@@jaex9617 I'm partial to the rural American system of using time as a unit of distance measurement, for example, at average Floridan highway speed(~80mph, so on the lower side of the real average), the M1299 can fire a shell over 30 minutes away!
I want to point out that the Germans in WWII used assault guns and tank destroyers much more prodigiously than (what would now be considered) textbook SPGs but in a very similar role. Weapons like the StuG and Jagdpanzer were massively more common in the German army, and were similarly used to support the infantry on the offense and were capable of indirect fire. Arguably the StuG even is supposed to be an SPG, even if it became the mother of tank destroyers as well.
@@raylast3873Generally assault guns would be armored enough to survive expected frontal threats SPGs are armored to defend from small arms and shrapnel from bombs and enemy artillery
@@demanischaffer exactly. Which means your assault gun is pretty much just a better SPG and in most cases you‘re going to have zero problems if for whatever reason you use the assault gun instead.
@@raylast3873 Yes'nt Things like the Stug started as Self propelled artillery, but were re-gunned to work better as tank destroyers, Germany had other SPGs that differed greatly in design because they stayed pure artillery The Short Barrel Stugs were artillery at first, if you look at photos from early or pre war you'll see their crews do not wear the tanker uniforms Now a Stug makes a great assault gun because it's armored and enclosed, a long barrel stug makes a good tank destroyer because it's low to the ground and armored, a Priest or Hummel make better artillery platforms because they have higher elevating guns their designs would allow bigger guns to be employed
One of the best ways to spot someone who doesn't understand armored combat is to look for the folks who think tanks and SPGs are the same thing because of the way they look. Great video, thanks for sharing.
I disagree. The definition of a tank has never really been defined and you can find a lot of different definitions wether it's people or Google who said it. To me , SPG ,SPAA, IFV , MBT... They all are tank but with different characteristics and function.
While you're waiting, there's plenty of good information on the M982 Excalibur round on the internet (including here on CZcams). That one is probably the most interesting one. (There's also the Precision Guidance Kit, which can be attached to a dumb round to give it a significant fraction of the capability for far less cost).
@@jeffbenton6183 Nah, it's complete shit. Russian Krasnopol costs 1/20 the price and is much more accurate, happens when you don't build stuff to enrich 1% first and foremost...
@@KuK137 India has large stocks of both Excalibur and Krasnopol. Their conclusion is the opposite of yours. They've found Krasnopol unreliable at high altitudes (each one becomes a "dud" to use a direct quote). Excalibur, on the other hand, does not have this problem. The Indians also like that it has a bigger warhead and has "more penetration power" - again to quote their own assessment. Starting in 2019 they began to actually *replace* their stocks of Krasnopol with Excalibur. Also, Krasnopol is *not* one-twentieth the cost of Excalibur, it's one-fifth. Excalibur is still considerably more expensive than Krasnopol, but it's nowhere near as expensive as you claim. Moreover, Excalibur *can* be much cheaper: in 2006, it was fully *half* the price it was now, because they were being built in greater numbers. The US chose to buy fewer of them because they were so effective, that they didn't need as many as they thought in Afghanistan. Remember that economy-of-scale is a thing - they could be built in even greater numbers than they were in 2006, which would make them even cheaper. In any case, the Indians think it's worth the extra cost (and I think they're looking to license-produce their own Excaliburs, which are likely to be cheaper). Lastly, you don't honestly believe that Russia has a weaker 1% than the US, do you? Russia is practically *owned* by its oligarchs. The one societal difference that likely accounts for the extra cost is that American workers demand extra pay. The median household income in the US is 5-10 *times* higher than that of Russia (depending on which part of each country we're discussing, and when in the last five years as well). This more than accounts for the increase in price. If anything, US production of the rounds is likely much more efficient than the Russian procedures, since Excalibur *should* be even more exspensive than it is.
Loving your videos! One thing I noticed---the US' rocket-assisted XM1113 projectile you referenced is 155mm from what I can tell, not 105mm (unless it's a saboted round). Looking forward to more videos.
"High Caliber, Indirect fire gun, on a mobile platform, that can withstand small arms fire and shrapnel" -an oversimplified explanation of the Self Propelled gun. Another video well done i say, a go-through of the history of SPGs and the timelines that each nation military that integrated the doctrine of SPGs would most likely be a great pleasure to learn about.
Even more oversimplified explaination of the SPG: Big gun on big metal vroom-vroom go boom-boom then zoom-zoom to prevent counter boom-boom from mean people
The greatest risk for artillery was the opposition determining the firing location by sound and more recently radar. Anti-battery radar can determine a gun's location after just a few rounds, which gives the shooter a short window to fire then displace--a truly deadly game of tag.
