• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

C3 Howitzer Replacement

Colin Parkinson said:
You can do both, but Ukraine is teaching us that fieldcraft, camouflage and track discipline is important and neglecting it cost lives and equipment. At the armoury you can run interconnected sims and training scenarios, yes they can learn the why, when and how of AD there. Then putting that knowledge to the test in real life.

I also argue that AD detachment will have to be fairly self sufficient in food, fuel and equipment. They may go days without resupply or fresh rations (unless they make their own)

I also start teaching people how to make L trenches again and how to sh*t in the woods.
Click to expand...
This. See the red highlights. And not just for AD gunners.
 
I am all for a tracked SPG and MRLS systems for the regs. For the reserves wheeled MRLS and Caesar type systems in both 105 and 155. Also we need 120mm mortars. I would get the turreted versions of that mounted on a LAV to support the LAV's and the tracked systems to support the tanks with a buy of tracked APC/IFV's (CV90). However I would also buy standard 120mm mortars for training and other ops. I would keep the M777 for training and coin ops. Same with a M119 type 105mm gun that can be used at Reserve units for basic artillery training, reducing the wear on the primary systems and ensuring training can happen when the supply system fails to maintain enough parts for the truck mounted systems. This would give our artillery park depth and the abilty to quickly replace losses.
 
Colin Parkinson said:
I am all for a tracked SPG and MRLS systems for the regs. For the reserves wheeled MRLS and Caesar type systems in both 105 and 155. Also we need 120mm mortars. I would get the turreted versions of that mounted on a LAV to support the LAV's and the tracked systems to support the tanks with a buy of tracked APC/IFV's (CV90). However I would also buy standard 120mm mortars for training and other ops. I would keep the M777 for training and coin ops. Same with a M119 type 105mm gun that can be used at Reserve units for basic artillery training, reducing the wear on the primary systems and ensuring training can happen when the supply system fails to maintain enough parts for the truck mounted systems. This would give our artillery park depth and the abilty to quickly replace losses.
Click to expand...
Reg force, 2 x battery of M109 or K9, 1 x battery of HIMARS.

PRes: all 105mm phased out for ceaser or 120mm mortors

M777: given to parks Canada to replace the C3s for avalanche control, and used for ceremonial duty on parliament hill
 
But here's the $64 dollar question: should 120mm mortar be artillery or infantry with 60 and 81mm mortars, or would a 160mm mortar be worth considering.

And is the CV90 better than the Bradley, because there are a number of Bradley variants, like the AMPV, Linebacker and M270, and vehicles that use components from the Bradley like the M109A7 and M992, allowing for greater standardization.
 
MilEME09 said:
Reg force, 2 x battery of M109 or K9, 1 x battery of HIMARS.

PRes: all 105mm phased out for ceaser or 120mm mortors

M777: given to parks Canada to replace the C3s for avalanche control, and used for ceremonial duty on parliament hill
Click to expand...
The 120, 105's and the M777 give depth to your artillery park. Not all systems need to be in use at any one time and can be preserved and stored. Plus as I mentioned, you can guarantee we eff up the parts supply and maintainers for the gun mounted trucks and you need the towed just to complete the basic artillery courses.
 
SeaKingTacco said:
Soo…why would we buy weapons of war with Parks Canada in mind? Perhaps they should grow up and do their own Avcon…
Click to expand...
They tried that in the 90s. We stored their ammo for the 106 RR they got from us for a year. Didn't work out for them. Back to Palaci the next year.
 
Maxman1 said:
But here's the $64 dollar question: should 120mm mortar be artillery or infantry with 60 and 81mm mortars, or would a 160mm mortar be worth considering.
Click to expand...
Mortars are Infantry.
They belong in a Bn.
Be it 60, 81, or 120mm.

Maxman1 said:
And is the CV90 better than the Bradley, because there are a number of Bradley variants, like the AMPV, Linebacker and M270, and vehicles that use components from the Bradley like the M109A7 and M992, allowing for greater standardization.
Click to expand...
I’d argue that while I think the CV90 is a better option than Bradley, and the CV90 chassis can pretty much do anything (other than be a M109) it’s currently irrelevant as the CA won’t get away from the LAV…
 
suffolkowner said:
can you do avalanche control with the 120mm mortar
Click to expand...
You could but it's not a good idea. On Palaci the 105 mm is fired at charge 7 for a flat trajectory with a small beaten zone because the trigger areas are relatively small and the round can be thrown off by the high winds in a storm shoot (and many of the shoots are storm shoots) Winds would be a particular concern as the mortar round would have its max ordinate above the mountain peaks where the wind is the worst.
SeaKingTacco said:
Soo…why would we buy weapons of war with Parks Canada in mind? Perhaps they should grow up and do their own Avcon…
Click to expand...
There are many parks around the world that do. Palaci only involves a small det (albeit four 6-week rotations) and is an excellent leadership development platform for junior officers and NCOs - especially for reservists.

I certainly wouldn't buy a new weapon. We have lots of C3s and could cannibalize parts for decades to come if we ever gave up the gun as a training gun. One thing is that there are in excess of a hundred target areas (can't remember the exact number) changing the gun would require reregistering all those targets which would be pricy.
daftandbarmy said:
Because it's a task we'll never get rid of as the PR coverage is critically important?
Click to expand...
My guess is that the only people who know about Palaci are the guys who are stopped on the highway during a shoot. They're usually bitching about the delay. :giggle:
KevinB said:
Mortars are Infantry.
They belong in a Bn.
Be it 60, 81, or 120mm.
Click to expand...
Theories differ, but that's basically my view based on the principle that it's the battalion's guaranteed indirect fire support system. Handing it to the artillery would risk having it become a brigade asset to facilitate massing fires and thereby no longer guaranteed to the battalion.

