Talk:M107 self-propelled gun

message: isnt the range 33km not 30km?71.145.173.76 13:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: range

message: To answer the previous discussion question, yes, the tabular firing table (TFT), the document that lists data required to fire the weapon at standard conditions, lists the range with a standard weight projectile at 800 mil elevation (elevation for maximum range) as 32,800 meters.
On a related matter, this gun has often been maligned as being terribly inaccurate, with anecdotal statements that the gun "wouldn't come within a couple of kilometers of a target."  The highest range probable error (the distance within which half the shots at a given range will statistically fall), which occurs at the maximum range of 32.8 km, is 74 meters.  Expressing that as a percentage of range gives 0.23%; this is comparable to contemporary howitzers.  
Having fired the gun under field conditions, I can personally attest that, firing lower charges at shorter ranges, the gun was accurate enough to provide effective fires on target.  Firing the lowest charge, with a spacer behind it to ensure consistent placement of the propelling charge in the chamber, we were able to achieve target hits, which are uncommon with any indirect fire weapon.
Artillerist 15:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Range of M107 175mm SP Gun

message: Can someone tell this Limey ex-soldier what this weapon is ? The intro says 'gun' and the caption for the first picture says 'howitzer'. Or is it a gun/howitzer ? RASAM (talk) 14:48, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a Self Propelled HOWITZER. But it CAN fire in low arcs like a gun. ==MeepSire (talk) 23:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

text: Article says the gun had 65˚max elevation. I wouldn't call that low-trajectory. Original M1897 carriage had 18˚max elevation. I think that's a better example of low-trajectory. 108.45.79.25 (talk) 16:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusion

message: The person that added the photograph got it from Defenselink.  The original title from Defenselink correctly has the nomenclature as a "gun".  The person that added the photo incorrectly renamed the M107 as a howitzer.  The M107 was the last "gun" (high velocity, low trajectory) that was in the US Army Inventory, after some being retubed as the 8 inch "howitzer" (low velocity, high trajectory) "short tube", then later "long tube", the remaining M107s were sold to other countries (primarily Israel) under the US Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Programs.  These other countries to this day still use the M107s to "outgun" (based on range) other (tubed, not missile) artillery and upgrades that extended the M107 range to 30 miles (50 kilometers) which then inexpensively outranged some missile artillery.--Nakamuradavid (talk) 01:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarification

message: The edits regarding re-tubing the M-110 to the M-107 and vice versa are out-of-the-book "accurate", but ignore the experience in Vietnam were guns/howitzers were re-tubed--and relatively quickly--at the service battery level. The 7th Battalion 15th FA in particular re-tubed, both type to type and cross-type, as needed, and did it for almost four years.--Reedmalloy (talk) 10:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Retubing

message: I'm the one who just edited the article's page. The M107 was my favorite artillery piece when I was a kid (I had a model of it) and it deserves a better page than it had. My edit focused on making the organization more coherent, including the information normally included in other articles about weapons systems (for example design and production history), and removing some of the U.S. bias and U.S. Army jargon. The whole article was badly "intermingled" with M110 data; while acknowledging that the vehicles were based on a common chassis I generally took this out (folks who want to read about the M110 can do that easily). I also moved the very micro-level operational procedures to their own paragraph -- it's probably more detail than most readers need, but it's still there if they want it. While I am former U.S. Army (Reserve and NG), I'm not an artilleryman, and I may not have properly presented the "retubing" issue. There were several contradictory statements in there, and it looked like it had been edited by adding statements without much attention to organization or the overall message. It also seemed to be getting more attention than it deserved (it's just one aspect of M107 operations, and IMHO should not get the same emphasis as design, production, or operational history). I left it as saying that with the right equipment (i.e., 2 M578s) it could be done at the battalion level, but was more normally done by ordnance companies or at depots. I may have gotten this wrong, and it would benefit from attention from someone who knows the subject better than me.Darkstar8799 (talk) 18:14, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Edit

