and probably the one that started the concept of SPHs is the Gun Carrier Mk.1 by the british, used back in WW1, sporting a 60-Pounder artillery piece on the chassis of the Mark IV tank.
THANK YOU for being the only person that knows the difference between battalion and divisional artillery. Their employment in the field is so different from each other and I’m so glad there’s a youtuber mentioning it.
The US enjoys overwhelming fire superiority not because of the number or specs on our artillery but because we give far smaller units far more access to artillery and air power.
A lot of our info on unit structure comes straight from the channel Battle Order. I highly recommend him
Compared to what though?
Before the Ukraine war, the Russians banked a lot on the concept of the "BTG", which contained a SPG battery and a MLRS battery inside a battalion sized formation, meaning about 800 men had their own 6 SPGs and 6 MLRS on top of their own air defense battery, tanks and mechanized infantry.
In comparison, a US armored brigade consists of about 4100 men and has 18 SPGs.
That means the "density" of artillery systems per personnel is or was way heavier in the Russian army.
(1 US Armored Brigade would be the equivalent of 5+ Russian BTGs size- and manpower-wise, which means 4100 Russian soldiers would come with more than 60 artillery pieces, compared to 18 in the US Army.)
Of course, the concept of the Russian BTG is one of the victims of the current war because it turned out you need way more infantry to protect all that heavy gear. (x) I'm just saying that your claim that the US Army just gives more big guns to smaller units doesn't really seem to be backed by the available numbers.
Looking at the surprisingly small stockpiles of artillery ammo that have been revealed in the context of support for Ukraine, it seems to support what many have been saying, that the US has been looked at its artillery forces as a bit of a red haired stepchild, due to its reliance of air power.
Accordingly, as far as I can tell, the use of 120 mm mortar systems on a company level seems to be more prevalent in most armies, inside and outside of NATO, compared to the US Army, meaning even small units like companies usually get their own light indirect fire support in most armed forces, which the US Army seems to deem unnecessary, at least since they pool most of their infantry in Stryker brigades.
(x) At least that is the consensus you always hear. I'm not sure though because the concept of infantry protecting tanks seems kind of obsolete to me nowadays and not just because of drones. I think there is precious little a bunch of infantrymen can do to protect a tank against a modern ATGM fired from 2 or more miles away, let alone against accurate artillery fire.
@@TrangleC Russia might have switched from focusing on the battalion tactical group (BTG) to larger, division-centric operations, but all this changes is at what level the larger support network comes in. They'll still deploy battalion sized units independently, but only for shorter length operations, rather than expecting them to be self-sufficient for weeks at a time (and thus needing to give them all the support infrastructure to accomplish that). Russian forces still HAVE the same saturation of artillery to infantry.
This is probably worth a video of its own, but the issue with the BTG style of deployment was more so about the failings of Russian logistics than about the shortcomings of the BTG itself.
**For anybody else reading this who is confused, a Russian Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) is roughly equivalent to a US brigade combat team (BCT)
@@ArmorCast To me as a old military nerd and armchair general with no actual military experience, the concept of the BTG always felt very familiar. It feels like the kind of thing someone like me would come up with, if you know what I mean. Something that sounds plausible and sound on paper and is very neat and simple from a bird's eye perspective and thus would appeal to some dictator like Putin like it appeals to a "interested layman" like me. That also always made me suspicious though whether it would actually work out where the rubber meets the road.
Unfortunately, as you mentioned, bad logistics, a lack of discipline and seemingly unforeseen conditions like the influence of drones and almost total surveillance, make it really hard to gauge how viable the BTG and similar "making a big army out of a bunch of small miniature armies that have everything they need for every situation"-ideas are and could be in the future.
Possible that future Active Protection Systems that can protect a vehicle against drones and top attack ATGMs like Javelin, might change everything again and make BTG-style formations a good idea again.
As it looks at the moment, the battlefield just seems very messy from a military organizational and hierarchical perspective, with tiny, sub-platoon sized unis or even single vehicles just running around and operating on their own in a form of chaotic long range guerrilla-on-guerrilla warfare.
