Talk:Nuclear artillery

AFAP
The proper name for 'nuclear artillery' shells is AFAP, Artillery Fired Atomic Projectile. Elde 07:51, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Atomic Annie
I think that the Atomic Annie has enough information around it to be made into a full-sized article. AllStarZ 14:23, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

24.126.184.84 (talk) 04:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

W33
I think the text needs re-organising to follow either a time line or to group calibres together, eg 203mm before 155mm.

230mm was not a 'specialised' howtzer, it was a standard one (initially M115 towed, then M110 SP) although some armies only used it dedicated to the nuclear role.

I'm also fairly confident that the W33 yield information is wrong but don't want to say more. Incidently I think W33 was 'build to yield', the required yield was actually assembled in the field, the weapons were not held in an assembled state and unlike some (later) weapons the yield was not 'dialed'.

Projectiles also had a M number as well as the W number for the weapon. It should probably also be stated that they were all designed for airburst. Nfe 11:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC) Served with 3rd gun Battalion 39th Field Artillery in Germany from 1958 - 1960.. Nov 1958 39th Was stationed at Neckarsum, Germany, north of Heilbron. During that winter season, transferred, H&H-A-C Battery to Nurnberg. At Merrill Barracks. B Battery was stationed at Dachau.. Believe we had 2 guns assigned to a field battery. Never heard the slogan Atomic Annie used while I was there.. Belong to 210th Artillery Group, then 7th Army Artillery.. While stationed at Fort Sill, had a round destroy a MP Post, and we Lost our colors.. Regained them in spring of 1960- When My military Serice was About to Expire.. Art Higdon 24.126.184.84 (talk) 04:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Nuclear Artillery
What is the source for the novel assertion that 'nuclear artillery' means the nuclear projectiles? This is certainly NOT the terminology used by those Western nations that had/have nuclear artillery.Nfe (talk) 01:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

short range missle is not artillery
Nuclear short range missiles is not nuclear artillery. Or change name of the article or do not write spare Gnomsovet (talk) 23:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You'll have to explain that dogmatic statement. The field artillery branches of several NATO armies operated short range missiles.Nfe (talk) 02:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Short range missiles consisted on arms several NATO armies in artillery subdivisions but were Short range missiles rather then artillery and on agreement 1987 subjected to liquidations, but Nuclear artillery and nucleus projectiles no.For example 1st Cavalry Division ("First Team") uses tanks but A1M1 not horse. ;)Gnomsovet (talk) 14:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

To the NATO armies using short range missiles they were artillery. I suggest looking at the wiki entry on artillery. In land forces (and marines) artillery is a branch that uses guns, howitzers, mortars, rockets and missiles with any type of payload. Artillery is not defined solely by particular types of weapon.


 * Artillery have gun barrel or other the tube, usually metal, through which a controlled explosion or rapid expansion of gases is released in order to propel a projectile out of the end at great speed. But missile lanced from missile pad is missile.Gnomsovet (talk) 03:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

See wikipedia entry for artillery. Artillery is not defined by type of firing 'vehicle', it is defined as an organisation. This entry (nuclear artillery) conforms to this convention. Rockets have been used by western artillery arms since at least the early 19th Century (eg Battle of Leipzig).Nfe (talk) 05:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

And Russian Empire too. Ok. Then in article it is necessary to indicate only that weapon which consisted on arms in artillery parts army? Well then i correct has described the soviet (russian) nucleus artillery. Since for instance OTR-21 Tochka never consisted on arms of the soviet artillery parts.Gnomsovet (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

There was no agreement that abolished short range missiles, IIRC it was a maximum range limit imposed on theatre/medium range missiles. As the article points out there was a post Cold War agreement to remove all tactical/theatre nuclear weapons (whatever their delivery means) from Europe.Nfe (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Read INF 1987. All Pershing and BGM-109G Gryphon was liquidated on this agreement. In 2001 USA have done attempt to break this agreement within the framework of project GERAGnomsovet (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC).

INF only affected longer range Theatre missiles such as Pershing 2 (used by US Army Field Artillery), and Pershing 1A (used by Luftwaffe) because it imposed a maximum range limit. Whether or not these were 'short range' depends on your definitions. Suffice to say there were various other missile systems with considerably shorter range that were not affected. Nfe (talk) 05:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Intermediate-Range_Nuclear_Forces_Treaty Gnomsovet (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Nuclear landmines
Landmines? Jesus Christ. The article mentions these near the top but there is no further discussion of them. Is this really true? If so it needs a source in the article, and some elaboration would be even better. Thanks. Old Man of Storr (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

See Blue Peacock Henry Troup (talk) 21:14, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk of 'landmines' reflects terminological confusion, and of course they have almost nothing to do with nuclear artillery. Traditionally, 'mine' in a military sense, means a substantial underground charge, eg massive amounts of HE in tunnels in WW1 that were detonated remotely (suicide sapper squads being deeply unfashionable), but the term goes back centuries. 'Landmines' is a 20th century term for the far smaller (a few pounds at most) device laid on or just below the surface and initiated by something going over them. This highlights the confusion which arises from underinformed/confused/ignorant use of military terminology. During the Cold War the US had Atomic demolition Munitions (ADM). You can think of these as pre-packed demolition charges or 'mines', they were not 'landmines'.Nfe (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

North Korea?
North Korea can't manage to get a successful nuke blast under ideal conditions in a static test, and we're supposed to believe they have a functional miniaturized ruggedized warhead that can be used in an artillery gun?

Someone has been drinking the Kim-ade. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.152.206 (talk) 07:26, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

convert error
From the article "use in an 8-inch-diameter (200 mm) artillery shell." 8 inches is 203mm. I can't see anything wrong with the convert command used, but the conversion is off. Seems the command goes 25x8 instead of 25.4x8, maybe someone with a bit more proficiency with the command could look into this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.8.5.95 (talk) 17:43, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed. (Hohum @ ) 22:26, 9 June 2019 (UTC)