• 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

For completion

The Caesar on a Renault 6x6

100 km/h on the road with a single tank range of 600 km.

The road move from Toronto to Montreal just became a lot easier.
 
Kirkhill said:
M109A5 56 km/h 350 km
M109A7 61 km/h 300 km
PzH2000 45 km/h off road
PzH2000 67 km/h on road 420 km
Man HX 8x8 100 km/h on road 483 km
Click to expand...
"On road" is a limitation. Military vehicles rarely travel at 100Kph except in admin moves. How often have the guns fighting around Kherson or the Donbas been moving around at 100Kph or moving more than a few kms or dozen kilometres.
Kirkhill said:
Twice the speed and 40% more range on a single fillup.
Click to expand...
Batteries carry extra fuel and a functional supply system will ensure that even on admin moves refueling points are set up so that convoys continue to roll. We're not running blitzkrieg through the Steppes here.
Kirkhill said:
And if you are fighting in a region like Europe, with well developed road networks, and shoot and scoot tactics, how much time are you going to spend in muddy fields or crashing through bocage. Do you even need to set up your guns in battery? Or can you engage the enemy from 6 individual guns in parking lots and lay-bys firing MRSI missions
with GPS and UAVs?
Click to expand...
Road networks can be disrupted. Don't get mesmerized by visions of HIMARS shooting off highways. The vast bulk of artillery sits still a lot longer than you think in areas a lot rougher than a paved road. Don't forget that artillery manoeuvre areas are more restrictive than you think. Rear areas are relatively crowded and gun positions that attract grid squares worth of counterfire are highly disruptive to all the other living things sharing space with you. Guns will have to tough it out by short hops more than grand sweeping moves and all too often may have to continue to provide support even while taking fire.

And believe me, those hops will be through fields and bocage and bus 🍻 ted up roads and drainage ditches and small streams and urban rubble - lots and lots of urban rubble. Guns try to stay away from roads. Roads draw surveillance and surveillance draws unnecessary and unwelcome attention.

Do you need to set up guns in batteries? Technically no. We routinely deploy in pairs and command post systems can handle multiple single-gun deployments.

But - self defence and resupply, especially ammo, is facilitated by closer groupings. I'm not talking six-gun hub to hub positions here but probably pairs or triplets with a battery spread over 2 or 3 sq kms with maybe three or four alternate positions each. It's a little hard to track down how the French use them but I surmise that every Caesar battery is divided into two firing sections of either 3 or 4 guns. Strangely most regiments have three batteries but are listed as having sixteen guns and also sixteen 120mm mortars in a weapon locker format.

Technically speaking we might get to the point where command posts are not required but practically speaking I'll lay money that we won't. Flinging 100 lb bricks of high explosive around the battlefield needs a bit more oversight and supervision then some drone operator with a radio link talking to some gun. There will always be a need for something along the lines of a CP, an FSCC, an ASCC and an STACC.

Long story short when it comes to the chassis I want to see a chassis that's compatible with the vehicles of the supported arms and with the operating gun module protected and under armour, not just to protect the crews but all the delicate and breakable bits that hang on a gun.

🍻
 
daftandbarmy said:
I like that a 'shithole little country' like Slovakia can produce something like this, but we can't .

That, and it's so ugly it's cute ;)
Click to expand...
Probably because they've been major arms manufacturers since the 15 the century. Living as they do in a part of that world that hasn't seen much in the way peace.
And you're right it's a damned cute little thing isn't it?
 
GK .Dundas said:
Probably because they've been major arms manufacturers since the 15 the century. Living as they do in a part of that world that hasn't seen much in the way peace.
And you're right it's a damned cute little thing isn't it?
Click to expand...


penguin GIF
 
GK .Dundas said:
Probably because they've been major arms manufacturers since the 15 the century. Living as they do in a part of that world that hasn't seen much in the way peace.
And you're right it's a damned cute little thing isn't it?
Click to expand...
It is in the capability of Canadian industry to produce something like this its the will to that is lacking. That will is lacking because of the limiting interest in the government in buying any. And even if the government did it would be small amounts.

There is an advantage Canada has over most everyone. Any capability that Canadian industry is lacking can be easy purchased as we are a trusted buyer and source. Also the close interconnected North American industry makes such things easier. But I don't see much leveraging of that industry. GDLS-Canada is the best example. Bell Canada also to some degree. LM Canada in the maritime space has done ok also.

I also remember hearing when Bombardier was the aerospace national champion the government basically told them to stay out of become a defence prime. Yes they did and do supply the platform but that's it. The government did not want a company like Bombardier to be depended on military contracts. That creates problems the government does not like such as a voter base that would be mad at canceled or changing contracts. Again GDLS Canada is a prefect example. The Saudi contract was a huge problem for them of their own making. Big Unifor voter base in an important London area riding but the governments base supporter else where wanted the contract cancelled.
 
