How relevant are mortars today?

Unless they invent a round that can allow an M16 to demolish a bunker, they're a necessity.

it would be difficult to find any country that could establish even air parity with the US

and without some way to contest an air space, which isnt really gonna happen unless the US air force is somehow held back by international laws like in vietnam, then artillery can never really challenge US artillery without being counter-barraged or airstriked to oblivion

the kind of symmetrical, comventional war that you imagine is necessary to make that kind of battle is simply impossible in a monopolarity world like today

guerilla warfare is the only way to challenge US forces by refusing a conventional warefare, and instead bleeding out the troops slowly over a long period of time

The US has relied on artillery and air support since WW2. On rare occasions when it hasn’t been available, things haven’t gone well. Mainly because our enemies usually have numerical superiority.

op they are the most deadly out there bro. see large enemy formation. mortars end it fast.

Attached: 1530585382530.jpg (2100x1701, 628K)

Is it just me or is there something ominous about those small deep points?

ukraine conflict used them and rocket artilery alot.

Saddam had an air force in the first gulf war. He had artillery in both wars. The Air Force removed them early on in both wars. The US is not going to allow an enemy to retain parity, and they'll succeed because no other power can currently match the US in the air.

t. A-10 pilot shortly before being BTFO by Chinese SA-21

when last did they fight another super power jimmy?

Short answer, VERY.

Long answer, against low value targets like guerillas the cheap and fast firing mortar is the bread and butter fire support solution. I know I sound like a salesman here but they're just that damned useful.

Extremely.

Most of casualties in ongoing war in Ukraine is from mortars and other indirect weapons.

This. They are super cheap to use, mobile, low blast radius and are an organic asset. It also is faster reacting.

As an FO we will almost never call in FA.

Very

Check out Matsimus video about it since I should be studying right now and not doing TDLRs on k

youtube.com/watch?v=v772NNOTY8M&t=755s

>that fpbp
>those digits
goddamn user, OP is destroyed say again OP destroyed hole in one user good job

Attached: moethumbsup.gif (479x270, 482K)

indoors.

played coh so much

they should make it smaller and easier to deploy it's great

How accurate are they?

also if they could make it vehical mountable with a 50 cal support for close incounters they would be incredibly useful

also have them paired up with a sniper to spot targets you baisly win

Are people still made of meat?

There is your answer.

They really aren't that deep. There's videos about them. There's nothing down there but silt.

>I wouldn't worry about it

Very...

Wrong. Mortars are at least 150% relevant.

Bullets and explosives are always going to cheaper than soldiers lives. Both for morale and monetarily.

Enter the void, annon. You know you want to.

Dumbest weapon ever.

>held back by international laws like in vietnam
Let's see:
>Carpet bombing
>Napalming entire villages
>Shooting at farmers from hueys
>Use of chemical weapons against international treaties by hiding behind the term 'defoliant'

No. You lost even with superior air power because your nation forgot and still forgets wars are political.

More relevant than ever before

Attached: AMOS22.jpg (2464x1640, 522K)

Fuck swedes for fucking the project

>how relevant is tossing boom boom over things onto bad guys

I DUNNO BRO

I JUST DUNNO.

you mean, "what if invading the middle east was a real war" ?

They'd get fucking flattened because our hands would no longer be tied behind our backs.

yeah ?

how many SA-21's you got senpai ? we got a fucking shitload of planes too.

Pound for pound, per dollar spent....mortars are one of the most devastating weapons ever created.

mortars can make everything outdoors

Attached: brainlet.jpg (628x534, 75K)

Irrelevant. Melt down all mortar tubes and turn them into modern art installations depicting the birth of Christ in metaphor.

>trying this hard

Attached: 020.jpg (494x527, 73K)

Fire for effect.

In Canada, not much, we stopped using them as it got too pricey to train with.

@39529771
lmao what is with all this vietnam nonsense recently? nobody fucking cares about Gookshoot 1965.

