The 105mm might be a problem, as well as generating gun dets for that duty while also converting Reg and Res Arty units to other weapons in that period.
Also a tech issue, they have been trying for years for calgary class A techs to take over maintenance on those C3s. The problem? Every C3 maintenance course the past 8 years has been cancelled, and this year just did too. Currently that course only ran twice since first created, creating only around 8 techs nationally in the class A world.
That is funny.
I look forward to the C3 retiring and a M777 starts being used.......
There are and will be enough guns. Assuming that the 105mm calibre will go out of service as a training gun as planned, then there will be enough serviceable parts available for a long time yet. Ceremonial salute guns need very few replacement parts and can be sources. The AVCON guns have been slightly modified for their role but those mods can be transferred to a replacement gun.
I don't know what the financial arrangement between Parks Canada and DND are, but a 24/7 on call staff for 26 weeks of the year will be very pricey. Far pricier than an eight-person army detachment.
That's a very real problem but easily cured if a course is run while the gun is still in general service. 1 CAB will be in Edmonton and is supposed to get a service battalion. Build it into the plan while you can.
The plan is for the M777s to probably go into long-term storage once enough SPs come on line. Based on the way the army usually does these things the skill set for maintaining M777s will deteriorate the same way as it did for the M109s. (I guess we could always contract it out to 10 Mountain in Fort Drum.
)About half the shoots done up there are "storm shoots" which would make flying drones (or other aircraft) at those elevations nigh unto impossible. There are places where avalanche control is done by dropping dynamite out of helicopters but not where keeping the major east-west highway and railway link through the mountains open. That can be done through quieter periods like the "clean up shoots" done at Rogers once the storms have passed.
The big word is - priorities. The army is the living embodiment of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. As things drop down on the priority list ever smaller resources are allocated to it. M109s and ADATS are the prime examples of the last quarter century.
Issue is for the C3, until 2015 the regular force maintained it. Then came STARS and the push to have the reserves do more. However this mindset of the reserves train the reserves doesnt work if its a piece of kit that you dont have reserves qualified on. Alas because its the very last mod for a wpns techs DP2, it regularly gets canceled. Thanks to thats, I am 17 years in and still not fully qualified as a tech. Adding up all my time on courses in Borden, ive actually spent more time at the school then a regular force tech, but I am less qualified. Funny how that works.
I will argue that any gun plumber that can maintain a Leopard tank or a M777, can maintain a C3 if the they have the parts, tools and instruction manual. We make things harder than they need to be. I have seen a fully disassembled C2 (Thank you 202 workshop, for leaving machining swaths in the recoil system) It is a bloody simple system. Civilian car mechanics have to face working on vehicles they are unfamiliar with, everyday and they mostly manage to cope.The big word is - priorities. The army is the living embodiment of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. As things drop down on the priority list ever smaller resources are allocated to it. M109s and ADATS are the prime examples of the last quarter century.
The RCAS isn't responsible for life cycle management of the equipment. It merely manages the training of gunners on the equipment. The dirty secret here is that a C3 used simply for saluting requires absolutely minimal maintenance and you can train six folks to run the gun in an afternoon. It's like surgery - see one, do one, teach one.
The problem here is that for AVCON you will now have only one gun and maybe one or two backups that have to be maintained in firing condition and have a crew that can properly do live fire with it - that takes more than an afternoon (but less than a week) - plus you need to keep 105mm ammo in the inventory somewhere. That's a pimple. The army hates "wasting" resources on pimples.
Parts are an issue since the C3 conversion because of IP complications resulting from the bankruptcy of the Dutch company that did the conversions. This includes the recoil system. You are right - it's a basically simple system and anyone who can do M777s could grasp the skills in a few days. We've also hard some parts manufactured from scratch by RCN workshops. Pimple.
Honestly the C3 just need to get pulled from service.
Honestly the question needs to be determined if it is a CA (RRCA) task or not.OTOH, I see a bright opportunity here for some former gunner in BC to form a small company to provide AVCON support duties for Parks Canada on an annual basis.
IMHO, it is sustainable at scale for AVCON. My guess, based on the letter from the CDS, is that the arty and army have already decided that it is not and that it would be a distraction. Fair enough. They have a lot on their plate.
A mortar would be impractical unless it has a direct fire capability and even then. Weather - especially high gusting winds - are a big issue here. We fire all the AVCON rounds at charge 7 - not because of range because its usually 2 to 5 kms - but to minimize wind effects. We don't use met just preregistered bearing and elevation to target.
Yup
I'm the same way. IMHO, 2 RCHA should support the LIR with a composite regiment of a 6-gun (three 2-gun troops) battery of M777s, a battery of HIMARS and an STA battery heavy on UAVs and loitering munitions. Not that anyone listens to me.
