AT-ATs as artillery

[Pint0 Xtreme]

I was watching TESB the other day and something sort of hit me. I'm not sure if this was discussed earlier or not but I did run a quick look at Mike Wong's technology page and noted that he only described AT-ATs as armored vehicles.

But I argue that AT-ATs are not only armored vehicles but are also used as artillery in conjunction with their assumed frontal assault purpose. In the Battle of Hoth, there is a scene where the Rebels are entrenched waiting for the Imperial assault. The first shots fired came from the AT-ATs but at such a distance that it was purely impractical for Rebel forces to fire back. Instead, they deployed their speeders to spearhead their defense.

From such observations, it suggests that AT-ATs had two primary purposes; they were designed to provide artillery-like suppressive fire in the early stages of ground assault as well as being the Imperial Army's main battle armored vehicle. Clearly, as the AT-ATs got closer to their targets, their accuracy became increasingly deadly as observed when they shot down flying speeders.

Thus, one of the reasons why "artillery" in the traditional sense was never really seen in the films was perhaps that the AT-ATs were the artillery themselves.

[Darth Bowser]

Well with how powerful the main guns are I don't think it would be wrong to say that they're kind of like self-propelled Howitzers in a way.

[Gorefiend]

Very much so, i think they used AT-ATs as just that in one of the novels. Though I always found the usefulness of “fixed” artillery rather doubtfull in Star Wars, anyway. I mean if you want to bombard something to pieces, just do it from orbit.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Yeah, well Hoth... I'm sure Admiral Ozzel can tell you why orbital bombardment wasn't conducted.

[Darth Bowser]

Sometimes you just need a big gun on the ground to get your point across.

[Gorefiend]

Yes planertary shields

What i was trying to get at was that if you can actually land on a planet, something like a AT-AT is certainly more useful then a piece of "immobile" artillery that your have to drag along.

Sometimes you just need a big gun on the ground to get your point across.

Well if you are going to need more mobile firepower then a AT-AT can delivere you are pretty much screwed anyway o.O. I mean your could properly set up a heavy Turbolaser emplacement but that’s not going to work if your want a quick strike.

[VT-16]

Thus, one of the reasons why "artillery" in the traditional sense was never really seen in the films was perhaps that the AT-ATs were the artillery themselves.

I started thinking about this one day. A Few scenes before General Veers targets the power generator, the command centre was shown in shambles after being hit.

Now, I believe Veers´ AT-AT group was too far away to have been the culprites (since he didn´t target the generator until after the command centre had been hit, and it was buried in the mountains far behind the generator).

It´s possible some form of mobile artillery was used to disrupt communication and coordination by going after the base itself from a different side, while the walkers went for the generator.

Does the ITW: OT say anything about the attack on the command centre?

[Aaron]

Yes planertary shields

What i was trying to get at was that if you can actually land on a planet, something like a AT-AT is certainly more useful then a piece of "immobile" artillery that your have to drag along.

Artillery is far from immobile. Most modern artillery pieces are self-propelled. And given the Empires level of technology it would be very easy to make an artillery piece that uses tracks, walkers, wheels, or repulsorlift to move it. They would only have to stop to fire, in fact we have seen mobile artillery in SW. In AOTC they used the SPHA-T to shoot down a core ship.

[VT-16]

The Empire has repulsorlift mobile artillery, and the Republic had several SPHA walker-variants to carry out different missions, including over-the-horizon fire and anti-aircraft duty.

(And my previous post speculated about artillery-units attacking the Echo Base command centre.)

[The Original Nex]

Thus, one of the reasons why "artillery" in the traditional sense was never really seen in the films was perhaps that the AT-ATs were the artillery themselves.

It´s possible some form of mobile artillery was used to disrupt communication and coordination by going after the base itself from a different side, while the walkers went for the generator.

Proabaly another walker coming from a different vector.

Does the ITW: OT say anything about the attack on the command centre?

Nope.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Yes planertary shields

What i was trying to get at was that if you can actually land on a planet, something like a AT-AT is certainly more useful then a piece of "immobile" artillery that your have to drag along.

Artillery is far from immobile. Most modern artillery pieces are self-propelled. And given the Empires level of technology it would be very easy to make an artillery piece that uses tracks, walkers, wheels, or repulsorlift to move it. They would only have to stop to fire, in fact we have seen mobile artillery in SW. In AOTC they used the SPHA-T to shoot down a core ship.

Yes, but there weren't any artillery seen during Hoth. With such a large scale assault on a target that important as the Rebel base, you'd think that one would incorporate a significant number of artillery.

[Gunhead]

Observed direct fire is more accurate than indirect arty.
The rebels had no direct fire weapons that could hurt an AT-AT so the imps didn't need to fire from cover.
Also for arty you need ammo and fireplans so you don't drop shells on your own troops accidentally.
Friendly fire isn't.

-Gunhead

[Aaron]

Yes, but there weren't any artillery seen during Hoth. With such a large scale assault on a target that important as the Rebel base, you'd think that one would incorporate a significant number of artillery.

There could be any number of reasons why they didn't use it.

They might not have had any.
The artillery rounds might have hit the theatre shield.
Veers may have felt that artillery wasn't necassary, given the Rebels lack of firepower.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

There could be any number of reasons why they didn't use it.

