Dinosaurs

[George Wallace]

Sorry Al but comments like this set me off: 

Sounds like something that some of my peers may be interested in as well (well, the techno-nerds anyway.... the dinosaurs still go on about the good ol' days of Lynx recce and mud op's being the only way....)

Al

Life is a wheel.  Everything that is old, is new again.  I just love how young pups or those who really don't understand how or why something is done such and such a way must break the mold and create something that may be inferior to the tried and true way.  For instance, your comment above may be a sign that you are indeed not truly up to speed on what the job entails nor imaginative enough to adapt to changing times.  In the process you deem it proper to call those who may protest the direction that Recce is moving, because they have the knowledge and are able to see the shortcomings of the current movement a foot.  Change is not always good and beneficial.  If it was we would have readily accepted the philosophies of Hitler and Stalin without complaint and resistance.  If one protests because he or she has the skills and knowledge to forsee the failures of new implementations they are branded "Dinosaurs" by those who are rushing forward blindly following misguided ministrations from an ignorant Government and it's minions in NDHQ and other Federal Departments. 

If you truly believe that the Coyote is a Recce Vehicle that can truly do all Recce tasks, then you are blinded by the "Bovine Scatology" of many unknowledgable 'social climbers' professing to be experts in fields they truly know little about.  The Coyote is a 'fair' "Surveillance Vehicle" at best.  It is not capable of properly and effectively doing Recce.  Mud Recce skills must be retained and practiced.  We need a proper vehicle to do Mud Recce.  The GWagen, as currently put into service, IS NOT that vehicle. 

Want to talk about dinosaurs!  The MGS is a dinosaur.  It is the return of an idea and philosophy that we got rid of after WW II.  The Assault Gun was done away with as Tank technology and Wpns technology advanced.  The last Assault Guns were those in German service, the Jagpanzer Kanone, which were all converted to Jagpanzer Rakette by the 1980's.  Tanks have proven their worth in Bosnia, Kosovo and the Middle East, yet people here in Canada insist that they are relics of the Cold War and anyone who professes that we retain them is a dinosaur.  That truly is offensive and very short sighted. 

As I said at first, history is a big wheel.  Events are cyclic.  We are destined to have to relearn lessons of the past, because those who have little knowledge and understanding of what is, insist on change, thinking that they have a better way to do things, only for someone to discover somewhere down the road that an idea and method of the past is indeed a good one, if you understand why it was done in the way it was.  It seems that many insist on trying to reinvent the wheel. 

I am a "Cold Warrior".  I am proud of that.  I do believe there are ways to improve my profession as Science advances.  I do believe there are better ways to do things.  I am one of those Dinosaurs and proud of it.

 

[Garry]

Hoo-yah.

 

[aesop081]

Fantastic post George. I get weary of this tendency to want to re-invent the wheel.  If you don't mind me sidetracking for a second, those who would have us do away with our ASW skills should read this and think a little.

Cheers

 

[Britney Spears]

The Assault Gun was done away with as Tank technology and Wpns technology advanced.  The last Assault Guns were those in German service, the Jagpanzer Kanone, which were all converted to Jagpanzer Rakette by the 1980's.

The Chinese, untill recently, were still producing, in limited numbers the Type 89 SPATG/tank destroyer/Assault gun. As the name implies it entered service in 1989. Obviously since the collapse of the Soviet threat the requirement for large numbers of such vehicles no longer exist.

Then again these are the same guys who were still producing Mig-19s in the early 90's so no big suprise there.....

 

[Britney Spears]

TANK DESTROYERS, China

Date Posted: 28-Oct-2004


Jane's Armour and Artillery

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


NORINCO 120 mm PTZ89/Type 89 120 mm SPATG
Development

Late in 1999 the People's Liberation Army (PLA) finally showed in public for the first time their Type 89 120 mm self-propelled anti-tank gun (SPATG), which is also referred to as the PTZ89. Recent information has stated that trials with the first prototype were carried out early in 1988.
The Type 89 120 mm SPATG is believed to have been introduced into service with the PLA in the late 1980s and is based on a much modified chassis of the Type 83 152 mm self-propelled artillery system.
As far as it its known, neither the 120 mm PTZ89/Type 89 120 mm SPATG or the Type 83 152 mm self-propelled gun have been exported by NORINCO (China North Industries Corporation).

Description

The layout of the PTZ89 is similar to the Type 83 152 mm self-propelled artillery system with the driver's compartment front left, engine compartment to the right and fighting compartment at the rear. In the rear of the hull is a door that opens to the right, which is not fitted with a vision block or firing port.
This chassis has been fitted with a new all-welded steel turret positioned further forward with an extended bustle which is believed to contain an automatic loader for the 120 mm smoothbore gun and fitted with a thermal sleeve and a fume extractor.
The 120 mm smoothbore gun fires various types of Chinese-developed (one piece) ammunition with a semi-combustible cartridge case. All that remains after firing is the stub cartridge case.
The latest 120 mm Armour Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot-Tracer (APFSDS-T) projectile is called the 120-II which has a higher muzzle velocity and greater armour penetration characteristics.
According to NORINCO (China North Industries Corporation), the complete 120-II round weighs 22.5 kg and has an overall length of 1.15m. The projectile is 655 mm long, weighs 7.4 kg and has a muzzle velocity of 1,725 m/s. This will penetrate 600 mm of Rolled Homogenous Armour (RHA) at a range of 2,000 m.
The NORINCO 120 mm smoothbore gun will also fire western types of 120 mm ammunition, such as that manufactured by Rheinmetall of Germany.
The gunner is seated on the left side of the turret with the commander on the right side. The former has a roof-mounted sight and a direct fire sight.
The Type 89 SPATG is also fitted with a roof-mounted 12.7 mm anti-aircraft machine gun for air defence and local protection and mounted on either side of the turret is a bank of four forward firing electrically operated smoke grenade launchers. There is also a stowage basket mounted on either side of the turret.
This 120 mm smoothbore gun is also being offered for installation in Russian T-54/T-55 and Chinese Type 59 Main Battle Tanks currently armed with a 100 mm rifled tank gun. As far as it is known, this remains at the prototype stage and was offered mainly for the export market.
Suspension is of the torsion bar type with either side having six dual rubber-tyred road wheels with the drive sprocket at the front and the idler at the rear. Track return rollers are provided.
Standard equipment includes an NBC system and night vision equipment. The system can ford but has no amphibious capability.
The Type 89 has a combat weight of about 30 tonnes, other details are not currently available.