To me, from the outside, the whole thing kind of looks like a real life version of War Thunder, IL-2 or other such MMO PC war games where basically everyone is just running around on their own, looking for a opportunity to shoot some enemies, without much organizational cohesion or overarching strategy.
Everything seems to work on a "just go there and see what you can do"-basis, which I suppose would be a extreme version of German "Auftragstaktik".
@TrangleC
that just isn't true. Sure maybe on an older doctrinal sense that would be accurate but that's not how the US Army operates today. Heavy Artillery isn't kept integrated with Infantry/Armor/ and Cavalry units because it doesn't make sense from a training and readiness standpoint. When Maneuver units train and deploy they most often have batteries attached at the Brigade levels which are then used to cover various formations and as they conduct operations. And as far as 120s go they are heavily used in Stryker and Heavy BCTs. In my career I have been in 3 SBCTs and 2 ABCT and each one had a mortar section that was organic to the company that was either a M113 MCV or the Stryker MCV. But you won't know most of that looking at the internet, the Army is still in the process of transitioning from COIN operations to LSCO, especially when it comes to doctrine.
Hey everyone, ive worked on the M109 for a long time especially on the mechanical side. its my absolute favorite platform. If anyone has questions about maintenance or how things operate on the platform id love to talk about it wih you all, within reason of course. Love the channel, keep up the good work.
There are several moments in the video where we can see M109s with 7 road wheels and then several other moments where we can see M109s with only 6 road wheels. What's that about? Also, the 7 road wheel variant seems to sit much lower than its 6 road wheel cousin.
You are spot on the M109A7 is the newest variant and the hull is loosely based on the Bradley which has 6 road wheels and it also sits much higher as well. It's tall enough that working on it sucks lol. The M109 through M109A6 had the same hull with 7 road wheels and a much lower ride height.
@@ThePaladinGuy142why did they change the hull in the a7 version?
@@fastbreak0073 The army has been after a goal of part commonality. The old hull and engine shared nothing with other platforms such as the Bradley. The engine and transmission were also something that was holding the A6 back. (There are more changes and reasons I just don't want to get to deep in case of OPSEC)
@@ThePaladinGuy142 Thanks a bunch for the info!! :)
I was an artilleryman in the army and our unit used the Paladin and it is actually insane how accurate and durable it is.
How hot does it get inside the cabin? I recently learned Abrams can get 130F or more inside. Different beasts of course, but that fact kinda blew me away. Curious if it's the same for wheeled artillery.
I worked for United Defense during the development of the Crusader SPH. I remember lots of briefings (with Pentagon officials) where they were gushing over how revolutionary Crusader was going to be, and how outdated the Paladin was. Famous last words, as the program got axed.
From what I've heard, in the end the Crusader was considered not revolutionary ENOUGH. The army wanted something completely new for the 21st century, and they'd be happy to stick with the Paladin while they waited.
Now, it's looking like the M1299 or the Next Gen Howitzer program might actually make it to production
@@ArmorCastRealistically post cold War America wasn't going to be getting anything next generation. Too expensive without a foe to justify it - the two wars of the 2000s just made that even more the case sucking up resources on unconventional warfare.
@@ArmorCast I've heard the big issue was that the Pentagon insisted on 100% separation of crew and ammo and back then automation wasn't up to that yet and the fully automatic reloading mechanisms was too complicated, too expensive and too hard to maintain.
The idea was stupid anyways. If something sets off up to 60 artillery shells and the according propellant charges, no internal bulk head will protect the crew from the resulting explosion, obviously.
aren't they salvaging parts of it to make the Paladin's replacement?
@@TrangleC Modern insensitive explosives are actually extremely difficult to set off by accident (assuming they used them...). So the real risk is a powder fire, which blow out panels etc can keep out of the crew compartment long enough to bail out. Remember that Abrams ammo casing is flammable, so it's a generally similar problem to the M1, just scaled up a lot.
I'm a former M109 crewman (13B10) and field artillery officer (13A5P) and artillery remains so wildly misunderstood in the military vehicle community to the point of being kind of hilarious.
