The race for long-range fires, Is the US army outranged? - missiles, cannons & Long-range precision

Sponsored by Ground News: Compare news coverage. Spot media bias. Avoid algorithms. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription by visiting ground.news/perun
Army artillery and missile systems have been some of the most critical weapons of the war in Ukraine.
Traditionally the US military has relied heavily on air assets to deliver heavy fires at very long ranges, with army artillery and missile units doing their best work in comparatively closer.
But on a massively networked battlefield, and with allies and competitors rushing to field longer-ranged army missile systems, the US army is now pushing ahead with a massive modernisation program to extend its reach.
This episode asks how the US army fell behind in range, whether that matters, and what they plan to do about it.
Patreon:
/ perunau
Caveats/Corrections:
As well as all normal caveats I want to stress that range and performance figures in public domain are a real...inconsistent mixed bag and caution should be applied when using them.
notes/sources:
Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Army Missile Procurement
www.asafm.army.mil/Portals/72...
FY 2024 Air Force Missile Procurement Justification Book
US 2024 Program Acquisition Cost by Weapon System
comptroller.defense.gov/Porta...
Assessing the feasibility of the SLRC
www.nationalacademies.org/our...
CRS report on LRPF
sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/R4672...
CRS report on MRC
www.everycrsreport.com/files/...
Leonardo - Vulcano 155mm
electronics.leonardo.com/docu...
RUSI - Preliminary lessons in conventional warfighting in Russia's invasion of Ukraine
www.rusi.org/explore-our-rese...
Australian Defence Business Review on PrSM testing
adbr.com.au/precision-strike-...
Lockheed Martin - PrSM
www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/...
Ballistic and Cruise missile threat report 2020
irp.fas.org/threat/missile/bm...
PLA deploying PHL-16
www.janes.com/defence-news/ne...
Global times on deployment of PCL-181
www.globaltimes.cn/content/11...
PCL-181 in 71st GA
www.janes.com/defence-news/ne...
RAND: Outnumbered, Outranged, and Outgunned: How Russia Defeats NATO (included as a reference for the Milley quote, as is often the case this is not an endorsement of content)
www.rand.org/blog/2016/04/out...
HCoC
www.nonproliferation.eu/hcoc/...
CSIS profile on KN-25
missilethreat.csis.org/missil...
Reporting on KN-25
opennuclear.org/publication/u...
Reporting on Army Futures Command view of the range gap
taskandpurpose.com/news/army-...
Reporting on Typhon delivery:
www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...
USNI news on Marine NSM carrier
news.usni.org/2021/04/28/firs...
HEL TVD datasheet and reporting
www.smdc.army.mil/Portals/38/...
defence-blog.com/pentagon-wan...
CSIS missile threat project
missilethreat.csis.org/countr...
LRPF
www.army.mil/article/265349/1...
www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...
www.army.mil/article/210198/l...
Timestamps:
00:00:00 - Long Range Artillery & MLRS - Is The US Army Outgunned?
00:02:37 - What Am I Talking About?
00:03:34 - Sponsor: Ground News
00:04:33 - Long Range Fires
00:10:59 - The Long Range Fire Role
00:12:41 - Lessons From Ukraine
00:16:54 - The Big-gun Competition
00:20:52 - Ground Launched Missiles
00:26:18 - Why Did The US Fall Behind?
00:34:09 - Long Range Precision Fires
00:36:50 - Extending Gun Reach
00:43:29 - Next Generation Missiles
00:58:56 - Changing Force Design
01:01:13 - Counters & Implications
01:04:48 - Conclusions
01:06:02 - Channel Update

[@PerunAU]

Thanks to returning sponsor, Ground News: Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription: ground.news/perun I'd also like to extend a special thanks to those who provided input into this episode. These features benefit greatly from these kinds of contributions. They also of course benefit from the support of all of you in providing the audience and support that underpins them. As mentioned in a recent poll, I thought it was important to step away from Ukraine for a week or two in order to allow the information space to clear up somewhat, and so I hope you will enjoy looking a bit and the R&D, doctrinal and procurement side of the problem of generating long-range precision fires on the modern battlefield. I'd like to note that the programs covered are not exhaustive and that all performance characteristics (especially ranges) on all systems should be treated with general scepticism unless well evidenced.

[@irgendwieanders2121]

As said aleswhere: You do you, stuffing at least 14 days of research into weekly episodes is superhuman enough :-)

[@DUBSTEP_KUSH305]

Thanks perun love your video ❤ 🇯🇲

[@akumaking1]

Can Perun talk about war profiteering?😊

[@squidgameman441]

Perun, related but perhaps you can also do a video on bunker busters? Esp. since Russian bots have claimed (many times) that Russian conventional bunker busters can destroy/already destroyed NATO bunkers hundreds of metres below ground, and I've seen more than one instance of ROK's own Hyunmoo-V ('high-power Hyunmoo missile' in Korean) cited as example of how the technology is there. So: are conventional bunker busters enough to reach the speed and destructiveness of nuclear weapons of destroying underground facilities? Is this weapon system an economically viable option, for US (targeting Iranian/etc bunkers) or ROK (targeting DPRK bunkers)? Interested in your thoughts PS: Korea's own govt and military experts have often claimed the above-mentioned Hyunmoo-V can destroy bunkers 100m underground, have the "penetrative destruction levels" of a tactical nuke, etc. Yet I also see Western experts eg. Ankit Panda or Decker Everleth laugh off such claims. I'm curious as to what a bunker buster actually needs to reach those levels, and if it's feasible at all.

[@Grundewalt]

look man , I hardly can add to what had been said again and again and I am agains the cult of personality :) . As a sidenote, I came to the unexpected outcome that the sponsor vet the sponsoree and not what is widely known, that content providers lend their credibility to the sponsor. In this case GN seems to highlight content providers with its sponsorship. Cheers

[@AnimarchyHistory]

I for one support Perun's Grandfather in his efforts to supplement our indirect fire capability

[@gbadspcps2]

I guess you can say we are supported by a broad age range. I enjoy your videos by the way.

[@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding]

Idk why, but the idea of home made rocket artillery sounds hilarious to me.

[@matthewkaseman7457]

When Perun does a video focused on the big defense contractors, he'll need to include at least one slide on Grandpa

[@TheEDFLegacy]

​@@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding True. Ironically I'm pretty sure the Ukrainians have already been doing that on occasion. Pretty sure I heard something about them welding helicopter rocket pods onto technicals like they were the Taliban. 😅

[@baneh1329]

He's got moxy

[@ScFirestorM]

"If you want to get to those critical but difficult to reach places, there's no substitute for length." Absolute poetry.

[@grahamstrouse1165]

What about girth?

[@alispeed5095]

l would argue " there is no substitute for girth " I will see myself out...

[@jdelark6428]

I first thought the quote was a vague homage to the old Oral B toothbrush ads. Guess I'm starting to mature a bit 😅

[@captainbanjo1617]

I bet this appears on 50% of divorce papers.

[@danjonalg]

@@jdelark6428 i thought it was about a back scratcher

[@christiangrantz6906]

Admittedly, as a USAF veteran, i may be biased, but I do somewhat agree with the notion that beyond a certain range, making stuff blow up is the air force's job. That being said, as an american, i do thoroughly belive that our capabilities in every domain of combat should be so developed that the other domains should be redundant. Because "overkill" is just another term for thoroughness

[@fluffly3606]

Give the Army National Guard ASW helos I'm kidding, I'm from a proud Navy family myself and I fully agree with you

[@jimmytehgeek]

‘That’s how Dad did it, that’s how America does it … and it’s worked out pretty well so far’ - Tony Stark

[@aspielm759]

"beyond a certain range, making stuff blow up is the air force's job" FUCK YEAH! AMERICA! Jokes aside, as mentioned in the Video, that only works well if the sky is uncontested. the US enjoyed this privileage in their middle-eastern entanglement and on top of that with ever growing technology it feels like the range at which it's the airforce's job is on a trend of increasing. Maybe I'm reading too much into it but I feel like creating an artillery system that could potentially be used as an alternative to the airforce was long overdue. Ofc I'm not saying that such a system shoudl replace the airforce, god no! The airforce simply has it easier with focusing on more imporant or urgent targets and has a fail-safe if somehow hindered. I'm just a theorist, though EDIT: nvm Perun later in the vid addresses exactly what I was trying to say with my comment except way better formulated

[@afterthesmash]

... and thoroughness is just another term for the taxpayer being sodomized everywhere.

