Indirect Fires Modernization Project - C3/M777 Replacement

[Kirkhill]

We don't have enough M777's if we suddenly need to grow the army into something that can fight wars. My previous answer was to give us 2x4 gun reg force batteries and 4 Reserve batteries. The reg force also gets all the SPG's . We could buy extra SPG's to be used as a training school for Reservists as well (Also a reserve M777 training battery would be nice). The M118/119 goes to the rest of the Reserves, which allows them to grow back into 6 gun batteries. That gives your artillery park depth, allows for more more opportunities to train new gun commanders, GPO's etc.

Bit by bit grow your reserve artillery so they can provide instructors for the Reserve training batteries on the SPG and M777 focusing on the break in the school year.

What percent of your 17 to 20 regimental batteries are you going to devote to each of

M119
M777
SPH
MRLS
LAA
IAMD?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

No SPG for the Reserve outside of the training battery. I have 4 of the Regiments closest to Reg force training areas to have the M777. I suspect that you could 2-3 Reserve units tasked with MRLS, perhaps even a Reserve battery as well. Depending on numbers, you could reduce the number of guns in the Reserve unit and give them MRLS as well. I think training a MRLS detachment who is already gun qualified will be fairly easy. I think the real work will be training the CP personal and tactical use of MRLS.

LAA, training battery as well, along with several Reserve units tasked with a Troop of LAA, either Manpads or smaller gun/missile system along with simulators.

You have 19 Reserve arty units

4x M777
2-3 x MRLS
12 x M119 with either LAA or UAS Troops

So tubes for Reserve units and training
20 xM777
4-6x 155 SPG (Training school only)
12-16x MRLS
78x M119 (6 more if you also want a summer training battery as well)
18x LAA systems (with 6 located at the training base)

You also need numerous spares of each, so workshops can cycle guns and weapon systems for repairs and upgrades and still keep the units supplied. The Reserve artillery school will eventually be quite large. Either in Shilo or perhaps Suffield?

 

[FJAG]

We don't have enough M777's if we suddenly need to grow the army into something that can fight wars. My previous answer was to give us 2x4 gun reg force batteries and 4 Reserve batteries. The reg force also gets all the SPG's . We could buy extra SPG's to be used as a training school for Reservists as well (Also a reserve M777 training battery would be nice). The M118/119 goes to the rest of the Reserves, which allows them to grow back into 6 gun batteries. That gives your artillery park depth, allows for more more opportunities to train new gun commanders, GPO's etc.

Bit by bit grow your reserve artillery so they can provide instructors for the Reserve training batteries on the SPG and M777 focusing on the break in the school year.

My view on the M777 has everything to do with the range. We definitely need more guns that come with more range. We don't need more M777s (and in fact the IFM is supposed to replace them.

We have somewhere around 33 M777s. At 18 per regiment that gives us one regiment plus two batteries and a few tech guns. I think we can safely form one light, air transportable brigade. One regiment is enough for that.

Assuming we can get all our LAVs and ACSVs on the road we have enough for another 2 to 3 brigades (depending on how you organize them and whether we expand on tanks) - so that's - lets say 3 regiments of SPs or 54 guns. Add another regiment for 18 rockets and another for AD and you've got the whole Cdn army - as it stands - equipped.

IMF is calling for 80 - 102 SPs. That leaves some 26 to 48 unaccounted for. Leaving aside guns for the RCAS and tech and there's probably 2 to 6 batteries of SPs up for grabs.

The reserves (16 fd regts and 3 indep bties) can, at best - as it stands - man 10 - 12 batteries. But we don't really need that many more manned. Maybe another regiment as a GS regiment. What we do need are a lot more air defenders, STA folks, rocket folks and LM folks.

It doesn't matter whether or not you have a separate RegF/ARes establishment, or create hybrid units (my favourite option), there are enough guns between the existin M777s and the IFM SPs and LRPF to equip the deployable tactical elements of the army.

I'll do the math in another direction. We currently have 6 4-gun RegF M777 batteries and 16 ARes regiments which together can form around 10-12 batteries. We also have 3 RHQs and 3 FOO batteries. The level of tactical and tech knowledge is getting to the point where it is hard to fully train a reservist on the essential RHQ, FSCC and FOO tasks - I'll take the view that you need a heavy RegF presence for those. Gun lines are more doable. based on the number of M777s in hand and the number of SPs incoming, we can equip roughly 27 to 32 4-gun batteries or 18-21 6-gun batteries. Either way, we simply do not have enough RegF and ARes combined to man that much less the rockets, STA and AD we need.