Hooah sir ! Current section chief here
I worked on the A2 back in 1985. it was awesome. glad to see this is still being upgraded. Much love from Texas!
Two notes: (1) M992A3 Carrier Ammunition Tracked isn't an upgrade of the M992A2 FAASV; it's actually a completely new vehicle built on the new PIM chassis, and (2) The XM1299 isn't a BAE product or BAE-integrated product; all of the XM1299 prototypes were built internal to the USG government using the organic depots, arsenals, assembled by the Armaments Center at Picatinny Arsenal using a decontented M109A7 chassis, a modified M109A6 cab, and the 58-cal gun built out of Watervliet Arsenal.
Just when I think I know a fair bit about a certain platform, these amazing videos prove I still have much to learn. Another fantastic video, thank you!
Thanks, keep up the good work. Could you do some videos on how military's chose to adopt a new platform?
Hey man, cheers for the support. That’s a bit of a broad topic. Is there any specific new bit of kit you’d like to see be the focus of the video?
@@ArmorCastcould you maybe do a video on how drones are reshaping the battlefield? & how they’re being integrated & countered by different militaries
@@dogloversrule8476 That's definitely a topic we'll be covering very soon
@@ArmorCast nice, I’ll be looking forward to it
I really love motorized artillery. Thanks for this video
I fully enjoyed this video! Thank you for your research, and for sharing it with us!
Italian guy here. A few months ago I saw an M109 being towed out of my hometown. I suspected it was sent to Ukraine, thanks for confirming.
Two small corrections: A swiss artillery battery (not platoon, that's dirty infanty language, not god of war talk) has six M-109s KAWESTs, not three.
An artillery battery is a company equivalent unit.
Battery = Complany, platoon is still used in both (Zug/Section/Sezione)
based on the intro the thing that goes boom the most is nuclear artillery -and it most certainly did, even when it shouldn't have-
I served on the pre-Paladin M109A6 in the US Army during the late 1990s. The M109A7 variant is actually the Paladin variant, but either way, it was a fun system to train on when you weren't doing maintenance on it. I did get to fire some of the RAP rounds during annual training. I watched one of those get fired from outside the track, and it knocked all the dirt off in a cloud. Fun times.
A6 is the Paladin, always has been. A7 began its life as the "Paladin Integrated Management" program, but that only became the A7 variant much later on, and has only begun mass production in the last few years. The Paladin moniker can be found in plenty of official US Army documentation as well as media correspondence from the late 90s and early 2000s, long before the A7 or even PIM program existed.
@@ArmorCast I'm just saying that none of my Drill Sergeants called the A6 a Paladin, and neither did anyone in my MA National Guard unit either, at least not in 1997. We knew the A7 was coming out, and that definitely was called the Paladin. At the same time, it was the National Guard, but even the Guard gets the same initial training as everyone else.
@@Ostenjager Here's some army documentation from August 2000 referring to the A6 as "Paladin". This was long before the A7 variant
www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/amd-us-archive/fm3-09.70%2800%29.pdf
This one is TRADOC, from December 1992, referring to the A6 "Paladin"
tradocfcoeccafcoepfwprod.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/fires-bulletin-archive/1992/DEC_1992/DEC_1992_FULL_EDITION.pdf
And this one is from even earlier, TACOM this time, again using the handle "M109A6 Paladin" officially
asc.army.mil/docs/wsh2/1992-wsh.pdf
Couple more:
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/A_case_study_on_the_relationship_between_OPM-Crusader%2C_UDLP%2C_and_TACOM-ARDEC_in_the_development_of_the_Crusader_Armament_%28IA_casestudyonrelat00cole%29.pdf
apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA284474.pdf
asc.army.mil/docs/pubs/alt/2003/1_JanFeb/articles/34_M109A6_Paladin-Changing_Face_Of_DOD_Acquisition_200301.pdf
There were no plans for an A7 variant of the M109 until the mid 2000s, after the cancellation of the Crusader and FCS programs. The designation "A7" wouldn't even be adopted until even later.
www.army-technology.com/projects/paladin/?cf-view
Perhaps because M109 are assigned to replace soviet artillery of mechanized brigades, while small amount of Excaliburs were sent to artillery brigades.