[@termitreter6545]

I feel like those are just really stupid military politics, which seems to be a general american problem. Self-interested branches working against each other in a popularity contest. Like whats even the logic? Theres zero reason long range missiles should be limited to be fired from planes. Thats really silly, might as well tell the USN they cant have tomahawks anymore on their destroyers. Or turn the logic around, you could ban the Air Force from dropping MK-80 bombs, because the Army decides thats their role via SPGs and MLRs. Making long range strikes purely dependant on aircraft, which are expensive, can be supressed and take a long time to rebuild, seems like a massive mistake. Its naive to assume you always got total air superiority. And looking at Ukraine, the artillery duels require a level of endurance that aircraft cannot provide.

[@zetsubouda]

Proof that Perun deeply understands our American minds in one quote: "When [the arms industry] asked [the Army] what sort of weapons and systems they wanted on their new infantry fighting vehicle, the response seems to have been 'yes.'"

[@honestlyreed1612]

"America, pure opinion and real talk for a minute. If your big gun on tracks is as complicated as a super-cruising stealth fighter, then someone somewhere may have gone just a little bit overboard."

[@raideurng2508]

I can assure you it is not as complex as the Raptor or F-35, not even close.

[@h8GW]

I am all at the same time outraged, humbled, and proud.

[@thekinginyellow1744]

Or it could be that sometimes generals are just talking out their ass.

[@danielf3623]

I mean, the computing power needed to do the things Crusader was designed to do was immense - in 2002. Today you can carry that kind of computing power around in a laptop.

[@toomanyblocks8448]

THE POWER POINT GOD HAS BLESSED US AGAIN

[@Cinn357]

Slides for the slide throne

[@melkor3496]

Our weekly dose of PowerPoint slides has arrived.

[@ryanthompson1981]

I used to hate PowerPoint.

[@MrIrvash]

-^-^-

[@tomnm1]

The guy is a bloody MACHINE How he's is able to consistently put out such high quality regular content I don't know Hey Perun - on the off chance you see this before it gets buried, look out for #1 man! I know your community would support you if you took a self care break With current developments, I expect there will be a surplus of potential topics and even more misinformation to wade through so taking a break sounds like a great idea to help you prepare / recover Love the content as always my dude, can't wait to digest this week's instalment

[@alterthough]

As a Swede, every time someone mentions Gripen and especially the DIY factor of it, I become a bit proud.

[@antonnurwald5700]

I just watched a whole video on what lessons from Sweden and its airforce doctrine, based on distributed operations and austere airfields with the Gripen, Nato could adopt. It's a very convincing system.

[@legionofthedamned157]

CV9040 makes my spine tingle with pleasure Svenskt stål biter hårt

[@Joemensa]

And so you should be....if nothing else the war in Ukraine has again reinforced the well established fact that bigger, more powerful, costly high tech weapons and the well trained forces that use them can be neutralized and driven off by highly committed, untrained sandal wearing civilians throwing stones and Molotov cocktails. "KISS"...."keep it simple stupid"

[@user-lv7ph7hs7l]

@@antonnurwald5700 The U-Boats are pretty good too. Sterling engine. Super quiet. Sunk a US carrier in a wargame. Yankees never knew what hit them until some rather smug Swedes surfaced and popped the hatch. Nuke boats are loud. 800C high pressure steam turning turbines at 20k rpm, water flash boiling and recondensing, dozens of pumps for the cooling loops... the prop can make no cavitation and it's still kinda loud to a very sensitive microphone at short distance. Now a nuclear driven sterling engine... ahhh it would be beautiful. NASA made some for Mars as power generators, Kilopower and KRUSTY. Finally greenlit again agter years of underfunding. It's high enriched uranium (weapons capable) heating a Sterling engine turning a dynamo. They figure it can do a kW for a decade or two and they are small. You could carry one. If you are very strong. Arnie could do it.

[@WacoA.I.]

Without Carl Edvard Johansson, the world wouldn't have modern manufacturing. Thanks, Sweden.

[@hansandersen5741]

I think it's high time that Pavel and his mates got some sort of commendation for all of their activities.

[@qdav5]

Perun's discussion of the historic value of infantry forward observers reminded me of a conversation I had with a S. Korean special forces soldier who served in Vietnam. He said if you came across a platoon of enemy soldiers, the first one you want to kill is the guy carrying the radio.

[@BiggestCorvid]

My great uncle said it's better to be a rifle than a radio. People respect guns and hit radios.

[@vinak963]

yea. They said the average "life expectancy" of a radio operator was 30 seconds. (obviously not literal but you get the point)

[@bigmekboy175]

We still train that way. Of course that training didn't help against the insurgents or the Taliban! The only radio the insurgents had was a cell phone.

[@badluck5647]

My grandfather volunteered to be a forward observer because the army would let them finish their tour in half the time to make up for their low life expectancy. He says he probably would have made a different decision if he knew the war would end in 2 years. I think he would prefer to use a drone if they have been available.

[@badluck5647]

​@@BiggestCorvid The Russians must have felt cool using unsecure cell phones instead

[@OvertravelX]

My dad was a cold war USMC artillery officer. He said the Soviet guns always outranged us because they were willing to accept the harm caused to their artillerymen by massive local overpressure.

[@dzzope]

Id love to see something that looks at this and the care of the personnel in general during all phases of this service from recruitment through training and operational conditions and any after service care. Whichever side your on, there are allot of people in need of allot of care, whether they are given what the need or not

[@Stephen85]

@@dzzope my guess is that the Russians arent getting any of the care they need.

[@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL]

​@@dzzopehearing and sinus problems are very common. A good mate of mine was a tanker and he has no end of problems and the same for most of his mates who were in with him. He did go Yugo and Iraq 2003 but never was wounded or such. Just effects of firing that gun.

[@tomasp3394]

Sounds like an engineering problem rather than something that would end up limiting design.

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

​@@tomasp3394 more a physics issue i reckon.

[@portmoneul]

US Air Force: We can put a bomb anythere in the world US Marines: We are the tip of the spear that will go anywhere, anytime US Army: We have a cannon that will bomb: The dude that fires at you The command center that gave the order The ammo depo that gave the ammunition And, if we are really pissed, the factory deep behind the enemy lines that built the bloody thing Perun comedy is absolute poetry

[@nickcharles1284]

But, in reality, we don't have that. Cannot get it to the field. Cannot produce enough shells for it. Cannot produce enough barrels to replace the worn ones. Cannot easily repair it.

[@portmoneul]

@@nickcharles1284 My friend, you undersell yourself short. Generally, as perun stated, it is not the job of the army to blow up everything behind enemy lines, and, if money is no objection, well .. The US Airorce could level everything to within an inch of deviation.

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

@@nickcharles1284 So, Russia has "the best air defense system in the world, and planes and pilots just as good", yet has failed to gain air superiority over Ukraine. Explain that please.

[@grahamstrouse1165]

@@cancermcaids7688He’s not just injecting it. He’s popping it and snorting it. I will be the first to admit that the US military relies heavily on Bullshittiam & Unobtanium munitions. Russia, however, is in a class by itself.

[@notsam498]

@@nickcharles1284 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@sonnybully]

Outstanding as always! A superb presentation. I am a retired Air Force intelligence officer. The one thing I will say is that the Ukraine war is showing how the Russians operate differently than the United States and the United States Air Force in particular. They do not intend to project power. Russians operate and fight on their periphery. Generally their Air Force is an extension of army artillery. Yhe United States Air Force supports the army for their needs from close air support to joint integrated prioritized targeting lists and prosecuting those targets for the Joint Force Commander who also incorporates the land force component commanders priorities and targets into the overall effort. Put simply the Russians fight differently than us. The US Air Force more than fills the gap and that is why we have a disparity in the ground based long range fire systems. It is up to the Joint Chiefs of staff in Congress to determine future weapons systems and they are all well aware of these facts. Things are set up the way they are now and how we have been fighting and continue to tweak our doctrine to continue to fight reflects this.

[@lamwen03]

And it should be recognized that by far the greatest use of Russian artillery is standard tube fired. Cheaper, faster, and more effective in keeping infantry in it's trenches.

[@michaelsnyder3871]

Yes, the USAF is so reliable in providing CAS that they had to be forced to develop and field the A-10 which they are replacing with an armed trainer after trying to convince everyone that a dual-missioned F-16 would always be available for immediate response versus doing air superiority or theater strike/interdiction. And then the USAF complains about Army aviation, especially anytime the Army starts hanging ordnance from fixed wing aircraft going back to the OV-1. Which is why the AH-1 got developed and why the Army tried to get the AH-56 fielded and succeeded with the AH-64.

[@lamwen03]

@@michaelsnyder3871 Yep, no glory in getting shot down providing cover for a platoon of grunts. We needed the A-10. However..... the war in Ukraine seems to make it very clear that drones will do the spotting that the A-10 did, and regular field artillery can better ( and more cheaply ) provide the striking power. And, let's face it, the A-10 could only function where there are no MANPADS around, and we're not likely to see that ever again.

[@Edax_Royeaux]

@@lamwen03 *Maybe*, A-10's could be used to respond to a paradrop incursion like what happened at Hostomel Airport.

[@rashkavar]

@@lamwen03 In fairness, MANPADS are probably still going to be difficult to get in quantity for a lot of less developed parts of the world. They're expensive systems, only produced by a few big manufacturers, and Ukraine's performance suggests that everyone who has them should very much care about keeping them....much like how the Stinger taught the world pretty much the same lesson in Afghanistan in the 80s. There's still plenty of places where the gold standard of military tech is the arms that the Soviets were happily throwing at anyone willing to fight capitalism. It's just not Iran, Russia, China or North Korea. War between the US and any of those countries is definitely not going to be the giant American boot trying to step on every ant in an anthill, which is kinda what we saw in Afghanistan and Iraq. Not saying America would lose, because America's military is terrifyingly huge, but I expect all 4 of those countries would be able to put up more of a fight than what we've seen recently. And that's assuming everyone keeps their finger off the big red button that launches all the nukes, since 3 of those 4 countries are nuclear powers to one degree or another.

[@casbot71]

A fun fact about the *Crusader* cannon was that a few in the Pentagon also pointed out that deploying a big gun with _that name_ in Iraq might not have gone down well with the locals. Alqida were actually disappointed the program was cancelled, even though they would have been on the receiving end - just cause they really wanted to use it in a PR campaign.

[@jic1]

They could simply have changed the name of the program. Happens all the time, often for much more trivial reasons.

[@equarg]

Yea…………. Political correctness is still in okay, even in the battle field.

[@jacksonmagas9698]

​@@equargwhen organizations like al'qaeda and isis already claim that the U.S. and coalition forces are a modern day crusade in order to recruit you REALLY dont want to confirm that in the eyes of the local population.

[@hurrdurrmurrgurr]

@@equarg It matters when your naming scheme becomes an enemy's recruiting tool. It'd be like calling your drone, "wedding crasher".

[@seriousmoonlight1573]

It's just how we name our self-propelled guns. Priest, Paladin, Crusader, etc. One of the prototype Crusaders is on display at Ft Sill, it's a pretty cool looking gun. Just didn't fit the army's priority at the time.

[@AKbamoida]

Just realised I'm now structuring my Sundays around a 1hr powerpoint by a bloke on the other side of the planet and not even finding it weird.

[@nikolaideianov5092]

Thats globalization for you

[@rossfinman9148]

Just consider it church where you come to listen to the PowerPoint priest along with the rest of the faithful congregation

[@richteffekt]

Same

[@Uncle_Neil]

yep, same here...for a year now.

[@h8GW]

I'm in the U.S. and I love Perun and all, but I can't be structuring my mornings to be "F¡RsT!" in the comments.

[@chrishooge3442]

The US approach to employing indirect fires is much more selective on choosing targets. It also heavily relies on a merging of gun, missile, and air platforms. Howitzers and MLRS focus on tactical targets but can suppress enemy air defenses in order to allow the Apache and fighter-bombers to go in and hit the critical target. We saw a version of this in Desert Storm. The air war opened with cruise missile strikes on command and control. Apache lead the way and hit SAM sites that then allowed the air forces to penetrate into the interior to crater airfields. Weeks of airstrikes followed before the ground war kicked off. MLRS spent a lot of time hitting Iraqi artillery while howitzers would hit entrenched troops just before the tanks and brads assaulted. I witnessed a 155mm battalion drop DPICM on an Iraqi position. It didn't deliver the iconic splash of an HE impact. As the artillery popped above the target area and dispersed it's load of DPICM...it sounded more like firecrackers. You could see small flashes but then the impact area slowly turned completely black with the occasional gout of flame. As an FO I'd called a lot of conventional rounds in training. But I'd never seen effects like that before. For most of the Infantry guys we were attached to...they'd never really seen artillery effects at all and were even more awed than I was.

[@whatisdisname335]

@mitchellcouchman6589 How many kindergartens, schools, and hospitals did the US bomb in Iraq? Sources?

[@WhiskyCanuck]

A "why procurement programs fail" video sounds like it would be really interesting. Also, I don't want to be shelled from Central Park.

[@firecopscott]

Seconded

[@johanmetreus1268]

Thirded! Will Canada finally take the title of Least efficient Procurement from Germany, or is the wildcard USA steal the win? (Russia got disqualified along with China, as their budget to yacht/villa ratios were too high)

[@GintaPPE1000]

Great news, he did it.

[@honestlyreed1612]

"But they [the Russians] found an interesting loophole in the treaty, namely that if you simply ignore the agreement, design and field the weapons anyway, and then just allegedly lie about their range, then amazingly the piece of paper itself has no magical ability to stop you"

[@macmcleod1188]

Team America's super power was "acting". Russia's super power is "lying".

[@h8GW]

Yeah, sometimes trying to stay on the side of the rule-based order sucks.

[@trolleriffic]

There were other loopholes in the INF as well. There was no limitation on naval (or air-launched for that matter) weapons of the same range so you could develop a new cruise missile or theatre ballistic missile with a 500-5,500 km range by testing and deploying it on ships. The design could be adapted for ground deployment by reducing its length to reduce the fuel capacity and bring its range within INF limits while retaining all other features of the missile. For no particular reason, both the long-range naval version and the short-range mobile land-based model would share the exact same launch tubes so at a moment's notice the standard ground-launched missiles could be replaced by the shipborne variant, thus providing what is effectively and intermediate range nuclear capability in waiting, without violating the treaty.

[@nihluxler1890]

@@h8GW The US has never given a thought to any treaty beyond the second it took to sign it. It’s basically how the entire country was formed in the first place.

[@brianmead7556]

Oh, it wouldn’t be one of these videos without some obligatory anti-Russian smear propaganda.

[@kokomo4718]

Perun: 'There's no substitute for length' Me: **cries**

[@WhiteIkiryo-yt2it]

Hey, that's what my Ex said.

[@irgendwieanders2121]

He is talking about artillery duels, you are talking about close-quarters combat. Different scenarios, ayn't they?

[@davidelliott5843]

There’s also the important point about feeling full.

[@EinFelsbrocken]

​​@@irgendwieanders2121 They cant reach you if you outspear them either; length remains unsubstitutable(?)

[@irgendwieanders2121]

@@EinFelsbrocken Just having a long spear isn't enough, usually. Guy with a short sword (and good technique) can step around a long spear, close the distance and use the short sword very effectively. So if all you have is a long spear and no skill then you usually are f**** Plus there is the "available space" problem. Not all spaces are suitable for long spears.

[@johnsanko4136]

Artillery is definitely one way that the USSR really focused where America didn't, and much of that can be down to where both sides felt the wars would be. Both believed that World War 3 would be fought primarily in Europe, and it's much easier for Russia to roll land based vehicles West than it is for America to ship ground based artillery to Europe. Artillery for the US is much less the broad use hammer, and more of a specific use tool, while for the USSR was the bread and butter. America basically built the artillery capabilities into their Air Force as ground attack planes because it is logistically simpler to build attack aircraft and fly them to Europe than building ground based artillery and shipping it to Europe. Though that does make it more difficult for us to be a premiere artillery supplier to Ukraine. Even South Korea, who has been preparing for war with North Korea since the armistice has arguably better artillery than the US, because artillery is so important for a potential war with North Korea.

[@jintsuubest9331]

F16 is not flying across the Atlantic any time soon? You do realized you still need to ship the aircraft across the Atlantic to be deploy in Europe?

[@willw8011]

The USA has 400+ HIMARS and 800+ or something M270A1... please tell me how the USA is falling behind, while also being the world's leader in artillery systems. The Euros took a lot of US Technology to build their Kraut cannons and Frog artillery systems. People that know nothing should also say nothing.

[@austin3600]

@@jintsuubest9331 Between an F-16s 2000 mile ferry range and aerial refueling, it absolutely can fly from the US to Europe

[@comentedonakeyboard]

Iraqs (mostly) soviet made artillery outranged the coalition ones in Kuwait, they just were lousy marksmen .

[@arthurmoore9488]

@@austin3600 Random fun fact, even the US Air National Guard has refueling tankers. The idea that a USAF plane can't go anywhere in the world is so ludicrous they must be trolling. The US Navy uses a different system, but same thing.

