Added: 1 year ago
From: arronlee33
Views: 7,013
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (12)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Bad copy of the CAESAR that equips my country (France)

  • We should use those as city buses :)

  • but the crew STILL has to leave the protected cabin..

    not saying this is a bad system, it´s just not as advanced as the swedish ARCHER artillery system wich is automatically loaded so that the crew never have to leave the cabin.

  • @Skuggan84

    Well, everything in this World voice down to the Budget.

  • @arronlee33 yeah, it does..

    but i dont think the swedish ARCHER system is much more expensive then this actually.. they have tried to keep the price to a minimum.

    i know that australia, finland and denmark has been interested in it, and sweden and norway has already ordered it..

    it´s planned to enter service from next year..

    but as you say, these days it´s all about the price tag. ATMOS might be a little cheaper.

  • @Skuggan84

    The Archer Artillery System is about US$4.2million a piece.

  • @arronlee33 ok.. and whats the price for the ATMOS?

    it´s fun to compare prices..

    since everything is about money it´s nice to compare wich gives the most bang for the buck..

    i know quite a lot about the capabilities of the ARCHER but not much about ATMOS, but it´s quite obvious that ATMOS is a much simpler construction..

    reminds more of a traditional towed gun then a modern artillery system. but that doesnt have to be a bad thing. less things that can go wrong might make it more reliable.

  • @Skuggan84

    Sorry, slight correction.

    Archer Artillery System is about US$6million.

    ATMOS is about US$4million.

  • @arronlee33 ok, so the ARCHER has a 50% higher price..

    not bad if you look at all the capabilities it have.

  • @arronlee33

    Norway paid 11,7 million from a single Archer back in 2009, that price probably included spares etc... still not very cheap.

  • @Skuggan84

    I would have both. Protected cabin for crew that also reload the gun. Then they can keep their jobs and gun maintenance would be less (due to less mechanical and electronic parts).

  • @Skuggan84 Or the South African G6-52

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more