@@ArmorCast I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I really do not remember the A6 being called Paladin by anyone on the line, or any of the other variants which were in service at the time. 1997 was a long time ago now. My memory is that at OSUT and while I was on the line afterwards, there was scuttlebut about a Paladin system being developed. It is possible that the people developing things and the Pentagon were calling it something else that us lowly joes on the line weren't tracking. That happens sometimes. Just because the brass think one thing does not mean that the joes are thinking the same thing.
22:00 FYI a swiss howitzer platoon is normally composed of 6 howitzers, there is an idea of changing it so a battery has two platoons of 3 howitzers but at the moment we're still doing 6
It was an informative and wonderful introduction of all characteristics of M 109 (Paladin)Hawtizer artillery systems designed by US military technology capabilities..that has accurate amid and widely range firepower... Artillery is the backbone of statistic army firepower
Wake up babe new Armor Cast video just dropped.
Too bad I'm American and have to sleep rn :c
I'll Sleep When I'm Dead- Warren Zevon; Sleep Is For The Weak- The Dreadnoughts; No Sleep Til Brooklyn- The Beastie Boys; Up All Night- Warrant
I've read decades ago Clancy's Armored Cavalry.. It left an impression.
This was interesting. Sadly I had to leave couple minutes before the end of the video, but I came back 20 minutes later and watched the rest.
As people said - South African G6 is also interesting. I do wonder what it would take to upgrade it's rate of fire - though whether it's worth it now, that I don't know. I do remember the hype for that thing being considered (it never went anywhere and government was considering couple others as well) in my country in early 2000's. It only took 15 years to produce something that... is decent, but maybe not as good. AHS Krab. Shame they couldn't make the darn original chassis to work properly. And Poland still needs to learn how to make better munition.
We do make modern 155mm rounds (and quite a lot actually). Some components are licensed from Slovakia (charges if I recall), but all of the production is done in Poland, and the ammo works well in Ukraine.
And the Krab is actually amongst the best artillery systems out there too. It's reliable, resistant to harsh terrain and weather conditions (unlike the PzH 2000), has outstanding fire control system (and electronics in general), but most importantly, it shoots *every single* type of shell and propellant charge there is. No matter what you load the Krab with, it can shoot it with no problem. Not to mention that it comes with all the necessary auxiliary vehicles - platoon, battery and regiment level command vehicles, ammo resupply trucks, repair shop trucks, radar and so on.
I miss being on the gun line. We had the M109A5, a variant just before the Palladian. I was in the FDC and worked with the gun line in the firing point. We led formations and did all of the firing table calculations along with communications with the FO and TOC in our M577. The Paladins were just coming online before I got out. I was lucky to see them in action several times and what a difference they were, yet so similar. Shot Over!
M109 is old but is still being kept up to date. But they also have the new M1299 with an extended L58 155mm calibur gun which almost doubles its range. In a demonstration it had hit a target 65 km away with an Excalibur round and 72 km away with a new XM1113 round. The same gun also fired BAE's XM1155 sub-caliber projectile out to 110 km. A battalion of 18 XM1299 SPH prototypes are to be tested by the US Army this year.
Swiss Arty guy here. Regarding the uncertainty around 21:57. In a Swiss Artillery Batteries there is only one gun platoon of 6 guns. We dont really split a battery between two targets and there is only one active fire mission per battery.
Cheers for the info lad 👍
A previous commenter did say that a Swiss howitzer battery was six PzHb 74s, but a battery is usually made up of two platoons. Interesting that the Swiss army don’t seperate them again the way other nations do.
there is an idea floating around for 2-3 years now that calls for the gun platoon to be split in two 3 gun platoons. The idea is to give the battery commander more freedom of choice having one platoon get more ammo or update its NAPOS while the other covers the fire mission. Hasn't been applied yet but it might be coming soon
@@sangay9361 Intressting, it would increase the flexibility in ammo resupply and updating the NAPOS. But you could only have one active fire mission due to the limitations of the FARGO.
