Seeing the Hotchkiss with the "Wurfrahmen 40" I thought it might be a good idea to oppose Rocket and Tube Arty advantages and disadvantagses in general (mixed from wikpedia, absoluteastronomy and FAS):
Artillery: Is a military Combat Arms which employs any apparatus, machine, an assortment of tools or instruments, a system or systems used as weapons for the discharge of large projectiles in combat as a major contribution of fire power within the overall military capability of an armed force.
- Rockets produce no recoil, while conventional artillery systems produce significant recoil. Unless firing within a very small arc with the possibility of wrecking a SP artillery systems vehicle suspension, gun artillery must usually be braced against recoil. In this state they are immobile, and can not change position easily. Rocket artillery is much more mobile and can change position easily. This "shoot-and-scoot" ability makes the platform difficult to target. A rocket artillery piece could, conceivably, fire on the move. Rocket systems produce a significant amount of backblast, however, which imposes its own restrictions on how launchers may be sited and the arcs that they can fire without damage to themselves and neighbouring vehicles.
- Rocket artillery cannot usually match the accuracy and sustained rate of fire of conventional artillery. They may be capable of very destructive strikes by delivering a large mass of explosives simultaneously, thus increasing the shock effect and giving the target less time to take cover. Modern computer-controlled conventional artillery have recently begun to acquire the possibility to do something similar through MRSI (pronounced "mercy": Multiple Round Simultaneous Impact arty) but it is an open question if MRSI is really practical in a combat situation.
- Rocket artillery typically has a very large fire signature, leaving a clear smoke-trail showing exactly where the barrage came from. Since the barrage does not take much time, however, the rocket artillery can move away quickly.
- Tube artillery can use a forward observer to correct fire, thus achieving further accuracy. This is usually not practical with rocket artillery.
- Tube artillery shells are typically cheaper and less bulky than rockets, so they can deliver a larger amount of explosive at the enemy per weight of ammunition or per money spent.
- While tube artillery shells are smaller than rockets, the gun itself must be very large to match the range of rockets. Therefore rockets typically have longer range while the rocket launchers remain small enough to mount on mobile vehicles. Extremely large guns like the Paris Gun (the name of an artillery piece with which the Germany bombarded Paris during World War I. This oversized railway gun was used from March to August 1918) have been rendered obsolete by long range missiles.
- If the artillery barrage was intended as a preparation for an attack, and it usually is, a short but intense barrage will give the enemy less time to prepare by, for instance, dispersing.
- The higher accuracy of gun artillery means that it can be used to attack an enemy close to a friendly force. This combined with the higher capacity for sustained fire makes cannon artillery more suitable than rocket artillery for defensive fire. It is also the only practicable system for counter-battery fire (a type of mission assigned to military artillery forces, which are tasked with locating and firing upon enemy artillery).
FWIW,
Rattler
