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

C3 Grounding

Nfld Sapper

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
10
Points
580
We have a vice-regal salute coming up in June Petard....maybe that's why...
 

Matt_Ubbing

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Cardstonkid said:
After the 18 AD Gun passed inspection it was sent back without its travel lights, cover and a missing breech mechanism. Not sure how that happened but we are still grounded as a result.

It is good to see we can still shoot, not sure how we are going to tow it with the new trucks but perhaps we can strap it down in the back of the MS and become self-propelled artillery?  ;)

20th Field also got its gun sent back with no breech assembly, overall cover or muzzle cover. Gun had the light mod, so its kinda hard to come back with no lights.
 

Rocketryan

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
Inspections of the cradle were completed this past week in Meaford.

21 guns were passed and 3 failed.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,372
Points
940
Looks like the system is going to have lots of spare parts, except for cradles. They aren't that complex, any talk about making replacements?
 

Old Sweat

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
56
Points
480
At the risk of stating a blinding flash of the obvious, we used the C1 since the mid-fifties with very few problems. All of a sudden, the C3 displays a reliability rate that would drive Ralph Nader beserk if it was a car. This ain't good!

Petard, what have I missed?
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
Not a thing Old Sweat

The C3 carriage is old, very old. All are conversions of the C1 and C2 carriages, and some of the C2 carriages have components that date back to the 40's.
And no, there are not a lot of spares in the system, or anywhere else, which is why the C1's will most likely have to be cannibalized to sustain the C3.
So far, none of the guns have failed during the inspection because of the original causes that snapped the Gagetown gun in two. Instead the detailed inspection has revealed hitherto unknown flaws/failures in welds in a few of the guns that may or may not be repairable. More signs the gun is at the end of the trail.
The life cycle management folks are doing their best crystal ball gazing to come up with what this means for the availability rate. But to quote Star Trek's Scotty: "She can't take much more Cap'n".
 

Old Sweat

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
56
Points
480
George Wallace said:
Only if that is not the reason that these three guns failed.  ;)
Intuitively I don't think a failure in the recoil system would be cause for a failure that would attract this sort of attention. A fault in this area could be fixed or replaced in second or third line. What we seem to have, if I read Petard's post correctly, is structural problems in the carriages - which pretty well includes every part that supports the bits that go "bang" and move back and forth.
 

Cardstonkid

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The "plan" for most Reserve Arty units is to have 4 guns, and a mortar troop. There are some trial units that are also operating a UAV troop.

My unit has 4 guns (on paper) two in reality and one that is certified good to go for live firing. We have two tubes of mortars.

I guess we will see what happens but it looks like there are some interesting days ahead.
 

Craig B

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Not sure if this is relevant, but in the last month I've seen a few C1/C2's on flatbed trailers.

First was in NB, on the highway between Oromocto and Moncton, then just last week 3 in Lachine, Quebec.

Looks like the army is moving some of the old stuff around.

 

Cardstonkid

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Our BSM and CO got back from a conference and they reported that  the regs are looking at our old C3's as a short-term replacement for the LG1's! They are also very interested in getting the Reserve allotments of MSVS as well. I am told that we will most likely be solely mortars in the next few years.

MILCOTS and Mortars, a low-budget solution to equipping the militia.

Funny enough the troops are really excited about the prospects of a mortar conversion course.

Interesting days.
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
no big surprise there
The LG1's are having problems, again, this time with the breech ring. 105 ammo is cheaper than 155, so the Reg Force will mot likely use the C3 for some training, the School especially

The MilCOT MSVS gun tractor will most likely show up sometime about May-June next year, and before the SMP variant for the Reg Force. Whole fleet management being what it is, I can see it being very likely the MilCOT gun tractors getting used to tow M777's (something it is not designed nor tested to do)

As for the Reserves going all mortar, that's easier said than done; I see many cons and not many pro's with that idea
 

Cardstonkid

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The latest news for the C3's.

There is no replacement plan for the C3 or the LG 1. However, getting a replacement plan is a top priority. The requirements are in part, that it be mobile, inexpensive, but it need not be a howitzer, as the 120mm mortar may also be considered. The replacement will only be for the Reg force. There is no intent to replace the C3 for The RCA.

The LG 1's will be sent to Atlantic Reserve units. Their C3's will be sent to the Reg's, along with other C3's from Reserve units across Canada. In the short term the Regs will use the C3's as it is believed they have 5-8 years left in them. The LG 1's are seen to be very near the end, and they cannot be deployed operationally.

It is expected that over the next few years Reserve Artillery will be the 81 mm mortar. All arty Reserve units will be mortar units of one kind or another. Expect this transition over the next 48 months.