And i don't really see the need for a second platoon here you could do it like the austrians 6 gun platoon but only 4 are active while 2 are resupplying or updating. A second platoon would also need an other officer and an additional M113 + crew for him.
@@Leggo-jm2tp you only need a second M113 if you plan on shooting two fire missions at once. This would rarely be the case irl since fire missions (without the whole security checks we do in peace times) take a lot less time and you don't correct shots (so you only shoot once then you scoot) and you don't have to wait for intaff to tell you to end the fire mission.
With the FARGO you can easily switch between one platoon and the other and don't have to wait for the guns to have reached their next fire position as the second platoon will already be there so you can virtually keep constantly shooting out of different fire positions with little to no downtime in between.
Also for important missions you can shoot with both platoons at the same time
@@sangay9361 I am happy to disscus this somewhere else. I am not too comfortable going in to greater details here in a public space. Idk what kind of information of FARGO is publicly available anyway but i dont want to risk it. Better safe then sorry.
But i think you missed my point. I didnt mean a second fire direction center or Flst. I meant a second M113 for the platoon leader of the second gun platoon. I know not really a huge problem but still worth considering.
When I see one of those I,think of rebuilding the elevation cylinder, situated on the ceiling. Getting the front pin to line up was always a pleasure when reinstalling.
Served on the M109A2 back in Desert Storm and after.
Amazing video as always, can you please make a video on the Merkava tank? Maybe also a video on the Namer IFV? Thanks
I LOVED this video, I really did.
Keep up the great content! :D
Cheers mate, really means a lot to hear!
Are you planning to make a similarly detailed video about the Krab in the future? I think it would be a nice topic, especially that its history is quite interesting.
Krab might be a difficult one to make such a video about, since it’s just a K9 turret on an AS-90 hull. We’ll definitely do a video about the K9 Thunder very soon, and in that we’ll talk about Krab as well
@@ArmorCast The thing is that the Krab SPG is not really just the AS-90 turret on a K9 hull. It sure looks like it is, but to say so is like to call the Stryker "just a Piranha III". The chassis itself is heavily modified to the point that it can't accept the original K9 turret - for example, its height was increased by about 30 cm to accommodate APU and air filtration system, it's equipped with fire suppression system (which even the K9A1 doesn't have in the crew compartment) and so on. And while there weren't many technical changes to the turret itself (except of the L/52 gun), these are built entirely in Poland, based on the technical documentation owned by HSW. According to unofficial sources*, HSW doesn't even need to pay license fees for the turret anymore. (Unfortunately, transparency isn't a strong suit of our MoD, so there are always some semi-official/unofficial sources when talking about Polish military equipment.)
I could write a wall of text here about how Krab came to be, what exactly is Polish in it and what isn't, but not here as YT doesn't allow links (at least for me).
Btw, speaking of the K9 video you're making, if you're planning to mention plans to replace the Krab with so called "K9PL", I'd just say that it's not certain yet - there no executive contract signed at this point even though it was supposed to be signed at the end of 2022 (and so called "framework agreement" is not binding), there are plans to increase the production of the Krab and now there are also some political factors as well. In short, the future of the K9 in Poland is not certain.
Thank you for giving the -109 some love!
Isnt the PZH2000 the gold standard for getting warheads on foreheads??
PzH 2000 is definitely BETTER, but M109 is the one everyone compares it to, especially with eight thousand of the things produced!
M109 had to walk before the PzH 2000 could run.
Pzh 2000 breaks quickly in war conditions.The autoloader is not durable enough when used intensively. Manual loading seems to be outdated but still more trustworthy.
@@tommygun333uhm, you know that ukraine uses them quite a lot woth the autoloader working just fine?
Yes, there are some issues with it beeing a bit finnickyin some cases, but the ukrainian artillerymen have apparently adjusted to that just fine. And there were even absurd cases like the one that went through 20000 (yes, twenty thousa d) shot fired before returning to the depot for notable maintenance and a barrel change.
"Nukes, I suppose."
