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

C3 Howitzer Replacement

NavyShooter said:
TBH, anything would be better than the nothing that seems to be happening now....

"Dear all Commonwealth Nations, we are looking to setup a saluting gun battery, and would like to buy all of your old 25 Pdr field guns...please respond with numbers and prices ASAP."

Cover off the saluting gun requirements and get something better for actual use...
Click to expand...
I still think the 9lb'er looks better for saluting especially with the period dress.

Part of the issue with replacing the C3A1 is that the CA doesn't know what it wants to be.

If there was a decision to make X Bde's Light, X Bde's Medium, and X Bde's Heavy that would at least give the Artillery Arcs to operate in for replacements. Right now there are 3 Reg Force Bde's that are Shmedium, one of those with tanks. 3 Bn's in those are Light, which to me it would make sense to have 1 Heavy, 1 Med, and 1 Light Reg, and then structure the PRes to support those.

Which would leave you with a Light Gun, (the M777 line is re-opening), a medium wheeled gun (Archer ish), and a Tracked (M109A7) plus the Rocket needs, and also Air Defense requirements.

But until the CA decides what it wants to be when it grows up, it's sort of hard to make a determination as to what gun system(s) are needed.
 
Interesting article from CDR.

Hanwha Ocean and Hanwha Aerospace presented their state-of-the-art defense technologies to Dr. David Perry, President of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI), who visited Hanwha facilities from January 23-24....
Click to expand...

“An impressive track record provides Hanwha with a favorable position for potential success in Canada, further establishing the K-9 as a Western standard self-propelled howitzer. As Canada seeks to grow its presence in NATO European deployments, Hanwha stands ready to provide artillery solutions based on the K9 self-propelled howitzer, that are already in service with many NATO allies." said John Kelly, CEO and President of Hanwha Defense USA.
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

🍻
 
Yeah probably.

The in-service L52 barrel and K10 limber keeps drawing me there . . . and they're willingness to allow off-shore manufacturing. The Aussies are building 30 and 15 K10s with options for more. IMHO Canada needs 3 x 18 gun battalions (54) plus maybe 2 or 3 for tech reference/spares and maybe a half dozen for the school. We could duplicate the Aussie deal - 30 would give you a first tranche of 4 x 6-gun batteries (one per regiment and one prepositioned in Latvia) plus six for spares and the school. A second tranche could fill out the regiments with six more batteries plus a few more for the school.

🍻
 
The CAF also needs guns for the Res F (and a Res F realignment to put capabilities in locations where they can train and be maintained). So, realistically, probably a CAF run of 120 or so.
 
Well they also have the KH178 which is a direct replacement for the C3, meaning very little in the way of upgrades, support equipment, new gun tractors are required. They also offer the KH179 Which which is also towed. This will require a lot more changes to gun tractors, buildings, training, etc.
 
FJAG said:
The C3 isn't dead yet.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=300124999709836

Mmmmmmm! Cordite!

;)
Click to expand...

Neither is the M101


Ukrainians are very happy with the old-fashioned M101 howitzers. Here is why​

The M101 is an American towed 105 mm howitzer. This is a very old weapon, in service since 1941. What’s more, this howitzer has its roots in the First World War. However, the defenders of Ukraine like this weapon and see many of its advantages.​



Ukrainian defenders say the M101 is such a light howitzer that it can be carried on any truck. In addition, these weapons are very reliable. Soldiers say that they fired more than 1,000 rounds from one M101 howitzer, ArmyInform reports.

Soldiers have only positive things to say about the M101 howitzer. Holes are visible in its frame because it survived a Russian attack. Soldiers don’t pay much attention to such damage because the M101 is a tool, and tools wear out when they are being used.

The M101 is an old-fashioned artillery weapon. So maybe it lacks accuracy? Not really. “It is very accurate. When shooting, it doesn’t spit fire too much, it doesn’t make too much noise. You can’t see it at night, you can’t hear the sound too far away. This is very important, because flashes and gunshots can unmask your position,” Junior Sergeant Viktor was listing the advantages of the M101.

“Our crew fired more than a thousand shells from it. And we are not going to stop there. We are ready to shoot 24/7. We can shoot as much as the situation requires,” the junior sergeant continues.

