The Economics of Artillery Shells in the Russo-Ukrainian War
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2023
- Download Warpath using my link bit.ly/3QbhAlr and explore the best military game with 30 million people!
Unguided artillery shells are arguably one of the most important weapons on the battlefield. But how many artillery shells Ukraine needs, how many shells are produced around the world, and why the equation is not just about the number of shells that each side has, is #NotWhatYouThink #NWYT
Music:
Fractured Paintings - Trevor Kowalski
What Do You Know - Enigmanic
As History Unfolds - Christoffer Moe Ditlevsen
Thyone - Ben Elson
No Stone Unturned - Brendon Moeller
The Dropout - Guy Copeland
Ostinato - Vieveri
Cloak - Christoffer Moe Ditlevsen
3 AM - Lennon Hutton
Virginia Highway - Tigerblood Jewel
One Last Drama - Philip Ayers
Footage:
Select images/videos from Getty Images
Shutterstock
Ukrainian Ministry of Defense
Russian Ministry of Defense
US Department of Defense
Note: "The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
Select References:
www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...
www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/us...
www.wsj.com/amp/articles/amer...
news.yahoo.com/us-plans-tripl...
www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...
www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/...
www.ft.com/content/75ee9701-a...
Download Warpath using my link bit.ly/3QbhAlr and explore the best military game with 30 million people!
Listen, can you give the measurements in metric please instead of freedom units? Nobody outside the US knows what a pound is. And, come on, Americans need to know what a kilo is, it's 2023.
@@tophat593just watch stuff that's outside of America, this is for Americans
We overlay it in metric, which I think solves that problem. Majority of our audience is in the US, so we are simply catering to our audience 😉
What are your sources for this information? Please list your sources.
@@tophat593if people cant convert units in 2023, there is something wrong with everybody
History repeats itself: there was the "Shell Crisis of 1915", now there appears to be a "Shell Crisis of 2023"
No, shit sherlock resources are very limited.
Artillery is just very good
This shortage is dwarfed by 1915 amounts. They fired over a billion shells in ww1.
@@tommygun5038
yes, but the production wramped up quickly and went from "a lot" to "insane"
in the frist week of the battle of the somme in mid 1916 the british fired around 1,5 million shells on a frontline with a width of only a few km - that is about 2,5 shells every second hitting the ground for day and night for 7 days
this is hard to imagine nowadays
Maybe history repeats its self when our green party drags us into war with russia again...
Another thing with the Excalibur: The first shell fired is the most important one. When the first shell lands on the enemy they tend to run away and hide. Therefore you want to score a direct hit with the first shell but that is highly unlikely with an unguided shell. You need to fire several shell to tune the gun to hit the intended target but then the target has already taken cover. With an Excalibur the enemy does not have time to run away
But it does cost as much as 35 shells - and you can do a LOT of damage with 35 dumb 155mm shells
@@occamraiser but if those 35 shells miss their intended target, then you wasted 35 shells. Both precision shells and unprecise munitions have their use on the battlefield
@@occamraiserthe entire premise of such incredible accuracy is twofold, 1 - hit your enemy with a kill shot the first shell, thus no ability for them to respond. 2 - be able to leave your shooting posture (ie pack up and move out with the artillery gun) and evacuate the area before the enemy can locate your artillery and engage via counter-battery fire, presumably with artillery that wasn’t taken out by your first shot. And a 3rd bonus is extending the lifetime of a barrel, thus having higher in-theatre availability of firepower, and spending less on barrel manufacturing and maintenance. Taking those factors into account, the Excalibur shells more than pay for themselves. It’s a weird economic concept to be sure, but it will lead to victory on the battlefield, by some combination of destroying your enemy or bankrupting them if they don’t have equivalent accuracy to respond.
As another poster mentioned, both guided and unguided shells have their place on the battlefield, but unguided shells simply cannot perform some of the tasks that high-accuracy shells can.
Not mentioned in this video is that the Excalibur shells have a range of up to 60 km while maintaining that 3 meter precision. Being able to hit your enemy’s artillery at a range they simply cannot match means saving absolutely vital soldier’s lives and gunnery equipment too, like a boxer with a 3 foot reach against an opponent who has a 2.5 foot reach. The short-armed boxer *always* has a risk of being hit before he can even land a damaging punch.
I don't know about other artillery systems but the PzH 2000 can fire up to 5 rounds to arrive simultaneously at the target.
@@michaelgoetze2103you can’t correct aim until they actually hit though
I worked for 10 years of green field infrastructure construction in mainland Europe. I have never been on a site where we didn't find at least one unexploded shell from WWII. Just so you understand how common is this.
They are still finding unexploded artillery rounds and other ammunition in France from WW2.
Nice, for your input, though what does it really contribute - Nothing. A Big Fat Zero.
Meh. Europe, always at war
If you are in the right region of France, you will find a lot of WW1 rusty shells too. And they sometimes are filled with chemical weapons ... We still have a lot of land unsuitable for agriculture due to that in my region close to Verdun
As a former artillery man... this was fascinating. Knew very little of the maintenance and logistics information.
Answer is A
Hows your hearing
The fact that this man got sponsored by a war game, while talking about an ongoing war is just nuts
🤣🤣
It just shows that the interests of his audience are shooting stuff not global politics.
@@occamraiserthat's dumb. Its definitely both.
Why are you surprised ? Companies are getting rich due to this war. Do you think they are fighting for freedom?