This fuckin thing is bad ass! When can we buy them?

youtu.be/jl-h3ZT9le0

Mortars are fucking scary. Combined with a thermal UAV to get your position you better dig a hole and pray

YOU HAVE TO GO BACK : ^ )

let's not fucking pretend that due to sheer experience russian artillery doctrine is years ahead of US doctrine in high intensity warfare. When is the last time US artillerymen had to shoot and scoot within 10 minutes or face counterbattery fire?

isn't* fuck

in world war 2, they never experienced counter battery fire because they were flat out overwhelming their foes with volume and accuracy

the goal is not to fight fair
the goal is not to set up a dick measuring contest about whos artillery is best or would win a duel or is better at performing a specific difficult task
the goal is to annhilate the enemy artillery any way you can, usually with air power, so you will never need to ensure counter battery fire

we have the most experienced military in the entire world you moron. weve been at war constantly for the last 18 years with a literal sandbox to test out and train in every new technology or wepaon of war or tactics

no other country has a military with this level of combat experience

meanwhile russian grads sit well within an AA net and some cunty drone flies over 10 minutes before your position gets wiped off the map

the idea that Russia would be able to achieve air parity for more than a few days is wishful thinking at best

ans the idea that US artillery is deficient is not very grounded in reality either

>weve been at war constantly for the last 18 years with a literal sandbox to test out and train in every new technology or wepaon of war or tactics
against sandniggers. the first gulf war was the last time you fought against something resembling a standing army with the resources to fight back. The experience done up in afghanistan or the occupation of iraq isn't enough or infallible. US soldiers will get killed in the next major war they participate in because "no other country has a military with this level of combat experience"

Thoughts on commando mortars?

>he idea that Russia would be able to achieve air parity for more than a few days is wishful thinking at best
How long will it take for the US to gain air supremacy? To completely surpress the russian AA net? After that will they have enough resources to cover all the ground they need to?

>ans the idea that US artillery is deficient is not very grounded in reality either
I'm not saying they aren't capable. I'm saying they haven't needed to be cutting edge capable for a while now and their doctrine/training has most likely suffered from that.

the reason why terrorists try to operate out of urban areas now is to negate the mortal by imposing political costs on using it. Or in other words, it's very effective.

>our modern enemies haven't had substantial artillery or air support.

You're joking right? Before desert storm the Iraqi's had 4k 155mm heavy artillery pieces, plus 10k large 100 to 160mm motor and howitzer systems in the theatre. They had an airforce of 934 combat aircraft, of which 5% where 4th gens, the US brought some 2k combat aircraft of which ~80% where 4th gens. They never really had a chance in the airwar as they were hugely outnumbered by more sophisticated aircraft. There were only a couple of engagements where the number of Iraqi and coalition planes were equal, and in the vast majority they were outnumbered. After losing the airwar, their artillery pieces were bombed to shit across a month or so. Turns out no one can hide huge ass guns while firing them. By the time the US troops moved forward, the C2 of the Iraqi army was in tatters, their airforce was effectively no more, their artillery was mostly shithoused, and their morale was as low as it can go.

If you think anyone in the world can oppose the US in the air, you really need to think again. For reference Russia's air force today has only 630 combat aircraft in service of which 2% are 5th gens, China has 1100 combat aircraft of which 2% are 5th gens, but the US has 4000 combat aircraft of which 13% are 5th gens. Once the air war is won, the enemies artillery will be unable to reliably and effectively engage US formations, as it will be hunted from the air and when identified struck from whatever assets we have nearby. Further, our training and doctrine is based entirely around a combined arms approach where air sea and land assets work together to annihilate the enemy, which is also ironically why we suck at training other militaries. We don't know how to fight just infantry vs all opponents up to an including ones with superior material support, because there is no opponent out there in the world that can make such a scenario happen.

>not clearing rooms with a mortar in 2018

meant for oopsie tehehe

>How long will it take for the US to gain air supremacy?

A day or two max. Turns out planes travel pretty quick, and you if you have a chain of friendly airbases you can move them around the world in far less than a day.

>To completely surpress the russian AA net?
You really haven't thought this through. There is no need to suppress the AA net, the need is to push it back just far enough that recon flights and stand off munitions can see and strike the frontline units. If we push back the AA just enough to get a location on your arty, we just HIMARS it to death.