I've heard some interesting talk about increasing the size of the ARes and creating a massive SuppRes, but very little of what we're doing in the way of formations and their tasks and roles much less their equipment. IMHO, its plain unproductive to talk in broad-brush numbers without having an outline plan for roles/structure.

Here's the problem the way that I see it. The army still doesn't know what it wants to be when it grows up. The little that I see of Inflection Point on this side of the DWAN reinforces that. It's an organization that stifles mobilization rather than prepares for it.

 

[dapaterson]

Before equipping the Army reserve abandon the thought that the current disposition and numbers of units is correct, or even thought out or planned.

 

[KevinB]

My view on the M777 has everything to do with the range. We definitely need more guns that come with more range. We don't need more M777s (and in fact the IFM is supposed to replace them.

We have somewhere around 33 M777s. At 18 per regiment that gives us one regiment plus two batteries and a few tech guns. I think we can safely form one light, air transportable brigade. One regiment is enough for that.

Lets aim for a 24 gun Reg't then.

Assuming we can get all our LAVs and ACSVs on the road we have enough for another 2 to 3 brigades (depending on how you organize them and whether we expand on tanks) - so that's - lets say 3 regiments of SPs or 54 guns. Add another regiment for 18 rockets and another for AD and you've got the whole Cdn army - as it stands - equipped.

That is the Reg Force -- the PRes have zero AFV's.
They are by nature light - so I would like to see those CBG's at least have a Gun Reg't each - but the ripple effect of that is even worse when looking below.

IMF is calling for 80 - 102 SPs. That leaves some 26 to 48 unaccounted for. Leaving aside guns for the RCAS and tech and there's probably 2 to 6 batteries of SPs up for grabs.

The reserves (16 fd regts and 3 indep bties) can, at best - as it stands - man 10 - 12 batteries. But we don't really need that many more manned. Maybe another regiment as a GS regiment. What we do need are a lot more air defenders, STA folks, rocket folks and LM folks.

It doesn't matter whether or not you have a separate RegF/ARes establishment, or create hybrid units (my favourite option), there are enough guns between the existin M777s and the IFM SPs and LRPF to equip the deployable tactical elements of the army.

Again that assumes using ALL of the PRes Arty to support the Reg Force Brigades.
I don't think either of us see that as viable.

I'll do the math in another direction. We currently have 6 4-gun RegF M777 batteries and 16 ARes regiments which together can form around 10-12 batteries. We also have 3 RHQs and 3 FOO batteries. The level of tactical and tech knowledge is getting to the point where it is hard to fully train a reservist on the essential RHQ, FSCC and FOO tasks - I'll take the view that you need a heavy RegF presence for those. Gun lines are more doable. based on the number of M777s in hand and the number of SPs incoming, we can equip roughly 27 to 32 4-gun batteries or 18-21 6-gun batteries. Either way, we simply do not have enough RegF and ARes combined to man that much less the rockets, STA and AD we need.

Again very worrisome given the fact that there are not enough Gunners (Reg and Res) simply to support the Reg Force.

I've heard some interesting talk about increasing the size of the ARes and creating a massive SuppRes, but very little of what we're doing in the way of formations and their tasks and roles much less their equipment. IMHO, its plain unproductive to talk in broad-brush numbers without having an outline plan for roles/structure.

Without an operational plan to train and equip that is all smoke and mirrors and the Good Idea Fairy waving the wand of dumb ideas.

Here's the problem the way that I see it. The army still doesn't know what it wants to be when it grows up. The little that I see of Inflection Point on this side of the DWAN reinforces that. It's an organization that stifles mobilization rather than prepares for it.

110%

 

[KevinB]

Before equipping the Army as a whole with abandon the thought that the current disposition and numbers of units is correct, or even thought out or planned.

FIFY.

To @FJAG 's point the key aspect before anything is what is the Army supposed to be, that really needs to be addressed before any equipment (etc) goes anywhere. Or you will end up with more TAPV type of issues.

That is on the CCA and their staff to distill down to what is needed to answer the Governments needs, in conjunction with the ground realities of the world today.

