• 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

In addition to what @FJAG has pointed out, the extra bodies allow one to work longer with rest periods, so local defense tasks.

SOF Recce Det’s are generally now a min of 6 pers, the old 4 man setup doesn’t work to keep eyes on target 24/7. Sniper dets have also grown in size - from 2 to 3-6 simply due to security and manning requirements.

While it appears some of those setups you mention save PY’s they do so at reduce operational flexibility.

How about this?

6 person det
1 gun with 2 gunners
2 ammo trucks with 2 gunners each
Ammo trucks equipped with autopilots to reduce the work load on the gunners driving -

Gunners of the det rotate taskings.
 
How about this?

6 person det
1 gun with 2 gunners
2 ammo trucks with 2 gunners each
Ammo trucks equipped with autopilots to reduce the work load on the gunners driving -

Gunners of the det rotate taskings.
I have not looked too closely, but that is very likely how the Swedes run an Archer Gun Det... Other than the autopilot truck part.
 
I think the gun's crew numbers are still messed up....don't you still need the 2x soldiers standing 100 feet behind the guns with the horse teams?
 
You've convinced me on the numbers not on the guns long ago. You've even convinced me on the numbers of truckers and ammo handlers.

The area that I see room for improvement is in your pet peeve of 4 gun batteries. You can get to your 6 or even 8 gun batteries faster with the Boxer/RCH-155 than you can with the M109s or PzH2000. And if tracks are the issue you could mount the RCH-155 rig on the back of a Bradley or a CV-90 variant.
The nice aspect of the 777, M109A7 and HIMARS is the US Army has them. This production lines and more importantly spares are next door.
When (or IF) the US Army adopts a wheeled SPA for the Stryker formations then that option slides in as well.

The CA with a fairly insignificant fleet size shouldn’t be looking at bespoke Items, but look south for equipment in most cases to simplify supply.
 
How about this?

6 person det
1 gun with 2 gunners
2 ammo trucks with 2 gunners each
Ammo trucks equipped with autopilots to reduce the work load on the gunners driving -

Gunners of the det rotate taskings.
I don't pay undue attention to the gun det numbers. I work in round numbers and current PYs. PYs matter most because regardless of what the true need is, PYs are sacred and unless you find them within your own establishment you won't get them. The fear is if you come to the table with a gun that "only needs" two operators, before you know it the infantry will want to take 200 of the arty's overall PYs as being surplus. 🍻

In the real world, however, one has to look at a lot of factors in determining how many people a battery needs: gun det minimums, ammo handlers, command posts, 24/7 operations, crew rest, maintainers, drivers, security, ability to absorb LOBs and casualties, type and scale of operations (position movements, dispersion, contested or secure AMAs, digging in,) etc etc etc. All of those can vary the scale of manning required and, since you never know how when or how you go to war, you always need to prepare for the worst.

This is why I'm a strong advocate of involving reservists. A large amount of the manning required in war is simply not needed in peacetime and can be kept on a parttime basis because the skill levels needed are not complex. The true purpose of peacetime training is to keep all the complex skill levels alive and current and, as a side benefit, have a right-sized force available for rapid reaction. BUT there needs to be a clear plan to acquire the additional people and equipment relatively rapidly when the time comes.

🍻
 
While we are waiting for the SPG's, get a bunch of 120mm mortars in the back of LAV's as an interim measure.
I'd have been against that in the past but considering the state of the C3s, some interim plan is getting necessary.

My fear is that some bright spark in Ottawa will consider the "interim solution" as the new status quo and figure out that we can save the billion bucks for SPGs and instead use it to fund four more GOFOS and their staff in Ottawa for a few years.

😖
 
I'd have been against that in the past but considering the state of the C3s, some interim plan is getting necessary.

My fear is that some bright spark in Ottawa will consider the "interim solution" as the new status quo and figure out that we can save the billion bucks for SPGs and instead use it to fund four more GOFOS and their staff in Ottawa for a few years.

😖
If it comes out of the Artillery then - yes, but it should be an Infantry thing, which shouldn't affect the balance of the force.

