C3 Howitzer Replacement

[Old Sweat]

Not to mention "Left brake on", "right brake off" , "Trails right", "right brake on", "Left brake off", "Trails left" to get over a bit of a hump. Ah yes my gun crew just loved me...... [lol:

Along with cries such as "Double man the left trail" and "Don't walk backwards with the trail."

 

[a_majoor]

While sadly no one in positions of power are going to look at this issue seriously (if at all), I will follow Chris Pook's lead and try to do a bit of catalogue shopping.

Perhaps the most reasonable alternative might be the Dragonfire 2 system trialled by the USMC some years ago. A 120mm mortar system which is capable of automatic fire and is highly automated, so only a very small gun det is needed per tube. Dragonfire can be carried on a towed mount, but was also demonstrated mounted in a LAV 25 chassis, so there are two options which fit with out ways of doing things (a Dragonfire 2 in a re-purposed LAV III chassis or a LAV 6.0 would be no problem.

Thinking a bit sideways, the Russian 82mm 2B9 Vasilek automatic mortar has been trialled mounted on the back of a HMMVW, as well as in Russian service ion Afghanistan on the rear deck of BMP's and MTLB's. While the Russian mortar itself isn't going to be in our inventory, there seems to be no reason that it can't be "reverse engineered" by us. The 2B9 Vasilek also comes on a towed mount, so our analogue can be pulled by a light or medium truck, if desired.

The Cockerill CT-CV 105HP turret is a "drop in" turret for LAV class vehicles. While designed for armoured warfare, it has the unusual property of begin a Wegmann turret with a max elevation of 420. Armoured troops have the ability to use their cannons in a "semi indirect" role, and firing 105mm rounds from a mobile, armoured platform is always a useful ability, even if the cap badge is armoured rather than "Unique". Similar abilities exist with single and dual barrelled AMOS 120mm mortar turrets for LAV class vehicles.

Finally, the Swedish "Archer" SP system provides a 155 cannon with a high degree of mobility and autonomy. Each gun is mounted on an articulated truck chassis and only requires a 3 man Det to set up and fire. The gun fires form a magazine, so the echelon follows with pre loaded magazines for quick change outs, also using largely automated systems. This is the most capable of all the catalogue choices, and also the most expensive in terms of unit cost and the amount of second line support that it might need, but it compliments the M-777 in both range and ability, and while the M-777 can be moved by helicopter and road, the Archer is readable and has some cross country mobility to compliment the M-777.

While Rocket artillery and GBAD/C-RAM systems are also important elements of the Artillery park. I would suggest they are more for the Reg Force than the Reserve.

 

[MilEME09]

Dragon Fire 2 would be a good system to have both towed, and LAV mounted. Buy the towed variations for the reserves, LAV mounted for reg force. Low cost, but still helps keep some of those skill from fading.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I would convert some Reserve units to towed 120mm, frees up more guns for the others, negotiate to buy some 105mm out of the South Korean stocks and rebuild to C3 standards. Also I was thinking a FOB that had mortars and a couple of light field guns could really reach out, particularly when you don't have space and resupply for the 155mm. It would not be hard to have a turntable for the C3, using the same mounting methods as the avalanche guns and portable turntable. Yea I know I am dreaming again.

 

[Kirkhill]

Do you mean like the old 25 pdr?

I think I remember reading that it had its advantages but rather slowed the "scoot" when the platform had to be dug out of the mud.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Do you mean like the old 25 pdr?

I think I remember reading that it had its advantages but rather slowed the "scoot" when the platform had to be dug out of the mud.

I guess the same can be said of the LG-1?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was thinking more as an option for long term usage in one spot. The 105mm C3 is a heavier gun already than the 25pdr, so carting that around all the time will cause issues. It is a nice feature though.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I would convert some Reserve units to towed 120mm, frees up more guns for the others, negotiate to buy some 105mm out of the South Korean stocks and rebuild to C3 standards. Also I was thinking a FOB that had mortars and a couple of light field guns could really reach out, particularly when you don't have space and resupply for the 155mm. It would not be hard to have a turntable for the C3, using the same mounting methods as the avalanche guns and portable turntable. Yea I know I am dreaming again.

The British L118 has a turntable too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L118_light_gun

29 Cdo enjoy man hauling the thing up into odd places from time to time:

BRITISH commandos have hauled a two-ton artillery gun up a 130ft cliff by hand to protect a vital strategic outpost in Afghanistan.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article158257.ece

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Where is  a will there is a way, the British have long history with "Pack artillery" http://www.victorianmilitarysociety.org.uk/reserach/2012-09-09-11-20-22/archive/27-mountain-gunners-a-brief-history-of-the-indian-mountain-artillery-1840-1914

 

[Cloud Cover]

The modernized version of the M119 with digital fire control systems is still in production at Rock Island. Really, this should be an easy decision if the only criteria was "replacement". But I am getting the sense that the army is looking at newer or different capabilities, and DND brain trust is likely asking why the guns or this component of the army reserve is needed at all, whether with guns, mortars or missiles.

 

[George Wallace]

The modernized version of the M119 with digital fire control systems is still in production at Rock Island. Really, this should be an easy decision if the only criteria was "replacement". But I am getting the sense that the army is looking at newer or different capabilities, and DND brain trust is likely asking why the guns or this component of the army reserve is needed at all, whether with guns, mortars or missiles.

When will they then make up their minds on "Pomp and Ceremony"?

 

[dapaterson]

Tragically, I think selling it on "gun salutes" instead of "indirect fire capability" could be a winner.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The modernized version of the M119 with digital fire control systems is still in production at Rock Island. Really, this should be an easy decision if the only criteria was "replacement". But I am getting the sense that the army is looking at newer or different capabilities, and DND brain trust is likely asking why the guns or this component of the army reserve is needed at all, whether with guns, mortars or missiles.

and where pray tell will they get guns and gunners from in a hurry when the shit hits the fan again in a conflict they never actually envisioned? Why also should someone join the Reserves if they don't get to do interesting non-civilian stuff? If you treat the Reserves purely as a holding cell for a warm body, you soon find the warm bodies have moved on. By all means convert some to 120mm mortars and also add AD and UAV troops. But they have known that the guns needed replacing 20 years ago, now somebody needs something "transformative" and that means you end up with nothing yet again.

 

[GnyHwy]

Tragically, I think selling it on "gun salutes" instead of "indirect fire capability" could be a winner.

Sadly, there is some truth in this. Is a gun salute an actual task? There are plenty of people that would say yes. Perhaps when the C3 is truly retired (many years from now), we will keep a few around for this. Or maybe we should go truly classic and use a 25 pdr or 75mm?

C3 replacement is probably a bad title, since we are not likely to replace the C3. The C3 still has plenty of usage, transferable skills and is a low cost option for training. There are initiatives to keep this machine moving forward.

The M119, although capable, is not a realistic option and would only be another (expensive) band aid on top of the existing band aid. The GMS for the M119 could provide a smaller delta for training on the 777, but probably not worth the investment. From my POV, in the current situation, our Res F are tasked with augmenting Reg F, whether it be the 777, 81mm or other enablers, and the C3 and 81mm fulfil this adequately. That said, I am very confident our Res F could stand up a very effective C3 Bty in very short notice.

Long term for the Res F, 12O mm or 155 mm are where the growth potential is at. Whether or not we have the cash to do it is another question. Going ultra-light (<81 mm) or long range rockets is probably something best left for the Reg F.

Cheers,

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Meanwhile in India http://qz.com/717243/india-will-spend-750-million-on-artillery-guns-to-secure-its-border-with-china/

 

[Cloud Cover]

I hope that defence budget number of  $620B number is a typo and not actually dollars.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

could be a currency conversion oops

 

[dapaterson]

That's for FY 14-22, a period of 8-9 years, as near as I can tell.

 

[Petard]

Easy to tell it's an American M777 gun Det and not a Canadian one in the pic; everyone has their PPE on

 

[Colin Parkinson]

This buy could drop the cost of the gun and lead to some improvements, might even spur us to pick up some more. A reserve 155mm battery at Shilo fed by gunners from across Canada for the summer?