C3 Howitzer Replacement

[FJAG]

That Ukraine is building new towed howitzers is not an argument for Canada to invest in the same.

I think the current leadership in the army sees the need for new sp howitzers and will invest in them.

I'm concerned that they plan to divest the M777 in order to get them. That's become such a financial habit in the CAF that its almost inevitable. I think that's a great mistake as Canada needs both an SP and a light weight (and therefore M777) howitzer. You should never throw out good kit that's still serviceable.

Here's a thought. If we do go for an SP gun that needs a crew of say five to operate (say 2 or 3 on the gun and 3 or 2 on the ammo limber vehicle) then the 40 detachment members of a current RegF battery could man the six SP guns that should be in a battery to the tune of 30 which leaves ten spares to be converted to maintainers/leaders that accompany the M777s or new SP going into ResF service where 10 man ResF detachments are less of a problem. 33 M777s could equip two full (almost) regiments which would provide replacements for the clapped out C3s in what are now six ResF regiments. The remaining ResF arty regiments could be equipped with or trained as augmentees on the new SPs.

There are numerous organizational options available if the M777s are retained. How the organization looks vis a vis what goes to the RegF and what goes to the ResF and how the units are organized should be based on which of the army's priority operational needs are. If the army retains three RegF light infantry battalions then they should be supported by a regiment of three batteries of light towed howitzer batteries. If the RegF keeps six mech RegF bns then they need to acquire six batteries of 155mm SPs (a least) to support them. The point is to keep the M777s so that options for operational deployments do exist.

 

[Michel Duhamel]

SKT pm'd me to point out a couple of errors in what I mentioned above and, of course, he's quite right. So I thought I'd just make a short (for me) post to correct that.


The more recent history of Canadian air defence is as follows:

1) 4 AD Regt was formed during the 1987/88 reorganization under the Billion dollar Low Level Air Defence project whereby U AD Bty of 3 RCHA, V AD Bty of 5 RALC, and the Blowpipe troops from 1 and 2 RCHA were all stood down. 128 and 129 Airfield AD Btys in Lahr came under command of 4 AD as did a new battery 127 AD Bty. 119 AD Bty in Chatham and 4 AD Bty with the AD School in Gagetown remained in operation. The systems in use were the new ADATS, Skyguard, and the old Blowpipe. The old 40mm Boffins were divested;

2) In 1991/92 things reorganized again with the closure of 4 CMBG. At that time U, Y and V AD Btys were briefly stood back up in 1 RCHA (now in Shilo) and 2 RCHA and 5 RALC and then almost immediately stood down again and personnel redistributed as 1 AD Regt in Pembroke (with 89 AD Bty and 109 AD Bty), 18 AD Regt in Lethbridge (with 20th AD Bty and 39th AD Bty) and 58 BAA in Lévis were stood up with Javelin (which replaced Blowpipe in 1991) and authorized as Total Force units to take over the AD support to the three Reg F brigades (after their formation some courses would also be run for reservists on Skyguard and ADATS which remained with 119 AD Bty and 4 AD Bty);

3) Also in 1992 as 4 CMBG stood down, 4 AD Regt was reduced to nil strength but 119 AD Bty in Chatham and 4 AD Bty with the AD School remained;

4) In 1994 reactivation of 4 AD Regt was authorized as total force unit for stand up in 1996;

5) In 1996 4 AD Regt's HQ and 128 AD Bty were located in Moncton. 119 AD Bty merged into 4 AD Regt and it together with 210 Workshop were now located in Gagetown. 4 AD Bty and the AD School were absorbed into the Arty School. 1 AD Regt, 18 AD Regt and 58 BAA were now tasked to augment 4 AD Regt with a total of five Javelin troops and three ASCCs;

6) During the massive 2006 reorganization (where regular force FSCCs became larger, more FOO dets were authorized, three STA batteries were stood up and gun detachments were reduced from 54 to 24 thus requiring more Res F gun dets as augmentees) all Res F AD units converted back to field units - completed in 2007. Skyguard and Javelin went out of service in 2005. The ASCCs remained with 4 AD Regt which also starts focusing their training for a while as more of a Direct Fire Support unit with ADATS;

7) 2013 last year for 4 AD Regt - renamed and restructured to 4 Regt RCA (GS) (with 119 Bty, 127 Bty, and 128 Bty) - All remaining ADAT assets gone. 4 Regt (GS) currently provides ASCC, above brigade level FSCC and STACC, Medium Range Radars which are the ELM-2084 Multi-Mission Radar and CU172 Blackjack unmanned aerial systems.

So the correction is that the Total Force AD units (1 AD Regt, 18 AD Regt and 58 BAA) did not support 4CMBG but were in fact formed as 4 CMBG and 4 AD Regt were disbanded and were initially employed directly supporting the three Mechanized Brigade groups in Canada until tasked to augment 4 AD with five troops when if was reformed.

Sorry about that - mea culpa. The trouble is I knew all this and wrote a section in the book about it about four months ago. Mixed some apples with oranges here - temporary brain fart I guess.

