Author Topic: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)  (Read 50224 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 196,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,765
  • Freespeecher
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #75 on: April 08, 2015, 09:20:46 »
Even dug in MG's are not invincible. I recall reading in the Falkland Islands War the British brought Milan ATGM's forward to attack dug in Argentinian GPMG positions. The Argentinian GPMG's were dug in and mounted on tripods, so could engage to 1800+ metres, while the advancing British using the same guns in the light role could only effectively engage to 800m.

The Milans could nail the enemy positions from over 2000m, leveling the playing field. If we were to do something like that now, the man portable ATGM's would have even greater advantages, since they or their firing posts generally have day/night and thermal imaging sights. Modern ones like Spike also have "man in the loop" capabilities, so the operator can steer the missile right into the target if needed, or abort the attack. In fact missiles like Spike and Javelin (and their associated sights) are so versatile there is a very strong case to make for having them issued down to the lowest levels, and they are light enough for the firing post and ammunition to be carried by a two man team. And of course the "mini Spike" is a man portable APGM (anti personnel guided missile), capable of attacking targets 1300m away.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 257,870
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,263
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #76 on: April 08, 2015, 17:28:46 »
Even dug in MG's are not invincible. I recall reading in the Falkland Islands War the British brought Milan ATGM's forward to attack dug in Argentinian GPMG positions. The Argentinian GPMG's were dug in and mounted on tripods, so could engage to 1800+ metres, while the advancing British using the same guns in the light role could only effectively engage to 800m.

The Milans could nail the enemy positions from over 2000m, leveling the playing field. If we were to do something like that now, the man portable ATGM's would have even greater advantages, since they or their firing posts generally have day/night and thermal imaging sights. Modern ones like Spike also have "man in the loop" capabilities, so the operator can steer the missile right into the target if needed, or abort the attack. In fact missiles like Spike and Javelin (and their associated sights) are so versatile there is a very strong case to make for having them issued down to the lowest levels, and they are light enough for the firing post and ammunition to be carried by a two man team. And of course the "mini Spike" is a man portable APGM (anti personnel guided missile), capable of attacking targets 1300m away.

Sadly, if you check the orbats of the infantry battalions deployed to the Falklands in 1982, our infantry battalions in 2015 can not match the integral support available way back then.

Each battalion had a MILAN platoon of 8 x firing posts, a full mortar platoon, a machine gun platoon, and an assault pioneer platoon amongst other assets.

"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Hamish Seggie

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 231,997
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,413
  • This is my son Michael, KIA Afghanistan 3 Sep 08
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #77 on: April 09, 2015, 00:35:11 »
Sadly, if you check the orbats of the infantry battalions deployed to the Falklands in 1982, our infantry battalions in 2015 can not match the integral support available way back then.

Each battalion had a MILAN platoon of 8 x firing posts, a full mortar platoon, a machine gun platoon, and an assault pioneer platoon amongst other assets.

And that ORBAT was stripped to bare bones by bigger brains than us.  :facepalm:
Freedom Isn't Free   "Never Shall I Fail My Brothers"

“Do everything that is necessary and nothing that is not".

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 209,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,803
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #78 on: April 09, 2015, 12:19:52 »
Is there no Gustav Adolph among you that can just decree?

The infantry WILL HAVE 9 Bns.  Coys WILL BE of such and such a size.  Platoons WILL BE armed with ....

The Artillery WILL SUPPLY 9 Mortar Troops to include MFCs, FSCCs and FOO/FACs.

The Engineers WILL SUPPLY 9 Assault Engineer Troops to include RECCE parties....

I've been on these boards since 2005.  I've been watching the arguments since 1980.

Your leadership hides behind process and democracy to avoid making decisions and just do stuff - even when people get pissed off and moan.

I'm sure there must have been some whinging in Gustav's ranks when he thinned out the pikes and added those 3 pdr cannons - "How are we ever going to beat the Spanish now?"

Don't your leaders have the confidence or other parts necessary to be unpopular?  Or is Principle 2 "Maintenance of Morale" so ingrained that it has become a liability?

