C3 Howitzer Replacement

[FJAG]

So, if we were to go for a towed replacement for the C3, given the option between the M777 (larger shell and commonality with the Reg Force, but more complex for maintenance) and a 105mm with similar range (smaller shell, less complex for maintenance, but different gun/ammo than the Reg Force - unless we eventually get the 105mm LAV vehicle), which route would the gunners here prefer to go?

For myself, there's little to no question. My fundamental, overarching factor is that we need to move away from training aids and get appropriate weapon systems which can be deployed into a high intensity theatre of operations. Maybe obtain sub-calibre devises so that less expensive training can be conducted with them but essentially get deployable weapons.

Firstly that means enough M777s to fully equip two light/medium brigades with full 18 gun regiments as well as several additional six gun batteries as reserve force training and reinforcement/replacement guns. (essentially sufficient to equip one additional regiment.)

Secondly that means at least one regiment's worth of extended range self propelled and armoured 155mm guns to equip a heavy brigade complete as well several additional six gun batteries as reserve force training and reinforcement/replacement guns (essentially sufficient to equip one, preferably two, additional regiment(s).)

Thirdly one regiment of HIMARS launchers.

Please don't start with the "that's not realistic" arguments again. The simple fact of the matter is that there is a need to get serious with acquiring and training with equipment that we will eventually have to fight with. All indications are that in the battlefield of the future we will need weapon systems that can strike deep into the enemy's rear areas in conjunction with modern joint target acquisition and joint strike capabilities. Anything else would be a waste of our time and our lives.

:cheers:

 

[MilEME09]

FJAG, the only difference between Realistic  and not is political will. If there was the will, the budget would be available, and the procurement system would make it happen.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I will politely disagree with FJAG, I think the 155mm platform will be to much for the gun and ammo for the reserves, except in certain cases where they are near a base with the appropriate ranges and support. Plus have an armoury that can handle them and their prime movers. A modern/more modern 105mm gun like the M119, has a much smaller logistical footprint and gives the CAF another tool in the toolbox to use in certain scenarios on the operational end and is much easier and logistical sustainable for the Reserves. What is the point of a bigger gun with less ammo, not enough spare parts and maintainers? Training can be eased by ensuring the FCS is the same across platforms and the survey/CP and comms are all the same.
There are so many things to be fixed and our C3's are leaving the building, more or less as we speak, so we don't have time for a big fix. The M119 could be built here under licence and also be a source of parts for other fleets out there(there are other 105mm options as well). That would bolster our defense industry and make the replacement program more politically palatable. At the same time bolster technical Class B positions at the artillery, armour and Svc battalions to start building the foundation of real logistical support.

We could also build at the same time, build kits to fit into the Navistar trucks to allow some of the guns to be mounted as mobile artillery. 

 

[MilEME09]

I will politely disagree with FJAG, I think the 155mm platform will be to much for the gun and ammo for the reserves, except in certain cases where they are near a base with the appropriate ranges and support. Plus have an armoury that can handle them and their prime movers. A modern/more modern 105mm gun like the M119, has a much smaller logistical footprint and gives the CAF another tool in the toolbox to use in certain scenarios on the operational end and is much easier and logistical sustainable for the Reserves. What is the point of a bigger gun with less ammo, not enough spare parts and maintainers? Training can be eased by ensuring the FCS is the same across platforms and the survey/CP and comms are all the same.
There are so many things to be fixed and our C3's are leaving the building, more or less as we speak, so we don't have time for a big fix. The M119 could be built here under licence and also be a source of parts for other fleets out there(there are other 105mm options as well). That would bolster our defense industry and make the replacement program more politically palatable. At the same time bolster technical Class B positions at the artillery, armour and Svc battalions to start building the foundation of real logistical support.

We could also build at the same time, build kits to fit into the Navistar trucks to allow some of the guns to be mounted as mobile artillery.

I disagree, what the reserves Can and can't do, again is a matter of the will power to see it through. Most Reserve Arty unit's that I am aware of are within 3 to 5 hours of a range to fire the guns, ditto for maintenance if not less. We have talked about the dangers in many other places about split fleets, have one common logistical tail for the arty would save us money, and stream line training. If we want a 105 then the entire fleet should be 105, and the same model. The 105 family is already a pain in the rear as it is with the C3/LG1 split to cause headaches in the gunner and technician world. I agree with bolstering class B support positions, even if it is on a rotational/semi permanent 89 day constant it would mean we keep peoples skills up. Right now only DRCCC has funding for qualified techs in the reserves to get short class B's to prevent skill fade, and even that is limited. Either way I agree with FJAG having a training purpose only weapon system is useless and a waste to the organization. Example as a weapons tech I need to have C3 Maintenance qualifications to finish my trades training to be allowed to go over sea's as a weapons tech. The C3 does not in any way carry over to the 777, the qual is essentially useless over sea's however I cannot deploy as a tech unless I have it, which in my opinion holds techs back from doing their jobs or deploying.