message: dont know who put up the article merger tag? but a howitzer is not a gun, a gun is not a howitzer. Brian in denver (talk) 20:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Designed to be part of a common family of weapons utilising the same chassis components, the M107 and M110 were essentially the same vehicle mounting different barrels."  "Since the weapons had identical carriages, the common practice was to install those tubes that best met the current tactical needs. One day a battery might be 175­mm.; a few days later it might be half 175-mm. and half 8-inch."
"During the 1950s the standard of US Army motorized howitzer of 203mm was the M55, based on the chasis and the turret of the M53 self-propelled howitzer of 155mm gun. The weight of the machines of this family (±40t) prohibited, however, their air transport, while their gasonline engines confered a range limit of approximately 260 km.
This brought the Army to build a new series of self-propelled guns, lighter and transportable by air, derive from the same frame and some same mounting. Pacific Car and Foundry company developed a number of prototypes. The self-propelled guns T235 of 175mm and T245 of 155mm, and motorized howitzer T236 of 203mm. The T235 and T236 were driven by a diesel engine and manufactured in series under the respective references M107 and M110."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m107-175.htm 96.231.37.18 (talk) 04:57, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: SP artillery of Iran was removed as many countries utilized the M-107. Highlighting one country over the many other users doesn't really make much sense.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 04:35, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Category SP of Iran

message: The photo at the beginning of this article is actually of the very rarely seen M-110A1 8 inch (203mm) self propelled howitzer; please note that the barrel of the weapon in this photo is significantly shorter than that of the M-107 175mm self propelled gun, which was exceptionally long, slender and tapered, and was characterized by a very distinct step about 2/3's of the way along the tube; the 175mm ordnance also had a belled muzzle reinforce, a feature the weapon in this photo lacks. The ordnance on the vehicle in this photo is too straight in profile, is too short, and if one looks carefully you can see threads on the muzzle- these were for the prospective addition of the large double baffle muzzle brake which converted this weapon to the M-110A2. Standardized in March 1976, the M-110A1 was in service for a relatively brief period, with the first units receiving them from the early to middle part of 1977, with a few examples serving on until about 1981/82; all M-110A1s were re-designated as the M-110A2 as soon as their muzzle brakes were installed. Installation of muzzle brakes onto M-110A1s started at some point during 1978. By no later than 1982/1983 most U.S. Army M-107s, M-110s and M-110A1s had undergone the conversion to the M-110A2 configuration. Israel continued to use both unmodified M-107s and M-110s into the early 1980s, particularly during the brutal siege of Beirut in the summer of 1982. Iran used her M-107s and M-110s during the Iran-Iraq War. SASH155 (talk) 21:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch! I'll remove the image from the article.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 00:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Re:Photo at beginning of article is actually of a rare M-110A1, not of an M-107

message: I've added a tag to the "design" section; the tag points to the very technical terms used to describe the patented features of the vehicle.  I honestly have no idea what any of the features are, and I suspect I'm not the only one.  If someone familiar with the terms could clarify, the article would be greatly improved, IMHO.  It seems that some items likely aren't notable enough features to discuss on their own, but I'll leave that up to someone with more knowledge of the topic.
Dpenn89 (talk) 01:01, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Jargon tag

message: This article states: "The M107 also had disadvantages. In addition to its long range it was also noted for its inaccuracy at longer ranges..." Almost sounds like long range is being cited as a disadvantage here, should read something like: "The M107 also had disadvantages. While it had long range, it was also noted for its inaccuracy at these longer ranges..."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.12 (talk) 12:08, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: *ND, you do know that there are many nincomputs out there who don't like to read very much but has a liking to cherry pick on online data, right? That comes too in the form of them annonymous editors using random IP addresses to troll on Wikipedia by posing stupid questions to us; however, the trick is not to dwell into what they want us to do too much but just to do right without asking or hoping for any recognition anyway. That said, you sir, are worthy of recognition in keeping the article page truthful to the fullest of your ability. Cheers~! --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 08:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: When is long range a disadvantage?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on M107 self-propelled gun. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151124130349/http://www.inss.org.il/uploadImages/systemFiles/Israel322533025.pdf to http://www.inss.org.il/uploadImages/systemFiles/Israel322533025.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151124130349/http://www.inss.org.il/uploadImages/systemFiles/Israel322533025.pdf to http://www.inss.org.il/uploadImages/systemFiles/Israel322533025.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified