Archer Artillery System | What is wrong?

[@WeaponDetective]

Since our regular narrator currently has health issues, our friend will voice our videos for the next few weeks. We thank him and hope you will enjoy his narration. We wish our regular narrator a speedy recovery. Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective videos kzbin.info/aero/PLEMWqyRZP_LrdqB-XbqY2LocUVEaG_w7D Please click the link to watch our other Swedish Systems videos kzbin.info/aero/PLEMWqyRZP_LpBbgCM_Ndw0Lq6CMmhBsrp Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective-Land videos kzbin.info/aero/PLEMWqyRZP_LpFkS9hH3KD9uTEKBDVQZRp

[@habahan4257]

Get well soon

[@homijbhabha8860]

Get well soon.

[@Galil-aces]

get well soon

[@perpetualcycle4201]

@Wolfman The narrator is what makes the channel interesting in a way. They are well aware of their own limitations with the English language and don't attempt to hide it when they make mistakes or pronunciation errors they roll with and that is one of the best things with their work. The accent comes with the content, its not like its too difficult to understand them for most of us, but it goes without saying that their will always be some who just will complain that the narrator has one. Those people need to accept that not everyone speaks English as their primary language and accents exist and ironically those who complain would have an accent themselves. Hope the narrator gets well soon

[@petesheppard1709]

The video was well done, and a different narrator occasionally gives the channel some variety. May recovery be swift and complete! As for Archer's problems, I can see why the simplicity of other systems is attractive; I was glad to hear that Archer does indeed have manual options. Nothing is more useless in combat than a gun that can't be fired.

[@kudretklc6120]

I think nothing is particularly wrong with the "Archer", maybe the price tag is on the higher side. After the artillery-intensive phase of the Russo-Ukraine war, truck-mounted artillery systems will be more demanded worldwide. Archer should get its share of this trend.

[@regregan6852]

How much?

[@kudretklc6120]

@@regregan6852 "BAE received a $200m contract in 2010 to supply of a total of 48 artillery systems, including 24 each for the Swedish and Norwegian Armed Forces, as well as associated ammunition handling systems." (resource: ArmyTechnology). If these numbers are true, then 4,16m each, of course, this is 2010 price and I don't have any clue about the details of the contract.

[@ZacSamuel]

Yeah it's not something you'd buy for your mother.

[@Nubbe999]

@@kudretklc6120 First version is the most expensive. Development costs. The biggest problem for sales is that 40% of countries buy from Russia and partners, 40% buys from US and partners and the rest 20% don't have any money or need for it.

[@dEcmircEd]

it's a bit large I guess but rich country with a lesser need to move them by planes could prefer them to Caesars I guess ?

[@zorakzoran1]

Those Swedes know how to make weapons, Bofors is at the forefront in so many fields. Amazing for such a small country, which is also peaceful..

[@brewsterly2927]

Peaceful... but sell weapons to kill people, such an oxymoron.

[@jmbig]

Si vis pacem para bellum .... 🤔🤔👍

[@cosmoray9750]

Blinken Threatens Iran, kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5S6iWCYl994fbs

[@somefuckstolemynick]

@@jmbigexactly

[@indoman8887]

There large numbers of Volvo A30 / A35 trucks used in the open pit coal mining industry in Indonesia, because they have excellent mobility characteristics in the wet and muddy conditions there. They will go places no commercial truck will go, and if maintained properly, are a very reliable truck.

[@Bialy_1]

Yea but generaly mines are generating huge profits so they can buy and use expensive trucks... in army you need cheap stuff as tax payers need to pay for it.

[@victorcapel2755]

@@Bialy_1 Yes, cheap stuff. As proven by nuclear submarines, air craft carriers and fighter programs, the military is all about "Cheap stuff"... Volvo A30/35 is standard equipment in mining and logging world wide, there is a global supply network and 100 000s of units doing hard work every day around the world. It's a very common commercial vehicle. The video really got this wrong, in an otherwise excellent video. And again. It's not a truck.

[@victorcapel2755]

Unsuprisingly, we use them extensivly in the Swedish mining sector as well, as well as in construction and logging.

[@tupetsi430]

@@Bialy_1 They aren't just for mining. I mean, they are all over Finland, every road construction site has at least one Volvo haulier.

[@madzen112]

Exactly. Would trust the Volvo to handle more.

[@tor2919]

Not buying the truck argument. In any kind of difficult muddy or snowy terrain like that in Northern Europe a truck can’t go anywhere off-road. A hauler truck like what the Archer is based on can drive almost anywhere. They have insane mobility and are also a lot more robust than trucks.

[@PeterKocic]

Yepp... imagine the muddy fields of Ukraine, the Rheinmetal truck would dig itself down instantly whereas the hauler would just plow through.

[@b.c.2281]

As a note, commercial vehicles tend to be rather geo-specific. Common models of trucks vary from country/continent and sourcing parts for an international buyer would be difficult. In contrast, the Volvo A30 is a common sight on industrial sites around the world. If the intent was to make something marketable to foreign buyers, the A30 was a great choice because there is a pre-existing international supply chain for its parts and maintenance.

[@danielrose1392]

The A30 is also by design built for field maintenance. Commercial costumers won't order a flatbed just to bring an A30 to a shop for it's overdue maintenance.

[@carlthor91]

Yes, I ranked, trucks, by commonality, in my similar response. Best wishes.

[@jmbig]

this is less and less true... trucks like cars are internationalizing for cost reasons... for example many cars of different brands share the same platforms, the same engines, and the same spare parts.. .. for example toyota, fiat, renault, peugeot, citroen, skoda, seat, nissan, etc... have models whose only differences are the aesthetics and the logos...

[@habahan4257]

Great video with many rare analyzes and footage. I was a little sceptical when I saw the title, but after I watched the video, I really liked it. I hope the narrator recovers soon.

[@Finane1]

The shoot and Scoot capabilities are outstanding. The perfect fit taking the fight to the enemy behind the Abrams MBT & the Bradly. Supporting the grounds troops at all costs is how you win. Then in close quarter combat you can target an ammo depot and destroy it and move the next target before the first set of shells hit their target. I like this a lot better than any of the other howitzers.

[@Bald_Zeus]

Honestly, as a swede I really wouldn't mind my tax money going into training some ukrainian crews on the Archer then lending some units to be proven on a real battlefield. It will be the real world experience that the Archer needs for commercial success, and it will be used against Russians which already are the only realistic adversary we could face in Sweden. Therefore by using the Archer to demilitarize Ruzzia in Ukraine, it acts as indirect defence of Sweden while also boosting sales for swedish arms export. Win-win really :)

[@benghazi4216]

I disagree. If we look at the attrition rate of the war in Ukraine we already have too few as it is. And by a mile. Let us actually join NATO first before we give away the little we have. I say we should give Ukraine some Gripen C's! With it, we get all the positive aspects you mention, And we get to gather data on Gripen vs S400, which is a great benefit for us, being our air force is the only branch capable of engaging with Russia with good odds, the rest is just a sideshow to be honest.

[@trololoev]

sweden helped nazi again. did it help in ww2? And it didn't helped now. When you will enjoy winter, i hope you remember why heat will cost you so much.

[@eraserstp]

@@benghazi4216 u will just get nuked in case of war with Russia, as being a part of nuclear alliance, and your air force is not really will be capable to do anything meaningful.

[@Tgspartnership]

a brilliant idea. this amazing looking machine deserves the opportunity to show how it performs

[@benghazi4216]

@@eraserstp Haha, why do you spread that Russian propaganda? War between NATO and Russia doesn't have to mean a nuclear war. And I think downing and sinking everything Russia has in and over the Baltic is something meaningful.

[@GronTheMighty]

When cost and training are the only real downsides worth mentioning, you know it's a good tool.

[@Buzzdog1971]

Finally a content creator that has professional level composed material that does not rely on reusing the same ten seconds of canned stock footage. Also excellent job on the voice over work, once again the pleasure to listen to an actual human voice reading from a script instead of a piece of software mimicking human speech. I have continuously told the algorithm to no longer recommend those channels to me. This time I have hit the subscribe and like button for well deserved and earned reasons. I have always had a strong interest in military hardware, history, and equipment. I believe I have finally found a new home on KZbin to explore those topics. Well Done!!

