C3 Howitzer Replacement

[Kirkhill]

My counter point would be that all of those have direct human controls.
With either AI/ML or remote input all of those can be interfered with non kinetic means, and no human at the controls means no way out.

My counter to your counter would be that a lot of really cheap stuff, like chaff or smoke, can make an impact simply by causing a shift in attention.

Even if your EW counters to AI/ML are 95% effective you still have to deal with the ones that get through.

 

[Prairie canuck]

I am curious if the Hawkeye system would be an option for a 105 replacement. A chinook can move it and it's ammo carrier. Doesn't have the impact or range of a 777 but its ability to scoot and shoot seems to give it those abilities that the 777 does not have. It is being trialed south of the border. Mandus / Hawkeye
It is on a Humvee platform for the trials but they also state it can be placed on other platforms.

 

[FJAG]

I am curious if the Hawkeye system would be an option for a 105 replacement. A chinook can move it and it's ammo carrier. Doesn't have the impact or range of a 777 but its ability to scoot and shoot seems to give it those abilities that the 777 does not have. It is being trialed south of the border. Mandus / Hawkeye
It is on a Humvee platform for the trials but they also state it can be placed on other platforms.

They've been flogging this system for over six years now and to the best of my knowledge while its been looked at by some folks no one has made it an in-service system yet. In part that's because of the big drift to 155mm as the NATO calibre of choice. 105mm systems are mostly national legacy guns of some type or other which remain around for some aight or air mobile use.

I'm not a fan of this thing. IMHO Canada does not need another "training" gun. The C3 will do nicely and if they ever all clap out, and we're still too cheap to do the right thing, we can always pick up a few dozen antique M101s from the Koreans. They've got tons of them.

IMHO the C3s replacement should be some, or all, of the following in no particular order: M777s, HIMARS, some form of loitering UCAV, STA gear, and whatever self propelled 155mm Canada finally gets if they ever form proper heavy and medium brigades capable of going to a peer to peer dance.

 

[daftandbarmy]

They've been flogging this system for over six years now and to the best of my knowledge while its been looked at by some folks no one has made it an in-service system yet. In part that's because of the big drift to 155mm as the NATO calibre of choice. 105mm systems are mostly national legacy guns of some type or other which remain around for some aight or air mobile use.

I'm not a fan of this thing. IMHO Canada does not need another "training" gun. The C3 will do nicely and if they ever all clap out, and we're still too cheap to do the right thing, we can always pick up a few dozen antique M101s from the Koreans. They've got tons of them.

IMHO the C3s replacement should be some, or all, of the following in no particular order: M777s, HIMARS, some form of loitering UCAV, STA gear, and whatever self propelled 155mm Canada finally gets if they ever form proper heavy and medium brigades capable of going to a peer to peer dance.

Looks like the Ukrainians are still making good use of the 105mm, so you might not want to count it out just yet:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1570494377767870464

 

[Prairie canuck]

They've been flogging this system for over six years now and to the best of my knowledge while its been looked at by some folks no one has made it an in-service system yet. In part that's because of the big drift to 155mm as the NATO calibre of choice. 105mm systems are mostly national legacy guns of some type or other which remain around for some aight or air mobile use.

I'm not a fan of this thing. IMHO Canada does not need another "training" gun. The C3 will do nicely and if they ever all clap out, and we're still too cheap to do the right thing, we can always pick up a few dozen antique M101s from the Koreans. They've got tons of them.

IMHO the C3s replacement should be some, or all, of the following in no particular order: M777s, HIMARS, some form of loitering UCAV, STA gear, and whatever self propelled 155mm Canada finally gets if they ever form proper heavy and medium brigades capable of going to a peer to peer dance.

As D&B posted they still seem to have their battlefield use in Ukraine. My concerns are about the 777 lack of mobility once it gets dropped off. If a local band of undetected comrades decides to attack it's position what then? how long before the chinook can get there and doesn't that put the chinook at risk? Whereas the Hawkeye can just drive away and reposition to fire on its attackers? Just some questions rolling around in my head...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

They've been flogging this system for over six years now and to the best of my knowledge while its been looked at by some folks no one has made it an in-service system yet. In part that's because of the big drift to 155mm as the NATO calibre of choice. 105mm systems are mostly national legacy guns of some type or other which remain around for some aight or air mobile use.

I'm not a fan of this thing. IMHO Canada does not need another "training" gun. The C3 will do nicely and if they ever all clap out, and we're still too cheap to do the right thing, we can always pick up a few dozen antique M101s from the Koreans. They've got tons of them.

IMHO the C3s replacement should be some, or all, of the following in no particular order: M777s, HIMARS, some form of loitering UCAV, STA gear, and whatever self propelled 155mm Canada finally gets if they ever form proper heavy and medium brigades capable of going to a peer to peer dance.

