It seems timid enough. It’s is small, black-orange and not dangerous? Completely wrong, if we talk about NEMO from Patria. We found it at IDEX 2017 in AbuDhabi. The state-of-the-art company PATRIA, with its innovative and unique mortar system NEMO, offered a much-respected and highly frequented exhibition space. This heavy mortar, 120 mm in diameter, is integrated into a completely self-contained container container and contains all the equipment required by a mortar unit for general daytime operation and fire fighting in one package. In addition to its own power supply and air-conditioning system, the armored container also includes an NBC filter system in its 20-foot standard EU standard. The basic armor offers ballistic protection against infantry, but can be supplemented by up to 10 mm thick steel cladding / ceramic plates for higher protection. The storage space offers space for up to 100 shells and thus provides a sustained firepower.
The main advantage of the NEMO container system lies in its simple and unique mobility. The flexible container system can adapt its firing position to the tactical situation within a very short time, regardless of whether it is mounted in static storage / object protection, as a moving mortar unit in the direct support of the advancing infantry or on a ship. The NEMO mortar tower can rotate 360Deg and with its -3Deg to + 85Deg pivot range all surfaces of min. 300 m to max. 9,000m with up to 10 grenades / min. This supporting firepower allows the infantry to react adequately “air” in critical situations to react to unexpected attacks.
Under the patronage of its Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the United Arab Emirates, the more than 1,200 international suppliers of the defense industry at this year’s trade fair from 19 to 23 February, showed the latest technologies for the three-dimensional defense sector land, air, sea. IDEX 2017 was once again a unique platform to build and strengthen direct contacts and relationships with government agencies, army staffs and other companies. This year again more than 100,000 visitors were counted.
PATRIA: patria.fi/en
IDEX 2017: www.idexuae.ae
SPARTANAT: www.spartanat.com
What does this do that self propelled tubes dont?
I agree, self propelled seems more versitile
Not if you’re placing these on freighters, disguised as a shipping container.
Looks like this allows for firepower that can be adapted for existing vehicle systems already in the US Army and Marine Corps inventory, without requiring the development for a new vehicle weapons system.
The first picture shows a container which can be loaded on the back of an LVSR, which can then be transported and/or dropped at any location providing immediate fire support. The time required to actually pick it back up and start moving is down in the minutes.
This provides a lot more flexibility and capability than transporting 120mm mortar systems using an ITV or MRZR system.
What does this bring to the fight we don’t already get with a 120mm mortar in a Stryker, or M113? Stryker BNs already have 120mm mortars integrated down to the company level.
Any self propelled system will have a shorter time to deploy, higher mobility, higher survivability and more self reliance than a mortar in a sea container strapped to a truck.
If the argument is “tubes on tracks might not be available” then you’re looking at either a doctrine or a logistics problem that should be solved accordingly.
This fills a different niche than self-propelled mortars. With this, especially in a standard container format, it can be transported more easily by regular infrastructure. I also don’t think it’s meant to be used “offensively” on land, at least. This is meant to be flown in to a FOB or base to provide fire support, rather than plonked down a battlefield.
Also I think this is more of a tech demonstrator for Patria, showing that they can package the mortar system into an easily transportable (also usable) unit. If it can fit into a standard sea container, then they can probably make it fit into different systems such as naval vessels, medium to large vehicles, etc. Imagine a few of these containers on the deck of an LHD, for example.
Just throwing this out there, but perhaps this could get somewhere via helicopter that a tracked/wheeled vehicle possible couldn’t? Think mountaintop Afghani FOB.
Exactly what I thought the first time I heard about the Dragon Fire mortar system when I saw it on Future Weapons back in about 2007.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Fire_(mortar)
The system is pretty versatile, highly automated, and self stabilizing( developed for pretty small boats) . If it’s just parked somewhere it doesn’t have many advantages over any other autoloading mortar, but it’s designed so you really don’t have to do that.
To get a good feel for how it can work find some of the YouTube video of it in use on boats.
I would guess that self propelled guns require trained personnel to drive them and also a larger maintenance/service organization.
I dont think this is meant to replace traditional arty or mortar systems
Pimp my technical-Be the first in your hood.
Modularity usually has drawbacks… But I’m not sure if I see any in this system.
What it actually is would be the first of the automated fire support systems that anyone can use. Engineer outfit on a bridge site? Need security? Drop one of these, and then either assign an FO or give control to the on-site unit. Same-same with the FOB, or some support unit running an LSA.
This basically puts the 11C out of business, automates his skills, and allows the Army/Marine Corps to put indirect fire into everyone’s hands.
We’re going to see more of this. Also, hacking the networks controlling them, and probably some dumbass is going to leave his firewall open and get the local whiz-kid doing his thing to actually use one of our own systems to bombard the FOB, or whatever…
Seriously, though–They better have this thing very well secured, electronically.
That first sentence should read “…first step towards a…” rather than “…first of the…”.
A mortar complete with a CHU.
11Cs reaching an even higher pogue status. lolz.
I love making fun of mortarmen but this doesn’t (or won’t if you’re hypothesizing about a further evolution of this system) put 11Cs out of business. People still have to walk places that are difficult to reach due to terrain and / or enemy and mortar systems still need to be man-portable. It’s like saying the MaxxPro Dash DXM with CROWs will make 11Bs obsolete.
Check out this article about the Patria Mortar System…it has pictures and videos that are cool. BTW, the is a manned system…that is why it has NBC filtration.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/6440/this-120mm-gun-built-into-a-shipping-container-is-pretty-damn-genius?iid=sr-link1
Where do I start?
Does the turret retract into the container? Then it’s not a 20′ ISO container because you can’t stack anything on top of it (raise the corner framing or lower the turret section the same way the power and ECU are framed so the whole fits into the 20’x8’x8′ and you’re good to go). It’s also not “placing these on freighters, disguised as a shipping container.”
It’s a dedicated FDC for one tube. What about my other tubes? Does this act as an FDC for a section with other standard systems?
Can it fire while mounted on the prime mover? This was a problem with Stryker until the gun upgrades in MC-B. If not, how long to dismount and how long to repack the interior for mounting?
What does the supplemental armor do to the size (interior or exterior mounted)? If interior mounted, how long to install and how does it work around interior racks? (For this reason, exterior seems MUCH more likely.) What does the increased volume of exterior mounted armor do to transportation requirements (it ain’t ISO anymore)?
And where does this do it better than either dismounted/trailer mounted systems or SP systems? The former can be laid in much more difficult terrain than this and the SP systems are more mobile and have their own NBC protected FDC capability. For use at sea, why is this configuration better than a 5″ gun, or for the swift boat pictured above, a 40mm autocannon?
The article linked by Hubb above answers most of those questions.As for the 5″ gun and 40mm autocannon :weight savings,and modularity over the 5″; indirect fire, payload,and possibility of precision guided munitions,
Site is blocked by CENTCOM NEC.
RE IDF vs a 40mm, the autocannon outranges the mortar and we’re talking about engagements at sea. Direct fire is likely much more accurate and more responsive. While the projectile may not have the same payload, there’s more than one way to skin a cat (or disable/sink a ship or defeat armor, as the case may be.)
Former 11C….Oh hell no!