[@UserName-cb6jz]

Amateur channels with over-dramatized content and robotic speech annoy most people.

[@Superknullisch]

If you like this one, I highly recommend to check out "Task & Purpose" and "Matsimus". Also "Drachinifel" for naval content. And "Perun" and "Covert Cobal" for overviews and analysis of military forces in general. There are a few more that really take deep dives.. but I can't remember their names at the top of my head right now. But I believe I'm subscribed to them so you can just check my subscription list. Although.. I have a few to scroll through.. ; )

[@Buzzdog1971]

@@Superknullisch Thanks for the feedback. I have been watching Capy since T&P began. I listen to Drachinfel all the time in the back ground. For small arms imho there is no one better than Ian with Forgotten Weapons. I also enjoy 9 Hole review.

Volvo A30 / A35 are used worldwide and the spare part network is just as big as any other manufacturer. It's more expensive than an ordinary truck, sure, but it can go where the more expensive tracked gun can go. And it's faster and longer range. And the crew is protected, unlike the truck. I guess it comes down to price tag and who you want to make happy. :)

[@mixmashandtinker3266]

The Archers fast in/out of position combined with the six salvo simultaneous impact capability is extremely powerful on todays battlefields. Just look at the huge problems Russia are facing with counter battery fire, and redeployment times. In and out including a three round burst salvo in under 5 minutes? Hard to beat.

[@lagrangewei]

the issue is rocket artillery exist and they can outrange even the best guns. it doesn't make sense to have a gun system that cost as much as an rocket artillery that outrange it, that's the problem. if i can afford this, why would i not buy rocket artillery instead? that is the hype behind the HIMARS afterall...

[@matchlockashigaru9755]

@@lagrangewei Artillery shells are considerably cheaper than GMLRS

[@lagrangewei]

@@matchlockashigaru9755 not if they are destroyed which is the point, you don't want to spend too much on lowend equipment, they are suppose to be disposal, so they should be cheap that u can afford to lose them. this is why US didn't send SPG to ukraine, they would be destroy like the M777. so their "improve survivability" as compared to normal artillery really isn't an improvement. for mortar and field artillery, there is no point to over invest in them. because if you are going to face an enemy that is strong enough that regular artillery isn't going to cut it, then this improvement really isn't enough to protect you. that is why no one buy it. it is overprice for the task and expendability of these system.

[@quantuman100]

@@lagrangewei meanwhile in Ukraine; Pz2000 being withdrawn for maintenance due to barrel wear because the Russians can't hit it back and the Ukrainian army have been using it to shell almost non-stop...

[@lagrangewei]

@@quantuman100 actually the reason they are out of service is because ukraine doesn't have enough artillery so they are overusing what few gun they had. it not reason good news that u have to depend on few guns. which is why u need number not quality.

[@oblivionnokk3531]

I am really sad Norway backed out, because these are awesome. As someone whom have worked with an Volvo A30 dumper, they are tanks even without the armor.

[@fyfaenihelvete]

We have our own systems too.

[@oblivionnokk3531]

@@fyfaenihelvete we do, but the archer is ace.

[@drzoidnilsson73]

@@fyfaenihelvete You have your own system but just do remember that IF you (Norway) would be interested in them again I think we (Sweden) are probably very interested to have a chat again about contracts and price tags and such. Just in case you change want something else. Off topic - but also thank you Slovakia. "Slovakia signs $1.37 billion deal for 152 CV90s under government-to-government agreement" And off topic but " BAE Systems Hägglunds in Örnsköldsvik (nowhere town with arms manufacture) is looking for 100 new employees" Please Norway - do have a look at the Archer System. Isn't it a bit both cooler and hoter? Something to boast a bit about in front of other NATO countries? "It's sexy and you know it!!!" (Norway, you do have plenty of oil money and note how sexy it looks... 🤔OK maybe not looks... but seems behave. RIght?? /End Of Sales Pitch

[@robertagren9360]

Norway secret weapon is the swedish banking that the economy of their only border neighbor would collapse in a week.

[@rayakins]

Sounds like if a large enough military procured it then it would bring some of the maintenance costs down and the overall advantages would shine through. Based on experience of plant operations, articulated loaders are cheaper to maintain than any similar sized tracked vehicle.

[@kennethhanes5438]

Most importantly doesn’t require specially trained mechanics them bitch are off the shelf just like the transmission

[@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter]

For the same money you could buy 3 B-52 Nora, which are more compact standard 8x8 trucks.

[@lynngreydanus-smith8816]

Those haul trucks are very common here in Canada

[@einar8019]

the chassis already has a really low maintinance cost because volvo has build like 100 000 of them for the commercial market

[@ph6560]

*Excellent video* on the *Archer!* However I'll contribute some minor corrections and also emphasize the following 2 broad aspects somewhat more than was done in this great production: *( 1 )* A KSP when competing with trucked SPH, is that the Archer is *considerably* more capable over the trucked SPH regarding *off-road driving* and *obstacle crossing.* Due to this truck-hauled SPH's ingenious construction and design Archer masters a wide range of different terrains and geographies (producing a *90 km/h top speed* on paved road through its *440 HP* engine output). May that terrain be dense, hilly forests or jungles, or even unpaved, rocky and steep mountain/hill roads, which for e.g. Caesar would be downright inaccessible. This versatility and broad-range capability to (access) hide and operate in dense, protected terrain while also activating the *Advanced Multi-Spectral Camouflage System* (MSC) increases both its overall potential and survivability noticeably. *( 2 )* The beastly auto-loader system together with the armored NBC-protected cabin and mentioned MSC allow *for 20 sec. deployments* and an *unrivaled firing rate of 9 rpm* and a full magazine firing (21 rounds) in 3.5 min, all the while the crew safely, productively and efficiently operates and coordinates ongoing firing as well as tactics via the Battlefield Management System. Maybe these aspects and added facts will be incorporated in the next Archer-report, once it's (finally) sold in numbers to Switzerland and the US. 😄👍

[@anomymouse5043]

Remember that, in the future, all the weapon system buyers will ask: Was this used against the Russians in Ukraine? How did it perform? So send these weapons to Ukraine, if you hope to sell them! (my 50 cents....)

[@satanihelvetet]

@@anomymouse5043 ...and the reason to not sending Archer (or any of all of the other "good-things-to-have all around the world) is that it take too long time to train ukrainian staffes at new and complex systems of a totally different standard as they are used to.

[@ph6560]

@@anomymouse5043 I totally agree! My intuitive guess is that Sweden is awaiting to *be in the clear* once the day of NATO-entry has passed. Considering they've quite recently decided to increase its Archers from 48 to 72 pcs., by then (NATO-entry) they would perhaps be able to spare and ship off some volume corresponding up to maybe 2 artillery batteries. It's obviously just a guess, but I have a fairly strong feeling they're eager to *increase* their *military equipment support* while also *promoting* and *showcasing the Archer system* on the "cat walk" of the Ukrainian plains.

[@anomymouse5043]

@@satanihelvetet You are partially correct. Well, European countries and USA are already training Ukrainians for various weapons. Training should be included into the package. This also means that it is not rational to send, say 4 Archers, to Ukraine. Weapon maintenance is another thing. I would bring trained Western soldiers to Ukraine (or to neighboring countries) to do complex maintenance tasks.

[@Kvistor]

KSP. Key selling point. Ha ha. Took mea second to understand. Mistook it at first as the Swedish abbreviation it for Kulspruta. Machine Gun.

[@TB-zf7we]

Some further cross-experience from documented Ukrainian Howitzer war experience: 1. Towed howitzers like the FH77 & M777 have been hit by counter battery if not moved often, which by definition is hard work; of course the SPH's are more survivable 2. German requirements for PzH 2000 only envisioned firing 100rnds per day. Real war experience against Russian army requires far more shells per day for defense. PzH 2000 are showing systems errors due to excessive use & auto-loader needing replacement parts sooner than expected. Not ideal design for high intensity combat. It has been mentioned by German politician that only 5 out of 15 PzH 2000 in Ukraine are presently operational due to unforeseen early critical maintenance.