 

[PrairieFella]

FIFY.

To @FJAG 's point the key aspect before anything is what is the Army supposed to be, that really needs to be addressed before any equipment (etc) goes anywhere. Or you will end up with more TAPV type of issues.

That is on the CCA and their staff to distill down to what is needed to answer the Governments needs, in conjunction with the ground realities of the world today.

It kills me that the TAPV will forever be known as a cautionary tale lol. The LSVW for the new millenium.

Hopefully we get some proper cav vehicles soon, that way we can finally use the TAPV as God intended, as hard targets.

 

[FJAG]

Before equipping the Army reserve abandon the thought that the current disposition and numbers of units is correct, or even thought out or planned.

I think both the numbers and locations were relatively well thought out and planned - as part of the Dundonald reforms of 2002-2004. The 1936 reforms also looked at the issues in a coherent manner. By the time we got to the Suttie commission in 1964 the army had lost the plot. Unfortunately since Suttie all that's been done is fine tuning and numbers crunching so you are absolutely right.

The kindest thing that one can say about the current disposition and numbers is that it still provides a potential core of moderately trained and poorly equipped folks to lead Stage 4 National Mobilization (Something that until a few months ago no one in Ottawa that mattered gave a hoot about.)

I'm a firm believer that DND needs reservists to a) augment/round out existing RegF units; b) have trained and equipped units and formations to expand the RegF army when mass matters; and c) have partially trained but properly equipped units and formations for homeland defence and national mobilization.

The folks in a) can come from an individual ready reserve or properly trained SuppRes list;

Those in b) need to be a well thought out organization for which proper capital costs and subsequent O&M cost properly provided. IMHO, these units and formations should all be 1) located in major city centres where a proper recruit base exists; and 2) have a healthy RegF leadership and admin component so as to provide them with an acceptable tiered readiness capability - this is where the mass of the army's artillery should be.

Those in c) should be widely dispersed with well defined tasks and roles commensurate with their numbers and location.

 

[Kirkhill]

Here's another heretical thought in an infantry heavy army...

In the event of Flood, Fire, Earthquake or Riot a hundred gunners with trucks and radios are as useful as a hundred infanteers.

Why not prioritise arty over infantry?

Conversely, if everybody is subject to the UAS threat and needs to be provided with their own LAA-CUAS umbrella, then why not leave the LAA role to the support platoons and troops of the infantry and cavalry and free up gunners for GS, LRPF and GBAD/IAMD work?

 

[KevinB]

I think both the numbers and locations were relatively well thought out and planned - as part of the Dundonald reforms of 2002-2004. The 1936 reforms also looked at the issues in a coherent manner. By the time we got to the Suttie commission in 1964 the army had lost the plot. Unfortunately since Suttie all that's been done is fine tuning and numbers crunching so you are absolutely right.

The kindest thing that one can say about the current disposition and numbers is that it still provides a potential core of moderately trained and poorly equipped folks to lead Stage 4 National Mobilization (Something that until a few months ago no one in Ottawa that mattered gave a hoot about.)

I'm a firm believer that DND needs reservists to a) augment/round out existing RegF units; b) have trained and equipped units and formations to expand the RegF army when mass matters; and c) have partially trained but properly equipped units and formations for homeland defence and national mobilization.

To me the Reg Force should be at 100% (min) War time manning all of the time, from units to schools and staff.
I think it is farcical to use the PRes as a bandaid to a broken system. Permanent Class B should be eliminated.
To me the PRes should emulate the ARNG down here - able to field formed units at Bde level at least. I am fine with Class C usage of formed subunits for Deployments, and I think that should be encourage both to limit burn out of the Reg Force, but also create a large experience base inside the PRes as well.
If that requires a significant number of Reg Force initially - then so be it.

The folks in a) can come from an individual ready reserve or properly trained SuppRes list;

Those in b) need to be a well thought out organization for which proper capital costs and subsequent O&M cost properly provided. IMHO, these units and formations should all be 1) located in major city centres where a proper recruit base exists; and 2) have a healthy RegF leadership and admin component so as to provide them with an acceptable tiered readiness capability - this is where the mass of the army's artillery should be.

Those in c) should be widely dispersed with well defined tasks and roles commensurate with their numbers and location.

I don't see the viability of any mass mobilization without a exponential increase in capital equipment acquisitions.