[@the443king]

Hey Perun, not a professional in any field, just an every weekend viewer. But I wanted just to say thank you for all the work. I found your channel near the first week, that you started these videos. And it has been amazingly informative, and has always been delivered in a way, that educates, and entertains. Keep up the great work 👍

[@aik21899]

Small packages of precision guided unity, justice and freedom at 19:31 is a neat reference and an example of humor I commend you for. Thank you for your continued effort delivering these great presentations, I always look forward to them.

[@rositasultana3958]

Let's not forget the units of freedom 😂

[@nikomitk8091]

I laughed so hard at this moment 😂

[@bosoerjadi2838]

19:31 ".. delivering little packages of justice, unity und freedom up to a distance of 70 kilometres.." Best german joke ever that only German speakers get.

[@biggsdarklighter0473]

Ich denke immernoch "Auferstanden aus Ruinen" ist die bessere deutsche Nationalhymne, aber ohne das "Lied der Deutschen" würden wir nie Witze wie diese hören.

[@j.f.fisher5318]

I didn't know and still laughed. It's cool that there's a deeper level too it though.

[@Lawrence22.]

With acurate counter battery fire, 'Shoot and Scoot' capabilities has become even more important. The German Panzer Haubitze 2000 can fire 3 rounds in 9 seconds, and then move.

[@alangordon3283]

Of no use if it’s out of range though is it 🤷‍♂️

[@SoloRenegade]

if you outrange your enemy, they cannot shoot back. but missiles do exist.... But this is why the "high ground" is so important. Elevation extends rang. So if two armies are using the same artillery, the on on higher ground has the longer range. The Swamp Fox in the US Revolution defeated a fort without firing by putting guns on towers to outrange the fort. The British knew thy had lost as thy knew they couldn't fire back at that range. Also, it's harder to fight uphill to defeat defenders. Air power is just really long range, really "high" ground.

[@tripod222]

@@alangordon3283 Imho, if your counter-battery arty outranges the opponents PZH2000, and that SPG fires for 10 seconds and then scoots, you are not gonna hit it. Target acquisition time and flight time of your shells mean even if you start firing 10 seconds after the PZH2000 has fired the first round - a pretty big "if" in and of itself - it's gone by the time your shell arrives at the target location. Thus you are not actually providing effective counter-battery fire.

[@heikolang335]

Ukraine is due to receive the RCH155 at some point this year. That’s basically a PZH2000 gun mounted on a wheeled chassis able to shoot and hit on the move.

[@jintsuubest9331]

Traditional shoot and scoot is not enough, we can see that in Ukraine. Enemy can approximate your location before your first projectile hit. We might get to a point which launch platform is design to be disposable.

[@kzsposeidon3121]

As a german I have to admit, your pronunciation of the Panzerhaubitze 2000 is really good. Probably as close to a native speaker one can get

[@miraphycs7377]

US lacked in the ground based long range missile due to the INF agreement. Now that it is history they are looking to double the range of PrSM upto a 1000km and have the ability to hit moving objects ie ships. So basically it will be ASBM capable of being launched from the 6x6 Himars. Of course DF-21 and DF-26 still outranges it but unlike those two Himars being smaller can be transported by C-130, more off road capable and be deployed on a wider range of areas making it unpredictable for the PLA Navy

[@bluemarlin8138]

Yeah, but it’s not in the same category as DF-21 and DF-26 either. That’s what Dark Eagle/LRHW is for. We ought to dust off Pershing II while we’re at it.

[@CeladonHairExtraordinaire]

41:12 Absolutely love the Supreme Commander reference you slipped in there!

[@Mosquitobomber1]

"small packages of precision guided unity, justice and freedom" that made me crack up XD I'm german, but i never herad that one before^^ For any one who is wondering "unity, justice and freedom" are the first three word of the german anthem

[@johanmetreus1268]

As a Swede, I very much prefer the second verse ;)

[@brianmead7556]

I thought it was “Die Fahne hoch”, oh sorry that’s the Ukrainian anthem!

[@Mosquitobomber1]

@@johanmetreus1268 The german anthem doesn't have a second verse^^ The original Deutschlandlied does, but only it's third verse (the about unity, justice and freedom) is actually the anthem. For the obvious historical, geographic etc. reasons

[@melkor3496]

Roses are red violets are blue a video from Perun is good for you.

[@Carbidestruck]

Sunday is always fun with powerpoint-man

[@thecellulontriptometer4166]

As a career US Artilleryman, I really appreciate this presentation. It hurt when the Crusader and then the NLOS were cancelled. Because of this, I will believe the new systems will actually come to fruition when they are fielded, not at any stage during the development. Historically, the US Army always loses budget battles to the USAF and USN. The on the ground problem with this is that the other services do not focus on ground warfare support. They have their own fight and that is where they put their money. So, the Army gets the 1970's developed A10 for Close Air Support. If the US Army is going to be able to successfully face peer to peer opponents, it needs equivalent fire support. Sadly, I don't think the DOD will put enough budgetary support into it compared to the next fighter jet or next submarine.

[@SoloRenegade]

"Historically, the US Army always loses budget battles to the USAF and USN. The on the ground problem with this is that the other services do not focus on ground warfare support. " but this is because the USAF and USN are the high ground, long range artillery. So long as we keep achieving air superiority/supremacy, the US military will always prioritize air power, and rightly so. Doesn't mean we can't/shouldn't remain competitive in traditional artillery, but airpower will be prioritized.

[@thecellulontriptometer4166]

@@SoloRenegade The main problem is that USAF guided munitions are VERY inefficient for ground support, so the USAF is hesitant to use them on tactical targets reserving them for strategic deep strikes. Ask any ALO(Air Liaison Officer) if they saw ground forces as the "priority" and they will tell you no. The USAF simply does not put enough emphasis on ground support, leaving the Army to rely on outdated systems. I simply disagree based on my deployment experiences.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@thecellulontriptometer4166 my experience is different. and recently the USAF precision weapons have gotten far better and more capable of CAS. My platoon once got 38, 500lb bombs dropped danger close (200-500yds) from our position over 2hrs, by a B-1 bomber. We've had precision support from F-15, A-10 and more. Artillery support was always the hardest to get. We made extensive use of drones as well. Raven, Puma, Shadow, T-hawk, Predator, and more. We never got support from artillery, even though we always lived right next to the artillery battery (literally just on the other side of a hesco wall or jersey barrier from where we slept), and would even go fire the guns with the artillery guys. Every time thy fired, we felt it in our hooches/tents. Modern small diameter bombs, Hellfires and its follow on, and other new munitions have changed the CAS game. The level of precision from high altitude and long range in all weather is insane. And ground launching these weapons is changing the game as well.

[@thecellulontriptometer4166]

@@SoloRenegade I would respectfully ask, did you ask why artillery fires were not provided? I am betting that if we are talking Afghanistan, it is because they could not provide support due to range limits which only serves to prove the problem. But the support you received was incredibly inefficient budgetarily. Instead of spending millions on an air force precision bomb, it would have been far more efficient to spend a few thousand on artillery rounds. I would also ask what rank you were at the time, and if you knew the fob's fires SOPs? It may also be likely that they were told not to fire at your targets precisely to allow air support to take the majority of missions. I saw this while working as a BDE FSO. We would get a fire mission only to have higher command assign another asset to attack it. But, Afghanistan is a poor example of my point. If there is any air to air threat, the A10 will no longer be able to provide support, and the F15 will focus on air to air missions. In a peer to peer fight the Army is as I said, far too often left to rely on itself.

[@Uncle_Neil]

Gentlemen, respect to both of you, but....we are here to ready ourselves for the next conflict which we all know is coming, soon. We have to not fight/re-fight the last war (learn the important lessons, yes) but I can tell you things are moving more rapidly than any of the services are responding to. And that means young people will die unless we all do our job as well as we possibly can and think, question AND do better.

[@rknowling]

I particularly liked the narrative flow/ structure of this one. Lots of making us think of questions/ objections- and then proceeding to address those. Awesome work! Oh, and Perun, thankyou for your incredible work sifting out facts from dross in the Ukraine news. The quality of your work is such that I rely on you to keep updated. I know sifting signal from random noise is hard enough in science; my brain just goes "NOPE" at the prospect of trying to analyse the Ukraine situation. Huge props to you, mate, you do Australia proud ❤ Bringing the thunder from Downunder!

[@ParameterGrenze]

The value of these vids both in information and entertainment can’t be understated

[@jamielondon6436]

You probably mean "overstated"?

[@Pnaraasi94]

Surely you mean they can't be overstated?

[@B.D.E.]

"They're alright I guess". See, I understated.