Old? Yes. But the M101 continues to serve. And maybe Ukraine could have even more of these howitzers in the near future, because South Korea recently announced its willingness to help arm Ukraine if such a need arises and it has a lot of the M101-type howitzers.


 
dapaterson said:
The CAF also needs guns for the Res F (and a Res F realignment to put capabilities in locations where they can train and be maintained). So, realistically, probably a CAF run of 120 or so.
Click to expand...
I've been playing with napkin forces for a few years now and anyway that you cut it, the current force structure basically within the realm of the possible basically comes out as one armoured/mechanized division with three SP regiments (52 guns) and a HIMARS regiment for GS (18 launchers). In addition there is a light/lightly mech'd force of one division which needs only two/maybe three light arty regiments of a mix of air portable M777s and something lighter (105 mm gun/howitzer or 120mm mortar) We currently have 33 M777s which outfits 5 x 6-gun batteries of the 9 batteries needed. We currently have 28 LG1s which could outfit the other 4 x 6-gun batteries. There's an issue of additional minor numbers to outfit tech reference/spares/school guns.

In short we could equip our existing field arty with just three SP battalions and a HIMARS battalion. The rest of the field arty we already own. The issue is how to distribute the RegF and ResF personnel optimally across the arty branch: the STA elements needed; the air defence we need; the additional FSCC/ASCC/STACC/FOO/JTAC resources we need; and last, but by no means the least, a force of precision strike OWUAVs that we need.

The long and the short of it is that we need to realistically adjust our thinking of how we organize our existing resources, our needed resources and our available personnel. Where and how reservists are trained is a factor but should not be an overriding factor. IMHO, because of the fact that SPs and HIMARS are systems only used in extreme circumstances, they should be mostly manned by reservists while the lighter, more likely to be deployed elements such as all the CC elements, FOOs, JTACs, need to be primarily RegF. Systems like STA, AD and OWUAVs are more a 50/50 mix because they have roles at both ends of the spectrum.

The one thing that I am dead set against is "lets get the ResF something that will fit in an armoury." That's the easiest way to keep them mostly irrelevant. My solution is simply: lets define what we need and when we will need it and then build the structure to suit it rather than trying to keep buggering around with an archaic force structure that lost its focus around 1970.

Sorry for another one of my rants.

🍻
 
dapaterson said:
The CAF also needs guns for the Res F (and a Res F realignment to put capabilities in locations where they can train and be maintained). So, realistically, probably a CAF run of 120 or so.
Click to expand...
I like where your headspace is!
 
SeaKingTacco said:
I like where your headspace is!
Click to expand...
Buying "enough to equip our peacetime Reg F military with a couple spares" is not "ensure the CAF is ready for the future and equipment losses".

Weird thing: If you wait for a shooting war to erupt, getting new equipment, materiel and ammunition is expensive with long lead times...
 
FJAG said:
The one thing that I am dead set against is "lets get the ResF something that will fit in an armoury." That's the easiest way to keep them mostly irrelevant. My solution is simply: lets define what we need and when we will need it and then build the structure to suit it rather than trying to keep buggering around with an archaic force structure that lost its focus around 1970.

Sorry for another one of my rants.

🍻
Click to expand...
Without the money to modify the armouries and to buy gun tractors that can haul the guns and handle the ammunition, then buying them a bigger gun might be a real problem. As you said before logistics matter and these are logistical issues. Reserve guns are stored the majority of the time on the armoury floor and that is a good thing as they get touched, used, trained on and maintained.

Some units are likley going to have to remain 105mm equipped due to these reasons. Some might do very well with SPG's or 155mm due to their proximity to bases. I like to see all Reserve units maintain a 4 gun battery, where new gunners do their basic training on. Then they go to the different trades like tech, survey, FOO, Sigs, AD or UAS operator.
 
Colin Parkinson said:
Without the money to modify the armouries and to buy gun tractors that can haul the guns and handle the ammunition, then buying them a bigger gun might be a real problem. As you said before logistics matter and these are logistical issues. Reserve guns are stored the majority of the time on the armoury floor and that is a good thing as they get touched, used, trained on and maintained.

Some units are likley going to have to remain 105mm equipped due to these reasons. Some might do very well with SPG's or 155mm due to their proximity to bases. I like to see all Reserve units maintain a 4 gun battery, where new gunners do their basic training on. Then they go to the different trades like tech, survey, FOO, Sigs, AD or UAS operator.
Click to expand...

There needs to be a reckoning of "what types of units can be what distances from bases that provide training areas and support". That, in turn, means units in some locations will have to be re-roled. Never assume the current laydown is optimal.
 
dapaterson said:
There needs to be a reckoning of "what types of units can be what distances from bases that provide training areas and support". That, in turn, means units in some locations will have to be re-roled. Never assume the current laydown is optimal.
Click to expand...
I get the need , but I doubt the money, political support and will is there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bossi
Real war story from Iraq (not Hollywood)
Replies
2
Views
5K
Fruss
F
Back
Top