• 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

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
831
Points
910
I agree, and while a training gun is fine and all, we need tubes we can get to the fight if needed. Invest in some kind of simulator if you want a training gun, if they can do it for tanks, why not an artillery piece?
Because eventually the "thrill" of going into the simulator is going to wear off and the gunners will get the message that we are not serious about their trade and leave. If you want a easy gun to deploy and train with that fits the current reserve support network, then the M119 is your best bet. If you want a cool bit of kit that can't fit into any existing armoury, will rot outside, will be perpetually broken down as there are no parts and only 5 or so trained techs, then get the Archer. Not to mention the transport budget from Vancouver to Yakima and back for 4-6 lowbeds to move them if they do work.

Now palletize this system to fit on the back of our current gun tractors and just replace the truck every 7 or so years
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
229
Points
710
Alternately, if we assumed an M777 baseline requirement for structuring the RRCA, but introduced the Hawkeye (or even 120mm mortars) then we we would be not only introducing different weapons and ammunition but also different organizations.

Apparently the M777 needs a crew of 7-10 with additional numbers for transporting the ammunition. The 105s, according to yourself, require 4-7 gun numbers plus a manual ammunition supply.

On the other hand, if Automation were the standard and gun/missile numbers were reduced to two per launcher then a Gun Battery would be reduced 60 PYs on the Guns to 12.

Those 48 PYs saved could be used to man, at the battery level, FOOs, Weapons Locating Radars, Audio Weapons Locators, UAVs and Air Defence assets.

And, if the decision were taken to emphasize missiles over guns in the reserves the Battery could see its six PLS trucks with demountable missile packs on the armoury floor.

So.

60 gunners on M777s or Hawkeys or

12 gunners on Missile Launchers on trucks

and

16 gunners in FOO parties
8 gunners on MANPADS
24 Gunners on LCMR, HALO and UAS.

Which battery will retain gunners?

Note that I am not talking about Archers for the Reserves - I reckon they or their Rheinmetall competition have so many moving parts to maintain that they are going to need full time gun techs to keep them operating like new.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
229
Points
710
Or some of those gunners could be tasked to something like this


Wiesel 2 lePzMrs




1x Driver, 1x Loader, 1x Commander

Perhaps the system could be mounted in a TAPV or a LAV.
 

markppcli

Member
Reaction score
75
Points
380
Because eventually the "thrill" of going into the simulator is going to wear off and the gunners will get the message that we are not serious about their trade and leave. If you want a easy gun to deploy and train with that fits the current reserve support network, then the M119 is your best bet. If you want a cool bit of kit that can't fit into any existing armoury, will rot outside, will be perpetually broken down as there are no parts and only 5 or so trained techs, then get the Archer. Not to mention the transport budget from Vancouver to Yakima and back for 4-6 lowbeds to move them if they do work.

Now palletize this system to fit on the back of our current gun tractors and just replace the truck every 7 or so years

Eh I mean my guys were fine with doing lots of BST Sim Shoots for TOW, usually do that once a week. In the words of one of my Cpls "I mean it's a shitty video game, but I'm still getting paid to play video games," then we tossed in some healthy competition between shooters and made it fun. Training is all about finding motivators. Oh course that was Latvia where we had a BST, as opposed to having like 2 for the a brigade but I digress.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
831
Points
910
Simulators are great, as long as there are live fire exercises as well. there were sims for the Blowpipes as well. A manpad based AD troop in the Reserves would use Sims , the training Manpads that send out a signal and real ones for occasional live shoots.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
899
Points
940
Simulators are great, as long as there are live fire exercises as well. there were sims for the Blowpipes as well. A manpad based AD troop in the Reserves would use Sims , the training Manpads that send out a signal and real ones for occasional live shoots.
Small aside. Blowpipes were with the Reg F AD units from roughly the lid 1970s to 1991. In that year the Blowpipe was replaced by the Javelin S15 and the five Res F batteries were formed and equipped with them as part of the AD modernization project (which also procured ADATS and Skyguard/Oerlikon).