"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

"If change isn’t allowed to be a process, it becomes an event." - Penny Mordaunt 10/10/2019

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 196,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,765
  • Freespeecher
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #79 on: April 09, 2015, 14:12:45 »
Fully agree that we have been stripped bare. One of my points is that the evolution of technology can help us make up the deficit. Mini Spikes are about the size of an AT-4 and can be carried and fired by an individual infantryman. This provides the long range ability to overmatch any handheld weapon or machinegun in the light role, as well as take on bunkered or otherwise protected infantry, attack light vehicles and cause damage to even vehicles like up-armoured HMMVW's, MRAP's or similar. A typical section can have 4 (the people not carrying the C-9's or M-203's). As a thought experiment, the Starstreak MANPAD is also quite light and portable, is amazingly accurate due to its mode of operation and can hit with the kinetic impact of a 40mm cannon shell, giving it the ability to damage light vehicles up to LAV class (no explosive warhead, though).

ATGMs like Spike or Javelin are somewhat larger than a Carl-G, but still man portable enough to be carried by the Platoon weapons det. This gives the ability to take on targets out to 2000+ m (I understand the Javelin can reliably hit targets out to 3000m), including heavy armour.

These capabilities are light and portable enough to be integral to the dismounted platoon, and do not *need* to be carried or used by a separate support organization. In some ways this is like the evolution of other weapons systems. Machine guns used to belong to an entirely separate corps, for example, but advances in technology made the MG's lighter and simpler to operate until they are now integral down to the section level.

The problem, of course, is we don't have Mini-Spikes, Spike or Javelin.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 257,870
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,263
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #80 on: April 09, 2015, 14:47:14 »
Fully agree that we have been stripped bare. One of my points is that the evolution of technology can help us make up the deficit. Mini Spikes are about the size of an AT-4 and can be carried and fired by an individual infantryman. This provides the long range ability to overmatch any handheld weapon or machinegun in the light role, as well as take on bunkered or otherwise protected infantry, attack light vehicles and cause damage to even vehicles like up-armoured HMMVW's, MRAP's or similar. A typical section can have 4 (the people not carrying the C-9's or M-203's). As a thought experiment, the Starstreak MANPAD is also quite light and portable, is amazingly accurate due to its mode of operation and can hit with the kinetic impact of a 40mm cannon shell, giving it the ability to damage light vehicles up to LAV class (no explosive warhead, though).

ATGMs like Spike or Javelin are somewhat larger than a Carl-G, but still man portable enough to be carried by the Platoon weapons det. This gives the ability to take on targets out to 2000+ m (I understand the Javelin can reliably hit targets out to 3000m), including heavy armour.

These capabilities are light and portable enough to be integral to the dismounted platoon, and do not *need* to be carried or used by a separate support organization. In some ways this is like the evolution of other weapons systems. Machine guns used to belong to an entirely separate corps, for example, but advances in technology made the MG's lighter and simpler to operate until they are now integral down to the section level.

The problem, of course, is we don't have Mini-Spikes, Spike or Javelin.

And even though the Egyptians proved that this concept worked well in 1973, using Sagger missiles against Israel in the Yom Kippur War, we still do not have anything like this either deployed, or in the pipeline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M14_Malyutka

We have machine guns. Let's get some more. And some bigger ones. Soon.   :nod:
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 196,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,765
  • Freespeecher
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #81 on: June 07, 2017, 17:56:39 »
A bit of a blast from the past. The "Dover Devil" was a light weight HMG design which was developed in the early 1980's, but rather inexplicably cancelled. It served as the inspiration for the CIS .50 produced in Singapore, and if revived today could provide a much lighter, more robust replacement for the .50 HMG. The thread makes an interesting observation which I had never heard before; the Dover Devil was apparently meant to be modular enough to convert to 20mm, or alternatively Soviet 12.7mm rounds. There is also some reference to thinking about using .60 cal rounds (developed near the end of WWII as more powerful ammunition for aircraft machine guns) and it would also have been interesting if development had gone on longer to think about provision for the FN BGR 15 round as well.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,19011.15.html?PHPSESSID=fclnbg23jud2gi256o6a7rkfu6

Some good pictures of the mechanism in the linked thread.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline AlDazz

  • New Member
  • **
  • 820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: The Cdn Army does not need HMGs (From: CANSOF vs. Boko Haram)
« Reply #82 on: May 21, 2019, 14:52:04 »
Not sure why the Army would want to get rid of such a proven weapons platform.  My only problem with them was the reliability issues due to their age. As mentioned the Brits brought them out of storage for their trip to the Falklands. I believe they were used as air defence and as fire bases for their light infantry attacks. 
If you are an old soldier you can be forgiven for muttering " Things aren't what they used to be." True, but then they never were.