🍻
 
Colin Parkinson said:
I am all for a tracked SPG and MRLS systems for the regs. For the reserves wheeled MRLS and Caesar type systems in both 105 and 155. Also we need 120mm mortars. I would get the turreted versions of that mounted on a LAV to support the LAV's and the tracked systems to support the tanks with a buy of tracked APC/IFV's (CV90). However I would also buy standard 120mm mortars for training and other ops. I would keep the M777 for training and coin ops. Same with a M119 type 105mm gun that can be used at Reserve units for basic artillery training, reducing the wear on the primary systems and ensuring training can happen when the supply system fails to maintain enough parts for the truck mounted systems. This would give our artillery park depth and the abilty to quickly replace losses.
Click to expand...

So you intend to expend the regular force in one 72 hour battle at one place while you will leave the reserves to continue the war on the beaches, on the landing grounds, in the cities and in the hills.

The more I see of the situation in Ukraine the less I think the CAF is mentally equipped to fight a war. Wars are more than just battles. The Cold War left the impression that there would be no more Wars. The A-Bomb did what the Maxim Gun was supposed to have done in WWI. If war were to break out it would be a "One and Done" affair. 72 hours and everybody is dead or goes home.

Ukraine continues the trend of Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Eritrea..... We, the West, go in ready to fight battles. The locals stand back, lean on the ropes and let us take the round. They come back. This time we are doing the "right" thing. We are backing the locals.

We are not backing "change".
 
FJAG said:
You could but it's not a good idea. On Palaci the 105 mm is fired at charge 7 for a flat trajectory with a small beaten zone because the trigger areas are relatively small and the round can be thrown off by the high winds in a storm shoot (and many of the shoots are storm shoots) Winds would be a particular concern as the mortar round would have its max ordinate above the mountain peaks where the wind is the worst.

There are many parks around the world that do. Palaci only involves a small det (albeit four 6-week rotations) and is an excellent leadership development platform for junior officers and NCOs - especially for reservists.

I certainly wouldn't buy a new weapon. We have lots of C3s and could cannibalize parts for decades to come if we ever gave up the gun as a training gun. One thing is that there are in excess of a hundred target areas (can't remember the exact number) changing the gun would require reregistering all those targets which would be pricy.

My guess is that the only people who know about Palaci are the guys who are stopped on the highway during a shoot. They're usually bitching about the delay. :giggle:

Theories differ, but that's basically my view based on the principle that it's the battalion's guaranteed indirect fire support system. Handing it to the artillery would risk having it become a brigade asset to facilitate massing fires and thereby no longer guaranteed to the battalion.

🍻
Click to expand...
It is not a military task. We (CAF) only do it because…reasons. Probably the reason we do it all had to do with a bunch of excess gunners after the early 70s artillery slaughter, so it was a life line.
 
SeaKingTacco said:
It is not a military task. We (CAF) only do it because…reasons. Probably the reason we do it all had to do with a bunch of excess gunners after the early 70s artillery slaughter, so it was a life line.
Click to expand...
My first AVCON roto was the winter of 1970/71 and I lived through that arty slaughter. Went on an NBCW course in Borden right after coming back from AVCON and found my Battery - H Battery - had disappeared and the regiment was half the size it was before I went to AVCON. There were no spare gunners after that - hell, I never saw a battery with more than 80% of the peacetime establishment (except briefly in the mid-Seventies when they stood up air defence)

The first artillery trials there were held in 1959 and the program went online in 1962. It was done in conjunction with a massive construction project of snowsheds on both the highway and the rail line through there. The Trans Canada only opened up in the 1950s. Up until the TCH opened, the pass was mainly a rail route. Rogers Pass was deadly and they had over 200 people had died in the pass. 62 workers alone died when a second avalanche hit them in 1910 while they were digging out a train caught in a prior slide.

If I recall in my talks with the Schleiss brothers back then, artillery was the favoured solution from their point of view because of several factors:

1. guns delivered a consistent result in all weather conditions which you wouldn't be able to do with helicopter dropped explosives or pneumatically delivered ones. Literally, a half mill deviation on some crest triggers would end up with a round flying over the mountain.

2. The 106mm recoilless rifle has a limited range which would not be able to reach many of the slide trigger points and also had elevation limitations to shoot uphill. We did use a 75mm pack howitzer for plinking non-standard targets until the ammo ran out but it was an issue as without brakes and no soil to dig the spade into it would skitter across the frozen road and shoulders every time we fired it.

3. the priority mission was to keep the rail lines open and secondly the road with the least interruptions possible. It's basically a no fail mission. They get 400 inches of snowfall every year and as I mentioned earlier, many of the shoots are in the middle of blizzards. The trick is to get the avalanche triggered early as the snow falls so that the slide never builds enough mass to actually reaches the rail line or the road. I recall one shoot that lasted three full days in a blizzard and we slept in the trucks while they opened the road and rail line for an hour or two now and then to let traffic through.

IMHO using military equipment and ammunition conforms to a military task. The fact that you can train a civilian to do it is beside the fact. I'm not sure I want a bunch of civilians in charge of artillery and high explosive rounds. The CAF does lots of things that are not "military" in nature - flood and fire fighting are just some examples. AVCON is more military than that.

Anyhow - Fun times. We never had problems finding volunteers for it then. (Those were the days when there was a hotel with staff and a heated outdoor pool at the summit)

Here's a little booklet on it.

🍻
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bossi
Real war story from Iraq (not Hollywood)
Replies
2
Views
5K
Fruss
F
Back
Top