🍻
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
229
Points
710
Another reason to contemplate "missiles" instead of "guns": 3D printing of missiles

Even if the printing is confined to factories rather than "in the field" the cost will drop and availability improve.

3D Printed Missiles from a Multiple Missile Launcher. Not a whole lot of moving parts to service nor a lot of ammunition to securely store.


 

GR66

Sr. Member
Reaction score
120
Points
510
Curious. Assuming the Reg Force were to replace their M777's with a self-propelled howitzer (to my mind whatever the US Army selects for their Stryker Brigades would be the logical choice from a logistics/interoperability point of view) is there any insurmountable show stopper that would prevent the Reserve Artillery Regiments from taking on the M777?

I know some people have raised issues/questions about maintainability, etc. by Reserve units, but is there really anything that couldn't be resolved within the current Reserve structure and legislation? And if not, what is a realistic number of M777's that a Reserve Regiment could be reasonably expected to be able to man and support?

And how is the Target Acquisition role handled in the Reserves? Does each Regiment have a TA Battery? It that a skill and equipment set that lends itself to being done by every Reserve Artillery Regiment, or is it specialized enough that it would be best concentrated in a Reserve TA Regiment (something like I understand is happening with the 4th Artillery Regiment in the Reg Force)? Or is the role so specialized that it really belongs with the Reg Force (or at least with a mixed Reg/Reserve force something like the 21st EW Regiment)?
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
337
Points
910
Curious. Assuming the Reg Force were to replace their M777's with a self-propelled howitzer (to my mind whatever the US Army selects for their Stryker Brigades would be the logical choice from a logistics/interoperability point of view) is there any insurmountable show stopper that would prevent the Reserve Artillery Regiments from taking on the M777?

I know some people have raised issues/questions about maintainability, etc. by Reserve units, but is there really anything that couldn't be resolved within the current Reserve structure and legislation? And if not, what is a realistic number of M777's that a Reserve Regiment could be reasonably expected to be able to man and support?
The US national guard pulls off maintenance by contracting BAE to come in a couple times a year to do deep maintenance, this maintenance always involves the units techs as well as to pass on knowledge. Within our framework it is possible for the reserves to make it work, we just need the will to change things, the status quo doesn't work any more.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
899
Points
940
Curious. Assuming the Reg Force were to replace their M777's with a self-propelled howitzer (to my mind whatever the US Army selects for their Stryker Brigades would be the logical choice from a logistics/interoperability point of view) is there any insurmountable show stopper that would prevent the Reserve Artillery Regiments from taking on the M777?

I know some people have raised issues/questions about maintainability, etc. by Reserve units, but is there really anything that couldn't be resolved within the current Reserve structure and legislation? And if not, what is a realistic number of M777's that a Reserve Regiment could be reasonably expected to be able to man and support?

And how is the Target Acquisition role handled in the Reserves? Does each Regiment have a TA Battery? It that a skill and equipment set that lends itself to being done by every Reserve Artillery Regiment, or is it specialized enough that it would be best concentrated in a Reserve TA Regiment (something like I understand is happening with the 4th Artillery Regiment in the Reg Force)? Or is the role so specialized that it really belongs with the Reg Force (or at least with a mixed Reg/Reserve force something like the 21st EW Regiment)?
Let me put it this way. It all depends on which direction we want to go.

First. We barely have enough M777s to equip to regiments fully (that's at three 6-gun batteries per regiment - we currently have two 4-gun batteries per regiment). The M777 is a perfectly good gun for a light or medium brigade as it is in the US and IBCTs and SBCTs where there is a possibility it may have to accompany air mobile deployments. More properly it would be good for all the batteries in a light brigade while perhaps the medium brigade will go to a Strykerish SP. Long story short, IMHO approximately 18 guns plus a few tech spares and a few guns at the RCSA would probably leave about 10-12 which could go to reserve units. Again, IMHO there is no reason why an M777 couldn't go to a reserve unit albeit that I would make it select units that are close to a Reg F base where M777s are in use so that training and maintenance support would be simplified. Generally they operate in troops of two guns so depending on the size of a reserve regiment 2-4 guns would do.

The three regiments also operate an observation battery which provides bn level fire support coord centres and FOO/JTACs as observers and air controllers.

STA has several components. The three Reg F regiments each have a battery which deploys the Light counter mortar radar, the Raven miniUAV and the acoustic weapons locating system. The 4th GS Regt operates Medium range radars, the Blackjack Tactical SmallUAV, Air Support Coord Centres and a Div coord centre.

In short again, reserve units can easily train and operate dismounted FOOs but would have trouble trg and maintaining currency on the LAV observation vehicle and as JTACs.

LCMRs, miniUAVs and acoustic systems are well within a reserve units capabilities. I'm not 100% sure but I believe the reserves flirted with some STA systems not too long ago but currently do not have them. Reserve units in the not too distant past also had batteries of Javelin Air defence missiles but not now. I could see a reserve unit handling both the Blackjack and the MRR but because of the limited number of systems I do not see that in the cards. Running and Air Support coord centre is probably not a reserve job either although it could be part of a hybrid unit maybe.

There are additional weapons systems which will probably in time get into the inventory including a long range rocket, loitering munitions, and ground based air defence both of which have elements which could be within a reserve artillery units capabilities.

My view is this. As between guns, air defence, STA and rockets there are very distinct specialties which make it difficult to have an all-singing, all-dancing gunner. IMHO the direction for the artillery to go is to create hybrid batteries which specialize in each area. Depending on the need for readiness to deploy, the amount of trg and retraining needed to be current and the likelihood that a type of system will not be routinely called on to deploy, those batteries could be either reg f heavy or res f heavy. Note the emphasis here on batteries. Regiments are basically aggregates of batteries more so than armoured or infantry units are aggregates of companies and squadrons. A regular force regiment could easily consist of an observation battery, two gun batteries and a headquarters battery and be augmented by an affiliated reserve gun battery and a reserve STA battery as the need arises. Alternatively a battle group could deploy with a regular force gun battery and observation troop with an affiliated reserve force radar troop and MUAV troop.

The issue is more one of how prepared the artillery leadership is prepared to fight for these systems (as many of them require new equipment) The trick here is to determine what is needed in the way of that equipment and not be too limited by the Reg F PYs available but to be prepared to use Res F Class A positions to round out the force properly and to decentralize trg so that reservists can take it. Having to send people to the artillery school in Gagetown for two to three months courses is a killer as far as reservists are concerned.

🍻
 

GR66

Sr. Member
Reaction score
120
Points
510
Let's say hypothetically (fingers crossed) that the Army replaces the M777 in the Reg Force with a self-propelled 155mm howitzer system which frees up the M777's for the Reserves.

Let's for arguments sake say we purchase 36 x Archer-like systems with a couple of extras for training, spares, etc. What would be the best way to organize our Artillery units?

If we had 3 x Reg Force Artillery Regiments each with:
  • 3 x 4-gun 155mm SP-Artillery Batteries (12 guns total)
  • 1 x STA Battery
  • 1 x FO Battery
  • 1 x HQ Battery
Would it make more sense to:

  1. Attach 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries (Reserve Regiments - 2 x 2-gun Troops per Regiment) to each Reg Force Regiment. This would give each Reg Force Artillery Regiment a total of 24 guns (3 x Reg Force 4-gun SP-155mm Batteries plus 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries).
  2. Group the Reserve M777s into an Artillery Brigade. Each Reserve Artillery Regiment could be made up with 3 x 4-gun M777 Batteries generated from 3 x Reserve Artillery Regiments plus an additional Reserve unit per Regiment to provide the STA, FO and HQ Batteries.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
2,163
Points
1,060
Let's say hypothetically (fingers crossed) that the Army replaces the M777 in the Reg Force with a self-propelled 155mm howitzer system which frees up the M777's for the Reserves.