Improvise adapt overcome
The fact that even with all the advanced tech deployed in the Ukraine front it all boils down to trench warfare and artillery shelling, just like the 1910's is pretty interesting.
When the infantry stop moving forward they start moving down. Once they stop moving down they start moving across.
Unfortunately all modern military doctrine still revolves around digging a hole to keep yourself alive. It's the cheapest and most reliable method of protection.
Artillery just happen to be the cheapest and most reliable way of countering it.
I don’t expect this will change even given another 80 years.
'all advanced tech' - what? look at Baghdad in 2003, libya in 2011, where US fired 100 tomahawks in one night destroying all libyan bases. At any given point in time USA can fire 2000 tomahawk missiles that are kept on currently active ships at any given target around the globe. UA war in 90% of cases doesnt involve high tech but soviet era weapons
Well it's because neither is using air assets or can't. No one has gotten air superiority. With it, trenches would warfare would not be a thing.
Because Ukraine had little air force that can secure their airspace while Russian air force is much larger but sucks with very little guided missiles and munitions to make any significant gains in this war, so both sides had no options but go back to WWI style.
The advanced tech given by the West is scarce, unfortunately. It makes the difference technologically. But still a lot of artillery and planes and air defence are USSR made. Some modernized, some not. So definitely Ukraine needs more of advanced tech from the West for a decisive win. By the way, I live there and I appreciate air defence help from US and EU, it is much better than a year ago
Very good information, except one thing, you can replace a M777A2 barrel on the battlefield. I did one at FOB Kushmond in Afghanistan with a wrecker crane. Tube weight is only 3500 or so lbs. About the weight of a mid size car. The tube was deliver via Chinook (cargo bay). And we did the whole swap out in the field within a few hours. It is also much easier logistically to move a tube than a whole howitzer. Can have it delivered in one day, whole howitzer takes 3 days to move from base to base on average out to combat bases. I was a 91F, weapons/artillery mechanic in the Army. Deployed to Afghanistan in 2010-2011. Loving the channel btw!
All guess work about the Russian shell production.
The latest I heard was that Russia produces somewhere between 5 to 8 million new shells a year, but actually nobody in the west knows the actual Russian capacity, and Russia has been expanding it's weapons and ammunition production massively.
Buying shells abroad is a possibility, but I seriously doubt that it's a necessity to keep Russia in the fight.
You don't have to be that clever to figure their production rates, if they make or acquire them they shot them. If fire rates drop it is clear production and acquisition is down. It is not guess work
It takes much longer to build something than it takes to destroy it.
America and UK arms industry noises intensify
@@raphaelcaldwell3831 brrr
That's entropy.
Marriage
Unless it can effectively protect itself like AGI
This was very well explained and the research staff did well to track down and take the regular person through the entire subject and storyline. Bravo.
The stat of how much artilairy is being produced and used sounds like it was business creating demand so they can increase pricing...
US Machine Shops have more profitable heavy turning & forging jobs in their plate - like refurbing Mine Heavy Equipment, OTR Diesels & Trucks & Rail.
Ukraine got themselves suckered into this scam by NATO & Nuland.
They can find their way out by themselves.
20k shots fired with one Barrel. Thats what I call german engineering.
Yeah, German engineering... I call Leopard 2 German engineering, and good for Russian target practice.
Volkswagen. Das Auto.
@@ozymandiasultor9480 When you lose 500 T-72's with all souls you sleep, but when Ukraine loses 12 Leopards with no crew loss you cope some real shit.
@@pvt.potato1943 Sure, on those 12 Leopards add 2500 other tanks, including that "mighty" Challenger... Russia has 12,000 tanks and has the ability to make 80 tanks per month...Ukraine has to beg and Europe is getting tired of that clown and beggar. Soon Ukies will have nothing. My country is in NATO but we gave them no weaponry, not a single billet, because Ukraine is not in NATO so we are not obliged to help them, and second, we know all too well what kind of junta the USA put in power via that coup in 2014, so we will not help them. You, you help them and in the process destroy the economy of your country by listening to your master, that militaristic plutocracy, the USA.
@@kaycee5115 too many opponents
I don’t think anyone would question the quality of their weapons
A forging line for making 155mm shell costs around 12million Euro and takes around 18~24 months for building and installation. This cost does not including the ancillary parts of the line including turning, hot stepping, billet cutting or furnace heating. This is just for the shell body. Not including filling, fuses etc. This time frame is an accelerated time frame and does not assume you are dealing with a typical government department or with German machine tool companies which can EASILY add 2 plus years to the time frame and still not get anywhere.
This may or may not be from personal experience.
Improving the barrel life can be achieved by installing zirconia spiral groove liners, spraying teflon lubricants onto the shells as they are loaded or spraying it into the barrel as its being loaded, graphite can work in a similar way, water cooling the barrel to keep the metal cooler during sustained operating can also help. TEL or tetraethylelead once added to leaded gasoline can also be used as a barrel lubricant as the deposited soft lead acts as a sacrificial bore liner to reduce scrubbing losses as the shells are shoved down the barrel. A barrel liner made of chromium cobalt nickel copper alloy can also be used to refurb the old barrels.
I love how you sneak your bias into the videos
He wouldn't be a NATO puppet without doing that.
95% of western media is 110% sucking Ukraine's D right now, no cap. I expect almost every western source to be fully biased towards Ukraine, so this is no exception.
Every human being has biases, yours are as obvious with this post
The NATO country's plans all seem to revolve around gaining air superiority (or near superiority) allowing the use of precision, air launched missiles and bombs. They have all gotten away from planning and stockpiling for the possibility of heavily contested air space not allowing this, requiring the use of high amounts of artillery fire instead. Like the Spanish Civil War I think the Russo-Ukraine War is giving us a peak into what near-peer fighting will be like this century. If we can learn the right lessons.
NATO, and especially the US, plans to fight it's wars in other countries.
The idea is to sever the chain of death as early as possible. Don't out shoot the artillery, blow up the supply truck, or the command post ordering the strikes, or the factory making the ammo.
Wargamming did recently suggest they'd run out of anti-ship missiles before the Chinese ran out of boats though.
Only thing is that if all of NATO was involved then there is no airforce in the world that would be able to contest it. Just the US alone has the largest af in the world and has some of the most advanced aircraft in the world taboot
I wouldn't compare NATO airpower to Ukrainian and Russian. NATO'S doctrine is Multi Domain warfare. They wouldn't get into a static large artillery slugfest like this.
In both Conventional and Guerilla Warfare NATO would quickly slaughter Russia, China, North Korea and Syria
But because NATO's plans revolve around air superiority, they hav developed aircraft for that. If the US let the F-22 and F-35 off the chain, they would have air superiority in a week, allowing for ground-pounding with air to ground munitions, both guided and dumb bombs. The challenge is they cannot do that, because it would require a declaration of war with Russia.
To be fair WWII artillery was a lot less accurate than modern ones so they needed considerably more shells to fire for the same effect, so it’s not surprising that there are far less in stockpiles and being produced today. And from what I’ve seen which may not be accurate another thing that seems to be using up a lot of unguided shells is that both sides seem to be just hammering the trench lines on both sides like it’s WW 1 all over again. That continual harassment fire has to use up a lot of ordnance.
Moreover modern howitzers have computers that calculate trajectory
So wrong
Bill Clinton destroyed our surplus
There were 85 plants in 1944 today there are 6.
A hidden advantage the Ukrainians have is more accurate artillery. This is a combination of better trained gun crews and Fire Direction and Control teams - along with more accurate Western howitzers. They simply do not have to fire as many shells as the Russians to achieve the desired effect.
@@colincampbell767they don’t actually have meaningfully more accurate artillery.😅
Finland can and have been producing 155mm artillery cells since the beginning of the Ukraine war and before. There are many factories like legendary Lapua ammunition factory. Currently it's been owned by Norwegian Nammo, but it's as Finnish factory as it can be.
Probably reason for ownership has been ability to get into Nato markets before Finland was in Nato.
You probably don't know that the one who guaranteed the borders of Finland after WW II (and other countries) was the then Soviet Union! And Finland can create big problems by joining nato... just as weapons were sent to Ukraine and nationalism was incited and the West thought that it would have a stick against Russia, which will soon fall and they will have a place to parasitize on others.. .but he miscalculated...it was enough to act and guarantee the non-expansion of NATO further to the east, but the US goal was obviously not to settle the situation and have peace (they should go there to fight and die in large numbers, heroes, when they basically provoked it, but it flows there for their interests Slavic blood (both Ukrainians and Russians)... and we know it.
You do know that just one of Russia’s many arms factories produces more ammo than all the European NATO countries combined
Nammo is a joint venture between Finland and Norway.
@@mickvonbornemann3824 I don't think so. Russian production was about 2M shell in 2023 when Europe is around 1.3M this year. The difference is, Russian shells are mostly 122mm with pathetic range of 11km, when western shells are mostly 155mm with 40km+ range.
Ukraine can then easily threaten Russian positions when Russia can use their artillery mostly to pulverize buildings and cities. Because inefficient tactics and low range, their demand is still much higher than production. It seems that usable stocks are quite well depleted.
Another difference is, Russia have prepared for this war and kept up production for that reason. West, however, have been on peace time mode, and only recently started to ramp it up to match demand. Those who believe Russian claims that Nato have prepared this attack to Russia can ask why they haven't been producing the weapons needed for a job.
To be straight: It is absolutely possible to produce 500.000 shells per month within a time frame of 6 months. The problem is ONLY the political will to do so. There is sufficient floor space available in every country. The utilities can be updated. The manufacturers know exactly how many presses, furnaces, robots, lathes and other equipment they would need for this. All this can be bought, delivered and installed within 6 months. If wanted.
"Rhein Metall" has got to be the most badass name for an artillery shell company.
yeah its like rain metal
It doesn't end on artillery shells. They also make the barrels for Leopards, air defences, and produce some tanks of their own.
A wonderful river in Germany.
@@donutgaming88 never thought of it that way. thanks
Rheinmetall - Producing Stuff to kill Russians since 1914.
A figure that ought to be included are the estimated number of artillery shell that get destroyed when ammunition storage depots get blown up
To be fair to the manufacturers, the "barrel lifespan" is against the rated accuracy, so at 4500 rnds it will start drifting and need repair, but hit up to 15k rnds before failure becomes a risk... that said I wanna spin up an ammunition plant and even cheap ammo will make BANK
I'm with you all the way collect some investors and let's do it.
@@MarvinSmith-wx1cl Merchants of death? Enjoy.
then you lose all your money when the war ends..
Shell, tank, red tape. Shell beats tank, tank beats red tape, red tape beats shell (production).
Thank you so much for adding metric units as text ❤
bro estimated the counter artillery duo's percentage by the amount of footage posted online
He gets all his footage from /r/combatfootage and /r/ukraine LUL, where every Russian footage is disallowed or downvoted so you wont be seeing it anyways xD
I've always wondered about this. If WW3 did kick off but in a non nuclear way, both sides would run out of ammunition pretty quickly. I mean, Ukraine is just 1 country fighting for its existence and its bleeding the west dry of ammunition. If Nato, china and USA decided to join in, there simply wouldn't be enough to go around.
Same with Aircraft and missiles, during WW2 planes were produced in their tens of thousands, right now in the UK we have 26 F35's. Not exactly an armada.
Even in WW2 we had "ramp up production" of arms. If we needed to, we could build more, and way faster. Look up how fast the US could produce a tank between the start and end of the war. Then look a the total amount of ships, aircraft, guns, uniforms that were made...
They would run out quickly but also the mass production of ammunition would start like it did in ww2.
WW 2 planes were basically flying cars with a big gun stuck to it and sometimes a bigger trunk for bombs.
Modern planes like an F-35 don't need to be produced in such numbers, nor do they need that much ammo. All missiles are 1-shot one kill if in target and an F-35 has such advanced stealth and computer targeting systems that if your shot isn't landing before the enemy even knows what hit them you are doing something awfully wrong. On top of that their ground strike objectives are destroying anti-air and bases, arfields and factories across the whole depth of enemy territory in single precision airspace penetration, not just bombing the hell out of enemy close to the fronlines in a contested airspace
NATO would attack with precision weapons, quickly removing Russia's already limited capability to fight conventional war. Russia would either surrender or launch nukes.
in a real war, the whole industry is basically rerigged to produce arms. russia is only 120 million people, minus 1 million educated that left, and some hundreds of thousands of men injured or dead, there is no way russia can outproduce nato that is close to 1 billion people and with basically most of the cash and competence on the planet, friends in japan, south korea and australia would also assist.
Barrels are inspected with a bore scope and the chambers have a gauge that lets them be measured. This is done on "Effective Round" count. That is based on some rounds or charges are harder than others. The checks are time consuming but if done correctly will limit changing major repairs. A simple barrel change is not a big deal, the recoil devices is where things get tricky.
Says old mate that’s never manned an artillery piece
@@spannaspinnaexcept he's correct. It's called a "pullover gauge" in the US. When I was a butterbar, we had M101A1s with tubes from just after the Korean War ended. The "Smoke" said the gauges would fall through they were so loose.
Well you would need a replacement barrel.
meanwhile Ukraine Armed Forces over use their barrels 5x over recommended.
"WE DONT NEED NO STINKING GAGES"
(+ they go in more easy)
@@KermitFrazierdotcom Yes German engineering at its finest. Artillery barrels last 5 times their expected life.
This is surprisingly accurate and relevant. Thank you.
Most likely the Russo have jammed GPS in the battle space area meaning the Excalibur is useless, since it doesn’t have guidance systems on board like infrared imaging tracking and targeting.
New Warpath update; they'll include limited ammunition supplies.
Same old story. My father participated in the Louisiana maneuvers before WWII as a bomber pilot and calculated the bomb stockpile of US would last 2 weeks at the consumption rate they used. Got information in national newspaper, did not endear him with superiors.
this is just like, "I heard it from a friend, who heard it from a friend" - so is this your Real Father, or is it your Friends Father that you heard it from??? or did you hear it from you friend who said his father said that???
Good explanation 👏
Barrel wear is also critically affected by rate of fire which translates to heat within the barrel, particularly on bearing surfaces (the lands of the rifling) and, most critically, in the chamber. Heat reduces the durability of the metal. Got it too hot and you reduce the temper and wear out whatever lining might have been added, if any. Reduction in the rate of fire, thus allowing the barrel to remain cooler, greatly extends the life of a barrel. That's why there were water jackets on WWI machine guns, to keep the barrel cool during extended fire. If you always fire from a cold barrel, you get get multiples of the expected life (maybe 10x), but in combat that is useless since it puts you at like six rounds per hour. Also, IIRC, "shoot and scoot" is 3-5 rounds rapid at the same target, not just one round.
You can't compare current munitions production with WW2 production.
WW2 was an existential threat that caused the US to prioritize war production over economic production
True. If some politicians today say we are going to increase the military budget to 40% of our GDP, he will be sent to psychiatric treatment center after making the speech.
Enemy troops didn't even set foot on US soil. WW2 wasn't an existential threat. It was a ticket to world domination for USA.
@@Test-bi5rgrussian as fuck all but the us knew they could milk an annexed Germany for everything
ww1 wasn't existential and production was insane
Also better mechanisation etc means the same number of shells should be easier
@@BigPimp238 What people forget is that not only was quality control (For WW1 shells in particular) much worse than it is today but those old shells would have been far simpler to manufacture than today's shells produced from modern alloys and filled with electronics
EFC stands for Equivalent Full Charge.
There have been some rounds that haven’t been EFC=1. So that factor needs to be calculated.
But take a Bradley, Training rounds are both ballistically matched to service rounds and have an EFC equal to 1.
So 1000-A940 rounds are tracked as 1000 rounds EFC.
I had to track this stuff back on Active Duty. We transitioned from old gun cards to tracking online like tanks.
Thank YOU for your service!
👻☠️🗽💯🙏
Great info ! Now I understand the artillery shortage much better.
Dang. Kudos for giving such a thorough picture. I never would've thought how dangerous the aftermath could be. What with scattered explosives still being a danger when the war ends. . .
500 to 3000 USD per 155mm shell, 168.000 shells per month after production ramp-up in the West. So we are talking about a minimum of 84 Million USD each month for the tube artillery munitions alone! One Excalibur shell comes at 100.000 USD, greetings from USS Zumwalt I guess. That war is some Keynesian cash trap.
Damnnnn!!! Explains why domestic (store brand) cheddar currently represents the price of an imported French soft
Fromage D’affinois…
I’ll be honest tho- will all these high $$$ numbers being thrown around & then literally blow up & burned… each being more than my annual income makes me feel REAL low on the Totem Pole- Slummin’It
And i work hard for my money too… no handouts. Kinda sickening at times😒
wars a racket
It seems that the similarities to WW2 are more identical than ever. Production and logistics combined with superior technology leads to victory…after grueling attrition.
Welcome to industrial war...
Ugh the odds are in Russia's favor then. They'll sacrifice there reserves of people for victory, they proved that 10x over in ww2. 300k ain't nothing to 12 million.
Except russia won with artillery back then
@@NeostormXLMAX
Yeah, and unfortunately Russia will most likely win this time around too. Although it's nearly impossible to get good, accurate info on what's going on in this war, there are reports from some military experts that Ukraine is running out of soldiers due to the trained soldiers being killed or injured long ago, and now they are throwing untrained men into the meat grinder.
They are reportedly trying to get neighboring countries to return the men who fled there to avoid the war. Supposedly they are throwing older and unhealthy men into the front lines at this point, and perhaps even women.
and the winner is also known as in WW2, one side knows very well how to defeat nazis
who ever did this report is a great person! It is filled with the type of information that I would enjoy in a report many numbers and facts no BS.
Can you imagine the amount of economic activity, oil, metal, machining tools, cutter bits, wiring, chemicals & other inputs needed to supply the entire global military industrial complex //
It actually blew my mind when you said that within 150 feet of the impact of the 155 mm shell “M975” is considered lethal n you will most likely die.. and injuries from as far as 400 feet away. Like that is a BIG Impact and explosion
There's like 3 radiuses.
Within so many feet the Shockwave kills you, within so many feet the shrapnel kills you, within so many feet the shrapnel can still be traveling at a rate significant enough to injure but likely not kill.
@@Nothing2150 that's correct
So dont charge through artillery/mortar fire??
Rule of thumb: If an explosive is designed to take out armored vehicles, it will also kill infantry.
was in field artillery 71-74, M-109SP w/ 155mm guns. old, bad memory but seems like the lethal radius for a round was 100 meters. if the shrapnel didn't kill you the concussion would. fuses could be set for air burst or impact. trenches and airbursts makes for a bad infantry day one would think. a battalion had 18 guns.
The USA is also providing precision guidance kit or PGK which is basically a smart GPS fuse to turn a normal 155mm shell into a gyided munition. Its $13,000 with a CEP of 30meters so lot better than unguided, if more expensive, but waaay cheeper (and less accurate) than Excalibur.
Isn't providing such technology the same as an act of war against Russia?
@@mattolivier1835nope. Russia already declared war on Ukraine when it invaded. Supporting Ukraine is just that. Support
The Soviets provided North Vietnam with advanced technology at the time and it was not considered an act of war.@@mattolivier1835
The USSR produced millions of shells, tens of thousands of armored vehicles all in anticipation to fight NATO and the West, in the end they ended up using those weapons to fight their own people (Ukraine was also in USSR).
I flippin' love this channel!
Great video! Maybe do another about mortar shells and other munitions used in the war
Look up the WWI figures. The Ukraine requirement of 600,000 per month is well less than WWI production levels. Scale production takes 4 things. 1)transport link- rail, barge, seaport 2) the factory building 3) the machine tools 4) training the workforce. In the US, the bottleneck is the tooling. For example, Haas Automation produces about 700 units per year (as of 2014). I'd estimate, given unlimited funding, about 3 year to ramp up the machine tool manufacture to like 20,000 per year. About 3 to 6 for the other steps (1,2,4 above). The base requirement is about 40 million shells per year, continuously. The peacetime need is just enough to train the artillerymen, 0 to like 20,000, per year. [artillery doesn't need much live fire, accuracy of fire is mostly what suffers without live fire]. Note that the daily unit of fire for a 155mm cannon was 150 shells, per WWII field manual 8. [1943?]. This could be greatly exceeded. Scale production of gun cotton (smokeless gunpowder), shell fuzzes, and cannon primers, is also required, but takes rather less money and time to set up. QC is a major issue, as is safe handlining and shipping of kilo tons of high explosives. This all can be done: we have done it before.
Some zeros are wrong my friend.
operation michel 1918:
"Over 3,500,000 shells were fired in five hours, hitting targets over an area of 400 km2 (150 sq mi) in the biggest barrage of the war, "
Good to see someone is paying attention to the actual numbers. My point is that the current US production CAPABLITY is way too small, in the range of 5000 (2020) to 15000(2024). Should be at like 4 million per month!@@matthiaspenzlin6465
It still worries me that they fixed shell crisis of 1915 by ramping up production to the point where British could fire 800,000 shells/week, but struggle to produce 300,000/month these days, with all the automation.
It's not like half the population is working in defence Industries now, is it?
@MrZauberelefant Yeah, since industry basically does itself, people are now working in offices and in services. For Lloyd George, it took roughly 2 million workers reserved to fix the shell crisis, if I remember correctly.
SAAB ceo talked about this yesterday, they have ramped up production for Nlaw and at4 from 1000 units per year to 4000 this year. But European countries don't want to invest in new production lines and factories don't want to produce without and order, if there was an agreement between them that EU and UK would buy 100 000 of shells the coming years scaling up production wouldn't be an issue.
I really appreciate you putting the "no injuries" warning on the video of the howitzer blowing up. Im sure it was mostly so you don't get demonetized, but personally I really don't want to see footage of people dying
When a gun blow up due to malfunction the user will most of the time lost an eyes or it's life. With a howitzer blowing up like this you can be certain that at least one of the crew either died or will never walk again.
@@alkazarjkdghjd well you're clearly wrong because it very clearly says no injuries
@@jogandsp It's literaly just a sign on the video... nothing backing it.
You can see video of people dying in car accident or worst with the same sign.
@@alkazarjkdghjd and you're literally just saying what you think happened and then immediately accepting it as fact as if you could possibly know.
To your last minute comment on unexploded shells. In germany we are used to evacuations of streets for defusal of old WWII bombs. Especialy in Hamburg it happens at least once a year. They're still frequently found on construction sites.
Great video, loads of valuable data points and statistics that are extremely interesting. Thanks for that 👍🏻
The amount both sides are firing is staggering
Good time to be an arms manufacturer.
Thanks to Putin.
They be ‘Putin on the Ritz’
👏👏👏👍🏼 Thank You for addressing the gun barrel replacement. Some only think of the munitions needed.
Mind boggling that we have to learn about this topic. 😢
Loving your longer videos
Man’s is like best ever teacher school😊
buT iTs NOt wHaT YoU thinK!
If you agree reply
Ukraine is also using 105mm shells, 122mm and 152mm shells in addition to the 155mm shells.
It also received some advanced rounds like SMArt 155 and Bonus that are effective against tanks etc.
In addition to Excalibur also a number of Vulcano guided rounds got delivered to Ukraine.
You forgot about 125 mm and 120 tank shells
@@bytesurfer8651
Just talking about artillery shells, they of course also fire mortars etc.
Ukraine and Russia also are using 125-123 mm shels fired from a MBT in a ballistic trajectory
@@danylokosmyna7115 123 mm? Are you sure?
@@HingerlAlois okay then how about 203 mm artillery shells?
I am surprised how those missiles that ten months ago you said were almost exhausted in Russia, in addition to the lack of precision, continue to hit so well on targets throughout Ukraine and not only on the frontlines... I think it's time for "Not What You Think" to think about it again and try to explain the miracle...
The number and types of missiles russia is using has changed. Obviously they make new ones also. Shaheed drones are making up 65% of strikes
Compared with 20% a year ago. Older missiles are being fired more also.
He can be worng in some points
Russian rockets are able to hit a large immobile supermarket. They are blind to find a small motorized military target.
@@jansix4287 i think it will called shelling I don't think shell hav guidence of were to hit if Russians shelled Odessa then it makes sence
@@knightlord368 A giant immobile grain harbour in Odessa. This didn’t diminish Ukraine’s military capabilities at all.
The precision guidance add-on for dumb rounds is impressive and changes much of the medium range strategies, no?
As always, really appreciate your balance, tone, and approach to every topic. Cheers!
lots of propaganda though
I'd love to hear some ideas for a solution. Sourcing, production, management, logistics, etc.
Good info,
Well presented
Russia is lowering their artillery fires but are increasing their drone use. I don’t think they’re running out, just found other methods
It is insane, but drones are even cheaper and more effective.
@@MetallicRegif you've ever dabbled in the rc community you know how easy it is to make super fast drones
stick cheap camera and some c4 and boom
@@godassasin8097 This is exactly what they are doing. They take one cylinder out of a cluster bomb, strap it to the lightest drones that can carry it and fly it with VR goggles towards the positions.
@@MetallicReg EW is a real thing Mr. armchair general.
@@godassasin8097 LOL "some C4" sticked to a drone will not destroy a Leopard 2. At best the tank will be damaged and abandoned by the surviving crew, which will come back in an Abrams. 😂
My memories of being in an artillery battery for 2 years of National Service:
1. The "dong dong dong" sound of ramming iron pickets with monkey rams, to up the camo net
2. Bloody f**king hot jungle
3. Standing on the trail leg and upping the camo net over the gun
4. Carrying the 155mm dummy round
5. Downloading and uploading stores (sliding pipes, iron pickets, etc) to and from tonner
6. Bloody f**king hot jungle
7. Did I mention the bloody f**king hot jungle?
Are you from 🇹🇼?
Which jungle were you in?
@@shawnryan2197 - Probably Vietnam.
Thank YOU for your service.
🙏🗽💯
@@WJV9 Vietnam doesn't have conscription.
This was extremely informative and interesting honestly. Without propaganda from any side. Just raw data and analysis. Pretty rare these days. Thumbs up.
f you believe the data then yes.
This is clearly biased towards Ukraine, you must be blind to not see that.
Extremely. It has huge misconseptions, for example Western Industry is making weapons for Ukraine. Truth is West given the soon to expire stockpiles to Ukraine and ordered new shiny things, for LOT of money.Huge companies making ammo, tanks, figthers, etc. are booked for 20, TWENTY years. They openly admit this.@@evilleader1991
@@evilleader1991 You can't just say that and have nothing to back it up. I'm willing to agree but you'll have to bring a bit more arguments than that.
I am not gonna write a thesis in the youtube comment section. Just use your brain, Ukraine is always seen a good light from the get-go (aka giving them the benefit of the doubt) while Russia is automatically is seen a negative light when doing this "analysis". You cannot say that this is neutral analysis when these creators are not looking at thing objectively or acting in good faith when doing "analysis" of the Russian situation....@@NRocky94
Thank you for a very informative video!
Love your videos man
Apparently artillery is still the king of the battlefield
Still the king in ex-soviet countries, we don't know what the war would have been if one or the two of the belligerent had a decent airforce.
Until you bring in a sufficient air force ^^, which apparently both Ukraine and Russia lack (not on paper for the second, but the battlefied proves that numbers on a page do not always translate to capabilities on the battlefield).
Especially if neither side has air superiority
Or AA capacity
One of the most educational shorts ever
0:45 what that means is the production volumes in peacetime do not marry up w/wartime requirements.
American : we fought with technology, stealth and presicion
Also America : supply the front line with good ol' artillery
The problem is uncertainty. WW1 was in a stalemate for years and rather suddenly the allies broke through. That can theoretically happen at any time and companies do want to invest in production only for demand to dry up. Governments take on that risk and cost. The shells are pretty stable but tech and war could pass them by nonetheless.
You say that but there is no way these modern companies and modern business capitalists will ever meet the need - if we went to wartime production and started guaranteed purchases - these modern companies would kill our OWN soldiers via war profiteering.
Another war Russia had to win for the allies..
But the breakthrough will only happen after you win the war of attrition and weaken the enemy enough to enable it. For which you need the ammunition. So it's not an option to just sit around hoping for a miracle
allies didnt breakthrough, Germany and AustriaHungary just imploded and their economies broke
Every loosing side in ww1 just because their economy fell apart and had no support from their own people.
Artillery always produces the majority of casualties.
Worked on Howitzers in the Marines, sure you can keep using a barrel if it doesn’t crack, but definitely you will lose so much accuracy that it is not an effective weapon after a couple thousand shells
Thank YOU for your service 🙏
Despite everything Russia can still keep up with ammo production of THE ENTIRE WEST. Just goes to show that after all the mockery and fails we cannot afford to underestimate them.
@@choomaque i think its more that they actually learned their lessons from ww1/2 and kept investing in traditional munitions instead of developing an overreliance on high tech guided ammo
не переживайте, мы справимся как в 1812, 1941, когда вся Европа объединялась против нас. Итог известен.
@@agi1363 ok? Bro I don't speak russian
@@ONI_002ok ok, твои проблемы)
@@agi1363 25 миллионов убитых, действительно справились
Blows my mind (no pun intended) at the cost of some of this Individual Single Rounds… it’s far above the Average Annual Income for most people living in the US (let alone the rest of the World) 😵💫
Wouldn't be suprised if China and India are watching every other big nation going through their supplies and testing their equipment under realistic conditions with kind of a big smile...
I think India is more worried about inventing their first flushing toilet.
I was a Marine 2131, Artillery Maintenance, aka: Gun Doc for the Rock Island Arsenal M-198A Howitzer back in the 90’s.
Ukraine is firing a staggering amount of 155 in my opinion.
Ukraine is firing 110,000 155mm a month, and says it could fire over 500,000 per month if they were available, between a bunch of cannons of course, not sure how many guns they have on the line.
Anyway, as part of my job, me and my fellow leatherneck 2131 used a borescope on our six M-198’s.
A long aluminum Multi section tube you had to put together and slide on these tube guide roller thingys, forgot the actual name of each piece, but you assembled this long tube that was like a colonoscopy for a Howitzer gun tube.
Had mirrors and a light an all that.
We were looking for rifle fouling, wear and tear in the tube.
I’ve never seen it done but I know a gun tube could be “shot out” from firing too much. Screw up the inside of the bore.
But, it’s not just the bore that is an issue. The recoil mechanism needed a lot of “in the field” attention back when I was in.
Maybe the M777 recoil mechanism is very good, but the M-198’s recoil mechanism was aging in the 90’s, had a good amount of issues.
Issues like a hanging gun, where a gun fires, recoils to the rear, but fails to move back forward again, or fails to go back into battery.
On the flip side of that coin, sometimes you’d fire the gun, it would recoil to the rear, and then it would Slam back into battery so hard that it lifted the trail spades out of the ground.
Was constantly messing with the nitrogen pressures in the M45 recoil mechanism in the M-198 howitzer.
11:40
BAE Systems says the 777 can fire 2500 rounds before barrel replacement, looks like Ukraine put that number to the test.
But if they started shooting at that rate, the barrels will be requiring replacement constantly. this would mean more cannons required also.
No, they need more shells because they have artillery equipment that is not used because of the laack of shells
Very informative, logistics win wars.
Imagine if Ukraine able to order 155mm shells from China.
It would be like :
Ukraine : "can you give me 1 million shells a month...?"
China : "check"
Ukraine : "what about 3 million a month...?"
China : "check"
Ukraine : "how did you do that...?"
China : "China"
Imagine if Russia able to order shells from China.