In a decade the Res Arty will fondly remember when they had 3 guns and some ammo to shoot. By that time the 20 or so remaining 105's will have been taken to support the 20 or so remaining M777. I be happy if we got refurbished M101's from SK to fill out the Regiments to 6 guns each and some for the regular force. I be much happier to get M119 with the same FCS as the M777. If by chance they bought 50 or so M777 for the Reserves, how long before the Regular Force grabs them like they did with the Bisons? Then you have Res Arty playing with wooden mockups on the Parade square. I have zero faith in the CAF or the Artillery Arm to actually build up our artillery arm.

 

[Kirkhill]

I am still inclined to see the L118/M119 105s in a toss-up with 120mm mortars.

I was impressed looking at the Mortar carrier @Kirkhill had mentioned earlier when I saw it today. In and out of action inside 30 sec.
On 4 min they can come into action lay and fire 8 rounds and be mobile. The setup was significantly more rapid than I had expected.
View attachment 73499

Also a lot of fire support light vehicle systems. I didn’t get a lot of pictures as folks are still setting up.
View attachment 73498

The Mortar can go on pretty much any 3/4 ton (or larger) Pickup - which is a selling point for those entities who don’t want Land Cruiser or can adapt current in service systems.

I pointed out the US Army happens to have an assload of Hummers that could be easily adapted.

The neatest part was one can get up to 1,000 targets loaded into the software so you can either do a pre configured raid and be in and out quickly - or be moving and get a Callfor Fire/Fire Mission -and swing into action immediately.

It’s a vast improvement over the towed 120’s down here.

The Colorado/ISV would be a suitable platform that could be delivered by CH-147/148/149 or CC-130J30, CC-177 and probably the CC-150 Polaris.

 

[daftandbarmy]

As D&B posted they still seem to have their battlefield use in Ukraine. My concerns are about the 777 lack of mobility once it gets dropped off. If a local band of undetected comrades decides to attack it's position what then? how long before the chinook can get there and doesn't that put the chinook at risk? Whereas the Hawkeye can just drive away and reposition to fire on its attackers? Just some questions rolling around in my head...

Meanwhile, at Albert Head in 1970

 

[KevinB]

As D&B posted they still seem to have their battlefield use in Ukraine. My concerns are about the 777 lack of mobility once it gets dropped off. If a local band of undetected comrades decides to attack it's position what then? how long before the chinook can get there and doesn't that put the chinook at risk? Whereas the Hawkeye can just drive away and reposition to fire on its attackers? Just some questions rolling around in my head...

Your envisioning a non starter scenario with the Hooks / 777.
The same scenario would happen to a 105 towed too, but most importantly your scenario is more likely with an Airborne insertion.
Which is why Gunners need to be able to conduct Local Defense (and direct fire with the gun is an available option).

But in both the Airmobile or Airborne situation the point of using those forces is to insert them in as part of an overall plan. With their prime movers eventually being there to move them — or in the case of the airmobile raid the Hooks not leaving the area — and it’s Canada’s issue for not having a true AH to support those sort of situations, which means Canada is realistically out of the Airmobile role in any significant near peer conflict.

 

[GK .Dundas]

There is a video and article at the Army Recognition site for the Boeing Badger with it's 120 mm mortar module and trailer.
Article dates from 2014.

 

[FJAG]

Looks like the Ukrainians are still making good use of the 105mm, so you might not want to count it out just yet:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1570494377767870464

As D&B posted they still seem to have their battlefield use in Ukraine. My concerns are about the 777 lack of mobility once it gets dropped off. If a local band of undetected comrades decides to attack it's position what then? how long before the chinook can get there and doesn't that put the chinook at risk? Whereas the Hawkeye can just drive away and reposition to fire on its attackers? Just some questions rolling around in my head...

I'm not so much anti-105mm as I am anti-Hawkeye.

Here's my rationale - the 105mm has a role in airmobile ops and for light troops but we actually already have a lightweight 155mm howitzer, the M777, for that role. Further we have enough of them. We could easily man four proper six-gun batteries (plus tech and training spares) which is enough for one light brigade.

If we're going to spend money on artillery then let's spend it on guns which we desperately need which are ones that can properly support mech brigades.

We already have training aid guns in the C3 and the LG1. Money is tight. Every nickel we spend needs to be spent on something we can actually go to war with. As a gunner I wouldn't thank you if you gave me a battery of Hawkeyes to go to war with. The range is short, and its unarmoured/poorly armoured. While I see the necessity for shoot and scoot and guns are faster to bring into action then ever before, every minute guns spend scooting is a minute guns are unable to support the grunts up front. One needs far ranging guns that can stay put if necessary and take some flack. Hawkeye can't.