Let's for arguments sake say we purchase 36 x Archer-like systems with a couple of extras for training, spares, etc. What would be the best way to organize our Artillery units?

If we had 3 x Reg Force Artillery Regiments each with:
  • 3 x 4-gun 155mm SP-Artillery Batteries (12 guns total)
  • 1 x STA Battery
  • 1 x FO Battery
  • 1 x HQ Battery
Would it make more sense to:

  1. Attach 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries (Reserve Regiments - 2 x 2-gun Troops per Regiment) to each Reg Force Regiment. This would give each Reg Force Artillery Regiment a total of 24 guns (3 x Reg Force 4-gun SP-155mm Batteries plus 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries).
  2. Group the Reserve M777s into an Artillery Brigade. Each Reserve Artillery Regiment could be made up with 3 x 4-gun M777 Batteries generated from 3 x Reserve Artillery Regiments plus an additional Reserve unit per Regiment to provide the STA, FO and HQ Batteries.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

The last thing we need is another Reserve Brigade, which is probably the most useless organization ever devised.

Unless your mission is to generate large, highly paid, inefficient post offices, of course ;)
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
899
Points
940
Let's say hypothetically (fingers crossed) that the Army replaces the M777 in the Reg Force with a self-propelled 155mm howitzer system which frees up the M777's for the Reserves.

Let's for arguments sake say we purchase 36 x Archer-like systems with a couple of extras for training, spares, etc. What would be the best way to organize our Artillery units?

If we had 3 x Reg Force Artillery Regiments each with:
  • 3 x 4-gun 155mm SP-Artillery Batteries (12 guns total)
  • 1 x STA Battery
  • 1 x FO Battery
  • 1 x HQ Battery
Would it make more sense to:

  1. Attach 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries (Reserve Regiments - 2 x 2-gun Troops per Regiment) to each Reg Force Regiment. This would give each Reg Force Artillery Regiment a total of 24 guns (3 x Reg Force 4-gun SP-155mm Batteries plus 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries).
  2. Group the Reserve M777s into an Artillery Brigade. Each Reserve Artillery Regiment could be made up with 3 x 4-gun M777 Batteries generated from 3 x Reserve Artillery Regiments plus an additional Reserve unit per Regiment to provide the STA, FO and HQ Batteries.

I think I've expressed my opinion on this generally. For starters, I think creating gun or rocket or loitering munition or STA or GBAD batteries are easily within the real of what reservists can do (The US National Guard does all of those). Once you strip the FOO and FSCC elements out of the battery, what's left on the gun line can easily be run by a captain and an MWO, even reservists, albeit I like seeing some of the positions (such as the tech warrant, the BQMS, and a maintenance team being Reg F). A battery would probably number some 80 folks give or take depending on if its four or six detachments and the size of each detachment.

There is, however, a need for a certain number of Reg F people to 1) meet immediate deployment needs; 2) create and maintain in depth technical expertise in the various systems and 3) provide for a sufficient career progression system for the branch.

IMHO there should be sufficient Reg F FSCCs, ASCCs, TACCs, FOOs and JTACs to properly staff all REG F brigades and battalions on a full time basis. I'm a bit concerned that these functions are slowly creeping out of the expertise of reserve arty officers although I've been assured by folks in the know that they can still function very well in the dismounted FOO role (it's a little complex to learn all the aspects of a LAV OPV drills and JTAC continuation certification - but who knows with the right trg aids). FSCC etc definitely not.

That's a round about way of saying I can easily see three Reg F close support regiments with a single gun battery and partial elements of an STA battery and a complete FOO battery (all Reg F) augmented by two additional Res F gun batteries and one or two STA troops. By the way I favour the six-gun/launcher battery for when we start having to throw dumb iron around after all the smart stuff is gone and to ensure that there are still some guns/launchers there after we start losing some. They won't need more command posts as one CP in a battery will be able to manage several dispersed elements (an alternate CP is necessary as a back up)

In addition I can see an artillery brigade.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

The last thing we need is another Reserve Brigade, which is probably the most useless organization ever devised.