Given the tiny 105 mm ammo allotment this year (400 rds for 41CBG) going mortars should increase the amount of rounds a reserve unit can shoot. Next year the ammo allotment is ex eyed to be reduced even more. (50%)

Parties over, welcome to the MO!  ;)


 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
Cardstonkid said:
The latest news for the C3's.

There is no replacement plan for the C3 or the LG 1. However, getting a replacement plan is a top priority. The requirements are in part, that it be mobile, inexpensive, but it need not be a howitzer, as the 120mm mortar may also be considered. The replacement will only be for the Reg force. There is no intent to replace the C3 for The RCA.

The LG 1's will be sent to Atlantic Reserve units. Their C3's will be sent to the Reg's, along with other C3's from Reserve units across Canada. In the short term the Regs will use the C3's as it is believed they have 5-8 years left in them. The LG 1's are seen to be very near the end, and they cannot be deployed operationally.

It is expected that over the next few years Reserve Artillery will be the 81 mm mortar. All arty Reserve units will be mortar units of one kind or another. Expect this transition over the next 48 months.

Given the tiny 105 mm ammo allotment this year (400 rds for 41CBG) going mortars should increase the amount of rounds a reserve unit can shoot. Next year the ammo allotment is ex eyed to be reduced even more. (50%)

Parties over, welcome to the MO!  ;)

Fascinating, what's your source of information?
You seem to make some bold statements, as if you're in the know, so let me ask a few questions of you, or your source

Why is the LG1 "near the end"?
Why is the ammunition allotment so low? Will it change? Are orders possibly pending but the manufacturer might just need the lead time to get that production done?

As for your point about the requirement not needing to be a towed howitzer, I have to wonder how you came to that conclusion. Is it not part of the Arty transformation concept the P Res force generating gun dets for Reg Force M777 Bty's. Deploying a mortar group is no where near as diffcult as deploying even a towed 105 howitzer, consequently any training system will also be far more limited. How do you do deal with that?

Assuming for a moment the 120 is a reasonable COA, how many do we need? How much do you, or they, think it will cost to qualify and bring into service 120mm mortar ammunition, which doesn't exist in Cdn inventory. How long would it take? Is there enough time remaining to implement a completely different weapon and ammunition system

If you think you can get by with 81's, ask them how many 81's there are for redistribution, and how much life expectency there is left in them

I think the problems are far more complex than you're making them sound Cardstonkid
 

Cardstonkid

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I am not in know, any more than anyone else who was updated on the information presented at the 2011 Arty Senate in Shilo. I will copy and paste the brief I received ASAP. 
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
Cardstonkid said:
I am not in know, any more than anyone else who was updated on the information presented at the 2011 Arty Senate in Shilo. I will copy and paste the brief I received ASAP.

This one?
http://www.artillery.net/beta/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Draft-DLR-2-brief-to-AAB-Sep-2011.pdf
 

Cardstonkid

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
My post is based on the information I received from the CO of our unit, it is obviously based on the information on the power point, but with the added information of the discussion around the table. When I get to my DND computer I will send a copy of the brief here.
 

Cardstonkid

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
"Why is the LG1 "near the end"?"

I think your PowerPoint link explains this well enough. They will not be deployed, but for training purposes I suppose they will do as long as they hold out.

"Why is the ammunition allotment so low? Will it change? Are orders possibly pending but the manufacturer might just need the lead time to get that production done?"

The Atlantic area has a much larger ammo allotment than 41 CBG this year. (This does not include CFB Gagetown's allotment) so at this point we do not know why we have so little, but what we do have is projected to be cut by half next year.

As for your point about the requirement not needing to be a towed howitzer, I have to wonder how you came to that conclusion. Is it not part of the Arty transformation concept the P Res force generating gun dets for Reg Force M777 Bty's. Deploying a mortar group is no where near as difficult as deploying even a towed 105 howitzer, consequently any training system will also be far more limited. How do you do deal with that?

Great questions, and if what I was told is true I have no answers. Remember these are not my ideas, but those of the folks doing the planning. If this does happen I have no clue how a Reserve gunner supplements the reg force - unless there is no 105 mm and the reserves supplement the suggested 120 mm mortar crews only, but that is just pure speculation.


"Assuming for a moment the 120 is a reasonable COA, how many do we need? How much do you, or they, think it will cost to qualify and bring into service 120mm mortar ammunition, which doesn't exist in Cdn inventory. How long would it take? Is there enough time remaining to implement a completely different weapon and ammunition system"

More good questions, and my answer is, it makes no sense to me either. In terms of cost I suspect the 120 is cheaper to operate but it is such a radical departure from the current situation it creates its own problems. As I mentioned earlier the 120 is on the table as a possible replacement, I have no idea if it is a serious consideration, or if the idea moves forward at all once it has been considered. 
 
Top