[@minecraftboy4208]

Trust me bro

[@BiohazardPL]

@@minecraftboy4208 german Business Insider wrote about problems with PzH 2000 in Ukraine. Beyond what was mentioned above, they are susceptible to fast wearing if loaded with ammunition not intended for them, like french 155 mm ammo for CEASER's. Ukrainians love polish Krab's, because they are more forgiving and generally easy to operate.

[@patriotenfield3276]

@@minecraftboy4208 Russians lob shells at a rate far more than any other military can imagine.

[@stefanb6539]

@@patriotenfield3276 Yes, but if you have seen any images of Ukrainian fields, a large amount of those shells lobbed are simply wasted on suppressing field mice and moles. 50.000 rounds a day is an impressive fireworks display, but if you don't achieve your objectives, it's just a waste of ammo transport capacity and useless degradation of gun rifling.

[@lagrangewei]

@@stefanb6539 yet is russia the one that is losing territory? the goal is not effectiveness, the goal is to win the war, and ukraine is losing, so as stupid as flattening the entire battleground is, it works. if it was just "firework" ukraine won't be losing ground.

[@JamesLaserpimpWalsh]

In an actual war, that 45 miles per hour top speed will be used. Regardless of diesel consumption, because they will be needed in a hundred places at once. Thanks for the added insight.

[@Tatwinus]

People dont seem to realize that this was made for swedens extreme terrain. You can go from bog to forests full of glacial erratics in just a stones throw, now do that about 500 times before you even get within range of the enemy. Now get out of there quickly. Only dumptrucks can do that reliably. Tracks get thrown all the time in this terrain.

[@xamn4351]

The idea that the hauler is difficult to maintain is not true, its actually easier to keep running than a regular 8X8 truck. The infrastructure is open and its easy to access the engine/gearbox etc. The trade offs made for the more expensive truck chassis will be apparent once you take a look at what it can do in muddy or snowy terrain. The conclusion at the end of the video delivers some misconceptions concerning the reason for the truck mounted guns, in the end when it comes to artillery its all about getting those rounds down range quickly and accurately and then running away. The hauler gives you a platform with the best blend of mobility and speed while its massively overbuilt for the weight of the archery system, slap armor on the cabin and it will still be trucking along just fine in basically any terrain. The normal truck on the other hand will have a harder time balancing armored protection and mobility due to weight constraints.

[@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter]

"The idea that the hauler is difficult to maintain is not true, its actually easier to keep running than a regular 8X8 truck" - any source on that claim? Even changing a tire is a major undertaking (kzbin.info/www/bejne/fmKToIeNl9ilbLM) in comparison to a simple 8x8 truck where crew can do that (kzbin.info/www/bejne/fmKTdaRqgNOab6c), and an 8x8 could even run in an emergency with one of its front tires blown. "in the end when it comes to artillery its all about getting those rounds down range quickly and accurately and then running away" - I would agree. "The normal truck on the other hand will have a harder time balancing armored protection and mobility due to weight constraints." - I wouldn't agree.

[@darkiee69]

@@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter The archer can run with all tires blown..

[@spiritwolf7]

@@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter well this one can run even if all the tires are blown and they can run in a terrain that a regular truck are pretty much useless in..and yes they are probably easier to maintain because everything is accessible,the archer are for nordic conditions, they can run in 1 meter deep snow without any problems

[@regregan6852]

@@spiritwolf7 "probably", so you don't actually know? A lot of people seem to be making these claims based on...nothing in particular. My favourite so far is because it is 6x6 instead of 8x8🤦‍♂️ so simple...

[@Isaveumoneyonmtrates]

Completely agree with you. 👍

[@loki76]

You're missing the spec of 60Km with Excalibur munition. The off-road capability is FAR surpassing the Truck mounted artillery. Might want to check yourself there buddy. It's basically the most advanced SPH out there. The Volvo articulated hauler is widely used and extremely durable. Volvo is huge in mining, trucking and so on in the world. I don't think you grasp how effective and demanding the Swedish armament industry is. The requirements placed on them by Sweden in use, functionality is bar none. The roads and climate and terrain this vehicle needs to traverse in Sweden and temperature is very strenuous. This artillery system is specifically for Northern Sweden fighting a potential Russian invasion via land for example. The system is so new that it has barely delivered 48 units and only been doing so at full production in the last few years. There isn't anything wrong with it at all. Raytheon and Bofors used this system to test the Excalibur munition they developed. Besides cost because of the hauler, they already have ideas of an export MAN 8X8 version to "ease in" any country for it's use.

[@Bialy_1]

You sound like Vladimir with all that mighty claims... this truck have no chance in many cases to be as effective as vehicle with tracks->and Ukraine is a good example. You can easly find pictures of tanks and other lighter tracked vehicles that were stuck in Ukrainian soil=>Archer would sink in Chernozem in no time...

[@victorcapel2755]

@@Bialy_1 It's not a truck.

[@Tony-cf7cp]

@@Bialy_1 your wrong

[@regregan6852]

The archer is over a decade old, hardly "new", and the only reason only 48 have been made is purely because that is all that was ordered, 24 for Sweden and 24 for Norway with only Sweden actually taking theirs and the rest being put into storage after Norway pulled out of the project after delays due to technical issues. You can literally only fanboy this system so much.

[@tor2919]

@Reg regan It entered service 7 years ago. Before that it was prototype stage. It’s a very recent system that is only now coming into maturity. Perhaps be a bit careful with calling every other poster “fanboy”. You post more than anyone in this whole comments thread and seem to have an agenda.

[@bobrown1970]

I have driven Volvo dump trucks for many, many years, mostly A40 but also some A35. They are solid and reliable as only a Volvo can be, they go year after year. In Svalbard, each of them drove about 600 km every 24 hours, it was 24 rounds of 25 km each. Standard Volvo inline six engine. There were no problems with them and the maintenance was done by a former bus mechanic so to say they are complicated is just nonsense.

[@stiglarsson8405]

Thanks at first, you got everything right! However, sweden is a big country, a small population and a small army. Its this, nobody build heavy military equipment that suits swedish military doctrines, so we need to build them our self! From artillery sytems, to uboats and fighter jets! Our military doctrine says, that all of our military bases going to be wiped out at the first our of a war! By this time, all our military should been dispered and allocated in our woods, if we get some time to do it. We use this Volvo articulated hauler at a dayly base for log hauling, it have very good mobility even in winter conditions! And it should be able to work even with a one man crue, there is more people at the logistic and comand units however! There is more to say about the topic.. it seems that Ukranie, kind of adopted to a similar military doctrine, if one get attacked by Russia?

[@awuma]

Poland would also fall into this category... Poland has LOTS of forests which have so many times been the base for resistance to invasion.

[@8teillumin]

As a Brit I would just live the U.K. to buy some of the Swedish military tech. I have been following the Archer and the CV-90 and, although I’ve never served, do belive both would add so much to the British army’s capabilities.

[@kalleklp7291]

Well, we (Denmark) bought 19 Caesar truck-mounted artillery systems and donated them all to Ukraine before we even got them ourselves. As mentioned in the video trucks can be maintained and repaired by any mechanic and parts are cheaper and widely available. We'll have to see how it performs on the battlefield. I hope our friends in Ukraine make good use of them. :) The Archer is a well-performing system, though.

[@andersutter7793]

Informative and objective video, doubt it is anything wrong with Archer except that development took way too long time. If it had been on time, both Denmark and Norway would have it and probably some other countries. The rate of fire is much higher than for example the truck based Caesar with traditional loading. First few seconds is then artillery has most effect so that is a key metric. The "magazine" is fairly complex engineering, can understand it took time to develop, I would also think that could be the maintenance/reliability issue. If there is a potential weak point the 21 round mag would be my guess, how is the reliability? Doubt the articulated Volvo design is any problem, much more of a strength, the civilian version has been used in rough forest terrain without roads hauling timber for decades. The cost seems to be higher for Caesar. Yes, cost is always hard to compare since we dont know how much training, maintenance etc is in the "system" price .I would have expected Archer to be significantly higher in price with the complex 21 magazine. Track Self Propelled guns are even more expensive than Archer/Caesar. Will be interesting to see how Archer does in the Swiss evaluation.