With radars, satellites, drones and fast computers (not even considering AI) I wonder what the future for SPGs will be. Imagine someone starts firing at your position and your computer (with all the available info) immediately calculates the origin location, sets up and fires the gun...
@@ThatAnnoyingGuyOnTheInternet Methods will be developed to at least confuse and slow the process, then countermeasures will be figured out; rinse and repeat.
@@ThatAnnoyingGuyOnTheInternet well the typical tactic is: shoot and disappear. First you're hidden in a forrest or a village. You get the order to strike and drive to the shooting position. The radius of the shooting position is very big and every spg has it's own sector. You get the order and shoot a few times and immediately disappear and hide again. All that happens whithin few minutes. Counter battery fire is a very big danger and could damage a battery very hard but normaly there isn't just one battery so we can triangulate their attack and start our own counter battery fire. Sorry for my poor English and greetings from a M109 commander of the Swiss military.
@@xDlol24 Cool, that makes sense. Assuming both you and the enemy have the same idea you described (fire and hide), would counter battery even make sense? Or would it be worth trying it "just in case"?
@@ThatAnnoyingGuyOnTheInternet well it depends on many factors, like what sort of artillery it is, what's their range, how fast can they opperate and is the risk worth it. So I can't give a clear answer.
I might be wrong, but believe Flak 88 counts as "direct fire" in its original use as anti-aircraft artillery--IF the in/direct distinction applies to AA use...🤔
It is worth noting that it isn't just about the gun itself being seen. Modern radar can detect shells in the air, and calculate their trajectories to tell where it is coming from, which means even a perfectly concealed gun can have shots coming back at it before its own shots land, making shoot and scoot an even more important capability.
Artillery. King of the battlefield. And now we even have ramjet ammunition, increasing range to 150 km. Slap it on a smart shell, and you got a 150 km "Fuck you in perticular" shell.
@@volteer1332that's not indirect fire If I have a rifle and I'm shooting a fast-moving man, it's not indirect fire because my sight is not directly at him Lobbing rounds up in the air with the goal of them coming back down and hitting someone is indirect fire
@@demanischafferyes you explained indirect fire which shouldn't be confused with indirect weapon. Direct fire weapons you can still shoot indirectly but that still makes them direct fire weapons because they're most effective when you have direct line of sight or physical sight of the target. But indirect weapons are weapons that you don't specifically need to see the target in order to destroy or cause damage. For example non artillery tanks are direct fire weapons and artillery tanks are indirect. Simpler terms is that direct and indirect fire weapons can both be fired directly or indirectly, but if it's effectiveness to contact or destroy a target is better directly or indirectly is what dertmines if it's one or the other. Or a simple anology would be guided missiles(direct weapon) and non guided missiles(indirect weapon)
Hey guys, I've worked on m109a6 paladins for about 5 years. If y'all have any questions about the platform within reason I'd be willing to answer. I know much more about the maintenance side than the operation side but it's interesting none the less
How is the shell trajectory calculated by the system? I'm currently building an SPG tank in a game but I'm not very sure what to calculate to fire from a significant distance. Are there also calculations for aiming the gun on high angles like a mortars?
I understood miles perfectly. Football fields, what is that, 100 yards plus both end zones? How long is each end zone, are they even counted at all when defining a football field? Football fields use yards which is also another conversion I have to make, ugh!!!!!1
Not sure if SPGs didn‘t come around at least as much due to the needs of the other arms during offensive operations rather than just problems the artillery faced. Traditional towed artillery performed extremely successfully in WWII and it was much cheaper than SPGs. But the necessities of mobile warfare meant that the infantry, and later also tanks, desperately needed a solution for mobile fire-support that towed artillery couldn‘t provide because it couldn‘t keep up with the rapid advances that became necessary. One solution was to try building smaller and smaller guns, but the Germans very early on hit upon assault guns as the only effective solution.
Maybe add a little story about the artillery observer, who'se role is (was?) very important for pointing out the target and assess the damage, and at the same time was a very dangerous profession with an etimated life span of 7 minutes or so.
One interesting fact about the history of artillery is they are spread out into every corner of the Old World with the help of the conquest of the Mongol Empire. After capturing and adopting the new weapon, Mongolian brought it anywhere they go to the siege, from Euro, and the Middle East, to South East Asia. When the native dynasty get conquered or defeat the Mongolian,they quickly realize the cannon are a useful tool for siege and adopted it
I remember how many people make fun of Russia because they have so many different artillery pieces both towed and self propelled. Then this conflict happened. Everyone immediately learned how important artillery is in conventional warfare.
once again suggestion for future video comparison of Low Pressure 90 mm agains 25-30mm Autocannons what are pros and cons why would modern military force even use LP 90mm?