[@TheBluum]

most favourite part of my sunday! Thanks for all the effort

[@Viviana088]

"I need my fridge to keep my food cold... not to run minecraft." - Perun LMFAO that statement had me rolling !!!

[@TheVillageIdiotUk]

The normally extremely high standard has been surpassed - utterly compelling, sobering and occasionally bloody hilarious. Thanks Perun. I’m a very impressed Patreon. It’s worth every penny/cent/krone.

[@tylerandrews4375]

I would love a comparison between the Afghan war and the Ukraine war, and some of the lessons learned from Afghanistan now being applied to Ukraine. For example it seems like most countries have generally stopped being back seat drivers and have allowed Ukraine to do things it’s way. The importance of long term support is also evident as Ukraine is still getting support, whereas every single American administration did their best to wipe their hands clear of Afghanistan. Another is the media. western media were generally more interested in what the president was tweeting than the events on the ground, few people probably know of the gazni rebellion where factions of the taliban broke away and fought a civil war within the taliban. However most people will have at least heard of bakhmut. P.S. sorry for spelling I wanted to get this out quickly.

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

These wars are really not comparable. And if you want to make those kind of comparisons you need to compare engagement with the afghan war in 2003/2004 with this year of the ukrainian war. Then those levels would be much more similar. Back then most people also knew about a handful of afghan cities because it was in the news all the time.

[@jic1]

That's because, for all it's problems and corruption, Ukraine has a functioning government and armed forces that are loyal to it. Afghanistan never did.

[@somethinglikethat2176]

Are comparisons that useful? One is a conventional war, the other wasn't. Completely different culture they are working with in Ukraine, stable and democratic as opposed to the tribal nature of Afghan society. Ect.

[@jeremygibbs7342]

The emotional immediate response of saying there is no comparison aside. The only comparison that I can see is that both sides are engaged in a long term war. The Taliban won by resisting longer than the Americans and allied nations were prepared to support the Afghan government. That's about the only comparison. Perhaps certain tactical comparisons might exists, but that wouldn't really fall under what Perun would cover.

[@SoloRenegade]

this is a terrible assessment and making unrelated comparisons. none of the things you brought up are important, and many have nothing to do with on another.

[@rossrhodes1963]

Sunday programming is up and running. Thanks Perun.

[@quantummotion]

I think this episode is my favourite one to date as it really got me thinking through the various permutations and combinations of how a force would integrate tactical fires, strategic range fires, the role of the Airforce, and the advantages/disadvantages of a particular mix. This episode made me realize the WHYs a particular military would balance it's forces one way or another. I'm also beginning to appreciate why the Swedes, for example, have something like the Gripen aircraft - operate the aircraft in the field, with short takeoff and landing characteristics, minimal support crew and fast turn around time. That would stand in place of in-field strategic range ground base fires as the Gripens would deliver the longer range punch, and being able to operate away from a large airbase allows to spread the risk. It also makes me appreciate why the US Marines would want VTOL aircraft under their control with a low support personnel requirements and fast turn around time. Fantastic job Perun!

[@nickcharles1284]

If the Gripen was used to attack Russia, Russian AA would take them out, and Russia would destroy the air bases they deploy from.

[@gbstingley4673]

As always, excellent break down. As an American, I get a knot in my stomach every time I here about our "world leading equipment". Truth is we have tunnel vision in our media concerning our military, and believe me I am obnoxiously proud of our military. The tik tok generation thinks this is always a slam dunk, but it's a world race and our adversaries may not have the GDP of the US but they are not stupid.

[@fakeplaystore7991]

the US does led in general military capability and equipment, but there are two caveats: 1) as Russia has shown the world, "leading" in this case could just be a case of the one-eyed man leading the blind pack, and 2) leading in general terms doesn't necessarily means leading in every single area.

[@brianmead7556]

The Russians have shown us the importance of having a bulk of economical systems and maintaining your industrial base. As an example from an older war, thw Soviets built seven times as many tanks as the Germans did; The German tanks were in arguably better designed a better fit and finish, and were more mechanically advanced. The problem is the extra advanced features weren’t worth that much once they got to the realities of fighting and the weight of 1734 for every single thing you had bearing down on you.The problem is the extra advanced features weren’t worth that much once they got to the realities of fighting and the weight of 7 T34 for every single thing you had bearing down on you was unstoppable. Another thing is gun production. Every M4 carbine the US military gets cost the government about $518 and it requires steel aluminum and plastics with lots of advanced processes and fine machining operations. 1,000,000 have been made. The Russian AK74 costs their government Moscow about $45, and they have made about 5 million of them. And in artillery, we like to croon about the M777 and its ability to put out 4 shells in in a minute. 2 minute prep/move time. to do this it needs a nitrogen gas buffer, and to be made of titanium. The Russians have had this gun called the D30 since the 1960s that can do six shots per minute every single minute has a 90sec set up/move time. It also has the ability to revolve 360°. And there’s no need for special metals or fancy gas, just springs and steel.

[@neolexiousneolexian6079]

​@@brianmead7556 The D30 looks to have significantly lower calibre than the M777. Still interesting, but not really comparable. Obviously a smaller gun with less power is going to be able to cool off and fire more quickly with less advanced materials.

[@Edax_Royeaux]

@@brianmead7556 I don't know, if you look at famous tank battles like the Battle of Prokhorovka, even though the Soviets had over twice the tanks, they suffered over 50-64% tank losses to the Germans losing 14-24% of their tanks. It really does look like the quality was worth the trade off, the reasons the Germans lost wasn't that they didn't have enough tanks. Good German optics, meant that German tanks with smaller guns and less armor could out preforms heavier Russian Tanks as just being able to see the enemy first and make the first shot made a huge difference. The reason the T-34s had to charge en-mass was because they couldn't see as well as their German counterparts and the German 88s could outrange them significantly.

[@jonathanpfeffer3716]

@@fakeplaystore7991 also on a higher level, having better equipment and even in superior numbers doesn’t mean you win wars. if the US wants to win a war in Taiwan for instance, it needs to not jsur be superior but greatly superior (massive oversimplification I’ll admit but the point is true) to offset the massive advantages the PLA has due to them fighting in their own backyard

[@embreis2257]

19:18 '...that allows it to rapidly deliver small packages of precision guided _unity, justice and freedom_ out to 70km.' I see what you did here.

[@peka2478]

Just sad it will probably fly over the head of all the non German speakers out there :(

[@AV-we6wo]

​​@@peka2478 It did fly over my thick German head, too, before I read the comments😄

[@irgendwieanders2121]

@@peka2478 Thank you, are you Finish? Just saw that the Finish article on the Deutschlandlied has a * @AV-we6wo Ich hab wenigstens die Ausrede, daß das bei mir im Land "Was der Bürger Fleiß geschaffen (schütze treu des Kriegers Kraft)" heißt... (Hätte mir trotzdem auffallen können 😴...)

[@peka2478]

@@irgendwieanders2121 nene, Österreicher ;)

[@irgendwieanders2121]

@@peka2478 Oida... 😮‍💨

[@fguocokgyloeu4817]

If Warhammer 40k has taught me anything, it's that a weapon range of more than 10 hull lengths of your vehicle is plenty.

[@WhiteIkiryo-yt2it]

Nothing says "ban hammer" like. 50 Basilisks dropping hundreds of Earthshaker rounds onto a target and a couple of Medusas to be certain.

[@Vandelberger]

Sounds like a Dakka problem.

[@TankandDimples]

Yeah but that doesn't destroy logistics. America has a long range howitzer that will shoot 68 miles in 2024. It has a rocket propelled shell and is capable of hitting moving targets produced by BAE. It shoots 3 rounds per minute or with an autoloader 10 per minute. It's quite impressive.

[@maddlarkin]

Back in 4th a Basilisk had an extended range of 240" indirect fire upgrade, we worked out you could fight a battle from the outside table of the pub across the road to the games table nearest the window of the local GW, all you needed was a kid as a runner, but apparently having a kid repeatedly run across a road to call hits is 'unethical' so the idea remained theoretical

[@maxpower3990]

@@maddlarkinI remember an old Battle Report in White Dwarf where they had 4 simultaneous battles with the smaller ones using Basilisks firing off board onto the main battle.

[@tdb7992]

I know you are unable to discuss anything relating to Australia's military and defence posturing - but thank you so much for working to keep our nation safe and capable of helping our allies in the Indo-Pacific and all around the world.

