The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 23, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Artillery Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: A wasted topic, but I would like to know.
00_Chem_AJB    4/11/2007 8:15:52 PM
Ok I'm sure this has been debated to death, but which would be better as an artillery system, tube artillery or an MLRS style system, for example, which is quicker to land on it's target a 155mm shell from a 39 cal tube or a 227mm rocket?
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
HIPAR       4/14/2007 10:44:48 AM
The MLRS generally attacks targets that beyond the range of tube artillery.

---  CHAS
 
Quote    Reply

Sabre       4/15/2007 9:13:10 PM
Mind you, the MRLS has been updated since I last dealt with it (so I may be wr, here), but the most modern tube artillery is much faster - you can have a round on its way to a target in less than 20 seconds, whereas MLRS takes at least 5-7 minutes, and that assumes you want whatever ammunition type is loaded in the "six-pack".  It would take much longer to change out the six packs on an MLRS or HIMARS to switch to a different ammunition type.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       4/16/2007 12:28:41 PM
I imagine rocket artillery can't sustain such a long barrage as tube artillery.
 
Quote    Reply

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy