M247 Sgt York Division Air Defense (DIVAD) System

[StiviGun1]

So what kind of problems did this system had that it couldn't be adopted by the army? What was so unfixable about it?

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 erm....the ENTIRE concept? I mean - the chassis was too slow and HEAVY, the guns were bent due to bad storage, the radar originally designed to work in a PLANE, unable to recognize its own guns or even ground echoes, the turret movement was too slow and unable to move manually, the ammo used was just a bad joke (40mm - as used here - can't penetrate modern armor. No, not even helicopter armor!)

This thing is pure FUBAR. Throw away and start over from scratch

[StiviGun1]

gajustempus Well, from what you say here, it was not the concept that was flawed. The pieces used to bring this concept alive were flawed. They used all those pieces that didn't work (like the radar and guns) mostly because they wanted to reduce costs. And we all know who's fault that was. But I don't understand why you say those 40 mm rounds couldn't pierce armor. The 40 mm round is a very powerful round. Also, here's a video with the guns firing (at ground targets). They seem to

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus fire in a pretty straight line to me. In specially for a gun with such a low rate of fire. Also, the turret also seems to be moving pretty fast. Must faster than the Tunguska's M turret anyway. Here's the link: / watch ? v = EvwCMd4q2AI. Remove the spaces. The biggest problem seems to have been the inadequate radars.

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 the CONCEPT itself is quite okay, yeah. But the realization was....well, we see what's happened.

The parts weren't cheap either - all the most expensive you could buy.

As for traverse speed: Have you ever seen other DIVAD-tanks like the German Gepard? The turrets move more than TWICE as fast.

oh and besides: The York may have fired on ground targets - but it didn't even hit them...

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus Well, I don't know when the instances in which it misses ground targets took place, but in the video I sent you, it managed to hit them. It also shows how straight forward the guns were firing.

Regarding the parts, actually, they were very cheap. The chassis was cheap, the guns were cheap, the radars, everything. And this was the problem. If they had done this properly, the system would've worked.

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 There's a small, dirty secret: The York was presented to several senators - three of them. The first aimed at them, thinking they MIGHT be an enemy tank (failed radar), the second one tried to shoot a drone (missed) with one jammed gun and the third one catched fire due to an ammunition explosion. The biggest joke: All targets were "hit" and exploded....because they were packed full with explosives....

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus Well, this is very doubtful. Such events usually don't go unnoticed. I can't imagine such a system being shown to only 3 senators. Why would this be? Who were those senators? I usually don't trust such info as many questions can be asked about them.

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 take a short peek at this here: watch?v=qNBswoOal7w

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus I've seen that vid already. It was made by that guy, blacktailedefense. He's known for posting such videos.

[gajustempus]

AND - if you'd like to compare the York to something developed at the same time here - take a look at this here:

watch?v=2-kM1qLxp9g

yet it will be replaced by this sweet thingy here within the next few years: watch?v=eEIGKkr68HQ

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus Well, the first one is the Gepard system. It's a good system, but its guns being spaced apart like that pose a flaw. I also noticed that its turret didn't move faster the the York's turret, like you said.

The second one, however, it's a different system. So why is it replacing the mobile Gepard?

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 whilst the gun positions APPEAR to be a flaw, they're quite nicely positioned in practical use. Gepard is proven on several battlefields :)

And looks a bit later in the video - the turret is able of doing a 180° in less than two seconds.

However the entire thing is - though modernized and optimized all the time - around 40 years old. That's why the new guns are introduced. And: Whilst these are fixed, there're mobile variants already - like on frigates built today.

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus I did watch the entire movie. The Gepard's turret doesn't rotate faster than the York's. Watch the video I sent you.

Regarding the C-RAM, what land mobile platforms are they putting it on?

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 Current plans are to put the turrent onto either a smaller variant of the Leo2 chassis or the Puma - the last one is more likely from the reports I heard. K.O.-criteria is the ability to airlift via A400M

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus Well, it will be a very good short range air-defense system. But it would be even better if they equipped with with missiles as well.

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 why? That's what we have our Roland for :)

C-RAM is for close-range defense, Roland for middle to wide range.

If you use specialized weapon platforms, you get experts on every level - whilst if you take an "universal" platform, you receive a vehicle like the "Bradley"....not too bad in every role, but also not good at any either :P

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus The Tunguska M is a system that uses both guns and missiles in one platform. And it's a very good weapon system.

[gajustempus]

watch?v=5ZdyZPVwvho

here you go :)

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus Yeah, thank for the vid. Very cool :) The Roland seems like a very good system. And unlike the Tunguska, it also has an automatic reloading system. Very cool. However, if you compare it with the Tunguska M, the Tunguska M seems to be better. I never understood how the Russians could build so good weapon systems and at a low cost.

[gajustempus]

@StiviGun1 there's alot good stuff from russia - I personally LOVE the freight planes - heavy cargo and able to start and land even on sand and soil. Unmatched advantage

The Tunguska looks a bit like our Gepard. A variant is also fitted with a Dual Stinger missile launcher. Yet I think the more you put onto a single mobile platform, the harder the logistics get, the more the enemy destroys and the more can break down...

[StiviGun1]

@gajustempus Maybe you're right. However, the Russians built systems that have missiles and guns only as well. The Tor M1, the 9K33 Osa and others. But for a smaller country that can't afford to build large numbers of such systems, I guess it's better to have guns and missiles installed on separate platforms. A Gepard version also equipped with missiles besides its guns, would be cool though.

[AudieHolland]

Or they should have simply stolen and copied the plans to the Soviet-built ZSU-23-4 "Shilka" which made mincemeat of low-flying Israeli fighter planes during the Yom Kippur War of 1973.

[1G3001]

The whole point was to save money by using off the shelf parts and trying to make them work using software. But the parts were poor at their jobs. The F16 Radar wasn't designed for that much ground clutter. The Korean war era surplus tank shells couldn't take the strain of stopping the 5 ton turret. The Gear Teeth kept being ripped out when the turret locked on to a target. The Army kept upping the requirements from stationary helicopters to finally close range jets. No way to make it work.

[BuzzDyou]

I was there, the DIVAD system in itself was flawed from the very beginning. I would point most of the blame at the TI (Texas Instruments) "off-the-shelf" procurement. This thing was supposed to be able to find up to 48 aerial objects, determine of which were enemy, and start firing at the most threatening, shoot-it-down, then proceed to the next "enemy target" so on...

I was also at Ft Bragg, NC when they were test-firing, on the range, it was pretty bad ass. The Bofors twin 40's,awesome!!

[WASPfreak]

The sergeant york was not made to work because they tried to cram too much technology into it, resulting in spectacular and embarassing failures.

[barkon]

Funny, the Gepard seems to work. Why couldn't we make the York work? We should probably make something else to name after Sgt. York; his legend deserves better.

[Magni56]

Oh god, this thing. If there's one Pentagon procurement programme you can call dark comedy, it's this.

Especially as they picked just about the worst contender out of the applicants. Afaik, there was a working system from one of the applicants that put the turret of a german Flakpanzer Gepard on the chassis of the M48. And they had made it work already before handing in the application.

[fanofrhymeswithstar]

Its showing both the XM236 and XM247

[metalrod23]

This is the weapon that confused a fart fan in a portable toilet for a target-and blew the shit out of it .

[1138thz]

@metalrod23

At Aberdeen the M247 was known as the 'turf master' early in the program. It always had a problem locking on to a target...so they started hanging radar targets on the targets to help it out. Maybe they should have just bought a license to build German Flugabwehrkanonenpanzer (Gepards). Hell they could have just planted the German turrets on M48 hulls and added rotary shocks to road wheels 1,2 & 6 to help it keep up with M1A1 tanks and M2 Bradleys (they'd be too lame otherwise)

[c4blew]

@1138thz Actually Raytheon proposed pretty much that! They opted to use the dutch version of the Gepard (PRTL) adapted for the M48 chassis! The XM246 seen in the Video (0:00-0:05 and 0:29-0:32) was pretty similar to the Gepard aswell! It also used the 35mm Oerlikon Guns except that General Dynamics mounted them side-by-side and used the radar and fire control systems of their Phalanx CIWS! It was way better than the Ford entry in testing but due to obscure reasons the XM247 won...sadly!

[Frankfurter99]

The Sgt. York did a fine job of hitting ground targets! Well as long as you could run the target over, the M48 chassis used on the system was great, the turret that Ford Aerospace build on the other hand was very expensive scrap metal. It also made an excellent paper weight at 62 tons. We never had a paper get away with that sucker parked on it! As an additional benefit, they stunk to high heaven as well.

[Fox111one111eleven1]

Uh, no they shouldn't have built it. It was so worthless it couldn't hit a stationary ground target. It was nothing more than pure defense contractor pork.

[upyr1]

should have built thisone