[@tonysu8860]

I don't know that Perun has avoided talking about Australia's military in the past but he seems to focus on the US military because of its importance to the Ukraine war (providing about 90% of all weapons and munitions to date) and its role as the world's technological leader in most areas. Has Australia contributed weapons to Ukraine or boast of any domestically produced weapons that surpass that produced elsewhere? I'm sure there must some that are specific to Australia's needs, it's common for countries to develop vehicles that perform best on native terrain.

[@relwalretep]

​@@tonysu8860Australia has sent materiel, and committed to send more. LMGTFY is your friend.

[@enriquejocson8117]

​@@tonysu8860 He's mentioned in channel updates he will not be directly analyzing Australian topics like AUKUS

[@grahamstrouse1165]

The Emus have some dirt on Perun. Bet they caught him in a honey trap with some ‘ol bird…

[@linhlopbaya]

@@grahamstrouse1165 need to call in the Kiwis to rescue then.

[@SirWolfwoodIII]

I admire and look forward to Perun's briefings and the manner in which he flavors his briefings with poignant tongue-in-cheek humor. Thanks for teaching, as well as making me laugh a few times along the way.

[@os3ujziC]

"If you want to get to those critical but difficult to reach places there is no substitute for length"

[@hungrymusicwolf]

As usual your humour filled episodes never fail to make me laugh.

[@truckinconvoy7312]

When an american calls in fire support, there is only one thing that they need to get right: the aspect ratio on their camera phone. Need to try and capture the entire explosion in frame. Doctor: so what happened? Me: we were strategically positioning, when upon my friend sustained attrition when impacting the deck. Appears to have sustained an information space injury. Doctor: he fell over and hit his head when you were walking? Me: correct. Perun videos have changed me.

[@Thenlar]

I watch every week, and learn so much every time. As a former M777 cannon crewman for the Marines (got out in 2011), I'm quite curious to see what you say about the FD2030 project. It is, of course, highly divisive!

[@fbb-bh5vp]

unity, justice and freedom. okay, i needed a moment to comprehend that. greetings from germany

[@maudelauf1885]

Wasn't expecting the Mavor from Supreme Commander to make a cameo in this video. What a blast from the past!

[@JoeyBlogs007]

HiMars now has recognized and proven range up to 300 km and a variety of future munitions in development that will offer extended range beyond 499 km.

[@anabasis3144]

Perun I have been watching your channel since February of 2022 and I believe that you’re briefings are peerless for those of us without a significant clearance for USDoD briefings. Many thanks.

[@fishbaitx]

Just an interesting fact america did in fact have a short lived nuclear artillery cannon called the M65 atomic cannon It delivered a W9 nuclear armament It was developed in the early 1950s, at the beginning of the Cold War; and fielded between April 1955 and December 1962, in West Germany, South Korea and on Okinawa.

[@RaptorJesus]

Atomic Annie!

[@scurra1163]

Don't forget the M-28/29 Davey Crockett; just to add to the insanity, let's build a recoiless rifle that shoots a tac nuke!

[@RaptorJesus]

@@scurra1163 Only an American could hear about the concept of nuclear warfare and have the first thought enter their heads be "but shouldn't the grunts be able to participate too?"

[@Jfk2Mr]

​@@RaptorJesusand then have second thoughts of strategic sarges

[@irgendwieanders2121]

@@RaptorJesus Democracy at work! You get a nuke, you get a nuke, everyone gets a nuke!

[@kekistanimememan170]

To me it’s always been my understanding that China and Russia prioritise range over logistics and manoeuvrability. Where as the USA and NATO as a whole have a more balanced triangle.

[@nihluxler1890]

No. China, Russia (and most countries which inherited from soviet doctrine) prioritize volume of fire, which means an emphasis on logistics for barrel replacement and shell production and supply as well as slightly lower ranges, due to lower charges to avoid excessive wear, and thus more shots fired per barrels. I have no idea why people seem to want to reverse it now. It was pretty common and accepted knowledge only a week ago, when everyone was still pretending lower ranges made Soviet and Russian artillery inferior… I guess everyone realized that the Russians actually have both (High VoF short to medium range artillery AND long range precision guided artillery) while NATO put all it’s chips in the latter for obvious financial reason and completely neglected its industrial capacity.

[@a5cent]

This is a false dichotomy. There is no reason to have to choose between range, mobility and logistics. They don't affect each other. All three can be best-in-class simultaneously. Maybe you are thinking of the armor triangle. That just doesn't apply to artillery.

[@emilsinclair4190]

​@a5cent while not being that coupled they still influence each other. Bigger range requires either more expensive shells (makes logistics more difficult) or longer guns (decreases mobility)

[@grahamstrouse1165]

I’m not sure I would equate Chinese & Russian capabilities. China’s strategy evolved out of Soviet doctrine but they have far more industrial capability. They’re also more open to borrowing (and stealing) Western technology & tactics. Their force distribution makes a lot more sense than the Russians & they have more access to advanced technology. They don’t have much in the way of battlefield experience, of course & are number of areas where that inexperience could really bite them in the ass-Submarine doctrine, for instance. The Chinese do seem a little more self-aware of their strengths & limitations than the Russkies, though.

[@a5cent]

@@emilsinclair4190 Sorry. Not buying it. You just add one truck to your supply division and you've easily compensated for larger charges to facilitate longer range. The point here is that this extra truck has NOTHING to do with the artillery unit itself. That is why it's decoupled. More importantly, having to add a truck is very much exaggerated. In terms of logistics, considering how much is regularly shipped to the front line, charges to reach out 60km rather than 40km us pretty much irrelevant. I served in the Artillery. I know. A longer barrel can impact mobility, but not in a way that really matters. For a tank trying to breach the front and cause havock behind enemy lines, 10km/h faster or slower matters. For artillery it doesn't. What does matter is how quickly you can transition from driving to firing and then scooting, but barrel length has little to no impact on that. That's all about automation. Nah. I think you are imagining relationships where none exist.

[@josephmoore4764]

To suggest a topic. I’m really interested in how modern armies breech fortified defensive lines? What are measures and countermeasures of doing this by both sides of this war?

[@SoloRenegade]

this is a very good topic. Best place to start is Vaubaun fortifications. Then the US Civil War, then WW1 Trench fortifications, then WW2 maneuver warfare (especially the German invasion of France and how they penetrated French defenses). Then look at minefield clearing techniques, and modern obstacle clearing (bridging tanks, ditch crossing methods, armored dozers, plows, rollers, sweepers, flails, detectors, etc.). I was a combat engineer, and my unit achieved 93% success against IEDs, my platoon achieved 98% success, and I achieved 117% success (100% success, plus predicting the exact location and type of multiple attacks days to weeks in advance). And I did it by studying the topics above (and having a strong desire not to die).

[@andersgrassman6583]

It would be interesting to me as a non-military person as well. I watched a US army instructional overview of "combined arms" breech of fortified lines last week. To me as a layman, the general idea of a plan seems very shaky. In any other business, I would deem it as a pretty unrealistic manner of action. (I would go for some completely different endeavor, but I'm an entrepreneur in normal business life. And keep in mind, as an entrepreneur, I'm the optimistic type!) It looks as if the margins of error are miniscule, and things nearly always go wrong, so huge losses seem to be likely in the weeks to come in Ukraine. Also I watched another video the other day, that I found by searching "what went wrong on D-day". It turns out that fire preparing just before landing troups either overshot, ur undershot the defence fortifications along the beaches, leaving all cannons etc untouched. Commanders of some somewhat larger warships spent the rest of the day, acting without orders to do so, doing what was supposed to be done beforehand. On top of that, the tanks that were supposed to land on the beach, sunk in the sea, never reaching the shoreline. All this of course resulted in very much larger losses than was expected to begin with. In the end of they day the overreaching goal was achieved. The entire mission wasn't a failiure after all. Which it easily could have become, in my amateur judgement.

[@michaelhoffmann2891]

Somewhat eery thought that my grandfather - who was the guy with the radio looking where gun go boom - may have been fighting in that same area. Survived the war but passed years ago.

[@mees9704]

A massive issue with the Paladin SPG is that there is only one factory that produces those barrels. If the US were to be caught in a massive conflict I wouldn’t bet on how long they can keep those SPG’s firing. (Source was a podcast from the modern war institute)

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

In a massive conflict that factory wouldn't be the only one producing those barrels.

[@mees9704]

@@baronvonlimbourgh1716 indeed, but how long will it take to convert other factories. And how long will the US need to play catch up with supply and demand?

[@demomanchaos]

I don't think they would be as much of a problem as you think, considering the US doesn't fight like russia. The US Navy has more aircraft that russia, west taiwan, and north korea combined, and the USAF has a fair few hundred more than the navy. Desert Storm is a perfect example of how the US fights those meant to be peer/near-peer opponents, blast the holy crapbaskets out of them from the air to delete their air force/anti-air capabilities then send in ground units with air support to mop up what is left.