>After that will they have enough resources to cover all the ground they need to?
Again, easily. In order to do what you seem to think Russia will do, they need to be able to prevent NATO planes from flying withing 100nmi of the front. Turns out, thanks to basic physics that is literally an impossible task.

>let's not fucking pretend that due to sheer experience russian artillery doctrine isnt years ahead of US doctrine in high intensity warfare.
hahahaha. Please show me the last group they've fought that actually used combined arms tactics. And before you post Ukraine, know that we will all laugh our asses off at you claiming the ukrainian military was a strong combined arms fighter.

Why do all you guys think a plane has to be right overhead of where it is looking and attacking? Are you so ignorant to think that modern day airforces operate on the same principles as WWII or something?

This man is a sea monster, believe nothing he says

You xenomorphobic asshole. Now, there's now way he'd actually be some kind of aquatic life-form, but if he were I'd be a lake-walker. Gotta remember the lakes are not saltwater.

I wouldnt worry about it

Attached: 1438320101947.gif (400x225, 1.86M)

Hello fellow fan of ball watch? yes? do you also browse watchuseek.com forum?

Depends on the fire team on the co-ords they are given, plus weather range and wind , but pretty accurate. Plus the kill radius is around 30-80m depending on the shell

Very. While closing on the enemy you can direct mortar fire only 50-100m front of you, meaning that they are ideal for ceeping the enemy pinned down just before you launch the attack on enemy position. Now this is with actually good FOs, some militaries know how to do this, FDF for example.

>not hip firing mortars while clearing buildings

Attached: 1537994477555.gif (640x360, 850K)

>Soldiers will die in war
Profound stuff right here. They switched over training doctrine in like 2012 to train more conventional methods of warfare and get away from COIN. By the time there's a fight against a "real" opponent there will only be a few crusty individuals left who did COIN as a butter bar or a private 15-20 years ago and some specialist units who still practiced the lessons learned.

Yeah it's true about the standoff for dropping bombs. Called in a mission one time and the plane released it like 15-20 miles out and the flight time of the bomb was like 2 minutes. By the time we called in the splash the plane had already turned around and was preparing for another run if necessary.

>kill radius is around 30-80m
Since when have Fallout mini nukes suddenly became real

>You really haven't thought this through.
Really? Before planes get air supremacy and the AA net is pushed back far enough, what is the most cost/manpower effective way of recon?

Small UAVs working together with artillery crews. Exactly the style of warfare russia has been conducting in the ukraine. Just because there's a similar doctrine in place in the US in the form of combined arms warfare doesn't mean that it isn't a massive mentality switch from sitting in a base popping shells somewhere every now and then.

>Please show me the last group they've fought that actually used combined arms tactics. And before you post Ukraine, know that we will all laugh our asses off at you claiming the ukrainian military was a strong combined arms fighter.
Moving the goalposts quite rapidly there. But i'm sure ukrainians having to completely change up their mechanized doctrines to not lose entire battalions to grad strikes means nothing to a potential US war against a willing and trained foe.

>Small UAVs working together with artillery crews. Exactly the style of warfare russia has been conducting in the ukraine
US has been using drones to aid artillery, air, and naval gunnery for years
its not exactly revolutionary

Yeah, all modern american wars (as in post 80's) have been against nations that were utterly incapable of defending themselves. Even in Vietnam, where there was actually real fighting, the enemy had zero air support and next to no artillery.

Dust off this ol' lovely.

guns.wikia.com/wiki/High-Impulse_Weapon_System

When will americans ever claim to NOT have your hands tied behind your backs?

That's easy to say (and do) when you are fighting nations whose military budgets are about 50 bucks. Another thing entirely when facing a nation that is well equipped and well trained.

When... they're not?

This is just numbers. They were still arabs, and arabs can't fight, and they didn't even want to fight. Doesn't matter if you have a million tanks if you lack the will and know-how to use them.

ITT: Americans that couldn't win against what's basically a farmer militia with surplus Soviet rifles and zero air support, zero artillery support and zero anti-air thinks that their army could win against a modern, well equipped army of roughly equal numbers.