[@buffuniballer]

And multiplied with the time on target capabilities. I.E. get 6 rounds off per gun, arriving simultaneously and you are moving off to your next firing position before the rounds even hit. Two or three dozen rounds hitting all at once has a quality all its own.

[@trplankowner3323]

Thank you for this video, it was very informative. I'm a Navy veteran and my knowledge of Army matter is a bit lacking. I saw the Archer discussed as a possible system to send to Ukraine and from what few details were discussed I thought it would be the best system for the Ukrainians to use to accomplish successful counter-battery missions against Russia. The ability to put 3 rounds in flight and be moving again before those rounds hit is, I think, exactly what is needed by Ukraine. I think the US Army should consider this system again or more fully, I don't know exactly where they are on that process. We in the US don't consider some weapon systems because our Air Force is so dominant on the battlefield. Attempting to fly in an area controlled by an F-22 Raptor is frankly a suicide mission for any opposition air force. Thus, less emphasis on counter batter fire, MANPADS and ATGMs. In fact the US hasn't built any MANPADS in over a decade and will likely send all our current stock to Ukraine. Perhaps the US Army will replace the Stingers with a much lower number of Starstreaks. I think a small force of Archers would be a good idea as well.

[@johnstark4723]

The US Army tested one at Camp Atterbury in Indiana in 2021 and later a general went to Sweden and took a closer look. That was 2022, still talk of buying some, maybe with some battle experience they may get some.

[@trplankowner3323]

@@johnstark4723 Thanks for the information. Considering that the US Congress is getting ready to spend trillions on weapons, I think the least we can do is buy enough of these to give the Army all they need for quick response mobile counterbattery teams.

[@johnstark4723]

@@trplankowner3323 it's too bad we didn't have 4 or 5 of these in syria when the ruskies attacked the 40 US Marines. That would have wiped out the entire russian force in 10 minutes instead of just 200 of them 😉

[@BHuang92]

I think the Archer is something of a medium between a tracked SPG and an truck mounted SPG. The problem I think is that it's too expensive for something that is a compromise between wheeled and tracked SPGs.

[@Sir_Godz]

minimal advantage over ceasar and zuhana at greater operating cost

[@aletheides3990]

Theres actually a truck mounted version ordered by the Swedish Army in their expansion of their military following the war in Ukraine and them joining NATO. They are acquiring 24 more units. They are also moving on acquiring rocket artillery. The hope of BAE is that the truck mounted version (rheinmetal truck platform) will be more appealing on the world market compared to the current version mounted on a dumper platform from VOLVO thats not massproduced contributing to its high cost. Press releases were sent out last month.

[@surferofthesynthwaves4710]

Why buy it when you can swipe 50k for a 1960 soviet arty.

[@John.S.Patton]

@@aletheides3990 ukraine will never join nato,ukraine is just a western pond

[@regregan6852]

How much?

[@janinsweden8559]

The same A30 chassies have been used for other purposes, for example a version with a roll-on-roll off hook loader where the vehicle can switch between carrying a flatbed, fuel tank, crane, 20" container, etc.

[@Rockstone1969]

14:25 mins: Normally it is not wise to fault the potential buyer for a product not selling. While I agree with you that the Archer is a fine system, there may well be other causes. The mentioned maintainability of the truck has been solved by using a 2nd type truck. But its a complex system, being fully remotely operated. Other automation may be more complex to maintain. Its possibly more expensive than comparable systems, both for purchasing and maintaining. The gun is the same on all competetive designs (155 mm L52) and all fire the same ammo. Archer may be able to leave the fireing posistion in 30 seconds, which is fast. But all competetive designs can do that in under a minute, so all are sufficiently fast. And what about reliability of the autoloader? Using manpower usually gives more flexibility when something breaks down. Having the crew in a separate compartiment, may then not be the best solution to that situation. I think Archer is a wonderfull design from an engineering point of view. But it is more complex than its role requires, requireing a more trained and specialized crew... and it is possibly too expensive to build and maintain.

[@OpenGL4ever]

The new German RCH 155 from KMW can shoot while moving. No other self-propelled howitzer can do that.

[@TheSimon253]

@@OpenGL4ever How does that affect it's accuracy though? It seems to have a relatively short wheelbase so a small bumb in the road must throw the accuracy out of the window?

[@OpenGL4ever]

@@TheSimon253 The trick is to use a computer and sensors. The computer knows when to shot.

[@TheSimon253]

@@OpenGL4ever no shit

[@OpenGL4ever]

@@TheSimon253 Well, that's the way it is done while keeping accuracy and precision.

[@MrMe11on]

1:01 Is actually me driving (Recognize my TC). Trident Juncture 2018 in Norway, all drivers had to "Practice" crossing that bridge that the engineers put up :) And a correction, it isn't fitted with CTIS. However it has a built in pneumatic system which can be used to change the air pressure by connecting a regular air hose and a tire pressure gauge.

[@WeaponDetective]

Thanks for correction. We hope you enjoyed the video.

[@MrMe11on]

@@WeaponDetective I for sure did!

[@julianscaeva4334]

Did you choke on your morning coffee when you visited KZbin and saw a video of yourself? lol. Thanks for the extra info!

[@howdywowey2165]

The perfect counter battery fire weapon ! Shoot & Scoot This concept is brilliant !

[@cearny7856]

Get well soon wishes to the regular narrator!

[@murkeyterky6852]

There's plenty of these type of commercial vehicle running around quarries, mines and building sites in most countries. The argument that you need special mechanics is flawed for any country that chooses a tracked SPH, if maintenance of the Archer vehicle is a factor, as tracked vehicles definitly need special mechanics to maintain them. I agree that it mostly is a psycological barrier, not a practical one, that is preventing international orders.

[@justmeandmeonly2501]

The idea that you need these massive pieces of metal produced at ridiculous expense when they can be blown up with a $20 drone is laughable. Our military is still fighting the wars of last century.

[@scubaeric1344]

I'm sure there are,right now,a number of Ukrainian artillerymen training on the Archer-system in the Swedish forests up north above the arctic circle.

[@MrMe11on]

No there isn't.

[@flummi6966]

@@MrMe11on

[@hittepasurname8731]

As a swede I hope that our government soon will send the Archer to Ukraine. It could do much good there instead of collecting dust in Sweden. 🇺🇦 Героям слава!

[@angela1984a]

I also hope Sweden can send Archer (and more) to Ukraine. But perhaps Archer will have to wait until Sweden are full NATO members. Blame Turkey and Hungary.

[@crillothedevil]

They mentioned sending it today 👍

[@angela1984a]

@@crillothedevil As I understand it there's been no confirmation yet. And that is Turkey's fault.

[@oscarlundberg7462]

It would be a good advert for it.

[@marcusjosefsson4998]

The primary reason for Swedish systems, like the Archer and the JAS 39 fighter jet, fail to sell abroad is the competition from the gigantic country across the Atlantic. Not because their systems are superior, but their bargaining tactics are...

[@ivanstepanovic1327]

Not all truck mounted guns leave crew exposed. For example, Nora B52 (also tested by the USA) is completely closed and has full ABC protection, protection from small arms and artillery splinters. Largely automatic and has auto loader...

[@WeaponDetective]

We think that the design features you mentioned of the Nora B52 make it a wheeled SPH rather than a truck-mounted howitzer, like the Archer.

[@HalloN1989]

@@WeaponDetective How about Slovak EVA howitzer(Konstrukta Defence), which is light version of Zuzana 2 autoloader on a standard Tatra 8x8 chasis? kzbin.info/www/bejne/rJO4mGZvip6kj68

[@something3565]

@@WeaponDetective Could you do a video about nora b 52, since there are very few about it outside of serbian/balkan youtube. Even tho its surprisingly prolific aroud the world, despite being produced in Serbia.

[@sqly3129]

Newest DANA M2 is also fully automated with armoured cabin

[@HalloN1989]

@@sqly3129 True, but Dana M2 is 152mm, so could only be relevant for modernization of Czech army if they want to keep to 152. They dont and thats why they are getting the new Ceasar

[@regregan6852]

The new MAN 8x8 platform could sway a few more users being it's common to many nations now so there is that problem solved. Other than that the concept is sound and modern conflicts such as the Ukraine war are proving the importance of shoot and scoot accuracy and more importantly survivability. The days of towed artillery are ending and automation is the way forward in modern warfare.

