• 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

quadrapiper said:
So many things to go wrong there.

Is the gun's wheelbase narrower than the tracks, at least?
Click to expand...
A little. A 2S1 Gvosdika has a width of 2.85m while an M777 in travel position has a width of 2.77 m. The guns wheels are just a few centimetres inside that max width. That's roughly the wheelbase on both so my guess is the M777s wheels follow just inside the track path of the Gvosdika.

🍻
 
The shape of the artillery?

UK Service - MAN HX3 with Air Defence Radar

1703871563211.png

UK Service - MAN HX3 with launcher for CAMM missiles

1703871578180.png

UK Service Proposal (Land Precision Strike) - MAN HX3 with CAMM launcher fitted for Brimstone missiles

1703871594951.png

Swedish Service (On order) - MAN HX3 with Archer Unmanned 155mm Turret

1703871611534.png

German Development - MAN HX3 with M270/MARS T&E

1703871631027.png

NATO service - MAN HX3 Container

1703871645388.png


All of the trucks can be optionally manned permitting drivers to get some sleep in convoys and gunners to exit the area before the guns fire.



And there could even be a role for the TAPVs as convoy escorts - Leader and Follower vehicles with C-UAS turrets and spare drivers for the convoy vehicles.
 
Colin Parkinson said:
Some mortar porn. A battery of these might be a good fit with a LAV Battalion.
Click to expand...
The concept is good and necessary.

I like it's ability to do something close to direct fire which might negate the need for a direct fire support vehicle like the Booker. One thing that I'm not fond of is its need to return to a "loading position" after each round. There should be a system that facilitates reloading from a broader range of bearings and elevations. It's the type of thing one needs to look at more closely than just an advertising brochure video.

🍻
 
The twin .50cal turret would be a easy thing for us to build here, mount it on a flatbed version of the Senator and we can start forming AD units in the Reserves out of the current Artillery reserve units. It would be a fairly easy contract for Canadian companies to cut their teeth on and start learn how to produce AD weapons and then move onto more complex items later.

 
Colin Parkinson said:
The twin .50cal turret would be a easy thing for us to build here, mount it on a flatbed version of the Senator and we can start forming AD units in the Reserves out of the current Artillery reserve units. It would be a fairly easy contract for Canadian companies to cut their teeth on and start learn how to produce AD weapons and then move onto more complex items later.

Click to expand...
The M2 fires too slow for effective AA usage. The M3 versions are better, but quite frankly the lack of of a bursting payload (and one isn’t belting Mk211) makes the M3 still a poor option.

These days you need a STC fire control - so a dedicated system.

Doing anything for the .50 is just throwing good money away.
 
I see it as more of a stepping stone for both the military and industry and cheap enough to fit our soon to be budget. Prior to WWII, the US tossed out small contracts to help industry and government figure out the procurement process, this could fit such a thing. Complex enough to test the industry, yet simple enough to have new to military contract companies to bite on it.
 
I tend to agree. I'd rather see a half dozen effective and useable systems rather than 30 training aids. Obviously I'd like more than a half dozen, but if it's a money thing, in all cases, I want something that can be deployed. A troop of four for deployment, limited as a single troop, and two at home for training is better than zero deployable ones.

🍻
 
Colin Parkinson said:
I see it as more of a stepping stone for both the military and industry and cheap enough to fit our soon to be budget. Prior to WWII, the US tossed out small contracts to help industry and government figure out the procurement process, this could fit such a thing. Complex enough to test the industry, yet simple enough to have new to military contract companies to bite on it.
Click to expand...
Absolutely zero point.

As much as I like the GAU-19 this isn’t a role for it either.

Realistically you need at least a 30mm cannon simply for a practical ammunition nature for that role, and you need a radar guidance FCS.

You aren’t growing industry for those from a ragtag dual .50 mount for a Brinks Truck.
 
An avenger style turret with a 25-30mm gun with airbusrt rounds and a couple of SAMS. For close in AD
The platform could be truck, Lav, TAPV and almost anything else that has wheels, tracks, floats etc.
If we pushed a system like that out to each battalion/ Reserve unit they could add a valuable resource we can train with and deploy.
 
KevinB said:
Absolutely zero point.

As much as I like the GAU-19 this isn’t a role for it either.

Realistically you need at least a 30mm cannon simply for a practical ammunition nature for that role, and you need a radar guidance FCS.

You aren’t growing industry for those from a ragtag dual .50 mount for a Brinks Truck.
Click to expand...
While I kind of agree with you, we are unlikely to buy much if anything. The .50 cals are in the system, as is the ammunition. There is training packages, range fans already made up. There is likley 10-20 companies that could bang the turret assemblies out pretty quickly, whether it's trailer, vehicle or palletized, it makes minimal difference. I will add anything that spends defense monies on domestic jobs stands a chance in the coming budget nightmare.

One thing that is apparent from the current conflict is that you will never have enough AD. If Canada buys an AD systems, it will be a handful, with a handful of missiles to go with it. Which means only high value targets like HQ and the tanks will get protection and your infantry will be on it's own most of the time. I take a stopgap system over a notional placeholder any day.
Supplement these with Manpads, then you are starting to see some layering, get a Geapard 2.0, another layer, get NASAMS and now we have something and the MK II version could have 20mm with better sights, which was done in WWII. For chewing up the lowend drones these will work okay.
If I was king for a year, I get a 35mm gun system with it's own radar on a K9 chassis to complement our K9 SPG's and the NASAMS as well. But I am not king, so I look for a homegrown pauper solution for a non-serious Canadian military with a non-serious government which is likley to be involved in a another world crisis totally unprepared, yet again.
 
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