The original SPGs were developed in order to give artillery the speed to keep up with the blitzes of WW2. This makes it all the more interesting that they are so useful in ukraine, where the frontlines could best be considered violently static
4:38 Ey, that's not an autoloader, that's a mechanically assisted loading system An autoloader is fully automatic and fully mechanical, with no human intervention other than to press a button to select the munition type or unload and reload again. And an autocannon is like an autoloader, but an autocannon working almost like a machinegun while an autoloader working more similarly to a bolt action gun (some autocannons can be just really fast autoloaders when on really big guns but have the firerate of an autocannon and therefore be practically functional as one)
Don't forget about the innovative usage of SPGs pioneered by African nations in modern times. By firing while still moving, and utilizing the gun barrel sideways, they maintain territory control without any need for actual accuracy.
I'm a fan of SPG's. It's what I usually play in WoT. But I have to admit the biggest disadvantage is that they are way more complex than towed artillery. When they are broken down they are useless. Where towed artillery just needs another tow vehicle.
Mobility Philosophy - historically changed with the Atomic Age - a doctrine of dispersing assets to avoid offering large targets - military forces were expected to gather force upon targets than spread out to minimize counter attack from nukez !🇨🇦
i've always wondered why most spgs resemble tanks. in the us the paladin is usualyy assigned to tank/bradley brigades. but stryker and light infantry brigades have towed artillery. why not have an spg on wheels like a stryker?
I don't know how I missed this when it came out 4 weeks ago. Excellent explanation of SPGs. We are often the 'red-headed' child of World of Tanks. Everyone hates us because when we hit the enemy, they cannot fire back at us because they don't know where we are. That creates frustration and from that comes deep-seated animosity. Thanks again for explaining why we are important.
Great short vid, SPGs are often overshadowed by tanks even though they seem to have same or greater impact on Ukrainian battlefield. To be fair I am a bit of a shill for our Zuzana 2s and Czechoslovak SPGs in general.
Sorry, by this video has the wrong take on SPGs. Firstly, there are self propelled guns for both direct (assault-, anti-tank and anti-air guns) and indirect fire (artillery). Secondly, the reason self-propelled artillery was invented wasn't at all avoiding counter battery fire, but to be able to keep pace with the mechanised formations, especially cross country. This is highlighted 4:13, since North-Vietnamese counter battery fire was almost non-existent during the Vietnam war, but there was a definite need to rapidly getting the artillery into firing position to support the mobile units.
1:47 maybe I'm wrong, but since when is a "Flak" an indirect weapon? The "Flak" means "Flugabwehrkanone"= Anti-Aircraft-Gun. Wasn't it shot directly at planes?
Me personally I call any vehicle with tracks/wheels, armor, crew, and a main gun that isn't a hand held or shoulder fired weapon(anything bigger than 50bmg) and is fired while the crew is still inside while protected by the vehicle, is a tank. Yes I know the names of technical or specialized vehicles but realistically.... it's still a tank and people who get offended by what you cakl something are just weird.
Sorry, we dont use football fields as a system of distance measurement, thats more related to weight. Can you please translate that into a more usable distance measurement, like glasses of milk. That's the best way to find distance, "how many glasses of milk is it to get there?"
Football fields have a finite length though. If you used cups/glasses as a measurement it would be harder to conceptualize because he could be talking about literally any form/shape/size of cup/glass ever created
It is in a historical context, and is vintage footage for educational purposes. I think there are known exceptions for very clearly historical appearances. (It did give me a knee jerk reaction too, don't worry) I would be more worried about the "Z" decals on the Ukraine tanks.
SPG was the hamster owned,loosely, by the "young ones" (mostly Vyvyan. "rick you are a complete and utter bastard.." )and named after a certain "Special Patrol Group"..
Talking about artillery and self propelled artillery from WWII and not even mentioning the ussr which have been the ones that fabricated the most number of pieces and developed the best doctrine...The american way..
The USSR did not use much self-propelled artillery, if any. It was not a large part of their “best doctrine”. And what are you talking about Americans for?
I mean at this point (M1299), why don't we replace the shells with regular ballistic missiles? Is it just a matter of cost and missile jamming/scrambling tech?
Cost and payload. Increasing the payload weight of a missile is exponentially more expensive than increasing the payload of a ballistic projectile. It is also possible to track the smoke/vapor trail of a propelled charge like a missile, or intercept it with C-RAM type automated anti missile and aircraft systems. You can't reliably shoot a falling bullet out of the sky.
@@volteer1332 Funny huh, how all the extra control one has on a missile somehow makes it _more_ predictable - I see what you're saying though, it's likely just a matter of size, shooting a missile with a bullet is hard enough, but good luck shooting a bullet with a bullet like that WW1 incident
@luigivercotti6410 prediction is predicated on being able to detect an object, and the heat signature on a missile is pretty noticeable. But size is the other big thing, all that extra space for the rocket fuel and the guidance computer and sensors makes it a bulkier target to hit.