[@morgitory]

Ok boomer. How is your artillery ending when the proof is in the pudding that they are in Ukraine. How hard is that for you to understand. Are you a man fanboy? You are putting me off man trucks now 🤣 ya bogan. Go dig a trench ya meathead.

[@regregan6852]

@@morgitory what??

[@peterfeeney721]

Only Archer provides armoured protection to the firing crew. Pay a couple of quid more for the odd spare part and Archer shows all the assisted load truck mounted guns a clean pair of heels! Only DANA/ZUZANNA come close. UK is to acquire 18 Archer to temporarily replace ALLLLLĹ its AS90 as an interim measure. We need to get the Cheerleaders out and Shout the benefits as they emerge. The biggest objection to Archer is its greatest advantage: its very small, protected crew - reduce the crew's, reduce the size of a regiment, reduce the number of Colonels you need!!!

[@TheNefastor]

I hadn't considered the maintenance aspect. Good analysis. Thank you.

[@EMBer3000]

I still think it's funny that people speak of the Archer as if it's super complex... it's a dirt/mine hauler with a great big gun mounted at the back. The service technicians for these things can be found at any heavy equipment rental place or the nearest mining operation, if they regularly work with hydraulics they can work on the Archer. Of course the electronics would require a security cleared technician but that is true for any military vehicle, you don't want the enemy to know how your comms work for instance.

[@Xerdoz]

To be honest, you can find parts for Volvo articulated dump trucks almost as easily as for Volvo trucks.

[@regregan6852]

And how "easily" can you find parts for even Volvo trucks then? I drive volvos daily, we actually have to have a spare and a service truck in our fleet...

[@einar8019]

@@regregan6852 you just go down to the local dealership or canibilise one of the thousands used by mines and construcion companies

[@regregan6852]

@@einar8019 sure you do, that's what militaries all around the world do, must be why there are so many of these in military use right? Lots of spare parts??.... I honestly do not get what part of this whole scenario you guys just are not getting, THESE ARE not being used by anyone, anywhere, in any great numbers other than apparently the Swedish forrests OBVIOUSLY FOR A REASON!!! somehow, I highly doubt it is because of the amount of spare parts they can "cannabilise" from all these mining and construction companies. At this point all you guys are literally beating a dead fish when the facts are ridiculously clear and obviously the proof is in the number, sales and use. 48 archers, ever, in the entire world, used by 1 country, who up until recently only even used half anyway, after more than a decade in service....I literally cannot spell this out any more clearly, Archer is not exactly selling like hotcakes is it? So it is either A. The gun itself or B. The platform it's mounted on, you be the judge, either way you guys just do not seem to like the answer.

[@einar8019]

@@regregan6852 only in sweden???????? they have been sold in over 150 countries

[@regregan6852]

@@einar8019 archers have been sold in over 150 countries??? Now you seriously are dreaming!!!

[@BIG-DIPPER-56]

Wow, excellent, thorough, interesting. Thanks ! 🙂😎👍

[@benghazi4216]

Great narration! A good sub for sure

[@Vendelcrow1948]

Good video, but I lack the number of shells, or how many shots the canon can shot,compared with similar systems before replaced. How long time to replace the canon, etc, must also be questions of importance....

[@rickardliljekvist5983]

Since it is Swedish and from Bofors you can rely on that it will last long, very long. Thats the kind of quallity we they make.

[@rikulappi9664]

There is nothing wrong with Archer but with the buyers. War against a peer opponent was merely a hypothetical scenario until Feb 2022 for most customers.. Hence, justifying a system designed for such a scenario was kind of difficult.

[@drhelmut3467]

if your product doesn't sell, then the product doesn't fit the demand. It's that easy

[@regregan6852]

So are you trying to say other countries procure their artillery merely to fight known inferior enemies, rebels or poorer nations? I'm pretty sure the US, UK, France, just to name a few (In fact any modern military on the planet) would disagree...that is the worst military logic I have ever heard tbh.

[@miriamweller812]

@@regregan6852 NATO only slaughter defenseless third world countries - and still fails on the ground. Against big enemeis it uses terrorism and proxies - what makes systems like that one pretty pointless, since it will simply be destroyed without a perfectly working army and it's surveillance. All the destruction of thos wonder weapon system of the west and that against an enemy that is massively holding back, shows, how pointless all that expensive shit is.

[@widar1plays645]

Yes but if the demand doesn't realize it's a good system it's a buyers issue@@drhelmut3467

[@christophggcyrus6861]

Very good and well made report - thx for this!

[@privatebandana]

I think systems like that Archer will be in more demand soon-ish because of the war in Ukraine that has proven that actual modern warfare looks much more different than fighting terrorists with AKs and RPGs in a desert. Drones and artillery is a MASSIVE thing in Ukraine which means mobility is the top priority, so if they can get a system that can fire a few rounds and drive off through muddy terrain before those shells even hit the ground would be gold worth. Also, one of the largest defensive barriers in Ukraine has been mud because of the nature of its terrain, something the Archer system is literally designed to overcome. I hope Sweden ends up sending one or two Archer systems to Ukraine just to see how they perform, I can bet a lot that it will outperform most of their current systems.

[@qvintuse.urvind7002]

Sweden should send some of these to Ukraine - would be really good to know how effective the Archer might be against the ruzzian occupiers.

[@benoone9573]

Agree, the sooner, the better. Speed up production at Bofors. We´re in difficult times. Defence is necessary, more than the last decades. Support Ukraine, and you support yourself. I´m Swedish, and I hope to join NATO very soon....

[@jorgenpersson662]

No absolut no. Why would we help the ukrainian nazis?

[@stoso9864]

@@benoone9573 you will not join Nato you will kiss our behind and kiss our flag over and over again. Your new master is Erdogan komsu

[@jorgenpersson662]

@erik bengt Hopefully we will not do something that stupid.

[@jorgenpersson662]

@erik bengt No I don't like that at all. 1. I don think we should arm nazis. 2. We will make it even more unsafe for us to do that. Vet du varför kriget startade? Du tar väl inte din info från "public service". kzbin.info/www/bejne/m4ubfpKEra5smtE

[@rickardliljekvist5983]

I helped the guy who dessigned the support legs with creating the 3D model.

[@jamesjellis]

In the end the archer was designed for snow covered mountain terrain specifically like in the Nordic countries. It has only been recently (last year or so) that they have looked to expand into international markets with an updated more modular design. It is highly likely that this system gets renewed interest as NATO membership becomes finalized and older out of production systems come to the end of their life. Also a lot of countries probably like to see the system in actual combat before purchasing it even if it is great on paper and during tests and simulated battle.

[@rickardliljekvist5983]

I'm not sure but F35 have not seen any combat yet, but many countries place orders.

[@provetamin]

@@rickardliljekvist5983 israel struck hezbollah inside syria with f35's

[@Sir_Godz]

biggest problem is that sweden didnt send this to ukraine.... best arms dealer show in history

[@trololoev]

yea, Russia want to collect full collection on western weapons.

[@datadavis]

Trololololo indeed

[@dopefish93]

The new 24 archers will be built on a different chassis. It will not be on the articulated chassi but on a "regular" volvo FMX truck stating the cost and maintence of the articulated dumper. the new archers will also be intergrated at a battalion level instead of being a regiment as is the case today,

[@regregan6852]

The only reference I can find to the extra 24 state the MAN 8x8 platform, as per the BAE testbed.

[@dopefish93]

@@regregan6852 might be man chassis i was not able to find that information at the time.

[@spitfire9632]

Great assessment of the Archer, I really want to drive one!