A couple inaccuracies in this brief history.... in 1994, 4 AD Regt was authorized as a "Regular Force Unit" and in 1996, 4 AD Regt HQ and 119 AD Bty were located in Moncton. 128 AD Bty and 210 Workshop were located in Gagetown. 4 AD Regt also had a permanent detachment of 15 personal commanded by a Capt located in Cold Lake, Alberta where a full complement of airfield battery weapons (ADATS and 35mm Guns/SkyGuard) were pre-positioned.

 

[FJAG]

A couple inaccuracies in this brief history.... in 1994, 4 AD Regt was authorized as a "Regular Force Unit" and in 1996, 4 AD Regt HQ and 119 AD Bty were located in Moncton. 128 AD Bty and 210 Workshop were located in Gagetown. 4 AD Regt also had a permanent detachment of 15 personal commanded by a Capt located in Cold Lake, Alberta where a full complement of airfield battery weapons (ADATS and 35mm Guns/SkyGuard) were pre-positioned.

You're absolutely correct Mike and you ought to know having commanded the regiment. I'm not sure how I came to mix the batteries up. That would be brain-fart #2. My only excuse is that I'm a mud gunner in a thread talking about old howitzers.

 

[Kirkhill]

A couple inaccuracies in this brief history.... in 1994, 4 AD Regt was authorized as a "Regular Force Unit" and in 1996, 4 AD Regt HQ and 119 AD Bty were located in Moncton. 128 AD Bty and 210 Workshop were located in Gagetown. 4 AD Regt also had a permanent detachment of 15 personal commanded by a Capt located in Cold Lake, Alberta where a full complement of airfield battery weapons (ADATS and 35mm Guns/SkyGuard) were pre-positioned.

Quick question, Sir, wrt Cold Lake.

What was the gun and ADATs strength of the battery and was the det the full strength of the battery or was there a need to increase the det's strength for operations?

 

[Halifax Tar]

I found this to be an interesting video.

 

[FJAG]

I found this to be an interesting video.

Small point with that at around 2:13 he states that "the C3 has roots that trace back to the British L5 pack howitzer ..." I'm quite sure this is just a misstatement because he goes on the trace to actual roots of the C3 to the WW2 M2 and subsequent M101 series. The L5 is neither British - it did serve with the Brits but is an Italian gun - nor having roots in the preexisting M2, M101 or C1 line having only been designed during the mid to late 1950s.

Otherwise a very detailed and informative video - quite suitable for an introductory video for new gun number training.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Small point with that at around 2:13 he states that "the C3 has roots that trace back to the British L5 pack howitzer ..." I'm quite sure this is just a misstatement because he goes on the trace to actual roots of the C3 to the WW2 M2 and subsequent M101 series. The L5 is neither British - it did serve with the Brits but is an Italian gun - nor having roots in the preexisting M2, M101 or C1 line having only been designed during the mid to late 1950s.

Otherwise a very detailed and informative video - quite suitable for an introductory video for new gun number training.

The M101 goes as far back as 1919 with the initial design dubbed the M1920 as I recall. The end of the war put development on hold. So one could say the design is 105 years old.

 

[FJAG]

The M101 goes as far back as 1919 with the initial design dubbed the M1920 as I recall. The end of the war put development on hold. So one could say the design is 105 years old.

Here's Wiki's take on it.

After World War I, the U.S. Army Ordnance Department studied various captured German 105 mm-caliber howitzers and developed the 105 mm Howitzer M1920 by using the Carriage M1920. A box trail carriage design (the M1925E carriage) and two other split trail designs (the T1 and T2) were also developed, but the original split trail design was found superior after testing. After being selected, the piece was standardized in December 1927, as the 105 mm howitzer M1 on carriage M1. The Army had an intention to replace all 75 mm gun-howitzers in its divisional and non-divisional field artillery regiments with 105 mm pieces, but a lack of appropriations stalled the idea and eventually forced it to be completely abandoned by 1929; a limited plan developed in 1925 envisioned re-equipping three regiments, but by 1933, only 14 M1 howitzers had been manufactured.

A modified version of the M1 was trialed in 1932 which used semi-fixed ammunition instead of separate-loading ammunition. Since this development required a different breech block, the new piece was designated the 105 mm howitzer M2 on carriage M1. 48 pieces were manufactured in 1939. The original M1 carriage had been designed for towing using horses rather than trucks, and a new carriage, the T5 (M2), was developed in 1939 and standardized in February 1940. The breech ring of the howitzer M2 was modified in March 1940 before large-scale production began, creating the 105 mm howitzer M2A1 on carriage M2.

It's the M2 that became the M101 and C1 we all loved. Haven't been able to find any photos of the experimental guns. The M1 superficially looks quite like the M2.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Here's Wiki's take on it.



It's the M2 that became the M101 and C1 we all loved. Haven't been able to find any photos of the experimental guns. The M1 superficially looks quite like the M2.

SPG version