Some (most?) artillery have adjustable charges (edit: adjustable charge is in fact necessary to do the time-on-target fire, like shown in the video), but if you're not doing ToT, unless you needed to aim a little higher to avoid hitting an obstacle, I'd imagine you'd just fire standard/full charge. With the same charge, the velocity is the same, but firing in a low arc, the shell will reach the target faster, since it's taking a more direct route.
775 football fields or roughly the length of 1.002.148 BigMac side by side
Americans will do anything to avoid SI units.
@@jaex9617 I'm partial to the rural American system of using time as a unit of distance measurement, for example, at average Floridan highway speed(~80mph, so on the lower side of the real average), the M1299 can fire a shell over 30 minutes away!
Bro you are CRAZY crazy
Is that Big Mac system based on the advertising photo, or the real "stepped on" dimensions?
Finally, a real American.
These videos are so well presented. With a good voice and without annoying music i'm always so hooked onto their subject
Yes! No music. It's rare that I finish watching a video with music.
Wish they were longer ☹️☹️
Thanks so much! There is actually some music it’s just very quiet :)
@@RedWrenchFilms Russian always have number
@@carkawalakhatulistiwawhat?...
I want to point out that the Germans in WWII used assault guns and tank destroyers much more prodigiously than (what would now be considered) textbook SPGs but in a very similar role. Weapons like the StuG and Jagdpanzer were massively more common in the German army, and were similarly used to support the infantry on the offense and were capable of indirect fire. Arguably the StuG even is supposed to be an SPG, even if it became the mother of tank destroyers as well.
Stug is an assault gun
@@gotanon9659 and what exactly is the difference between an assault gun and an SPG that‘s getting used as a tank destroyer 70% of the time?
@@raylast3873Generally assault guns would be armored enough to survive expected frontal threats
SPGs are armored to defend from small arms and shrapnel from bombs and enemy artillery
@@demanischaffer exactly. Which means your assault gun is pretty much just a better SPG and in most cases you‘re going to have zero problems if for whatever reason you use the assault gun instead.
@@raylast3873 Yes'nt
Things like the Stug started as Self propelled artillery, but were re-gunned to work better as tank destroyers, Germany had other SPGs that differed greatly in design because they stayed pure artillery
The Short Barrel Stugs were artillery at first, if you look at photos from early or pre war you'll see their crews do not wear the tanker uniforms
Now a Stug makes a great assault gun because it's armored and enclosed, a long barrel stug makes a good tank destroyer because it's low to the ground and armored, a Priest or Hummel make better artillery platforms because they have higher elevating guns their designs would allow bigger guns to be employed
One of the best ways to spot someone who doesn't understand armored combat is to look for the folks who think tanks and SPGs are the same thing because of the way they look.
Great video, thanks for sharing.
or people who think ifvs are tanks
Ryan Mcbeth's HAT method works for them.
I disagree. The definition of a tank has never really been defined and you can find a lot of different definitions wether it's people or Google who said it. To me , SPG ,SPAA, IFV , MBT... They all are tank but with different characteristics and function.
They don't even look the same to me, which I guess shows that I've spent too much time learning about military history 😅
@@mateomignone947 If you're using Google to look up the definition of "tank", I think you just proved my point.
;)
I don’t know if it’s in your interest but could you discuss the newer guided munitions of these modern spg’s?
While you're waiting, there's plenty of good information on the M982 Excalibur round on the internet (including here on CZcams). That one is probably the most interesting one. (There's also the Precision Guidance Kit, which can be attached to a dumb round to give it a significant fraction of the capability for far less cost).
@@jeffbenton6183 Nah, it's complete shit. Russian Krasnopol costs 1/20 the price and is much more accurate, happens when you don't build stuff to enrich 1% first and foremost...
@@KuK137 India has large stocks of both Excalibur and Krasnopol. Their conclusion is the opposite of yours. They've found Krasnopol unreliable at high altitudes (each one becomes a "dud" to use a direct quote). Excalibur, on the other hand, does not have this problem. The Indians also like that it has a bigger warhead and has "more penetration power" - again to quote their own assessment. Starting in 2019 they began to actually *replace* their stocks of Krasnopol with Excalibur.
Also, Krasnopol is *not* one-twentieth the cost of Excalibur, it's one-fifth. Excalibur is still considerably more expensive than Krasnopol, but it's nowhere near as expensive as you claim. Moreover, Excalibur *can* be much cheaper: in 2006, it was fully *half* the price it was now, because they were being built in greater numbers. The US chose to buy fewer of them because they were so effective, that they didn't need as many as they thought in Afghanistan. Remember that economy-of-scale is a thing - they could be built in even greater numbers than they were in 2006, which would make them even cheaper. In any case, the Indians think it's worth the extra cost (and I think they're looking to license-produce their own Excaliburs, which are likely to be cheaper).