As for the Ukrainians, if all I had was 25pdrs I'd take them into action too. When your butt is against the wall, even a C3 will do.

 

[dapaterson]

But not a LG1...

 

[FJAG]

But not a LG1...

If the situation was desperate enough I'd take LG1s too.

Realistically we would never deploy a force large enough to need that. I doubt that we would ever deploy more than a brigade and we have enough M777s that we could support a brigade adequately.

But after that, if we needed to deploy a second or third brigade - deploy and not rotate - then we've got nothing except C3s and LG1s in our inventory - At that point 20 years of stupidity would come home to roost and we'd end up reorganizing deployed artillery regiments into one M777 battery and two C3/LG1 batteries. But of course, an all-in scenario will never happen.

 

[childs56]

I wonder if the G7 105mm from South Africa might be a decent gun to get. Incorporate the FCS from the 777 and we have two pretty capable systems.
Ideally I would like see a fleet of Towed 105 and 155mm. Then a fleet of Mounted 105 and 155mm.
It would be nice to have a 105mm that was deployable on a scale other then as a emergency backup.
I think Reserve Units could get proficient on both a 105 and 155 system pretty quick, especially if we had both on similar platforms.

 

[KevinB]

I wonder if the G7 105mm from South Africa might be a decent gun to get. Incorporate the FCS from the 777 and we have two pretty capable systems.
Ideally I would like see a fleet of Towed 105 and 155mm. Then a fleet of Mounted 105 and 155mm.
It would be nice to have a 105mm that was deployable on a scale other then as a emergency backup.
I think Reserve Units could get proficient on both a 105 and 155 system pretty quick, especially if we had both on similar platforms.

Why the fascination with 105mm?
As @FJAG mentioned, there are enough 777’s for a Light Bde, and one could get a 155mm SPA for the Heavier forces, and HIMARS for GS.

105mm offers nothing than can it be done better with other systems, especially given the state of the CA’s 105’s…
So there is a need for a new system anyway - so best to adopt to the new standard of 155 and MLRS/HIMARS

 

[Kirkhill]

L119 drills with a 4 man crew?

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/xft1lj

 

[Kirkhill]

I particularly liked the Great Big Sea soundtrack...

 

[Kirkhill]

Why the fascination with 105mm?
As @FJAG mentioned, there are enough 777’s for a Light Bde, and one could get a 155mm SPA for the Heavier forces, and HIMARS for GS.

105mm offers nothing than can it be done better with other systems, especially given the state of the CA’s 105’s…
So there is a need for a new system anyway - so best to adopt to the new standard of 155 and MLRS/HIMARS

Fan of the possibilities of the 120mm mortar that I am, I have said that it is pretty much a toss up with the 105s.

As a Battle Group commander I don't know that there would be much difference between having 6 L119s on call or 8 120s. The primary difference is that there is a history of the 105s and the Gunners seem to like it. If they would rather come to the fight with 105s than 120s, and its coming out of their budget, who are we to complain?

Both go downrange and make similar size bangs.

 

[KevinB]

Fan of the possibilities of the 120mm mortar that I am, I have said that it is pretty much a toss up with the 105s.

As a Battle Group commander I don't know that there would be much difference between having 6 L119s on call or 8 120s. The primary difference is that there is a history of the 105s and the Gunners seem to like it. If they would rather come to the fight with 105s than 120s, and its coming out of their budget, who are we to complain?

Both go downrange and make similar size bangs.

Mortarmen use the 120mm in most other Armies it in a BN Infantry weapon or manned by Infantry in the CAV Sqn etc.

Thus your Artillery are free for 155 and rocket/missiles.

 

[childs56]

Why the fascination with 105mm?
As @FJAG mentioned, there are enough 777’s for a Light Bde, and one could get a 155mm SPA for the Heavier forces, and HIMARS for GS.

105mm offers nothing than can it be done better with other systems, especially given the state of the CA’s 105’s…
So there is a need for a new system anyway - so best to adopt to the new standard of 155 and MLRS/HIMARS

The current fleet of Canada's 105mm howitzers is something of a disaster. But upgrading them might be a good choice. Modern 105mm still pack a usable punch in a modern day situation. Cost wise, operational wise I think there is still a spot for them.
It will be interesting what the AAR from Ukraine will be on the use of 105mm in theatre.

Ideally I would love to see mixed fleet of towed 155/105 (some are saying towed artillery is a thing of the past) A fleet of Mech 155/105
Also some form of MLRS would be good also, with the ability to cross use Missile systems from the Navy and Maybe Airforce.

A G7 artillery gun mounted on a truck chassis would be a pretty good system. You wont over stress the chassis, you can carry a fair bit of ammo, maintenance would be manageable for all units Reserve and Regular Force.

I would say anything we get we need to be able to produce it here in Canada along with provide the ammunition for it domestically.