[@yfelwulf]

Ukraine has exposed the lie of Superior Western Weapons. The M777 breaks down daily requires liquid nitrogen to operate can't match Russian Arty in FIREPOWER or endurance. Javelin Stinger and UK MADE NLAW exposed 50% fail to fire or detonate US reports even trained troops can only get TARGET AQUISITTION 19% of the time not even actually firing it the MYTH of thousands of Russian vehicles destroyed are like the Ghost of Kiev lie. Cesaer from France was exposed as fragile in operation with a poor rate of sustained fire. HIMARS reported up to 50% fail to detonate. It IS operating no better than Russian KATUSHYA style systems for effectiveness. Troops in Ukraine have complained that US and Western made equipment is far below the QUALITY and DURABILITY of Russian made equipment can't match it for SUSTAINED FIRE. The west has sent its supposed best equipment and now realises if push comes to shove they have ZERO hope against Russia. That is firing 60 to 70,000 Artillery rounds per day while the best Ukraine ever managed was 6000 per day when it was full equipped. The wests reliance of ganging up on 3rd World countries using airpower has shown they have no combat power at all. Israelistan 🇺🇲 is a paper tiger it's military overstreched undermaned with 4th rate equipment that barely works yet costs a fortune to make and operate. SHITSTAIN 🇬🇧 lacks everything and can barely get a ship to sea. Germany caught with its pants down has NOTHING. So why start a war in Russia simple Israelistan 🇺🇲 and the EU thought they could sanction Russia till it collapsed then move in and buy everything dirt cheap Oil Gas Minerals Food. It has all backfired with the collective west facing massive economic loss and lsraelistan 🇺🇲 in the brink af total collapse. Biden declared the world will unite under AMERICAN RULE meaning endless wars coups Assassination and theft of resources forr the 1% wealthy that now own 80% of all wealth in America. The other option as Putin says is NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY where countries decide their own fate and future. Exactly what the JWO wants to control. The next 200 or 300 years of human civilisation is being decided which side will you take. US led serfdom under the wealthy or FREEDOM.

[@totensiebush]

5:30: I suspect the crew cabin is resistant to "small arms fire", which refers to essentially anything usually used by a single man. It absolutely includes full power rifle cartridges like 7.62 NATO used in many general purpose machine guns, but not to 50 BMG as used in heavy machine guns.

[@Bialy_1]

"The Archer artillery system is operated by three or four crew members who are protected in combat by being under armor. The armored platform provides protection against 7.62mm rounds, armor penetration rounds, 6 kg mines (level 2 STANAG 4569). The cab provides the crew with a protected work environment ensuring extreme endurance during severe circumstances. The protection includes ballistic protection, mine protection, NBC protection, fire protection, and noise protection."

[@glandhound]

The problem is at the Brigade level if your artillery needs to work under small arms fire.

[@gandalfgreyhame3425]

Have the Swedes sent any Archers to Ukraine? Seems like a great way to showcase the superiority of this system (or reveal its flaws). How are the Polish Krabs doing in Ukraine compared to the PzH 2000 and the US M777? You should do a video comparing the known experience in Ukraine with these NATO supplied 155mm howitzers!

[@nats50]

Useless. They are just being destroyed easily.

[@sqly3129]

Dont forget caesar and ZUZANA, DANA, DANA M2

[@Flaccid_Child1]

@@nats50, much like the Crimean airbase 🤡😂😂🛑😭😭☠️💀🛑

[@nats50]

@@Flaccid_Child1 Hahaha, stop it, you guys are killing me laughing! You climaxed with 1 explosion while Russia manages a dozen a day on Ukr, a thousand Ukr casualties a day? I'm coming too...hahaha. Bye everybody.

[@Flaccid_Child1]

@@nats50, aw hell naw RTs reporting a thousand a day. Maybe those were the Russian casualties during the ‘feint’ whoops 🙌🙌😭😭😭😭😭🤡😭🙌

[@shlinn]

My 2 cent on this is that the archer is the jack-of-al-traits unit. Its as fast as a truck on a road (but more expensive) Its better at offroad driving then a truck but worse then a tracked vehichle. It has a higher rate of fire then a traditiobal howitzer but slower then a muliple missile launcher. Its like its the middleground of truck/tracked vehichle and howitzer/multiple missile system. Making it have clear disadvantages against everything. This is why I think its hard to export.

[@sidekickbob7227]

I think you hit the nail on the head. Norway left the project because the Archer didn't meet the requirements. My guess is, this can be translated to be too heavy for good enough offroad capabilities.

[@ghostmourn]

I agree. The archer was ahead of its time! The war Ukraine has shown the world how important artillery is in a modern conflict and also that even a very formidable air power can be shut down by modern air defense systems.

[@stefannilsson2406]

8:12 Wait. If it takes 3 seconds betwen every shell fired, how can you put 6 shells in one place at the same time? That's 15 seconds of reloading, so once the last shell is fired, the first one is well on it's way to the target if it hasn't hit already?

[@magr7424]

They are fired in different angles and have therefore different travel length to the target. The Panzerhaubitze 2000 has the same feature and there are some videos that show how that multiple impact technology works

[@Markus-zb5zd]

Also different charge sizes

[@09jt1]

Thx for your interesting and well made vid. First I am perhaps not so objective bc I am Swedish .🇸🇪 But what I learned from earlier high tech weaponsystem sales. When it's such big amount of money, the political game starts. It depends of "rebuys's" , if we buy for 1 billion $ you have to buy equal stuff from us, in money. In my mind we lost weapon affaires bc that fact. They get an acceptable machine (not better) and make jobs in exchange. Now it's an ongoing war, they have to make proof in reality. "Viggen" was an excellent, for that time, weapon. Rearmed and refueled in a matter of minutes. Specially trained unit? No, justa bunch of civilians reentering by order. We had obligatory defence service then. You were in service until ~50 years of age. Needless to say we didn't export many. Big business make decisions. Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦

[@rickardliljekvist5983]

AJ, SH and SF 37 Viggen was excellent. JA 37 Viggen good but not excellent compared to other jets. I think the first JA was delivered to the air force late 70, and 1977 the excellent F15 was born and F16 the year after. But as a recon or attack it was perfect.

[@bettyswallocks6411]

6:56 “…13 rounds every 3 seconds…” Did you mean 3 rounds every 13 seconds?

[@ahmedalsadik]

Hope you get well soon.

[@TrungNguyen-du9cn]

Different narrator. 👍 Enjoyed this video very much.

[@robertsneddon731]

The Archer is a complex weapon system with a lot of automation, as you described but this is a weakness as well as a strength -- a lot of small parts have to work together perfectly for the gun to be effective or capable of being fired at all, and many of those parts aren't amenable to being "adjusted" in the field with a big hammer in an emergency unlike most other large-calibre artillery systems used today. It's still an interesting piece of equipment and a simplified version of the gun system capable of being fitted to different chassis might make more inroads in the export market. The articulated six-wheel drive transporter the Archer gun is mounted on is a good fit for the Swedish countryside with lots of logging roads through forests and a modern hard-surfaced road system connecting the cities plus airports, railways, roll-on ferries etc. for extended deployment range. These conditions don't apply universally and that's one reason tracked SPGs are more popular for high-mobility situations (such as the famous Ukranian mud season in early spring). When conditions permit smaller less complex wheeled howitzers can be more easily deployed via smaller transport aircraft or in extremis towed into firing position if their own prime mover engines fail.

[@pget8462]

Correct. Future doesn't lie in sophisticated mechanical artillery systems, which will fail, one day or another on the field. And result in high repair/maintenance costs. Future lies in precise computer assisted aiming systems, good ammunitions, mobility and not-so-sophisticated loading systems, which can challenge any operational conditions. That's exactly what the Caesar is providing.

[@drhelmut3467]

forgot to mention that you need the reload truck, big liability.

[@robertsneddon731]

@@drhelmut3467 From what I've seen of the Archer howitzer its internal magazines are loaded by hand from a regular supply vehicle if needed -- the munition carrier vehicle for the Archer is not that sophisticated or specialised. Tanks like the M1A2 Abrams have a specific armoured auto-loader vehicle which can accompany them on the battlefield for fast resupply although again the M1A2 can be restocked manually from trucks in extremis. Any large piece of field artillery, armoured vehicle or mobile anti-aircraft battery requires lots of resupply consumables if it's engaged in fighting for any length of time. That's just the nature of large machines meant to throw large pieces of metal long distances repeatedly.