Lastly, you don't honestly believe that Russia has a weaker 1% than the US, do you? Russia is practically *owned* by its oligarchs. The one societal difference that likely accounts for the extra cost is that American workers demand extra pay. The median household income in the US is 5-10 *times* higher than that of Russia (depending on which part of each country we're discussing, and when in the last five years as well). This more than accounts for the increase in price. If anything, US production of the rounds is likely much more efficient than the Russian procedures, since Excalibur *should* be even more exspensive than it is.
@@KuK137And I have oceanfront property in Nevada to sell you
Russian claims on accuracy and reliability must be taken with a large amount of salt
@@KuK137mad cope
Thank you SOOOOOO much for NOT using computer narration!
Loving your videos!
One thing I noticed---the US' rocket-assisted XM1113 projectile you referenced is 155mm from what I can tell, not 105mm (unless it's a saboted round).
Looking forward to more videos.
It is a 155, and noteably, it's pretty much just the already in use Excalibur. It's the gun that's experiemntal, not the round.
"High Caliber, Indirect fire gun, on a mobile platform, that can withstand small arms fire and shrapnel"
-an oversimplified explanation of the Self Propelled gun.
Another video well done i say, a go-through of the history of SPGs and the timelines that each nation military that integrated the doctrine of SPGs would most likely be a great pleasure to learn about.
Even more oversimplified explaination of the SPG:
Big gun on big metal vroom-vroom go boom-boom then zoom-zoom to prevent counter boom-boom from mean people
@@Techno_Idioto " Operation of a SPG for Dummies "
@@Techno_Idiotoeven more simplified version... TANK
@@LottoDub720 Yeah, that's the long and short of it.
So, a tank
The greatest risk for artillery was the opposition determining the firing location by sound and more recently radar. Anti-battery radar can determine a gun's location after just a few rounds, which gives the shooter a short window to fire then displace--a truly deadly game of tag.
With radars, satellites, drones and fast computers (not even considering AI) I wonder what the future for SPGs will be. Imagine someone starts firing at your position and your computer (with all the available info) immediately calculates the origin location, sets up and fires the gun...
@@ThatAnnoyingGuyOnTheInternet Methods will be developed to at least confuse and slow the process, then countermeasures will be figured out; rinse and repeat.
@@ThatAnnoyingGuyOnTheInternet well the typical tactic is: shoot and disappear. First you're hidden in a forrest or a village. You get the order to strike and drive to the shooting position. The radius of the shooting position is very big and every spg has it's own sector. You get the order and shoot a few times and immediately disappear and hide again. All that happens whithin few minutes. Counter battery fire is a very big danger and could damage a battery very hard but normaly there isn't just one battery so we can triangulate their attack and start our own counter battery fire.
Sorry for my poor English and greetings from a M109 commander of the Swiss military.
@@xDlol24 Cool, that makes sense. Assuming both you and the enemy have the same idea you described (fire and hide), would counter battery even make sense? Or would it be worth trying it "just in case"?
@@ThatAnnoyingGuyOnTheInternet well it depends on many factors, like what sort of artillery it is, what's their range, how fast can they opperate and is the risk worth it.
So I can't give a clear answer.
Hey, could you do a video about ERA and composite armor? When it started being used, why, advantages and others. Thanks a lot, really like the videos!
Thanks for the idea!
I might be wrong, but believe Flak 88 counts as "direct fire" in its original use as anti-aircraft artillery--IF the in/direct distinction applies to AA use...🤔
@@volteer1332 I'd still count it as DIRECT fire. You aim at area on the sky which is in your direct line of sight.
It is worth noting that it isn't just about the gun itself being seen. Modern radar can detect shells in the air, and calculate their trajectories to tell where it is coming from, which means even a perfectly concealed gun can have shots coming back at it before its own shots land, making shoot and scoot an even more important capability.
Artillery. King of the battlefield. And now we even have ramjet ammunition, increasing range to 150 km. Slap it on a smart shell, and you got a 150 km "Fuck you in perticular" shell.
Flak88 is not an indirect weapon. It is direct antiaircraft and antitank.
@@volteer1332that's not indirect fire
If I have a rifle and I'm shooting a fast-moving man, it's not indirect fire because my sight is not directly at him
Lobbing rounds up in the air with the goal of them coming back down and hitting someone is indirect fire
@@volteer1332 Flak88 in AA use is still direct fire, you aim at the spon on sky in your direct line of sight.