Unless your mission is to generate large, highly paid, inefficient post offices, of course ;)

The brigade would provide all artillery resources that are not part of the close support regiments (LRPR, GBAD, Loitering munitions, more STA, arty intelligence (yes D&B there is such a thing)). Like the close support regiment there would need to be a solid core of Reg F expertise which would include the operations cell of the bde complete and sufficient Reg F personnel within each equipment specialty to provide a rapid reaction force of probably a troop each, a career profile for those members, and the requisite technical maintainers. However, the large bulk of the batteries should be reservists as these systems need to be available but would rarely need to deploy beyond exercises or show of force operations (and of course major combat) I generally see three regiments (one each LRPR, GBAD and Loitering) with two or more batteries each.

I agree fully that we need less reserve brigades. In fact I don't think we need any, but what we do need is a limited number of deployable hybrid brigades over and above the three Reg F brigades that we have. Even if they were lightly equipped light infantry brigades they would be a benefit as long as we get rid of the herd of deadhead Res F leadership and convert the existing Reg F RSS staff into the cadre of far fewer but fully manned battalions. I also think we need one or two hybrid sustainment and/or manoeuvre enhancement brigades as well. Much of the Reg F cadre for a hybrid artillery, sustainment and manoeuvre enhancement brigade already exist within the CCSB and RSS and a judicious reallocation of Res F arty, Engr, Svc Sp and Med units would fill out the remainder. That kind of a structure does not require more PYs or Res positions. Just a lot less Cols, LCols, HCols, HLCols, CWOs and even majors

We need to abandon the protection the multitude of regimental anachronisms (both Reg F and Res F) and useless command layers (probably six or seven brigades and two divisional headquarters are sufficient for our size of force) and realign them into functioning and deployable elements properly equipped and trained. If, Heaven forbid, we ever need to raise another two or three hundred thousand man army, we can resurrect units from the Sup order of battle. We do not need a hundred and fifty some odd reserve units and ten brigades hanging around in waiting.

🍻
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
899
Points
940
Let's say hypothetically (fingers crossed) that the Army replaces the M777 in the Reg Force with a self-propelled 155mm howitzer system which frees up the M777's for the Reserves.

Let's for arguments sake say we purchase 36 x Archer-like systems with a couple of extras for training, spares, etc. What would be the best way to organize our Artillery units?

If we had 3 x Reg Force Artillery Regiments each with:
  • 3 x 4-gun 155mm SP-Artillery Batteries (12 guns total)
  • 1 x STA Battery
  • 1 x FO Battery
  • 1 x HQ Battery
Would it make more sense to:

  1. Attach 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries (Reserve Regiments - 2 x 2-gun Troops per Regiment) to each Reg Force Regiment. This would give each Reg Force Artillery Regiment a total of 24 guns (3 x Reg Force 4-gun SP-155mm Batteries plus 3 x Reserve 4-gun M777 Batteries).
  2. Group the Reserve M777s into an Artillery Brigade. Each Reserve Artillery Regiment could be made up with 3 x 4-gun M777 Batteries generated from 3 x Reserve Artillery Regiments plus an additional Reserve unit per Regiment to provide the STA, FO and HQ Batteries.

I think I've expressed my opinion on this generally. For starters, I think creating gun or rocket or loitering munition or STA or GBAD batteries are easily within the real of what reservists can do (The US National Guard does all of those). Once you strip the FOO and FSCC elements out of the battery, what's left on the gun line can easily be run by a captain and an MWO, even reservists, albeit I like seeing some of the positions (such as the tech warrant, the BQMS, and a maintenance team being Reg F). A battery would probably number some 80 folks give or take depending on if its four or six detachments and the size of each detachment.

There is, however, a need for a certain number of Reg F people to 1) meet immediate deployment needs; 2) create and maintain in depth technical expertise in the various systems and 3) provide for a sufficient career progression system for the branch.