My brother led a Special Weapons group that specialized in them back in 1991. The W48 was discontinued in 1992, though I don't know if it was replaced or the capability simply dropped.
I suspect the latter.
24:34 ah, the Vladdy Cooker.
i swear half of the pics i see of destroyed Msta-S are of it in fragments
rejoice!! a new video from armor cast.
The original M109 was built by Food Machinery Corporation (FMC). United Defense was created in 1994 by a merger, and the first version built by them would have been the M109A6, which had gone into service in 1991.
23:22 : You are familiar with the thought experiment 'the M109 of Theseus' in the field of artillery metaphysics ?
Naturally. The M109 of Theseus is an artifact in an army. Over time its components rot and are replaced with new components. When no original component remains, is it still the M109 of Theseus ?
Secondly. If those removed components are restored and reassembled, free of the rot, is that the M109 of Theseus ?
Neither is the true howitzer. Both are the true howitzer.
Why havent you scrubbed the baracks yet private?
Well look sarge,
I knew it as a M109 Howitzer. I was a mechanic on these for nearly 10 years. 3:55 We also had M548 as well for the first 7 years or so. Wich were replaced by the M992 in my later years around 1988.
I can't wait until the M1299 finishes development that's a monster
“God fights on the side with the best artillery.” -Napoleon
Driver of this beautifuil beast here ! Served in Switzerland in the 49 Artillery Group.
Gotta respect the fact that besides various updates and overhauls, the basic design is still the same since Vietnam. The designers made a stellar vehicle and it shows in its staying power.
M109 and M113: "I am the new M3 Half-track. I will be in service forever."
I was an M109 Gun Chief right before Paladin came along (82-2008). Loved it though I always thought the tracks needed to be doubled in width, way too narrow for this heavy beast. That was our motto btw "the beast" Nothing beats the German SP Arty though in my opinion
Glad to hear from you mate! Always a pleasure to have veterans watching and commenting.
The German PzH 2000 looks fantastic on paper, though in practise, its autoloader has been experiencing major reliability issues in Ukraine, and it's actually the French CAESAR that the Ukrainian forces have found to be the best system.
K9 Thunder is also up there as one of the best arty platforms today, but with all its upgrades the M109A7 certainly isn't far behind. Slap an L/52 or even the L/58 gun on the thing, call it M109A8, and we're golden!
Interesting to hear about track width being an issue. Was it getting bogged down easily?
great video good info
As an American thank you for covering this absolute work of art.
this video reminded me how Greece broke a record for distance with one of those like by a lot
years ago......
at 4:00 this was my battalion in the late 90's. bravo battery always had issues though.
I served with 5thBn 10thMar Sierra Btry we retired the last of the M110a1 8"howitzer in 1990
That was my "office" for two years. I loved it.
Hearing about the incremental model numbers’ increasing lethality, it is easy to imagine a Dr. Strangelove character in our military engineering a new conflict specifically to enjoy the latest model.
Sad still no Leclerc or EBRC Jaguar video 😢
Scottish Military Alignment chart:
ScottishKoala: Neutral Factual
Lazerpig: Chaotic Non-Factual
Fort Sill trains the kings of battle.
Class of 97 13B 1/22nd Deathdealers Ft Sill
This channel would be close to a milly if you just uploaded and focused it
Unfortunately, life gets in the way sometimes… we’ll still get there, just might take us a bit longer than we hoped
Thank You For Your Service
Imagine being an enemy tank commander, finding one of these on the battlefield and seeing the gun start falling towards you
Nice Video Thank you. What is the source for the historic M109 footage?
A lot of it comes from an old promotional film called “Weapons of the Field Artillery” from 1966
The barrels from the M110 was used the make the first generation of GBU-28 bunker busters used in the first gulf war
When I was staioned in Graf, Germany in the Army, (8th ID) they used to shoot over our heads to their downrange. You could hear those rounds overhead passing us by.
23:26 Working those Harbor Freight gloves.
Thanks, Armor Cast.
One thing I don't understand are those boxes that seemingly are always fixed to the sides of the turret during transfer, but then swiveled back during firing. What are those for and why do they need to be swiveled back and forth?