@@demanischafferyes you explained indirect fire which shouldn't be confused with indirect weapon. Direct fire weapons you can still shoot indirectly but that still makes them direct fire weapons because they're most effective when you have direct line of sight or physical sight of the target. But indirect weapons are weapons that you don't specifically need to see the target in order to destroy or cause damage. For example non artillery tanks are direct fire weapons and artillery tanks are indirect. Simpler terms is that direct and indirect fire weapons can both be fired directly or indirectly, but if it's effectiveness to contact or destroy a target is better directly or indirectly is what dertmines if it's one or the other. Or a simple anology would be guided missiles(direct weapon) and non guided missiles(indirect weapon)
Hey guys, I've worked on m109a6 paladins for about 5 years. If y'all have any questions about the platform within reason I'd be willing to answer. I know much more about the maintenance side than the operation side but it's interesting none the less
How is the shell trajectory calculated by the system? I'm currently building an SPG tank in a game but I'm not very sure what to calculate to fire from a significant distance. Are there also calculations for aiming the gun on high angles like a mortars?
Whats the maintenance like? Are there any parts prone to breaking? Whats the funniest thing you’ve seen while maintaining the m109?
In the Swiss M109 KAWEST it is possible to shoot direct with a scope. Is that Swiss thing but also on the paladins?
You could do a take about IFV's in Ukraine or in general, could be a fun video to watch
Please make more Ukraine war related content. It's very educational and entertaining!
Great video. Would be cool too see you maybe covering the south african G6 rhino in the future. It's a very cool and unique spg
I’m so glad he translated to football fields. How could I ever know what the other units mean? 😂
I understood miles perfectly. Football fields, what is that, 100 yards plus both end zones? How long is each end zone, are they even counted at all when defining a football field?
Football fields use yards which is also another conversion I have to make, ugh!!!!!1
@@uss-dh7909imagine meters
Funny, informative, entertaining with a smooth voice and good video production, finally a channel worth subscribing too
Not sure if SPGs didn‘t come around at least as much due to the needs of the other arms during offensive operations rather than just problems the artillery faced. Traditional towed artillery performed extremely successfully in WWII and it was much cheaper than SPGs.
But the necessities of mobile warfare meant that the infantry, and later also tanks, desperately needed a solution for mobile fire-support that towed artillery couldn‘t provide because it couldn‘t keep up with the rapid advances that became necessary. One solution was to try building smaller and smaller guns, but the Germans very early on hit upon assault guns as the only effective solution.
WWII German SPG names: BADASS
WWII British SPG names: DASHING
WWII USA SPG names: MMMMM
I think you have the best non-french prononciation of the CAESAR, very good video 👍
I trained on M-109 SP Howitzers but when I went to my Permanent Party assignment we had M-198 towed howitzers.
Maybe add a little story about the artillery observer, who'se role is (was?) very important for pointing out the target and assess the damage, and at the same time was a very dangerous profession with an etimated life span of 7 minutes or so.
Would be great to see a video and small Troop carriers like the Willy Jeep and it's descendants like the HMMWV and JLTV
isnt every tank an SPG, but not every SPG a tank?
Oh fuck you right 😮🧠 💥
Always a good day when Red Wrench Films posts a new video
One interesting fact about the history of artillery is they are spread out into every corner of the Old World with the help of the conquest of the Mongol Empire. After capturing and adopting the new weapon, Mongolian brought it anywhere they go to the siege, from Euro, and the Middle East, to South East Asia. When the native dynasty get conquered or defeat the Mongolian,they quickly realize the cannon are a useful tool for siege and adopted it
I remember how many people make fun of Russia because they have so many different artillery pieces both towed and self propelled.
Then this conflict happened. Everyone immediately learned how important artillery is in conventional warfare.
once again suggestion for future video comparison of Low Pressure 90 mm agains 25-30mm Autocannons what are pros and cons why would modern military force even use LP 90mm?
The original SPGs were developed in order to give artillery the speed to keep up with the blitzes of WW2. This makes it all the more interesting that they are so useful in ukraine, where the frontlines could best be considered violently static
Could you make a video about soviet tank destroyer, such as the 152s
4:38
Ey, that's not an autoloader, that's a mechanically assisted loading system
An autoloader is fully automatic and fully mechanical, with no human intervention other than to press a button to select the munition type or unload and reload again.
And an autocannon is like an autoloader, but an autocannon working almost like a machinegun while an autoloader working more similarly to a bolt action gun (some autocannons can be just really fast autoloaders when on really big guns but have the firerate of an autocannon and therefore be practically functional as one)
Is it bad that the football field conversion actually helped me visualize it better 😂
Don't forget about the innovative usage of SPGs pioneered by African nations in modern times.