 

[FJAG]

FJAG, the only difference between Realistic  and not is political will. If there was the will, the budget would be available, and the procurement system would make it happen.

The government is giving DND 23.4 billion for 2020/21 growing to 32.7 billion by 2026/27. While the government sets the budget it's based on cost estimates created by DND. Politicians rarely wrap their minds around the details of defence spending and their priorities are more nebulous than the details of the equipment acquired and how the force is structured.

Sure, tell them we want to close down a base in Lower Cumquat and they'll get excited; tell them there's no economic spin off on a given capital project and they'll get excited, but they really don't care if you buy model x or model y of a ship, or model a or b of a given artillery system. That's basically based on how we frame the SORs for a given type of equipment. Neither do they care whether we cut capabilities like air defence, mortars, tanks etc.

All the decisions to turn us into a medium weight army were made by officers based on their own interpretation as to the direction of modern warfare. Everything the CAF is now is based on decisions made by CAF leadership one to two and a half decades ago. For example, it was DND and CAF and not the politicians who increased spending on headquarters above the brigade level by 46 percent during 2004-2010 (38% in the Capital Region alone and 19% at the executive level). Concurrently CAF lost combat capabilities. I doubt that a single politician other than the MND was involved in those decisions.

The budget is available right now to deliver better defence outputs. The high cost of full-time personnel is the anchor which is dragging down the force. It's up to DND/CAF to make internal changes before seeking more cash. Once DND/CAF has shed its bureaucratic deadwood and all other unnecessary full-time positions and determines a better way to make use of reserve personnel it will have sufficient incremental funds to acquire essential equipment.

:cheers:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The budget is available right now to deliver better defence outputs. The high cost of full-time personnel is the anchor which is dragging down the force. It's up to DND/CAF to make internal changes before seeking more cash. Once DND/CAF has shed its bureaucratic deadwood and all other unnecessary full-time positions and determines a better way to make use of reserve personnel it will have sufficient incremental funds to acquire essential equipment.

:cheers:

I believe the Czarist and Ottoman Armies have almost achieved the removal of their bureaucratic deadwood and all other unnecessary full-time positions.  8)

 

[Ralph]

The budget is available right now to deliver better defence outputs. The high cost of full-time personnel is the anchor which is dragging down the force. It's up to DND/CAF to make internal changes before seeking more cash. Once DND/CAF has shed its bureaucratic deadwood and all other unnecessary full-time positions and determines a better way to make use of reserve personnel it will have sufficient incremental funds to acquire essential equipment.

Do you have a working list of the bureaucratic deadwood?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Do you have a working list of the bureaucratic deadwood?

FJAG has written lots of papers, and I do believe a book a
listing such things....

 

[daftandbarmy]

FJAG has written lots of papers, and I do believe a book a
listing such things....

Yes. Please don't get him started again. I find the truth far too depressing   

 

[FJAG]

Do you have a working list of the bureaucratic deadwood?

Not itemized, no. Gen Leslie had a fairly extensive summation in his Transformation Report of 2011. And that was without being allowed to look into the civilian side of NDHQ.

By almost any standard and like almost all of our friends and allies, we have too many headquarters, too much cumbersome process, too much overhead, too much tail. We are going to have to reallocate a significant number of people from within to meet the demands of the future, and we have to do all that we can to protect and invest in the equipment, training and infrastructure needs of the front line and deployable units.
Transformation Report p. 79

Just for starters, I'll offer up one half of the Legal Branch and the National Defence and Canadian Forces Legal Advisor.

Re-read Leslie's Report and you'll understand the problem and see some of the solutions.

 

[MilEME09]

Not itemized, no. Gen Leslie had a fairly extensive summation in his Transformation Report of 2011. And that was without being allowed to look into the civilian side of NDHQ.

Just for starters, I'll offer up one half of the Legal Branch and the National Defence and Canadian Forces Legal Advisor.

Re-read Leslie's Report and you'll understand the problem and see some of the solutions.

And also see why it wasn't implemented, gotta protect those empires after all.