German Rheinmetall currently produces almost twice as much artillery shells as the entire USA combined
🤣 As if?! I need to look this up XD
@@Mr.Dodo- Have you even seen the video? As of the video, the USA produces 24k per month, while Rheinmetall already produces almost 40k per month. But now it's a bit more because they now produce 24/7
A lot of defense contractors are making really good money selling ammos!
If you can't beat high volumes of unguided shells, I know a few Battleships laying around that were good at that kind of thing. ;)
A few weeks ago I watched a similar video in which a source mentioned Russia has an arsenal of 10 million shells and could keep up the war for another year easily.
If true then they must have a major problem with supply routes as Russian soldiers on the front lines have been complaining about shortages for many months
I Read Russia producing 200,000 artillery shells a month right now
I learn so much when I watch your videos.
Thanks a bunch.
And the quality is more than on point.
A lot of recent footage shows Ukraine using HIMARS against small artillery guns because they can't get the smaller pieces in range without being destroyed. That is an expensive use of rockets against old small guns.
still effective use economics wise. One GMLRS rocket costs 150k$, whereas artillery piece (even old Soviet one) costs way more
Depends on what you consider expensive, what if that gun kills soldiers or takes out tanks , Ifvs, apcs I mean it’s hard to consider cost for most things
You can't compare the WW2 era to today
WW2 was a total war where the entire economy of the US was re-tooled for war production
Today we rely of stockpiling where low production accumulates over time when wars aren't happening, with flexibility to increase production if a hot war breaks out.
That's what's happening now, the stockpiles are emptying and the US is ramping up production to war time levels.
Also buying all the Soviet era munitions on the market is as much about keeping them out of Russian hands as it is about supply Ukraine
Screw "I NEED MORE BOULETS" guy, Ukraine needs more "boulets".
Having Warpath as a sponsor, even saying "you never run out of resources even if you die", is a disgrace. Sharpen up!
Damn, just shows artillery is really the king of battles. It doesnt get enough credit how many casualties artillery causes
Although crucial, artillery's near useless without any defensive lines behind it. Sure, the enemy will sustain casualties, but once they've crossed the line of barrage or kill zone, something needs to be there to repel them, or at least try to. At the moment (so were told), we cannot occupy an area without having boots on the ground.
In the foreseeable future, AI-units will be able to occupy and control territory, rendering human-infantry units more expendable. However, it will most certainly be countered with AI-automated artillery and/or AI-guided "smart" shells.
I do wonder if the US has also been sending Ukraine M1156 Precision guidance kits. These have been in service since 2015 and had excellent results when tested in Afghanistan. All reports (except the official test results) suggest that while not quite as accurate as Excalibur shells with a M1156 fuse reliably hit with a 5m CEP. It is essentially just a modified fuse with control surfaces so it can be fitted to pretty much any standard 155mm shell. It also costs (last reported cost) $13,541 per kit and is made in much larger quantities than Excalibur.
Long term these seem like the most viable guided artillery solution to aid Ukraine and shore up US guided munitions stockpiles
that sounds like a _way_ better idea. A tiny relative cost increase and way more effective without much need for built in guidance.
@@redoneteron5933 $13k increase on the cost of a $500-1000 shell?
Tested in Afghanistan? Probably on wedding parties and hospitals, tipical for the US. Talibans will use it better.
the problem that is uses GPS. Same as JDAM. THe problem is these aren't sandal wearing enemy. Russians are actively jamming even spoofing GPS signal, which is easy, it's a very very low strengtth signal. Easy to jam, ot spoof.
Only the expensive cruise missiles can penetrate Russian side deeper, using Loran-C. Russians use GLONASS. Both are strong signal, hard to jam, and can be coded.
Yet, if we provide them wifi they could have attacked the entire Russian fleet. @@MolnarG007
Trusting Lockheed Martin is like getting medical advice from an opioid salesman.
Они весма прогорели иза пондеми навёрстывают фигасовые потери уроды аморальные.
It’s wild how much we’ve diminished our industrial capacity so much.
That's what happens when you export labor to china.
NAFTA killed north america.
Little c4 drones with ai will be the 'new' artillery shells after the first year of a war anyways. I think any near-peer war will result in non-nuclear mutually assured destruction anyway (unless one side can actually doninate early). The weapons are so powerful and advanced that the lethality margins will lead to trench warfare earlier and little expolsive drones that can be flown into a trench will be the move. Never served a day in the military myself, but look how confident I am.
the largest bottleneck in european ammunition production is simply regulation and stigma. i know some very wealthy people who would love to found a ammo producing company (the machines are even available) but they won't invest in such a project because taking on the legal obstacles is very time consuming and expensive while ammo producers in my country (germany) are constantly badmouthed as warmongers.
Stop making up rumors. Nobody’s badmouthing ammunition production and there’s no need to losen regulations on the production of explosives.
@@jansix4287 i'm not making up anything. try to get a ammo plant running in germany and tell me again how regulations don't need to be loosened
@@Moimus You’re not supposed to get an ammunition plant running where there’s anything nearby that could be harmed by an explosion. Also we don’t need more factories. The current rate at which Russians are dying is absolutely fine.👌
7 ads in 5 minutes on the video. Got to love it
during ww1 both sides combined produced around 1.5 000 000 000 shells, in the period between 1914 and 1918
true those shells were no doubt less complex, but they also didn't have the tech we do today, just manpower
Lower safety standards
And no precision guidance. Most WW1 shells just plowed the earth. Ukraine doesn’t fire unless it has spotted a target by drone footage. Every attack is a guaranteed hit on target.