IMHO there should be sufficient Reg F FSCCs, ASCCs, TACCs, FOOs and JTACs to properly staff all REG F brigades and battalions on a full time basis. I'm a bit concerned that these functions are slowly creeping out of the expertise of reserve arty officers although I've been assured by folks in the know that they can still function very well in the dismounted FOO role (it's a little complex to learn all the aspects of a LAV OPV drills and JTAC continuation certification - but who knows with the right trg aids). FSCC etc definitely not.

That's a round about way of saying I can easily see three Reg F close support regiments with a single gun battery and partial elements of an STA battery and a complete FOO battery (all Reg F) augmented by two additional Res F gun batteries and one or two STA troops. By the way I favour the six-gun/launcher battery for when we start having to throw dumb iron around after all the smart stuff is gone and to ensure that there are still some guns/launchers there after we start losing some. They won't need more command posts as one CP in a battery will be able to manage several dispersed elements (an alternate CP is necessary as a back up)

In addition I can see an artillery brigade.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

The last thing we need is another Reserve Brigade, which is probably the most useless organization ever devised.

Unless your mission is to generate large, highly paid, inefficient post offices, of course ;)

The brigade would provide all artillery resources that are not part of the close support regiments (LRPR, GBAD, Loitering munitions, more STA, arty intelligence (yes D&B there is such a thing)). Like the close support regiment there would need to be a solid core of Reg F expertise which would include the operations cell of the bde complete and sufficient Reg F personnel within each equipment specialty to provide a rapid reaction force of probably a troop each, a career profile for those members, and the requisite technical maintainers. However, the large bulk of the batteries should be reservists as these systems need to be available but would rarely need to deploy beyond exercises or show of force operations (and of course major combat) I generally see three regiments (one each LRPR, GBAD and Loitering) with two or more batteries each.

I agree fully that we need less reserve brigades. In fact I don't think we need any, but what we do need is a limited number of deployable hybrid brigades over and above the three Reg F brigades that we have. Even if they were lightly equipped light infantry brigades they would be a benefit as long as we get rid of the herd of deadhead Res F leadership and convert the existing Reg F RSS staff into the cadre of far fewer but fully manned battalions. I also think we need one or two hybrid sustainment and/or manoeuvre enhancement brigades as well. Much of the Reg F cadre for a hybrid artillery, sustainment and manoeuvre enhancement brigade already exist within the CCSB and RSS and a judicious reallocation of Res F arty, Engr, Svc Sp and Med units would fill out the remainder. That kind of a structure does not require more PYs or Res positions. Just a lot less Cols, LCols, HCols, HLCols, CWOs and even majors

We need to abandon the protection the multitude of regimental anachronisms (both Reg F and Res F) and useless command layers (probably six or seven brigades and two divisional headquarters are sufficient for our size of force) and realign them into functioning and deployable elements properly equipped and trained. If, Heaven forbid, we ever need to raise another two or three hundred thousand man army, we can resurrect units from the Sup order of battle. We do not need a hundred and fifty some odd reserve units and ten brigades hanging around in waiting.

🍻
 

GR66

Sr. Member
Reaction score
120
Points
510
It would be ideal to see the three Reg Force Artillery Regiments equipped with 3 x 6-gun Batteries of whatever self-propelled 155mm gun we acquire, but that would mean replacing 37 x M777s with I'm guessing 60-ish new SP guns (54 for the line batteries plus tech spares and guns for the schools). Is that wishful thinking in our current economic/political climate?

If we could get 40-ish SP guns to replace the 37 x M777s, with the reduced manpower requirements we could have 3 x 4-gun Batteries per Regiment without an increase in PYs and if we could get an additional 6 or so M777s from the batch being divested by the USMC we could have enough guns to have a matching 4-gun Reserve M777 Battery for each Reg Force Battery.

Hybrid 155mm Artillery Regiment.png
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
899
Points
940
M777 portee system. Not sure if it can fire mounted?