Kirkhill said:
How the Zuzana handles once it comes off its flatbed

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/won0fi
Click to expand...
There's an interesting little question that arises out of the functioning of this gun. The sequence around 0:58 shows the gun firing and it rocks back which exposes a view of the top of the turret which shows quite a few exposed moving parts and a fairly large part of the tender bits of the gun exposed in a large open slot at the top of the turret. That's not what I'd call an elegant solution. Not quite as exposed as the Caesar but nowhere near as protected as an M109 or even the KMW Arty Gun Module as incorporated into the experimental Donar and Boxer.

Spencer100 said:
It is in the capability of Canadian industry to produce something like this its the will to that is lacking. That will is lacking because of the limiting interest in the government in buying any. And even if the government did it would be small amounts.
Click to expand...
I agree as to the will but put it even further down the government scale. I don't think that it is within the will of the CA to put resources into this. There is always talk but no funded project that I'm aware of.

😇
 
Pick-up trucks with multiple 70mm rockets

23x 1-2 kg of HE. 8 to 11 km ballistic. 3 to 5 km with Precision Guidance.

Being supplied by Germany to Ukraine


1660919707028.png


https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/ws84xx

www.businessinsider.de

Es geht um spezielle Raketenwerfer: Lambrecht prüft neue Waffen-Lieferungen für die Ukraine

Die Bundesregierung prüft die Lieferung von leichten Raketenwerfern an die Ukraine. Diese können auf Pickup-Fahrzeuge befestigt werden.
www.businessinsider.de www.businessinsider.de


www.arnolddefense.com

MLHS : Arnold Defense

www.arnolddefense.com www.arnolddefense.com

en.wikipedia.org

Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org


A low cost technical solution that can be built in Canada - lots of ammunition in stock at Dundurn.
 
Kirkhill said:
A low cost technical solution that can be built in Canada - lots of ammunition in stock at Dundurn.
Click to expand...
I'm sold.

The difficulty that I see is that the CA wasn't looking for a solution to a problem.

It now have multiple solutions for a problem it didn't recognize.

At this point it will take the Army ten years of study to decide as to whether there really is a problem or not, and if there is, what the optimum solution to it is.

I despair.

😖
 
Last edited:
Surely you jest! Nearly two decades ago we decided to reduce our fire power was the way to prepare for whatever was coming down the pike. Since then, we quite rightly worked on an integrated fire support establishment, albeit one without a meaningful amount of surface-to-surface and absolutely zip in surface-to-air systems. It's sort of like deciding automatic weapons had no place in winning the fire fight.
 
FJAG said:
I'm sold.

The difficulty that I see is that the CA wasn't looking for a solution to a problem.

It now have multiple solutions for a problem it didn't recognize.

At this point it will take the Army ten years of study to decide as to whether there really is a problem or not, and if there is, what the optimum solution to it is.

I despair.

😖
Click to expand...

Perhaps the 70mm is better suited to the Spt Troop in a Light Cavalry Squadron. 1 Spt Tp and 3 Patrol Troops.
 
Taiwan buying HIMARS because the US can't produce 40 M109A6 Paladins fast enough.

The worsening geostrategic environment is motivating Taiwan’s decision to purchase additional M142 High Mobility Artillery Rockets Systems (HIMARS)
Click to expand...
In its proposed defence budget for 2023, Taiwan has allocated funding for the acquisition of 29 HIMARS, as well as 84 ATACMS surface-to-surface missiles (SSM) and 864 precision guided rockets
Click to expand...
Having initially planned to purchase 11 HIMARS launchers and 64 ATACMS missiles, Taiwan was forced to update its planned defence expenditures after original plans to purchase 40 M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzers were cancelled in May due to “inadequate production capabilities”
Click to expand...



Lessons from Ukraine

Analysts highlight the extremely high attrition rate of both advanced and legacy platforms in a high intensity conflict. “The previous efforts to enhance deterrence by acquiring small numbers of advanced platforms and systems have come under increased scrutiny over the past several months,” says Sauer.

“Concerns mount that such an approach would provide ‘priority targets’ for any hostile. Once defeated, these would cripple the military’s capacity to react and respond.”

A paradigm shift has occurred in the Taiwanese procurement priorities, with funding being diverted from large-scale procurement programs to support the development and purchase of more affordable force-multiplier technology. These include tactical uncrewed aerial systems, anti-tank guided missiles and man-portable air defence systems.
Click to expand...

www.army-technology.com

HIMARS purchase by Taiwan reflects the tension driving Japan’s military build-up

China’s shadow leaves neighbours adopting new defensive approaches, including HIMARS heavy 'porcupine strategy'.
www.army-technology.com www.army-technology.com
 
FJAG said:
Just an update on ERCA



🍻
Click to expand...

fifteen private companies brought their perspective to the table
Click to expand...
As the Army sought outsider perspectives, only five of the companies were selected to continue with their capabilities testing and were sent to the proving ground
Click to expand...
“These companies have a new eye, are new to the Army, new to artillery, but they also know engineering and how can we take this process and optimize it and look at it from a different lens,”
Click to expand...
“We are about halfway through a two-year sprint to improve rate of fire for the ERCA system,”
Click to expand...

So NOT the same old, same old....
 
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