>Really? Before planes get air supremacy and the AA net is pushed back far enough, what is the most cost/manpower effective way of recon?
Cant you read? I already answered how long it would take. Are you trying to claim that the Russian military moved sufficent ground forces to be a threat to the border of a NATO country, spent weeks building up and moving men and material, and NATO did no recon?! Are you drunk, or just Russian? In fact our intel is best at the very beginning of large fights because its a hell of lot easier to find and track units when your not being shot at.

>Small UAVs working together with artillery crews. Exactly the style of warfare russia has been conducting in the ukraine. Just because there's a similar doctrine in place in the US in the form of combined arms warfare doesn't mean that it isn't a massive mentality switch from sitting in a base popping shells somewhere every now and then.
Moving the goalposts there. Do you really think our doctrine is to sit in our base and pop shells every now and then? Further, Russian doctrine has been constantly approaching US doctrine in every regard, See Syria.

>Moving the goalposts quite rapidly there.
Wow, you again didn't think this through did you? You believe that they have superior experience in fighting mechanized foes with heavy amounts of artillery, and yet you also believe that pointing out that the only foe they've fought that could even be considered that is Ukraine. You know the country whose military is a joke and you yourself have most likely belittled time and time again, which now you are claiming is a legit fighting force. You've claimed that the Russians have huge amounts more experience. Where? Against whom? You haven't shown us anything.

>zero air support and next to no artillery
absolutely false. the viet congs didn't have it, sure, but the north vietnamese sure as hell did

Turns out fragmentation is a real bitch

So never?

And 90% of the fighting was against the Viet Cong

六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre
反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward
文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution
人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system
民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行
法輪功 Falun Dafa 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗
胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨
獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 肅清 活摘器官
黑社會 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩
台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama
新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 東突厥斯坦

>But i'm sure ukrainians having to completely change up their mechanized doctrines to not lose entire battalions to grad strikes means nothing to a potential US war against a willing and trained foe.
Haha, they lost a single battalion that way, and it was a border post where they were struck from artillery across the border back when it was separatists doing the fighting. Further Ukraine didn't want to retaliate at that time lest they bring Russian into the war directly. Turns out they should have fired back, but hindsight is 20/20

Hahaha, I'd like to see the military that can be bombed one sidely for a month losing all contact with command and very limited resupply while taking 10% casualties and still retain a high morale. Russian troops when out matched for example have surrendered to Ukrainians, Georgians, even ISIS and Chechnyans. Yet you think that when they are being hit by precision bombs, suffering massive losses in men and material, they will remain confident of victory?!

>arab excuses

You can look at literally every modern war where arabs were pitted against non arabs, arabs fought like crap every time

I don't know, maybe when I can use the full weapons available to me without worrying about the legal ramifications of shooting a dude who threw his gun down after shooting at my guys. I literally have mk19's in my arms room I'm not allowed to use because of some fucking policy letter some general made to be more friendly to CNN or something. I have the technical ability to turn anything in front of me into a burning white phosphorus hell or to roll through an area at night hitting targets at 3,000m away with HEAT rounds that will kill literally anything that exists. I can see anything that produces a heat signature from over a mile away, and if I can see it I can destroy it. My tank crews make hits at 4,000m, my snipers hit a mile away, my paladins laser guide Xcal rounds within 3 feet at 40km. There is literally nothing that can stop the US military if we don't hold back.

Attached: bluetears.jpg (480x480, 50K)

Who would win?
The most technologically advanced army in the world
Or
A piece of paper with some writing

Attached: IMG_0015.jpg (236x236, 17K)

Fun fact, the Mini-nuke is about the size of a large mortar shell.

Oh that's just the last bits of the glaciers lay after they carved out the thousand foot holes now known as the great lakes.

You'll never get our neo-horser archer tech.

Depends on a lot of things and often mortar crews will need to walk their shots but generally you can expect most shots to land in a 50mm wide circle.

Modern mortars don't look like that anymore, if you are serious about using them.
In my unit we have 120mm mortars mounted on computerized mounts on m113s. They're very accurate and have about 7km range.