Towed artillery has always played a crucial role in the US military’s arsenal. However, the ongoing war in Ukraine has shed light on the importance of mobility in modern warfare. This raises concerns for the US military about whether towed guns can effectively stay ahead of the enemy.
The effectiveness of artillery is not solely determined by its range or destructive power. The mobility of a howitzer, its ability to quickly relocate after firing, can mean the difference between survival and destruction. Recognizing this, the US Army is now questioning whether transporting guns by truck is still a viable option.
General James Rainey, head of US Army Futures Command, stated that a 10- or 15-minute displacement time would not work against a formidable enemy. This realization has prompted the US military to reconsider its reliance on towed artillery.
The war in Ukraine has showcased a variety of towed and self-propelled artillery from different nations, including the US M109, Russian 2S19, and German PzH 2000 self-propelled howitzers, as well as the US M777, Russian 2A65, and British L119 towed guns. Both sides have also employed counter-battery radars and drones to locate and eliminate enemy artillery batteries.
To enhance the effectiveness of artillery, precision-guided shells like the US-made Excalibur, which can destroy enemy howitzers with one round, are being utilized. The increasing sophistication of anti-artillery systems has reignited the debate over the value of towed and self-propelled guns.
Throughout history, towed artillery has been transported by horses, oxen, and later trucks. However, self-propelled howitzers emerged during World War II, offering better mobility and rapid relocation capabilities. Western nations often prioritize self-propelled guns with armored protection, while towed cannons are commonly used by airborne and amphibious forces or given to less advanced allies.
Supporters of self-propelled howitzers highlight their superior protection and the ability to quickly relocate after firing. On the other hand, advocates for towed guns emphasize their lower cost, lighter weight, and improved setup times. Logistically, towed cannons are less demanding, as they can be towed by another truck if needed.
A hybrid solution is truck-mounted howitzers, like France’s Caesar, which offer self-propelled mobility without the added cost, weight, and complexity of armored protection. In the future, remotely operated or autonomous artillery systems could become a viable option. The US Army is already exploring wheeled and robotic solutions for towed artillery.
Although unmanned and robotic artillery systems may offer advantages in terms of size, weight, and expendability, the US Army’s next-generation Extended Range Cannon Artillery will be an upgraded version of the M109A7 Paladin with a more powerful gun.
The war in Ukraine has made it clear that artillery will continue to be a crucial weapon in future ground combat. Therefore, militaries will focus on neutralizing anti-artillery systems and developing highly mobile or well-protected howitzers. However, there is no one-size-fits-all solution, and each nation is likely to invest in a combination of approaches.
The war in Ukraine serves as a reminder that there are no easy solutions on the battlefield, and adaptability and innovation will be critical for success.
