• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Indirect Fires Modernization Project - C3/M777 Replacement

FJAG said:
9 Rocket won't be stood up for a while. The artillery regiments are standing down their OP Batteries and reintroducing the FSCC and FOO parties to the gun batteries. C Bty 1 RCHA has been retasked from OP Bty to be the first HIMARS battery and will do the introduction and conversion to HIMARS for the branch. They are already turning to the task AFAIK. In due course once the systems come on line, 1 RCHA will split into two regiments - 1 RCHA and 9 Rocket, RCA - with both currently expected to operate out of Shilo. Note too that 10 Fd Regina, 26 Fd Brandon and 116 Fd Kenora are designated to be aligned as LRPS-L units with 9 Rocket.

Yes there are and there should be even more which is why I smile anytime someone suggests using gunners for mortars. Air defence alone could and should eat up several thousand. STA and deep strike, more yet. And that's before we start going from 2 four-gun batteries/regiment back to 3 six-gun ones. And what about a light regiment for the LIR? I could go on but we simply don't have enough gunners as it stands even if we filled all the blank files in all the regiments. More PYs and more ARes positions are needed.

I'm not sure what you mean by off-loaded. Quite clearly the infantry needs to designate a lot more folks to the combat support companies in the battalions to do mortars, anti-armour, CUAV, LM, even pioneer - not everyone can be in recce. :giggle:

Not just the RCAC but also the rifle companies. You know my view on the LAV. IMHO it is not an IFV for MCO albeit the 25mm is nothing to sneeze at in a pinch. My view is that every rifle coy should keep 7 of their LAVs with the 25mm and get 7 new ACSV TCVs with a 30 or 35mm RWS capable of both anti air and DFS tasks. That puts a fair number of 25mm LAVs into reserve or form more mech battalions and could keep the GDLS factory busy churning out more ACVs. Since I'm not paying the bills anyway, I'd do the same for a fleet of tracked IFVs for NATO albeit there, since all the vehicles would be new, I'd want dual purpose RWS on every vehicle in the rifle coy. Yup I see two type of brigades - and armoured brigade with tanks and tracked IFVs and a wheeled mech brigade with just LAVs. (Yes - light brigades too).

🍻
Click to expand...


C Bty was STA not OP. Z, the OP Bty, is stood down while C is currently sending a small nucleus to various partner nations to train for himars.
 
FJAG said:
9 Rocket won't be stood up for a while. The artillery regiments are standing down their OP Batteries and reintroducing the FSCC and FOO parties to the gun batteries. C Bty 1 RCHA has been retasked from OP Bty to be the first HIMARS battery and will do the introduction and conversion to HIMARS for the branch. They are already turning to the task AFAIK. In due course once the systems come on line, 1 RCHA will split into two regiments - 1 RCHA and 9 Rocket, RCA - with both currently expected to operate out of Shilo. Note too that 10 Fd Regina, 26 Fd Brandon and 116 Fd Kenora are designated to be aligned as LRPS-L units with 9 Rocket.

Yes there are and there should be even more which is why I smile anytime someone suggests using gunners for mortars. Air defence alone could and should eat up several thousand. STA and deep strike, more yet. And that's before we start going from 2 four-gun batteries/regiment back to 3 six-gun ones. And what about a light regiment for the LIR? I could go on but we simply don't have enough gunners as it stands even if we filled all the blank files in all the regiments. More PYs and more ARes positions are needed.

I'm not sure what you mean by off-loaded. Quite clearly the infantry needs to designate a lot more folks to the combat support companies in the battalions to do mortars, anti-armour, CUAV, LM, even pioneer - not everyone can be in recce. :giggle:

Not just the RCAC but also the rifle companies. You know my view on the LAV. IMHO it is not an IFV for MCO albeit the 25mm is nothing to sneeze at in a pinch. My view is that every rifle coy should keep 7 of their LAVs with the 25mm and get 7 new ACSV TCVs with a 30 or 35mm RWS capable of both anti air and DFS tasks. That puts a fair number of 25mm LAVs into reserve or form more mech battalions and could keep the GDLS factory busy churning out more ACVs. Since I'm not paying the bills anyway, I'd do the same for a fleet of tracked IFVs for NATO albeit there, since all the vehicles would be new, I'd want dual purpose RWS on every vehicle in the rifle coy. Yup I see two type of brigades - and armoured brigade with tanks and tracked IFVs and a wheeled mech brigade with just LAVs. (Yes - light brigades too).

🍻
Click to expand...
In your view, do Manpads belong to the Artillery Air Defense units or be organic to the various Infantry and Armour units?
 
Kirkhill said:
Ukrainian current assessment on guns and drones.

Some interesting numbers and tactics.

www.twz.com

The Evolving Role Of Ukraine's Artillery In The Age Of Drones

Artillery, once the 'king of battle' along the front lines has been dethroned by drones, but it still has a critical job to do.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
That's a good article and hits the nail on the head. You need both. The as yet unanswered question is what ratio of gun to launcher do you need.

One thing that concerns me is that drone countermeasures are getting more and more effective and I don't think we have the same level of innovation cycle that the Ukrainians have. We're too risk averse to innovate rapidly and I'm not sure we can change.

So far I'm staying with a 3:1 ratio but am willing to go to 1:1. We're also missing dedicated rapid entrenching systems for guns and physical and electronic deception systems. Or electronic strikes and proper intel/fusion cells that optimize selecting the right effector. And anti-drone screens. There's so much we don't have and don't do.

If there is one thing we aren't its agile.

🍻
 
FJAG said:
If there is one thing we aren't its agile.
Click to expand...
No peacetime military is ever agile.

Ukraine until 2022 was still a post-soviet state with a soviet style military. It was Western advisors, and battlefield experience, that helped them adapt. They have managed to adapt and become agile pretty fast, so our military, that has been trained to "adapt and overcome" from BMQ/BMOQ onward will do the same when required.

My concern with the obsession with drones is that, as you said, countermeasures are getting better, and soon enough the "cheap" drone goes back to being an expensive missile.
 
Last edited:
Furniture said:
No peacetime military is ever agile.

Ukraine until 2022 was still a post-soviet state with a soviet style military. It was Western advisors, and battlefield experience, that helped them adapt. They have managed to adapt and become agile pretty fast, so our military, that has been trained to "adapt and overcome" from BMQ/BMOQ onward will do the same when required.

My concern with the obsession with drones is that, as you said, countermeasures are getting better, and soon enough the "cheap" drone goes back to being an expensive missile.
Click to expand...

Will we ever get to the point where we are willing to go into battle without drones because counter-measures exist?

Aircraft generated anti-aircraft measures which did not remove aircraft from the battlespace.

Likewise for tanks and AT defenses, for subs and sonars.

....

As to the expense, the costs of engines, hulls and sensors are all rapidly falling. Just like prox fuses have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top