[@r.gilman4261]

The concept of the Canadians driving 3 hours and flattening Watervliet does crack me up, but politics of getting votes. Gary Indiana would be a far better strategic location IF land invasion were considered a thing ( relevant electroslag melt facilitites and all)...but Indiana politics thinks wrong so no chance of that.

[@alantoon5708]

America has destroyed its' own defense infrastructure

[@rollandchapin5308]

I have learned so much , from your content. Truly remarkable times I live in. I grew up splitting wood, Hauling water and burning garbage. Snowshoes and Traplines. Rifles and knives. Hunting and killing. I'm retired, in town and able to spend my time learning. God Bless you.

[@serronserron1320]

I grew up in city apartments and lived my entire life around computers ever since I could walk, for work and entertainment. Only now am I starting to get out to the country to live a more rugged lifestyle and learn the things that you talked about in a hands-on fashion.

[@jeffreytam7684]

When costing air vs ground launched platforms (guesstimate on the timestamp here, 53:00) I think it’s super important to remember the cost of not only the vehicles themselves, but of operating the systems and carrying out their missions

[@frogturtle]

Experts in short-barreled artillery ranked by expertise: 1. My wife 2. Perun

[@Jackinsa]

Best long form videos!!! Funny and informative. Love the deep dives into the economics and logistics side.

[@hccdgvvfccdgn993]

I was just thinking when the next video was going to be released, thanks! ❤

[@Runningr0se]

If you want to get to those critical but difficult to reach places, sometimes there's no substitute for length. - Perun

[@fakeplaystore7991]

That's what she said. 🥁

[@asherkosmos4312]

Very girthy length

[@stereosonix2000]

​@@fakeplaystore7991 😂😂😂😂

[@BraveDeterminedMerciful]

Just wanted to say your videos are exceptionally informative and besides that fun to watch. Your balancing act of reason, telling factual and structured information and mix it with some dry humor is greatly appreciated. Greetings from Amsterdam

[@jloiben12]

I bet Perun answers this but how do we count things like the B-2 or the F-35? We effectively use them, as one part of their larger mission set, as artillery. Hell, we even use the B-52 like this from time to time. Just ask the Russians

[@dzzope]

B2? Surely B21? Also, that is distinctly air power rather than surface based artillary. Which is the subject

[@jloiben12]

@@dzzope Well the B-21 isn’t active yet but yes. When the B-21 comes online it will fit in here too

[@setlerking]

Its a matter of expense, not ability. Sure, f-35s can do the same thing but you’re now using something that costs several orders of magnitude more to operate than just using normal shit. In military terms there’s usually always a way but that way may be more or less impossible in large scale practice. You need cheaper ground pieces if you want to operate a long front. Planes are prohibiting in terms of costs for this purpose, for a targeted strike that has to go yesterday then maybe but not in normal operations.

[@PerunAU]

I don't count them as ground-based fires, but point out that part of the reason the army didn't have more long-range options to this point is because the USAF and USN had such significant ability to deliver pain at very-long range. I also suggest that the army push for more long range options might put it in tension with some leaders in the USAF

[@jloiben12]

@@setlerking Oh I 100% agree. But how do we count that? Clearly it still does the thing but just in a far more expensive way. Just a thunk

[@YanBaoQin]

I keep holding out for railgun artillery

[@hurrdurrmurrgurr]

Won't be a thing until someone works out how to build one that won't break the barrel.

[@YanBaoQin]

@@hurrdurrmurrgurr 💯% agree

[@aliasalias8433]

Very interesting presentation, like always. Thank you.

[@chugachuga9242]

Some one in the US army played Ace Combat once, got to the part were the particular super weapon of which ever Ace Combat game said army officer was playing gets revealed, and thought,”That looks fun, I want one!”.

[@DirtyAstronaut]

Yessssss! Perfect timing! About to goto sleep and this is what I'm going to goto sleep to! (That's a compliment BTW.) I end up hearing it in my sleep and usually have dreams about whatever is being talked about ... freaking awesome. My favorite channel ever.. and I've been on KZbin since it first started 😊

[@Perunfan]

Me too bloke

[@DirtyAstronaut]

@@Perunfan ... righto

[@JKS_Crafting]

The Perun sleep listening club is in session!

[@jackbarbour9514]

Another brilliantly presented slide show, thank you.

[@hestan723]

Hi Perun Just wanted to say that your videos are not only very good and instructive, they also fit very well for playing Bloons TD6

[@sangay9361]

An interesting program that you also could've mentioned was the navy's AGS on the Zumwalt class destroyers. Using LRLAP 155mm munitions it was supposed to be able to hit target accurately at a range of 140-190km. Problem was, as you explained in your video, it was way to expensive. One round was between 800 thousand and a million dollars, basically one tomahawk worth

[@chrisoffersen]

I imagine the Air Force would appreciate the capability of having anti-air batteries taken out without needing to risk aircraft.

[@CharChar2121]

No, they wouldn't, because that means that money would go to the Army. The Army wants to be able to operate without the USAF.

[@glenmcgillivray4707]

The army can envision a world with enough SAMs in an area to deny air cover. Lacking air cover how do we deal with challenges. Oh tomahawks at anything that sits still. That'll work. And something not quite nuclear tipped for flattening factories could be nice. And some rounds we can guide in on ammo dumps or tank parks could be nice. Oooh and let's get some concentration of fire to blow up logistics hubs or railway terminals to make life even more miserable. Yeah so? It'll be expensive. But if it saves soldiers lives it'll make military operations more palatable with the public. And the Military Industrial Complex will not start a revolution against the nation it works for by building private military contractors.

[@chrisoffersen]

@@CharChar2121 Too right.

[@danielbomgaars1008]

Always well researched and informative!

[@thierryschmidlin6936]

Thanks for that analysis and all your work. Amazing !

[@fodz9246]

Ah, my weekly indulgence, on time as always. Thanks champion!

[@Slapdab]

I wonder if an infantry focused video might be good. I enjoy hearing how different combat vehicles have had different roles in history, and it seems like infantry might have new roles as drones become more prominent.

[@Stephen85]

Yes, with an emphasis on the drones.

[@SoloRenegade]

it's getting very difficult to move on the battlefield without being observed/tracked/targeted. You pretty much have to assume every second, every action, is being observed, and act accordingly.

[@dannyzero692]

I’d love to see a video about the evolution of ground warfare from before WW1 until modern day, and how advancement in firearm and vehicle technology has changed it.

[@tonysu8860]

I think if you look in this channel's archives that there have been several episodes which have covered your requested topics from comparing Russian vs Western battlefield organization both as pure infantry and as mechanized, how they're equipped, their importance, training, etc.

[@jake2.035]

Great video as always, thank you Perun

[@BalbazaktheGreat]

Excellent work, as always.

[@reyalsregnava]

Another important topic that can be addressed during these high fog periods: Climate change and the impact on military readiness. I know for a fact the Department of the Navy is shitting bricks thinking about having to rebuild potentially all of their sea bases. I mean if you defend yourself against all the missiles in the world but a hurricane floods and ruins your defense system it wasn't a really prepared for the battle field we all understand is coming.

[@longforgotten4823]

Second this

[@kevatut23]

Thanks Perun. Long time subscriber. As a lifelong professional tech guy and Vietnam era Vet, I always find it fascinating to consider the technologies and capabilities of these defense systems. But let's not forget; there is an underlying insanity to this. In a world of increasing humanitarian need and global natural threat, the concept of a $30mil artillery round, regardless of it's capability, is more a narrative on how we have accepted government procurement abuse's, than it is about need. This is a global phenomenon, and absolutely not just an American thing. Proliferation of threats aside, we as a specie's, need to rethink priorities, and stop this insanity. It is little more than a runaway train. And one day, it will crash into all of us.

[@playedout148]

Agree. It's neck and neck between ecological collapse and nuclear war, with AI gaining in 3rd.

[@arthurmoore9488]

The problem is that to even bid on a DOD contract you have to be willing to spend ludicrous amounts of money on paperwork and compliance. As a former DOD contractor, the concept of reporting "Waste, Fraud, And Abuse" is a joke.

[@filanfyretracker]

@@arthurmoore9488 I have my own joke that the difference between US corruption and Russian corruption is that at least we still get the war machine rather than just an empty soviet era hangar with an IOU post-it on the floor.

[@user-cx9nc4pj8w]

As sad as this situation might be, I don't see how you're going to convince a runaway train to stop because crashing would be bad. And unless all major countries including Russia, China, the USA, India, France, and others can agree on that, and we all know they won't, it is necessary, as Ukraine shows.