Those are cargo baskets.. we put our gear there, such as soldiers gear extra MREs some times extra water cans to swab the breach with
We were still using the Vietnam era variant when I got out. I'd love to be younger & have a go with some of the newer stuff.
Merkava and Magach evolution video when?
At least they finally put it in Warthunder!
"69 kilometers (nice)"
It’s probably the Army’s best option to adapt the M109 with the L52 gun from the M777. That could be a faster, more cost-effective and logistics friendly way of extending the M109 platform’s range
My country uses the M5 variant and those shells are fooking heavy. It should be an olympic sport.
Yes there about 100 pounds a piece
This thing is one of my Warthunder goals. It just looks so damn good.
It is a lot of fun in WT, definitely recommend!
Could we be seeing a war thunder video soon? Especially considering how much has changed and how much has happened I would like to hear your thoughts on it
We'll be coming back to War Thunder pretty soon, and one of the first videos I intend to make will be about all the things that have changed recently, for anybody ELSE who, like me, left the game for a substantial amount of time and is coming back to it now after all the changes
@@ArmorCast LETS GO!
What commonality did the M109 chassis have with the M113?
Anything that can function after a tactical EMP burst and then perform accurately is going to be the difference....
I was a driver and loader on the M109 way back in 1965 / 1967 In Germany 2nd 7th field Arty 24th infantry ❤
Why are stabilisers not a thing for self-propelled artillery. It isso useful in direct combat.
Was the one of the last classes at Sill to train up on the ol M110 8in spent the majority of my time on the 109 17 yrs to be exact then I went into the Trans Corps and retired
With the advent of effective counter battery technology its mobility is one of its most effective features. Shoot and scoot counts.
these things astound me with the accuracy and range they apparently achieve from a pipe and some gunpowder, I presume GPS location of weapon and target then some enviromentals a bit of trajectory mathematics, bang and good bye. Anybody out there able to correct or elaborate, would be interested to know. thanks for the vid.
Yes u are correct OK so every round has its specific weight which means it has a specific amount of gunpowder you can put behind the round to send it a certain distance. Now our distance is determined based on how much powder we put behind the round now the people that determine that are called FDC so when somebody calls for fire or calls for our help, and they give coordinates over the radio, it goes to a battalion FC from battalion it goes to the battery level which is where the guns are so which battery of guns is closest to target or range the target better Battalion will choose that battery now based on where that target is with the battery we have an FDC, which will do mathematical equations based off of distance, air air, humidity weather, sometimes the circumference of the earth the time of day because believe it or not hot air or cold air determines how the round flies then after all of that is determined, will send us the fire mission. Once it gets to us, we will load around based off of what FDC send us we will load whatever round it requires for the fire mission and we will put the amount of powder it is required based on how far, the target is away from us along with all of the other mathematical equations so field artillery is not as dumb down as many people think there is actually a lot of mathematics that goes into it
It's really a shame that the XM2001 got cancelled Eric Shinseki made a bad call by assuming the US would only ever find itself in low intensity conflicts rather than large scale conventional wars.
I can't wait for the 1299. The thing's going to be insane.
100km range! Will be the new gold standard, in testing ranges it's already fired shells at 90km range
please tell why old tanks often uses short barrels ?
The Sherman had a short barrel because it was kept at a length that kept it from overhanging the front of the tank for ease of shipping
Good video covering all of the variants and it’s peers, but no mention of the actual weapon of artillery, namely the shell/round/projectile.
I worked with the M109 as a British soldier, we quite often got US ammunition in the 80s, that had stickers with Uncle Sam on them and dates from the 70s.
But by far the biggest advantage with the introduction of the AS90 was the British 155mm ammunition. It was by far a much better quality shell, the US ammunition fragmented in to pieces sometimes as big as your hand, while this looks impressive, the British shell fragmentation no bigger than a thumbnail, just think about the increased efficiency… granted you don’t want a piece the same size as your hand hitting you, but the chances of getting your own little ray of sunshine reduces. Anecdotally I have been told that British 155 ammunition is folded more times during production.