By firing while still moving, and utilizing the gun barrel sideways, they maintain territory control without any need for actual accuracy.
Thanks for the explanation! Great video man
I just want to add that one of the olderst artillery weapons is technically the bow and arrow, at least when employed in large numbers :)
Another great video. Many thanks.
Excellent! Thank you. I learned something new.
I did not know the distance until you gave me the football field distance. Thank you
"I see You, You don't see Me, I shoot You, You don't shoot Me, I kill You, You can't kill Me"- Motto of the SPG crews, colorised
Very interesting, thank you
i wasnt quite sure the range you were talking about until you explained in football fields, thanks for including that
I love how artillery is just become missile yeeters at this point.
I'm a fan of SPG's. It's what I usually play in WoT. But I have to admit the biggest disadvantage is that they are way more complex than towed artillery. When they are broken down they are useless. Where towed artillery just needs another tow vehicle.
Mobility Philosophy - historically changed with the Atomic Age - a doctrine of dispersing assets to avoid offering large targets - military forces were expected to gather force upon targets than spread out to minimize counter attack from nukez !🇨🇦
Awesome video =)
The bison is such a beautiful tank my goodness 😍
Could you do one specificly on American SPG’s? Love to learn more about especially the WWII ones
i've always wondered why most spgs resemble tanks. in the us the paladin is usualyy assigned to tank/bradley brigades. but stryker and light infantry brigades have towed artillery. why not have an spg on wheels like a stryker?
My friend operates one of these vehicles, he's leaving for deployment in Poland here soon. Let's hope his services are not needed.
I don't know how I missed this when it came out 4 weeks ago. Excellent explanation of SPGs. We are often the 'red-headed' child of World of Tanks. Everyone hates us because when we hit the enemy, they cannot fire back at us because they don't know where we are. That creates frustration and from that comes deep-seated animosity. Thanks again for explaining why we are important.
I heard a Lamborghini outside
lets be honest, Paladin is one of the sexiest SPG ever. Especially later versions with longer turrets and longer gun
M109: 🤡👶
T92 Howitzer Motor Carriage: 👴😎💪🗿
70km?
eh
775 FOOTBALL FIELDS?!?!? MY GOD
the beauty of evolution
In Germany we call them Haubitzen and I am dissatisfied after you didnt include the good old Panzerhaubitze 2000
Ground war is about artillery not about sophisticated missiles.
Great short vid, SPGs are often overshadowed by tanks even though they seem to have same or greater impact on Ukrainian battlefield. To be fair I am a bit of a shill for our Zuzana 2s and Czechoslovak SPGs in general.
Sorry, by this video has the wrong take on SPGs.
Firstly, there are self propelled guns for both direct (assault-, anti-tank and anti-air guns) and indirect fire (artillery).
Secondly, the reason self-propelled artillery was invented wasn't at all avoiding counter battery fire, but to be able to keep pace with the mechanised formations, especially cross country.
This is highlighted 4:13, since North-Vietnamese counter battery fire was almost non-existent during the Vietnam war, but there was a definite need to rapidly getting the artillery into firing position to support the mobile units.
This is a really nice ad for all arms industries and war. All warmongers can be happy about this video.
You clicked the video Wilhelm.
@@RedWrenchFilms I did not know its content. So what?
1:47 maybe I'm wrong, but since when is a "Flak" an indirect weapon? The "Flak" means "Flugabwehrkanone"= Anti-Aircraft-Gun. Wasn't it shot directly at planes?
Would love if u can do a video on the S27 Pion and Malka that both Russia and Ukraine are using. Its a monsterous piece of artillery hardware
Don't forget about Soviet SPG used during WWII
Haha which ones! I couldn’t find anything concrete that wasn’t a tank destroyer, assault gun or prototype.
@@RedWrenchFilms ISU-85, ISU-122, ISU-152. They can be called tank destroyers but it doesn't make significant difference.
@@RedWrenchFilms So you don't even mention USSR at all. What a lame excuse.
@@azatmingalimov I mean - I literally do.
Tanks are when you put a gun on a vehicle
SPGs are when you put a vehicle on a gun
Armies must rename these pieces as Shoot-N-Scoot (SNS).
Ty i learned so much but isn't there any tank spg's?
Looks like a heavily upgraded Nashorn
Thanks!
Nice video but such a shame you didn't cover Russian SPGs...
They didn’t really have any in World War Two. They use the Soviet style systems listed when I talk about Ukrainian SPGs.
@@RedWrenchFilms Not out of bias at all. Right?
@@azatmingalimov … which ones would you want me to talk about?
Also tanks are pretty much used in indirect fire role
Me personally I call any vehicle with tracks/wheels, armor, crew, and a main gun that isn't a hand held or shoulder fired weapon(anything bigger than 50bmg) and is fired while the crew is still inside while protected by the vehicle, is a tank. Yes I know the names of technical or specialized vehicles but realistically.... it's still a tank and people who get offended by what you cakl something are just weird.