 

[Ralph]

Well, it's not all bad. We did come out of the last reorg with a Joint Lvl 1 HQ (manned at 97%). Also, claims processing, described as "onerous and technical, requiring user time to prepare, and specialist clerk services to administer and oversee" is easy enough for me to have 32/34'd a hundred of them at my last job...baby steps...

 

[suffolkowner]

https://twitter.com/TotherChris/status/1310884827202310146?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1310884827202310146%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.snafu-solomon.com%2F

saw this system on the snafu-solomon blog. multiple pod mlrs on a simple truck

 

[Kirkhill]

Or, on the other hand, a shorter route from Warehouse to Target.

You can fly rounds to theater and load them into launchers, OR, you can launch them from the shipping pallet when the transport is 1000 km from the theater.

C-17 Launches Pallet of Mock Missiles During Arsenal Plane Test

https://www.realcleardefense.com/2020/10/05/c-17_launches_pallet_of_mock_missiles_during_arsenal_plane_test_579605.html

 

[Kirkhill]

150 km Ramjet 155mm L52  from Nammo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vIPNElDkns

Also from Nammo a Ramjet Anti-Air Missile - 500 km Air to Air?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxQkUqYzOpk

And from SAAB - the 93 kg GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb mounted on an MRLS rocket = 16 kg AFX to 150 km with 5 to 8 m CEP

https://www.saab.com/products/ground-launched-small-diameter-bomb-glsdb
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmUU1SUDeAo
http://www.dmitryshulgin.com/2015/03/14/its-not-powerpoint/

 

[FJAG]

One sometimes forgets that in large part wars, and preparing for them, is an economic exercise.

There was a time when smart weapon systems were an improvement because they destroyed a target at a fraction of the commitment (and cost) of the conventional munitions needed to produce the same effect.

Unfortunately, we have reached an age where the costs of the super-smart technology munitions we hurl at the enemy is more expensive then the target it destroys (vis the ATACMS for MLRS and HIMARS at $800,000 per pop or a Harpoon at $1.5 million.)

It's gotten to the point where the launch platform is the cheapest part of the system to acquire and maintain.

Three cheers for the military-industrial complex. I'm more-and-more of the view that it is becoming essential that we acquire and control the means of production of weapon systems and ammunition into a form of national arsenals so as to control it's costs. (Yup. I know we've been there and done that and divested ourselves of the capabilities)

:worms:

 

[dapaterson]

Three cheers for the military-industrial complex. I'm more-and-more of the view that it is becoming essential that we acquire and control the means of production of weapon systems and ammunition into a form of national arsenals so as to control it's costs. (Yup. I know we've been there and done that and divested ourselves of the capabilities)

:worms:

Despite bureaucratic appreciation of that approach, it tends to increase costs, decrease flexibility, and erode interoperability.

For dissenting views, however, you can look at https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/samd-dps/eam-lmp-eng.html

https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/munitions-eng.html

 

[GR66]

There seem to be plenty of countries that produce weapons at the lower end of the tech scale in volume without bankrupting their economies.

Perhaps those are the areas where we should focus to produce for our Reserves.  Weapons that we will need en masse in a "break glass in case of emergency" scenario and save the extra high-tech (and expensive) toys for the smaller Regular Force.

Things that should be well within our capability to produce domestically in militarily meaningful numbers would be something like a light-weight 105mm howitzer in towed and self-propelled (by light, domestically produced vehicles) versions, mortars (again towed and self-propelled), MLRS launchers, etc. 

 

[blacktriangle]

There's also the opportunity cost...

Having systems that can deliver desired effects, with reduced risk of collateral damage or danger to blue forces, is worth something. The alternative is you may not be allowed to engage at all, or the precision/effect will not be up to par. I'd rather have something that I'm allowed to employ, and delivers the desired effect on the first shot.

If we have to cut people, tear down empires, or divest some legacy equipment to do so, so be it.

:2c:

 

[GR66]

There's also the opportunity cost...

Having systems that can deliver desired effects, with reduced risk of collateral damage or danger to blue forces, is worth something. The alternative is you may not be allowed to engage at all, or the precision/effect will not be up to par. I'd rather have something that I'm allowed to employ, and delivers the desired effect on the first shot.

If we have to cut people, tear down empires, or divest some legacy equipment to do so, so be it.

:2c:

That's why I suggested keeping the high-tech toys for the Reg Force.  Honestly, if we ever get to the point where we are mobilizing Reserve units for combat rather than as augmentation for Reg Force units then we'll likely be at a point where the ROE's are pretty damned loose.