[@rickardliljekvist5983]

The gud that made Bofors world famous was the 40 mm automatic canon during WWII. Yes a very relyable automatic canon. CV90 got the same canon today with small adjustments making it a little more modern. Bofors know how to build good relyable automatic canons since they have done it i 80 years. Find one single company in the world who can match that experience and know how. It will hold and it will work.

[@gregsutton2400]

guest read by Perun? Great article thanks.

[@danjf1]

I hope it will find great use in Ukraine. I really like the multiple simultaneous burst on one (or more) locations. Not novel to the Archer, but a great addition to it. I can foresee the parts for the vehicle and systems to be a bottleneck. And later down the road, ammo. Since they do seem proprietary and not NATO-wide. I could be wrong about that though.

[@huzarion3814]

I agree 100% with that , I think Archers will run like 2 weeks then "automat" will fail , and Archers will wait loong for service , and I am worry about reload ... I have write such comment and soon loot of Sweds with wet pussies started to storm me , and call me "russian troll" ...

[@quintenbrosens3621]

thank you for this advertisement on the archer artillery system. Where can one buy said artillery system?. For a friend's birthday

[@bobthompson4319]

it takes a specialized trained mechanic to service the tracked sph. archer is very impressive

[@Tatwinus]

Yup, a specialized mechanic, thats why sweden lets 18 year old conscripts do it.

[@einar8019]

@@Tatwinus we also let them fly fighter jets!

[@widar1plays645]

No we don't hahaha, fighter pilot education in Sweden is 7 years long dumbass@@einar8019

[@TheGaggenau]

But archer is based on a commercial articulated hauler. The Volvo dumper are widely spread around the world I don’t get the argument that it would be an issue compared to a truck.

[@watcherzero5256]

The Archer is really ideal for countries with bad roads or road conditions where normal road vehicles will struggle, as such its ideal for countries that experience a lot of snow or whose roads are extremely muddy and poor quality, though the more intensive maintenance requirements and higher cost likely eliminates any interest from African countries.

[@ThePoshPrince]

Since it's wheeled, i doubt that

[@watcherzero5256]

@@ThePoshPrince These are quarry vehicles you shouldn't think of them as road wheeled vehicles.

[@pget8462]

The Archer is twice as heavy as a Caesar, for the same efficiency (even better for the Caesar in terms of precision and distance). It is costlier and more maintenance demanding than the Caesar. With no operational gains. May be the Ukrainians would like it, as an optional help. I don't know.

[@watcherzero5256]

@@pget8462 Archer is indeed heavier than the 6x6 Caesar, though its lighter than the 8x8 Caesar which has similar armour protection for the occupants.

[@einar8019]

@@pget8462 how is the ceasar more precice or have longer range when they use the same ammo?

[@l.8979]

Just as you made this Video the Swiss army is considerning buying either the Archer System or Rheinmetall RCH155. As it seems the archer is supposed to be put on a MAN 8x8 HX truck.

[@yakymua]

I would argue it’s mechanical platform IS it’s strength. Take a closer look at the Volvo articulated rock truck, and you’ll realize it can go both further and into places others cannot. Archer can be deployed rapidly. You want you to outmanoeuvre the enemy and you want to support infantry and armour. This machine is truly perfect for defending Scandinavia, should Rashistan try something stupid (lol @ Rashistani logistics) in the north.

[@Isaveumoneyonmtrates]

Couldn't agree with you more. 👌

[@reginareynolds8221]

Like the new voice way way way better

[@koenvangeleuken2853]

i think the 6x6 volvo is less ccomplicated than the 8x8 MAN! especially the front half of the vehicle is far more crowded and complicated on the MAN.

[@petter5721]

As a mechanic I totally agreed with you. In Sweden articulated trucks are very common and spares and skilled personnel is not a problem. This was chosen because of the sub arctic climate of northern Sweden, there is where a Volvo excels over an ordinary truck in cross country terrain….

[@regregan6852]

Why do you think that? Obviously the rest of the world does not share your veiw.

[@mikkaav8574]

8:55 - pivoting by hydraulic rams? Cylinders perhaps? 9:00 - front and back tyres can not follow the same path with this type of steering (also well seen in the video footage at the same time)

[@ThePzrLdr]

Sweden announced they are sending Archer SPH systems to Ukraine two days ago. We will see how they perform in combat very soon.

[@hunkenpunken]

Thats amazing. Were can we read about that?

[@ThePzrLdr]

@@hunkenpunken The Swedish Foreign Minister made the announcement at a news conference. I saw the report on KZbin the DW News channel from Germany I believe.

[@Gambler11111965]

What is the range. 30, 40, 50 or 60km. All distances are mentioned or written

[@geopolitix7770]

Watch the video. Depends what it's firing

[@Daylon91]

Driving fast IS important in order to get out of the way of counter battery fire. Look at the Ukrainians use of the archer and Himars and other vehicles and they escape at top speed.

[@regregan6852]

Ukraine does not have archer.

[@remistiegler5302]

@@regregan6852 he probably meant Caesar

[@Daylon91]

@@remistiegler5302 yes I did thank u good sir!

[@nats50]

Top speed? They are just being destroyed nonetheless...hahaha

[@ithaca4201]

@@nats50 Yes, we all have heard the countless stories how Russia destroyed several hundred HIMARS last week alone. Out of 12 delievered.

[@Outside85]

I have a hunch about why Denmark ultimately went with the French Caesar system over the Archer, and unfortunately it may be down to the Archer being overqualified. Its designed mainly for use in Sweden and Norway, both countries have mountains and huge forests... Denmark is flat as a pancake and is mostly covered in fields. So while the Archer might be happy to go deploy in the middle of a field, it will still only be a few hundred meters from a small road used by farmers to get to the field where the Caesar would be deploying.

[@g-3409]

Norway did not want it because of spiraling costs, delayed delivery, and poor cross country mobility. Norway went for K9 instead.

[@madzen112]

Wondering, what is the role of artillery on the modern battlefield? Assuming a machine like the Archer is used quite differently than a WW1 or 2 artillery barrage.

[@einar8019]

well the archer could be used with Bofors Bonus anti tank rounds to smash armoured formations

[@miriamweller812]

Depends. When you got no air defense, artillery is pretty pointless, it will be destroyed - just like anything else by missiles systems, drones and airforce. When you got anti air and at best ECM on top, it can still be the king of the battlefield with quite high range and high efficiency. You msut be able to protect it. For example: A Russian standard BTG got 10 tanks, 6 artillery units, 6 missile artillery units and 6 anti air units. Take the anti air away and the rest is just scrap metal in modern warfare. Well, if you don't fight like NATO = slaughtering goatherders with rifles in thrid world countries (and even then losing...).

[@aletheides3990]

Theres actually a truck mounted version ordered by the Swedish Army in their expansion of their military following the war in Ukraine and them joining NATO. They are acquiring 24 more units. They are also moving on acquiring rocket artillery. The hope of BAE is that the truck mounted version (rheinmetall MAN truck platform) will be more appealing on the world market compared to the current version mounted on a dumper platform from VOLVO thats not massproduced contributing to its high cost. Press releases were sent out last month from BAE.

[@benghazi4216]

Wait, did we order 24 extra ones now on some MAN truck platform? Surely we didn't? Tried to google, but all more detailed articles I found are behind pay walls....

[@martinlyhagen6166]

NO there is not a truck mounted version, and it's not ordered by anyone. That's a digital rendering showing what a potential exportversion can look like... Doesn't exist.

[@benghazi4216]

@@martinlyhagen6166 Thank god, so reality is the best of both worlds then. We will get another 24 on the more capable Volvo chassi. Win win.

[@zalthemaniac4633]

@@martinlyhagen6166 They built one archer on a MAN 8x8 in an attempt to get export orders. It was displayed at the DSEI 2019.

[@Ubeer85]

Wait what?? You are saying that the Volvo adts are not massproduced. Volvo is the largest manufacturer of adts in the world. They have big factory in Braås sweden. Of course they dont produce as many as compare to regular trucks wich is a bigger market. But the reason for the high cost of the platform has little to do with low volumes being produced. It have way stronger axles with bigger planetarys and the chassi is double the strenght of a regular truck

[@perwibert6434]

Nice video and informativ 👍

[@Pheckphul1]

This is the second video I've seen on the Archer. Seems like a quite capable system. Neither of the videos discussed price comparison with other truck-mounted systems. Sad that Norway backed out. Hopefully the US will buy a few to get a more objective idea of its worth than info from the Swedish army. Sweden should give/loan Ukraine 3-6 of these to use in its war with Russia. Would provide valuable firepower to Ukraine while at the same time giving Bofors/Volvo valuable feedback from war use, which could lead to improvements and/or more sales. Слава Украине! Героям слава! 🌻🇺🇦🌻

[@zoom5024]

Dont really think that would ever happen, we currently only have 48 of these. And they make out all of Swedens long range artillery at the moment. And the Swedish military is in the progress of a big expansion so we need all we can get. We have ordered 24 more but i dont know which year they will enter service.

[@Pheckphul1]

@@zoom5024 One can still hope and dream.... 😋

[@carlthor91]

Heavy Equipment mechanics would find no difficulties maintaining the Volvo chassis. Also parts availability is far more readily available then the MAN systems shown. Look on any heavy construction site around the world, you are more likely to see Volvo then Cat then Komatsu, then Bell articulated trucks. Please get the details straight. Best wishes from the far North.

[@crissdiamond1907]

The Swedes has always know how to make great weapons, the world is just a “bit” slow to pick them up. Give Ukraine 4 Archers and the export problem would be solved …

[@fo90f33]

alot of weapons were made to save the swedish weapons industry during 90-2010

[@crissdiamond1907]

@@fo90f33 save from what???Swedens biggest problems was that they was neutral and had strict laws of weapon exports…but both Bofors and SAAB get together and became a sister company in BAE and the export problems was solved! That why NLAW/Bonus/Excalibur/GPS guidance and programmable artillery rounds/Meteor missile and loads of other stuff is made abroad.

[@fo90f33]

@@crissdiamond1907 sweden demilitarized after the cold war and in 2016 we spent most money in all of europe on each soldiers 4times more then germany. during this period the army had problems with basic stuff such as boots but could get money for advanced stuff this was to save the weapon industry from bankruption

[@crissdiamond1907]

@@fo90f33 now you are talking about the Swedish government financial input on their army, that doesn’t mean that the weapon developers that sell weapons was on the brink of bankruptcy… Swedish weapons has always been sold abroad like the CG84mm with ammo/AT-4/naval gun 57mm with 3P ammo and proximity fuses that takes high G’s and loads of other gear…US is a big buyer of Swedish weapons, believe me I know👍🏻

[@fo90f33]

@@crissdiamond1907 yes but this made alot of weapon manufacturers go bankrupt. the producers of the cv90 are no longer fully swedish because of this. SAAB also had tons of probelms with there normal car industry and crashed some time ago and now there future is weird and we will have to se what happends next.

[@crimsionCoder42]

This platform was just ahead of its time and everyone is catching up. HIMARS is great for long range but for volume, this is the perfect replacement for the m777 type of artillery. Arty teams can't afford to be static in an era of kamikaze drones and counter-battery. Then there's the amount of ammo it can hold on it's own never mind if it had a support tuck or two.

[@kyrenthang8633]

The Archer is going to war in Ukraine as of an announcement 2 day ago. It's baptism by fire after which they'll hand out assessments for the Russians to respond on how much they enjoyed it. 😊

[@petter5721]

High automation, less staff means less training of personnel and less salary cost for the army, Archer is the future 👍🏻

[@regregan6852]

So why isnt it? Archer is not new, been around operationally for over a decade now.

[@bigdmac33]

Decent analysis, however, I'm not sure that the worldwide support market for this vehicle is as problematic as it makes out.

[@josephwennerlund5075]

Could you guys do a video on the CV90 Mjölner :)

[@WeaponDetective]

We could consider making a special video for CV90 Mjölner. There is a section about this AMC in our CV90 video. kzbin.info/www/bejne/mIbdp4mQbL6JmLc

[@petter5721]

@@WeaponDetective Please do so, you make excellent videos 👍🏻

[@lmaoguy100]

Norway withdrew because of the rising cost of the F35 JSF program. Lobbying by Lockheed also led us to not choose the Gripen as our next fighter.

[@robertagren9360]

It's always those deals that if you don't buy now we won't give any deals in the future and it's not really interesting what Lockheed can provide today but what may be in the future. Gripen is like many other gen 4 updated while stealth capability was found to be a shortcoming as USA never dared to use the SR-71 within foreign borders. For this instance the fear of losing the war machine is more freighting than having to use one. USA operated in Africa where the S-300 shot down their stealth fighter. The future won't be about jet fighters as ground missiles are more reliable and will cost just as much. Gripen is used for guard duty, mainly leased since reliance on spare parts is relying on a country capable of securing trade routes. USA handing over technology they consider obsolete.

[@rockytorres958]

Very easy to set up, operate & lighter than the other howitzers. This Archer is like the bulls eye French Robinhood.

[@JohnBeauchemin]

Sounds to me like the US in particular balked at the logistics/training tail required to field this system, which is absolutely a legitimate reason to not adopt the platform even if it is the best. If you can field twice the amount of guns at a significantly lower cost, why not do that?

[@BestOpinionHaver]

This is sound reasoning. Put up against ANY SPG in the world in a 1:1 scenario I think the Archer is superior to every single one of them in almost all respects.... appart for the logistics required. As the old saying goes ""Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics." I think if the Swedes want to export this it would be a good idea to first give away 10-20 units to Ukraine and let them have a real trial by fire, so to speak.

[@niklaslundh8944]

@@BestOpinionHaver US army is already testing these as we speak so yes they and others are interested if they buy them is another thing, but yes ofc US are highly interested in high capability.

[@atlet1]

Because they will be destroyed by the enemy.

[@JohnBeauchemin]

@@niklaslundh8944 They're considering the gun, but I don't believe for a second they're going to want this thing on a Volvo chassis.

[@regregan6852]

@@JohnBeauchemin BAE is marketing it on HEMTT for the US.

[@nucnik]

I find it strange you came to the conclusion it's the perspective of its buyers that's the problem when you did such a fine job explaining its issues. Can't fly in a Hercules, too expensive to maintain, etc.

[@olivierpuyou3621]

On paper this system seems excellent. But in which country could it be used? Western Europe has millions of kilometers of roads and highways. Driving at only 65 km/h can be a serious brake when its competitors drive at 100 km/h, consume less, are lighter, easily repairable, while being lighter and therefore more easily passing all bridges, tunnels etc etc. ... My humble opinion: Too expensive, too heavy, too high, too complicated. On the other hand, it is probably very useful in the desolate and icy plains of Scandinavia (but beware of mountainous areas and small twisted roads). Another question, is such a complex (although very advanced) weapon system durable? Can it fire its shells for days, weeks or months without going to a maintenance shop? Personally I doubt it, but I'm just a humble internet user.

[@kirgan1000]

The chassi is a VOLOV dumper truck, the auto loader have its orgin from the old Bandkanon 1C, then gun is from Haubits 77 so the component is tested and durable. No it is not suited for WW1 typ of bombarment. But optimized for shoot-and-scoot. Yes its stupid expensive becuse the low production run.

[@henrikcarlsen1881]

2:00 the what? 🙂 I totally agree (I'm a KZbin expert) that the Archer is great, and we ought to have it. Only thing I hold against it is the piece being attached way behind the rear wheels, like a big butt ant or the illogical placement of the engine in a Porsche 901/911. Even that they all work, they dont look right (well, the Porsche does). Really sad that Norway and Denmark backed out. Not surprised that Denmark did, we always end buying American regardless of functionality (... won't mention the F-35 that I hate; we should have bought Swedish toys instead ...)

[@buffuniballer]

probably the only way to get the needed articulation of the gun, not to mention fit the gun to the carriage. Even then, it must be retracted to travel. Had they turned it around, fitting the spades to the vehicle to stabilize it during firing would be far more difficult. Given the platform, that was probably the best engineering choice. The enemy won't see the big butt, just shells raining down on them.

[@robfer5370]

Well the Ukrainians will show the world how good the Archer Artillery System is.

[@lintonhart9814]

UK has just announced they are buying some Archer units