*at least in a task focused Military.
 
I'd have been against that in the past but considering the state of the C3s, some interim plan is getting necessary.

My fear is that some bright spark in Ottawa will consider the "interim solution" as the new status quo and figure out that we can save the billion bucks for SPGs and instead use it to fund four more GOFOS and their staff in Ottawa for a few years.

😖

My fear is that we will continue to do nothing while we wait for the right thing.
 
If it comes out of the Artillery then - yes, but it should be an Infantry thing, which shouldn't affect the balance of the force.

*at least in a task focused Military.
I took the suggestion as getting 120s as an interim for the guns but leave the 81s with the infantry. In my mind, once the final SPG solution is made the 120s could go to the infantry.

I know we're just fooling around with this in these posts, but the C3 crisis is becoming palpable to the point where shooting will soon become undoable. If guns don't go "boom" troops will vote with their feet.

I suspect that ResF issues are taking even more of a back seat as we deal with "reconstitution" but these issues run in parallel. Young soldiers aren't stupid. They can see what is and isn't important to the centre and you can only revel in being an underdog for so long before you say "F--- it".

My fear is that we will continue to do nothing while we wait for the right thing.
My fear is that we aren't even looking for the right thing.

😖
 
Last edited:
I took the suggestion as getting 120s as an interim for the guns but leave the 81s with the infantry. In my mind, one the final SPG solution is made the 120s could go to the infantry.
My concern would be if they came as a C3 stopgap, that the CA would call it a day...
It would become the Royal Canadian Mortars, and the Royal Canadian Horse Mortars.

I know we're just fooling around with this in these posts, but the C3 crisis is becoming palpable to the point where shooting will soon become undoable. If guns don't go "boom" troops will vote with their feet.
One would think that it should be possible to work exercises either with the RCHA units, or try to find something down here with the ARNG Arty units. It isn't a solution, but more of a bandaid.
I suspect that ResF issues are taking even more of a back seat as we deal with "reconstitution" but these issues run in parallel. Young soldiers aren't stupid. They can see what is and isn't important to the centre and you can only revel in being an underdog for so long before you say "F--- it".


My fear is that we aren't even looking for the right thing.

😖
My fear is more they wouldn't know the right thing -- the LG1 enters the chat...
 
Thankfully my unit has 2 complete 25pdrs and limbers, so they can at least continue to train after the 105's are gone. We also have a 18pdr for area defense using shrapnel and it seems they just acquired a 155mm Howitzer (aka The Pig), so we can have a Heavy Troop as well.

image002_orig.jpg
 
My concern would be if they came as a C3 stopgap, that the CA would call it a day...
It would become the Royal Canadian Mortars, and the Royal Canadian Horse Mortars.
Ditto.
One would think that it should be possible to work exercises either with the RCHA units, or try to find something down here with the ARNG Arty units. It isn't a solution, but more of a bandaid.
Using their ranges is one thing. Borrowing their kit is another that neither bureaucracy would be thrilled about.
My fear is more they wouldn't know the right thing -- the LG1 enters the chat...
There aren't that many and they come with their own problems.

On the other hand, S Korea still has a thousand or so M101s. Or maybe the US could sell us a few clapped out M119s.

We could opt for these to flesh out our M777 numbers
Don't laugh. They were the runner up if we couldn't have gotten M777s in 2006.

😟
 
For the unit that goes no where without its vehicles (LAVs, CV90s or Tanks) then

4 of these for every Leo Squadron ( and reduce the Leo Squadron down to 14 Leos)

1665080244688.png

8 of these for every LAV Battalion

1665080456271.png

81 mm mortars for those folks who have to walk to work, preferably at least 2 for each company but can be held at battalion for dispersal as required.
 
BAE looking at re-opening the M777 lines. Apparently a number of countries are expressing interest.

Unfortunately the whole story is behind a paywall.


Together with NAMMO's 155mm Ramjet ammunition, tested by the US Army, that would mean all weather precision fire at 150 km ranges from the standard L39 barrel of the M777.


 
Back
Top