They might not have had any.

Ridiculous. It was the fucking Imperial fleet.

The artillery rounds might have hit the theatre shield.

In that case, the artillery used by the Empire is a little pointless given that if the artillery rounds would be useful only if the planetary shield was down, an orbital bombardment would have been far more effective for the job.

Veers may have felt that artillery wasn't necassary, given the Rebels lack of firepower.

That's probably the best reason but again, observations from the movie suggest that the AT-ATs were used as artillery as well. I'd rather have an armored vehicle that can serve as artillery and armored assault than to have to manage two separate units for artillery and armored assault.

[Aaron]

That's probably the best reason but again, observations from the movie suggest that the AT-ATs were used as artillery as well. I'd rather have an armored vehicle that can serve as artillery and armored assault than to have to manage two separate units for artillery and armored assault.

I think what we've got here is a semantics problem. What we call artillery in the military is weapons that are exculsively used in the indirect fire role.

The AT-AT would appear to combine the traits of an APC, with that of an assualt gun.

Of course the AT-AT is so high that it can engage the enemy beyond the effective range of the enemies own guns. So it might as well be artillery.

[mauldooku]

In that case, the artillery used by the Empire is a little pointless given that if the artillery rounds would be useful only if the planetary shield was down, an orbital bombardment would have been far more effective for the job.

Capturing Skywalker would've been rather difficult with the planetary surface of Hoth cooked off into space.

[Alyeska]

Its possible the theatre shield used by the rebels prevented artillery fire.

[Aaron]

Its possible the theatre shield used by the rebels prevented artillery fire.

Agreed, I'm thinking that the rounds would have impacted on the shield before starting the downward portion of their tragectory.

[Alyeska]

From what we can tell, the shields limited access to the point that no Tie's made it into theatre. The shields stopping artillery use seems like the most logical explination.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

From what we can tell, the shields limited access to the point that no Tie's made it into theatre. The shields stopping artillery use seems like the most logical explination.

I don't but that seems a little silly to me. It would defeat the purpose of the artillery unit itself. Consider if the planetary shields did not exist, there would be no need for artillery since orbital bombardment would do the job in a more efficient and devastating manner. If the shields were activated as in TESB, then the artillery unit's trajectory would hit the shields. It would be useless either way!

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

But I argue that AT-ATs are not only armored vehicles but are also used as artillery in conjunction with their assumed frontal assault purpose. In the Battle of Hoth, there is a scene where the Rebels are entrenched waiting for the Imperial assault. The first shots fired came from the AT-ATs but at such a distance that it was purely impractical for Rebel forces to fire back. Instead, they deployed their speeders to spearhead their defense.

How does that prove they were artillery pieces? Some APCs got as large as 73 or 100mm guns. And if they are attacking a bunch of light infantry who only got a few recoilless guns, it could even outrange them. Which is why the Rebels are engaging them with motorcycles. That doesn't mean they are artillery. It just means their opposition is a light infantry battalion.

Thus, one of the reasons why "artillery" in the traditional sense was never really seen in the films was perhaps that the AT-ATs were the artillery themselves.

Actually, army units do have artillery fire weapons, but not the stormie formations.

Yes, but there weren't any artillery seen during Hoth. With such a large scale assault on a target that important as the Rebel base, you'd think that one would incorporate a significant number of artillery.

They simply didn't bring any. Stormtroopers are elite assault formations. In what they would think is a small scale action requiring a hasty attack, the AT-ATs guns in direct fire would prove adequate. If it was a large deliberate action, they'd be supported by orbital bombardment (if possible) and try to clear the equivalent of a beachhead, after which Army arty battalions are landed if needed. There's little point in landing relatively vulnerable arty pieces before secure locations are found for them.

In any case, if you believe official data, neither an Executor or a ISD has enough APCs (AT-ATs) for its people. It's carrying capacity is only 40 troops. An ISD only has 20 AT-ATs (800 troops), and the SSD only has 25 (1000 men). The Eclipse has 100 for 4000 men. Out of 9700, 38000 and 150,000 men respectively. One can understand why dedicated tanks and arty has to wait.

[MickeyMo]

AT-ATs will never exist. They are easy targets, and since shels made of the same substance as their armor will destroy them, there is little purpose to them.

There is already concern that the AbramsA1A2......is obsolete. To wide and too heavy. Now here comes the AT AT......huge, an EASY target, VERY expensive!.

[Stark]

Hey check it out - some people still don't read the main site!

For a laugh - easy targets for what? In ESB they're used under a shield against light infantry. They were obviously unable to do anything to stop them. Which SW ground weapons do you recommend? I was under the impression that AT-ATs were shielded, in any case.

[MickeyMo]

Stark, you and others seem to think that replies should never consider reality.

[Shroom Man 777]

There is already concern that the AbramsA1A2......is obsolete. To wide and too heavy.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Source on this, please? Since everyone's still sporting tanks and since the M1A2 is perhaps the best tank out there.

EDIT:

And BTW, sure, granted the AT-AT is huge and an easy target...so what? Nothing out there can hurt it, save for things like proton torpedoes, which can fuck up everything else anyway. And how can you say an AT-AT is expensive for a galactic civilization that builds planet busting artificial moons for shits and giggles?