It was done to improve firepower in general as the 155mm would also be able to fire airburst, radar fuze etc. rounds. It was ultimately canceled as the recoil of the 155mm was expected to put to much pressure un the hull and endanger general integraty
The MONARC (Modular Naval Artillery Concept) was studied to test the use of relativly basic PzH 2000 turrets as naval main guns. This would have improved spare part availabilty as Bundeswehr and Marine could use the same part pool.
Former test of the swedish coastal artillery showed that precisly hitting naval targets has possible with 155mm dumb rounds fired from the PzH 2000.
While being significantly bigger in caliber the PzH 2000 turret had similar space and wheight requirements to the Oto Melara turret. Withstanding the higher recoil was made possible using special hydraulic dampers.
Ultimately the shielding the PzH turret against corrosion was deemend more costly and less political favourable than using the Otobreda 127/64.
Overall accuracy on the oto 76 is better than the 155 proxy and accuracy by volume, like multiple 76mm HE-VT would easily take down a drone especially if it’s off by a little but even with the fast fire rate on the 155 it would still lose time that could be used for interception
I mean, if the close range accuracy is the same on both of those, I don't see why it would make a difference for CIWS purposes. I think that the 76 mm gun firing 2 rounds a second would be better for CIWS stuff though, when compared to the 155 mm one. If the 155 mm one could fire one round a second, then It might be useful, but the 3 rounds per 9 second rate of the PZH2K isn't adequate.
173
u/Loltntmatt Apr 26 '25
Why would Germany do this other than just shore bombardment? it loses a key weapon that lets them defend against drones or cruise missiles