Footage of Ru forces destroying M777 howitzers with drone and artillery strikes

a reply to: 35Foxtrot

I appreciate your honesty, thank you.

You and I both are speculating. Incomplete information is all we each have.

It looked to me like the guns were sitting ducks. If the Russians do own the sky there, my bet would be that gunships would be on the way.

a reply to: 35Foxtrot

You don't need to see everything but you need to see enough to make those logical conclusions. Your videos don't show enough.

So our disagreement is on how much needs to be seen to make a conclusion. That would be subjective.

Also, this video comes from the Russians themselves.

Very astute. Footage from Russian drones did indeed come from Russia.Where else could it come from? I don't think you thought that through.

Give me a "logical" reason why - if they did destroy them outright, capture them or whatever - they would not SHOW that video too. It doesn't pass the smell test. Logic and all...

That is actually a good question on the first part not the second. You don't show captured tech if there are security concerns.

And, sorry to rain on your parade, but howitzers - advanced or otherwise, US made or otherwise - are hardly game changing technology.

It is advertised that those howitzers outrange theirs. Well, not the howitzers but their ammo and that would be game-changing technology. Yes.

I'm sure the Russians and a lot of others have access to these and even better toys thanks to our withdrawal from Afghanistan.

So you are not against drawing conclusions without evidence after all.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: 35Foxtrot

You don't need to see everything but you need to see enough to make those logical conclusions. Your videos don't show enough.

So our disagreement is on how much needs to be seen to make a conclusion. That would be subjective.

Also, this video comes from the Russians themselves.

Very astute. Footage from Russian drones did indeed come from Russia.Where else could it come from? I don't think you thought that through.

Give me a "logical" reason why - if they did destroy them outright, capture them or whatever - they would not SHOW that video too. It doesn't pass the smell test. Logic and all...

That is actually a good question on the first part not the second. You don't show captured tech if there are security concerns.

And, sorry to rain on your parade, but howitzers - advanced or otherwise, US made or otherwise - are hardly game changing technology.

It is advertised that those howitzers outrange theirs. Well, not the howitzers but their ammo and that would be game-changing technology. Yes.

I'm sure the Russians and a lot of others have access to these and even better toys thanks to our withdrawal from Afghanistan.

So you are not against drawing conclusions without evidence after all.

- Yes. Subjective. Kinda my point.

- I did think it through. My statement that the video comes from the Russians themselves should be read in conjunction with the following sentence; thus showing the logic flaw that if they show this claiming it shows destroyed m777s, why not show video of that actually happening? They don't. Why?

- What "security" concerns could they possibly have? Use the same drone footage to show them actually doing what they said they did (or what you infer they might have done) if they, in fact DID it. Or did they MAYBE use their super secret squirrel hypersonic warp missile?

- Range is not a game-changing technology. The ammo we've supplied is not game-changing, technologically speaking. So, that's a no to your question.

- We've all seen the items left behind in Afghanistan. There are videos of it that actually show those items. That's different than a video purportedly showing, "Footage of Ru forces destroying M777 howitzers with drone and artillery strikes," [ your title for this thread, genius] that shows NOTHING of the sort no matter how many what ifs and maybes you and others concoct.

Holy Christ! We're now guessing that gunships showed up and it's true because governments lie or whatever or the "real" video is longer and shows what really happened to prove your [and Russia's] claims - which the video clearly does not prove.

a reply to: 35Foxtrot

I never said anything about a gunship?

Outranging the enemy is absolutely game-changing.
Again, it is not the cannons it is the ordinance. The Excaliber round is said to be able to hit within 30 feet from 22 miles away. I remember when they were in development. They said the round could curve back around to hit their target. That means burms and other fortifications are far less effective as cover.

As for the cannon itself, it is advertised as the modern-day sniper rifle for artillery. It is lightweight, and quick to deploy. Russia would absolutely love to get their hands on some of them to learn all their secrets. Especially the rounds.

Showing that they captured them could allow for the US to repurpose their satellites to track them and Tohka-Us are still a threat even in Russia. If they see them being shipped back they could be designated as targets.

a reply to: Salander

Over many years, including MH 17 in 2014, the Russian Government has been much more honest and accurate than anything put out by the US federal government. That doesn't make me happy or proud, very much the opposite.

Is that the same Russian government that released this laughable Photoshop as "proof" MH17 was shot down by an A2A missile?

The MRLS strike seems to be a 9M54 300 mm GLONASS guided cluster round which has range up to 120 km.

a reply to: Grimpachi

If it was one UNCUT vid i would agree but it looks heavily edited. i dont even see anything burning.
It also came from RU MOD.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Your footage does not show any Howitzers being destroyed so why did you choose to make that claim in the title of your thread?

english.pravda.ru...

A new report is saying the initial attack was from a Russian Cube Kamakazi drone.

That makes more sense because what I thought was a missile curved a lot in that video.

The video wasn't to show off killing the howitzers it was to show off the drone.

a reply to: Grimpachi

The latest Msta-S M2 shoots laser guided and GLONASS guided rounds. Other than America, China and Russia both already have such guided howitzer rounds. They don't need to capture.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Then why make the claim that you made in the title of your post?

a reply to: 35Foxtrot

The video is a recent upload. My first thought when watching, wondering how they missed such an easy sitting duck went to retrieval. The later half of the video appears like cluster munitions, or maybe it was just a massive artillery barrage. Kind of looks like they are just trying to create enough concussive force to annihilate personnel but keep the weapons intact.

That led me to the line of thought they wanted to retrieve the equipment and parade it in front of the Chechnyan guys for propoganda effect. They may even be shown using them and saying "Thank you Biden for the gifts" the way they did in other videos with confiscated Javelins and Nlaws. But they were not shown using the launchers, just being coy and sending thanks.

But if they were using them in a video that would be hella insulting.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Read the thread.

They were still destroyed by artillery.

originally posted by: AcuraILXV
a reply to: Grimpachi

The latest Msta-S M2 shoots laser guided and GLONASS guided rounds. Other than America, China and Russia both already have such guided howitzer rounds. They don't need to capture.

But the new EXCALIBUR rounds are way more accurate. they can be fired from any howitzer though,just do better with the m-777. And when drones are in use..better to shoot n scoot and not remain in place too long. They are MOBILE for a REASON. a good crew can get in,set up fire and then be gone before the return fire comes.

As to being destroyed,didnt see one burning or black smoke from any of them. there were no secondaries either. they got 1 looks like,but a grazing shot. the rest cant be confirmed.

a reply to: yuppa

I doubt it's more accurate. China's Beidou GPS and Russia's GLONASS GPS are on par with America's GPS GPS in terms of accuracy. But the US lacks laser guided artillery which China and Russia uses other than GPS guided artillery. Laser guided artillery can hit moving targets. GPS guided artillery cannot.

originally posted by: Salander

My guess is that the targets were attacked for longer time than the length of that video.

Guesses are great. My guess is they shot back and we don't get to see that video since it is not pro-Russian.

originally posted by: AcuraILXV
a reply to: yuppa

I doubt it's more accurate. China's Beidou GPS and Russia's GLONASS GPS are on par with America's GPS GPS in terms of accuracy. But the US lacks laser guided artillery which China and Russia uses other than GPS guided artillery. Laser guided artillery can hit moving targets. GPS guided artillery cannot.

WRONG. The excalibur can change direction in flight as well btw.

The rounds proved to be extremely accurate with a CEP of just 5 meters. In 2015 United States planned to procure a total of 7 474 Excaliburs. In 2016 the unit cost including development costs was reportedly $258 777. This actually made the Excalibur more expensive than the M777 field howitzer.
Caliber: 155 mm
Country of origin: United States
Entered service: 2007
Projectile weight: 48 kg

Excalibur S is an improved version with an added semi-active laser guidance. It can engage moving targets, or targets that have repositioned after firing. Development of this munition was initiated by Raytheon in 2013 as a private venture.

Excalibur N5 is a smaller 127 mm version of the Excalibur S. It was specially designed for naval guns, used on destroyers and cruisers.

Excalibur EST (Excalibur Shaped Trajectory) is a version, which can approach the target at an angle. It was demonstrated in 2018 and deployed shortly afterwards.

GP155B is a Chinese copy of the Excalibur.

So th echines one you mentioned..is a KNOCK OFF of excalibur S

a reply to: Grimpachi

Read your thread title.

It's not true.

The footage does not show what you claim it does.

Why all this squirming?

originally posted by: AcuraILXV

I doubt it's more accurate. China's Beidou GPS and Russia's GLONASS GPS are on par with America's GPS GPS in terms of accuracy. But the US lacks laser guided artillery which China and Russia uses other than GPS guided artillery. Laser guided artillery can hit moving targets. GPS guided artillery cannot.

Why is Russia just bombing the crap out of everything if their stuff is so accurate?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Different munitions for different purposes.