So.... it's a howitzer with its own engine?
Sorry, we dont use football fields as a system of distance measurement, thats more related to weight. Can you please translate that into a more usable distance measurement, like glasses of milk. That's the best way to find distance, "how many glasses of milk is it to get there?"
Football fields have a finite length though. If you used cups/glasses as a measurement it would be harder to conceptualize because he could be talking about literally any form/shape/size of cup/glass ever created
Hey I understand the miles you really didn't need to add football fields to the mix.
5:30 they also got the howitzers from the Netherlands. Probably counted then with the Germans?
-Hears "for americans its 98 fpptball fields"
-sighs
-checks top comment
Could you do a video on tank optics? Cant seem to find any good videos on it.
Really good idea David
Most things inside mostly all military vehicles are classified upon technical details
@@LottoDub720 Yeah that's unfortunate
Short answer: Gun with wheel/track
0:12 that sh aint buller proof. any gun bigger than 10mm can penetrate it
Same as a bullet proof vest then? Bullet proof windows?
@@RedWrenchFilms Cope
It's a gun.
That propels itself.
This channel is going places! Sub now and be an early bird before 100k and 500k subs.
The bloke has well presented vids and great info!
Hahah appreciate it Jacob!
It's going places, I'm sure those are not right places though. Channels based on bias are bound to become echo chambers of little value.
As an American, I am very familiar with miles even more so than imagining 70 football fields placed side-by-side.
Imagine getting a hit 6 times at once by the same vehicle. Bro
great content, keep up with it!
edit: the ww2 germany flag at 3:52 might get you banned
It is in a historical context, and is vintage footage for educational purposes. I think there are known exceptions for very clearly historical appearances. (It did give me a knee jerk reaction too, don't worry)
I would be more worried about the "Z" decals on the Ukraine tanks.
it's a GUN...that is SELF-PROPELLED
What is your RPM for these kind of videos?
While the 70km of the ERCA aren't bad, the 2S35 has 10km more range and a faster rate of fire.
Was just an example! The XM1155 can go out to 110km.
@@RedWrenchFilms Damn, haven't heard of that one. Just looked it up, pretty wild
Cool vehicles.
SPG was the hamster owned,loosely, by the "young ones" (mostly Vyvyan. "rick you are a complete and utter bastard.." )and named after a certain "Special Patrol Group"..
Is the sturmtiger a spg ?
That joke explains 99.99% of Americans..
Talking about artillery and self propelled artillery from WWII and not even mentioning the ussr which have been the ones that fabricated the most number of pieces and developed the best doctrine...The american way..
The USSR did not use much self-propelled artillery, if any. It was not a large part of their “best doctrine”. And what are you talking about Americans for?
I mean at this point (M1299), why don't we replace the shells with regular ballistic missiles? Is it just a matter of cost and missile jamming/scrambling tech?
Cost and payload.
Increasing the payload weight of a missile is exponentially more expensive than increasing the payload of a ballistic projectile.
It is also possible to track the smoke/vapor trail of a propelled charge like a missile, or intercept it with C-RAM type automated anti missile and aircraft systems. You can't reliably shoot a falling bullet out of the sky.
@@volteer1332 Funny huh, how all the extra control one has on a missile somehow makes it _more_ predictable - I see what you're saying though, it's likely just a matter of size, shooting a missile with a bullet is hard enough, but good luck shooting a bullet with a bullet like that WW1 incident
@luigivercotti6410 prediction is predicated on being able to detect an object, and the heat signature on a missile is pretty noticeable. But size is the other big thing, all that extra space for the rocket fuel and the guidance computer and sensors makes it a bulkier target to hit.
Missiles cost 10x more than artillery shells…this is the main cause of
I was 13B 20 years ago in Operation Iraqi Freedom, the M109A6 are most definitely not bulletproof... Lol
Is the velocity of the shell slower when fired in a lower arc?
I’m not sure! I’d presume it was just fired last. I think the animation exaggerates the differences in elevation.
I think shell flights faster with flatter arc since travel distance is shorter and it takes less affect from gravity
Some (most?) artillery have adjustable charges (edit: adjustable charge is in fact necessary to do the time-on-target fire, like shown in the video), but if you're not doing ToT, unless you needed to aim a little higher to avoid hitting an obstacle, I'd imagine you'd just fire standard/full charge. With the same charge, the velocity is the same, but firing in a low arc, the shell will reach the target faster, since it's taking a more direct route.
Clearly we all know an SPG is Strict Parental Guidance...
Of course it's not a tank, its called snd Artillery piece.