Burst firing is not limited mechanically, it is limited by the heat of the breach, after firing rapidly you start to run the risk of igniting the charge bags before you have even closed the breach= bad!
Most casualties are caused in the first 10 seconds anyway so sustained fire becomes ineffective as everyone has taken cover.
Joined with a Multi Role Fuze that bursts at the optimum height for causing a casualties @9 metres and small fragmentation equals much better efficiency.
The other big advantage of the AS90s introduction was the accuracy of its own location, being averaged between inertia, gps and actual track movement. Introducing simple windows based software allowed guns to deploy in totally dispersed locations.
That crusader looked awesome, how could they cancel that??
K -4-12 was the test bed for the M-109 in the Vietnam War! We had them in Okinawa when we were sent in country so we took them with us! Marine Corps 55 howitzer!
Loved watching these fire at night during OIF. Always gave me chills how you can hear that 155 whistle down range. Don't call it "King of Battle" for no reason.
I would have thought that the M53/M55 was the father of modern artillery, with its fully enclosed turret.
(And more importantly cool looks)
“Laughs in PZH2000”
Out of curiosity does the undercarriage have a shot count before it gets replaced?
You state that with the upgrade to the A1 variant, the Detroit 71 series engine (wiki claims it's an 8V71T, 8 cylinders, V configuration, 71 cubic inches per cylinder, Turbocharged - turbo is in addition to a roots blower needed for operation of any 2 stroke diesel and doesn't qualify as forced induction, it won't scavenge without it) received a "greater capacity", I disagree with that phrasing. The output was increased from 345hp to 405hp for A1-A4, 440hp A5-A6, but engine capacity is synonymous with engine displacement and that didn't change. I'm not sure what was changed on the engine, whether it's cam, porting, boost level, or just fueling. Displacement did not change.
You're absolutely right. I assume by your language that you work with engines to some degree? "Capacity" definitely wasn't the best word to use from a technical standpoint, but without knowing specifically what was changed about the engine I honestly couldn't think of a better one. Not only is it the same engine, but it's the same VARIANT of that engine, so there was obviously no change in number of pistons, the piston size or angle, or the crankshaft etcetera. I initially supposed that only on the M109A1 was the engine then turbocharged to gain power, but that is not the case, it was turbocharged from the beginning. Perhaps just a larger turbo?
Either way, it had a greater "capacity" for producing power, but not a larger displacement.
Thanks for the video.
MLRS should be next. The mighty M270
Why Excalibur rounds arent used with M109 in Ukraine? As you said earlier in the video Ukraine received multiple versions of the M109... Not all of them are able to use that round - basically their targeting computer doesnt recognise the ammo.
That doesn't necessarily explain why Ukrainian donated M109A6s haven't used Excalibur shells, though in that case it's likely because the M109A6s are integrated into the same units as A3s and A5s, and the unit ITSELF isn't being supplied with those rounds at all
Probably because of the range. If you have to choose between the L/39 and L/52 barrel, you'd go for the longer one, so the Krab and the PzH 2000, both of which would give you the same, longer range than the L/39.
Btw, it doesn't really have to recognise the ammo - Krab wasn't integrated with any kind of smart ammunition, yet in Ukraine it was seen firing almost every type of round, from DPICM to Excalibur, SADARM, SMArt, Bonus, with the possible exception of the Vulcano. You just need a programmer and an FCS that gives you all the necessary information.
The Ukrainians are using them in TOWED guns, I guess to stay out of counter-battery range. A problem the m109 avoids by merit of being self-propelled.
Awesome video as usual, i just want to point out the background music used in the into is the same as The NetNarrator uses for his Humanity Fuck Ya stories...10/10 pick
What makes a good Gunbunny? The ability to fire 3 rounds a minute in any weather!
1:40 My God ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! Look how low their barrels are and how far the targets are????? How far can these things shoot with the barrel elevated for max range? ???
'bout 40km ish
@@ArmorCast Thanks. LOVE your videos. I watched it from start to finish. Subscribed !