Just a few short words from someone who has used both the 2 1/2 ton portee and the M548 portee for the L5 pack howitzer ... I friggin' hate portees. They suck. And that was for a little light pack howitzer like the L5. I can only imagine what a horror show it will be to load an M777 onto one of those suckers regardless of the hydraulic assists.

As for the UAE Enigma; its an enigma for me how: 1) you ram the damn rounds into the gun with the vehicle right there; 2) how that damn barrel is supported on that tiny trunnion system; 3) what exactly absorbs the recoil that would ordinarily go into the M777s rather robust base and trails; and 4) a whole lot of other little crap that bothers me.

Just for those who've never seen an M777 operated in anger, here's a short video (please ignore the gun drill shortcuts that would turn an AIG purple):


🍻
 
Last edited:

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
899
Points
940
It would be ideal to see the three Reg Force Artillery Regiments equipped with 3 x 6-gun Batteries of whatever self-propelled 155mm gun we acquire, but that would mean replacing 37 x M777s with I'm guessing 60-ish new SP guns (54 for the line batteries plus tech spares and guns for the schools). Is that wishful thinking in our current economic/political climate?

If we could get 40-ish SP guns to replace the 37 x M777s, with the reduced manpower requirements we could have 3 x 4-gun Batteries per Regiment without an increase in PYs and if we could get an additional 6 or so M777s from the batch being divested by the USMC we could have enough guns to have a matching 4-gun Reserve M777 Battery for each Reg Force Battery.

View attachment 65587
Challenge accepted. I go for hybrid regiments too. But the establishment set out below is designed to kick off with the purchase of only 18 self propelled guns (wheeled or tracked plus a pair for the school and some tech spares)

All of them would go to 1 RCHA to support 1 CMBG as an armoured brigade. 1 RCHA's 8 M777s go to 2 RCHA and 5 RALC. One of 2 RCHA's batteries would be in Gagetown to also support the school and work with 2 RCR. That leaves one tech spare - a little thin but I don't want to buy any new M777s. The idea with the M777s going to 2 RCHA and 5 RALC is to support both brigades as they are now organized or even if 2 Bde goes light and 5 Bde goes full mech the guns would not change (the US currently supports SBCTs with 18 x M777 as well although I think there might be a wheeled SP in their future)

Each DS regiment has three gun batteries with two Reg F gun troops each, a Reg F battery echelon and one Res F gun troop. Each troop consists of two guns and tractors, a CP, a recce element, a TSM and an ammo det. Each regiment's FOO battery has three Reg F troops and a Res F troop. Each troop has an FSCC det and three FOO dets. Each regiment's STA battery has two weapon locating radar troops (one Reg F one Res F) and two UAV troops (again one Reg F and one Res F) (Note that 1 RCHA and 5 RALC have LAV OPVs while 2 RCHA uses light wheeled vehicles. This is based on a presumption 2 CMBG will go light and 5 CMBG fully mech. If the status quo remains mixed mech and light then the FOO OPVs would be adjusted accordingly.

4 GS takes its existing two batteries and designates one radar and one UAV albeit in the final analysis there will be a realignment as AD comes on line. The intent is to grow the regiment to eventually add on two AD batteries and one long range precision rocket battery. I expect the current radars and the ASCCs to form the backbone of the two AD batteries while the radar battery will eventually disappear.

For convenience, I've allocated designations for which Res F units become responsible for manning the various Res F troops required. I've left the battery HQs and at least one troop of everything in the hands of the Reg F to provide the appropriate level of expertise and leadership.

I'm looking at this as a Phase 1 effort in order to get the existing four brigades more or less up to strength with no PY increase and modest equipment increases. IMHO there ought to be a Phase 2 if and when we ever reorg the Res F to provide formed units, at least some of the Res F regiments could grow for that but for starters they would have the expertise associated with all the operational equipment.

RCA Reorg Phase 1.png

Let the critiquing begin.

🍻
 
Top