[@rogerbeck3018]

Again Perun has instructed me in a subject I did not know I wanted to know, but stayed to the end. Thanks team Perun

[@paulanthonynelson2733]

Brilliantly articulated, as you always manage with, great balance and momentum, as it were. Thanks mate, carry on Mr P.

[@aspielm759]

articulating your thoughts into words accuratley and precisicely truely is an underestimated art, isn't it?

[@paulanthonynelson2733]

@@aspielm759 It often does seem that way, to be underestimated, certainly seems to be also underappreciated as well, and perhaps its also fair to say it is an under-exercised and too infrequently practised discipline. Those who can do it on the fly, out of the box, garner particular admiration from me as I usually need to fiddle the pieces around during a rehersal before Im good to try making sense to others fdom the trains of thought I would arrive with at first draft in presenting an idea, especially ideas with many moving parts such as the complex topics Perun addresses. Its just a bloody bomza effort by old mate here every week. Cheers. 😁🍻

[@Orieni]

What can be seen, can be hit. What can be hit, can be killed. In my day, getting eyes on target so you could then get fires on target was the challenge. Drones, which don’t result in too many Purple Hearts over dangerous areas, change everything, and make US long ranged artillery much more useful.

[@attemptedunkindness3632]

I loved the champagne analogy I could see these expensive ramjet artillery shells being issued in limited numbers to punch at any counter artillery at length before creeping in with the cheap stuff.

[@AndrewBlucher]

Your preferences are showing. He was actually talking about Cabernet Sauvignon.

[@jeffbrown773]

Thanks for another great video

[@aspielm759]

fascinating! Thank you Powerpointman!

[@aliasalias8433]

Just as an aside: Rheinmetall is currently testing a self-propelled howitzer with a range of 80 kilometers. Rheinmetall MAN HX3, 155 mm L/60 gun with 29 litre chamber.

[@JCtheMusicMan_]

Your presentations are so incredibly thorough and informative! Glory to Ukraine! 🇺🇦💜 Glory to Perun! 🇦🇺🦘

[@jdelark6428]

And Glory to Emutopia 😋

[@therealuncleowen2588]

Very interesting presentation. Thank you.

[@dianabouvier4718]

Thank you for the information!

[@Geotpf]

I think the relative lack of long range ground based fires in the US military is not a serious problem considering the ability to use air or sea based alternatives. However, it's always nice to have options and plugging this hole is a good thing.

[@Ffourteen]

After seeing your videos on corruption, it really made me curious where else in this world this is going on. The problem I ran into is although I found a lot of reports of corruption, it was largely in places that don't have a free press. So I have no way of knowing if these are systemic problems or just anecdotal incidents. For example I'm curious about some reports around one of China's aircraft carriers, the Fujian. I found a report about a supplier not being able to produce steel to the quality standard in the time frame they were given. So someone in the project bought a cheaper grade of steel and pocketed the difference. This came out when he was arrested and charged with corruption, but does that mean important parts of the carrier are made with steel that isn't up to design standards or does that mean the guy was caught and the problem was solved? That is just one example, what I'm asking is there anyway to dig deeper into something like that? And if I do find something more, how can I feel confident in the information I find if there are not any independent and professional journalists that can report on the story?

[@Uncle_Neil]

Without first-hand knowledge you cannot know, sorry. Here, Perun crosses over into the gray areas routinely and filters out all the non-sense he can to cast light upon the issue. The time when journalist actually did their job has been over for some time. Defense issues cannot lend themselves to overt clarity, too much is at stake.

[@OptimusSledge]

Everywhere. Corruption happens everywhere. It's particularly noticeable in Russia because of the extent and the brilliant decision to take that half-crippled army to war, but it happens everywhere to some degree.

[@jonathanpfeffer3716]

Trying to assess corruption or really any details about the PLA will drive a man to insanity. Same is true for many places but the PLA is next-level opaque and there is so so much noise around them.

[@AndrewBlucher]

​@@OptimusSledge Human nature. At least in a democracy there is some chance that someone will speak up, even in a military environment. That's why the more authoritarian turn we are seeing worldwide is such a concern.

[@xBINARYGODx]

@@Uncle_Neil "The time when journalist actually did their job has been over for some time." nonsense, its not actually better or worse than it used to be - you should see what various welahty people did with newspapers they owned back when the paper was where people got all or most of their news. Walter K or whoever stand out for a reason - because usually you dont get people like that or the guys who spoke to deep throat. "things are worse today" things were also bad in the past, frequently much worse than now, about almost anything you want to discuss.

[@csonracsonra9962]

You seem like just the type of feller that's going to get a job offer in America soon. I think we could use you on a board someplace! HIGHLY UNDERRATED CHANNEL

[@pplinius7043]

Good job Perun as always!!!!

[@WraithMagus]

41:47 OK, I laughted when he brought up the Mavor. For reference, I think the gatling gun bots near it are supposed to be something like 50 meters tall. The Mavor barrel when extended is something absolutely bonkers like 500 meters long and fires tactical nuclear ordnance. It is considered a "game ender" for its ability to flatten opposing bases with essentially infinite range. (SupCom basically looked at Warhammer 40K's absurd units and said "hold my beer")

[@glenmcgillivray4707]

No. No. Warhammer still holds the dubious high ground in terms of these guns. But the whole point of experimentals is they are supposed to do the absurd for the sake of military victory. They will often loose you a game as easily as they can win it, but mostly T3 bombers are more reliable at defeating any threat. The bomber always gets through.

[@WraithMagus]

@@glenmcgillivray4707 The thing that's always so disconcerting about SupCom isn't so much where the scale ends, but where it *starts.* One of the smallest units in the game, mech marines, look like they might be people-sized, but they're supposed to be 10 m tall, the size of a riptide.

[@glenmcgillivray4707]

@@WraithMagus a reference to the predecessor. Total Annihilation. Even the experimental technology was trialed there. Kogroth was much fun. Anti air missiles launchers, a head mounted doom laser bolt and hand cannons that look so impressive (but are actually out damaged by three Pee-wee's) A glorious game in its day. Still quite playable. Just. Go look for community balance and modpacks. That's where the game comes into its own, Cavedog left it a mess. The Kogroth was the size of a walking battleship, but the rapid fire artillery was bigger still. And honestly Battleships usually ate Kogroth for breakfast because you could afford several and outrange it forever with higher movement speeds 🤔 And Kogroth was horrifically overpriced. Anyway. The whole point was battle is far beyond what we have to date and everything is going to mess and for the sake of an advantage you could either build bigger and bigger to try to generate value, or go the path of more and more and more of everything and overwhelm the opponent. Players in the campaign usually got sick of losses so followed the idea of go big or go home because it generated value. In multiplayer usually the reverse is true. More is just more and will overwhelm the opponent with value in the form of raw damage output. But for all the Mavor was impressive. There were submarines a kilometer long filled with airfields, battleships half a kilometer wide building warships on the battlefield, a mobile factory that cruises around barraging everything in sight and building the army that surrounds it if needed. And the monkey Lord sneaking in the shadows with massive damage looking for somewhere vulnerable to run in and burn everything and damage something valuable. I do love the game.

[@threeshirescyclist554]

South Africa had 70km range back in the 80's/90's with their G6 guns and they can land 6 rounds at impact at the same time using different trajectorys. The tech has been there for decades, Western nations have really let the ball drop and thought artillery redundant.

[@dtly50]

Its redundant if you do a massive air attack. Air supremacy power is the absolute counter to normal artillery. Against a peer you are in trouble though. No supremacy, weak artillery presence and only air superiority means you would lose a lot of expensive aircraft on the attack and are forced into a stalemate.

[@Edo_Ginting]

Is this comparing to the M109? Since the PzH2000 is arguably better.

[@armablign]

@@Edo_Ginting PzH2000 came into service in 1998. The G6 is 80's.... Yet the G6 is arguably better still. Also, the Stats put up by the PzH2000 are while using amination designed for the South African G6.

[@irgendwieanders2121]

The Wikipedia article on the G6 howitzer seems to tell the story a little bit differently. E.g. the G6 (in a certain variant) could fire 6 rounds for multiple rounds/single impact but only up to 25km or the first G6 were fielded in 1988...

[@kilianortmann9979]

MRSI fire is always at significantly less than maximum range. You need a high and a low trajectory, so the ideal angle for maximum range is not possible, and for more than two simultaneous impacts, lowering the charge for each additional pair is required.

[@markwilson2992]

I am always sad when the video ends. Such great information.

[@paulcrusse7800]

Thank you for all of your hard work.