That would be a complex solution a problem that a simple gun can do. It would be easier to rent M101s from the Koreans and let them maintain them. (My guess is we still have the older C1 (M101) firing data available for AVCON.
The trouble as before is the weather and the guarantee of success needed in order to minimize the avalanche threat on a very busy highway and rail line.
Okay K9 it is.IMHO, it is sustainable at scale for AVCON. My guess, based on the letter from the CDS, is that the arty and army have already decided that it is not and that it would be a distraction. Fair enough. They have a lot on their plate.
A mortar would be impractical unless it has a direct fire capability and even then. Weather - especially high gusting winds - are a big issue here. We fire all the AVCON rounds at charge 7 - not because of range because its usually 2 to 5 kms - but to minimize wind effects. We don't use met just preregistered bearing and elevation to target.
Yup
I'm the same way. IMHO, 2 RCHA should support the LIR with a composite regiment of a 6-gun (three 2-gun troops) battery of M777s, a battery of HIMARS and an STA battery heavy on UAVs and loitering munitions. Not that anyone listens to me.
That would be a complex solution a problem that a simple gun can do. It would be easier to rent M101s from the Koreans and let them maintain them. (My guess is we still have the older C1 (M101) firing data available for AVCON.
There are 18 gun positions each of which has a concrete ring (for the modified spades to rest in) and a centre point hub for the modified jack on the axle to sit in. This ensures the gun is in the exact same position as when the targets were registered. A major make work program is to keep those routinely cleared of ice. Deploying is very simple but often needs to be done in near white out blizzard conditions where the biggest challenge is seeing you aiming point. The targets are never visible during a storm shoot. Success is measured by the rumble of an avalanche.
The 155 round is simply too expensive for the job (as are the extra three det members) and I'd dread having to do a storm shoot with the M777. The worst one I ever did ran during a blizzard over three days straight without a break having to run back and forth along the series of the 18 gun positions several times including being dragged by a bulldozer over two avalanches. I wouldn't wish having to do that with an M777 on my worst enemy.
The trouble as before is the weather and the guarantee of success needed in order to minimize the avalanche threat on a very busy highway and rail line.
Here's a small booklet on the Rogers Pass. I dealt with the Schleiss brother on a daily basis. They were the undisputed experts on avalanche control in North America and while there are many different ways to approach avalanche control, the situation in Rogers Park is quite unique - starting with a 400 inch a year snowfall - and for them the best solution, after much research, that the mobile 105mm solution was the optimal one which balanced the weather, minimizing road closures and increasing safety.
This is one of those bureaucratic solutions made in Ottawa by folks trying to simplify what is really a minor problem by passing the buck to another agency.
Edited to add: Incidentally while the TCH is not technically a federal highway and is maintained by the province of BC, the railroad is under federal jurisdiction as is Glacier National Park which contains Roger's Pass. It's not simply a BC issue.
The factory they are proposing is designed to be flexible, so you can switch between platforms. Kinda like car manufacturing where they use the same equipment but swap out some of the tooling and reorganize the process for a new model.G&M is saying it may go beyond K9's. We're already getting HIMARS so Chunmoo's can probably be ruled out , but Redbacks may be in play.
Damn, skillful arm twist by the government on this one. Hanwha has sweetened the pot with a commitment to armoured vehicle manufacturing in Canada if they get the sub contract.
South Korea sweetens submarine bid, will manufacture armoured vehicles in Canada if chosen
Under pressure to increase economic benefits to Canadians, South Korea’s Hanwha is committing to manufacturing armoured battle vehicles in Canada if it’s awarded the lucrative contract to build the Royal Canadian Navy’s next fleet of submarines.www.ctvnews.ca
Now say ‘yes!’ and sign the bloody thing!
According to G&M it could be more than just K9's. Still waiting to see what was said at the presser earlier this morning.
I wish. We've got a wheels fetish up here. OTOH, if the Koreans make the industrial side of it very tempting then the government might just lean that way. IMHO, if you are a "northern" power and intend to swing your military influence towards "northern" theatre of operation, then get a gun that can go where it needs to everyday. When you decide dispersed, shoot and scoot doctrine then make sure the gun can do that.Okay K9 it is.
We may have turned the corner on that. Aimpoint 1 is looking at equipping the arty ARes with the new equipment - SPs, HIMARS, VSHORAD, TA - we'll see how it goes. Force 2013 faltered on the STA side.
We've already got LG1s so don't need M119s which are also long in the tooth. There's nothing wrong with the LG1 that good maintenance won't fix (except being lifted by a Griffin - that was just stupid) That might just be a solution too - retire all of the C3s, but keep the LG1 in service for the LIB brigade by adding either an ARes LG1 battery or batteries to the M777 and HIMARS batteries I previously mentioned. I think we have 28 so there are plenty.