Status

Production complete. In service with China in small numbers. This was not offered on the export market.

Manufacturer

Chinese state factories.

NORINCO, China North Industries Corporation.

UPDATED

Sorry about the hijack, but I thought the armrd types might be interested. Now back to the dinosaurs....

 

[Zipper]

Thanks BS (no pun intended ;D), it was a good read.

As is most of the time, GW has in my opinion the clear sight over the situation. We are once again going back(still going I should say) to the pre-WWII ideas of the post WWI mounted rifles and "saving" money. Thus we are going to have to waste young Canadian lives paying for the learning curve that will eventually come our way again. Of course with our WWI and II veterans almost gone, the whole idea of "never again" will be lost as well.

What have we lost in the past 10-15 (and longer) years of budget cuts and political scapegoating? The airborne, our armoured regiments (mud recce and tanks), our heavy lift, our lift anything for that matter, our submarines, our coastal patrols (air), our sea-borne supply capabilities, our naval helicopters, our rear area technical (support) services, etc...

What have we gained? JTFII, DART, transformation of our line regiments into ad hoc patrol units for peace keeping missions and aid delivery support. Basically all high profile, publicity constructs to make the foreign affairs office look good. Like we're "doing our part".

Bah.

And the non-dinosaurs are buying into it with the shiny new toys, and "new" ideas of that things will be better...        ...blah blah blah.

Meanwhile they keep shrinking capabilities and dropping hard learned knowledge based skills like hot potatoes.

 

[TCBF]

"Bah."

- Zipper, you are bang on.

Tom

 

[GK .Dundas]

there are two reasons the forces are undergoing this "transformation ".
    !.  Most of our Sr. officers tend to be graduates of the  American
        Military  Command colleges .There's nothing wrong with this per say
        but it does colour the thinking of many.
    2.  The  military's political master view "transformation as a way of doing
        defence on the cheap while at the same time giving it a softer image.

 

[George Wallace]

there are two reasons the forces are undergoing this "transformation ".
      !.     Most of our Sr. officers tend to be graduates of the   American
        Military   Command colleges .There's nothing wrong with this per say
        but it does colour the thinking of many.
    2.     The   military's political master view "transformation as a way of doing
        defence on the cheap while at the same time giving it a softer image.

Makes me feel just like they are turning us into a bunch of "Cream Puffs".....  :  ;D

 

[George Wallace]

Further to GK Dundas' comments on; "Most of our Sr. officers tend to be graduates of the  American Military  Command colleges .There's nothing wrong with this per say but it does colour the thinking of many." I would tend to think that it is more likely the way that we feed our officers through the 'Sausage Machine' and really don't spend enough time developing them as Cbt Officers in the Regiments.  They come to a Unit, after two or three years they get their 'Ticket' punched and then off to Staff School, back to the Unit again, get their 'Ticket' punched and off to a Staff College and perhaps come back to the Unit as CO or go to a HQ.  All the time they are just getting their 'Tickets' punched and then up the 'Social Ladder'.  The percentage of actual Cbt Ldrs in the group is small.  The actual percentage of competent leaders is also not too high.  The Officers, truly admired by their men and supported thus is not as large as it should be.  We are working on the "Promote to two levels above their competency" philosophy in far too many cases. 

We are gifted as a Nation to have the opportunities to send our Officers and Snr NCOs to US, UK, French, Australian, German and Italian Staff Colleges and Schools.  These are gifts that give our Military many subliminal lessons learned and experiences that will allow us to continue to be able to integrate into most NATO, Commonwealth, or UN Contingents seamlessly, or at least with less difficulty.  I only wish that a larger proportion of our Military was so inclined and competent enough to carry out these tasks.  (Always room for improvement.)  I believe in 'merit'.  I will not get into some of those 'other' debates.

Thank God for Corporals!

 

[Zipper]

Right again George.

Unfortunately another thing that seems to be happening (to the military and otherwise) is that the military is no longer looked upon as a "career" where you are a soldier first. It is being looked at and run as a business where you must meet budgets, and stay out of the red. Officers (and technical NCO's) are in it as a career builder so that they can go onto a higher paying civvie job with as little fuss and muss as possible. The idea of joining to one day (maybe) get into combat are to be avoided at all costs. Why would you want to fight when you can get your education paid for and all the management training you need to come out in a few years to a 6 figure job without the huge educational debt? Sounds good to me. And world travel to boot.

I've talked to many "officers" who are doing their time until they achieved their educational goals and then it would be off to civvie land and a cushy job waiting for them. Its similar for the techs. Do their time and get trained for their ticket, then quit to a nice union paying trade.

The only ones screwed are the dumb asses (like me) that went combat trades. Its they who keep the word soldier alive in the military.

Some exceptions of course. ;D

 

[Zipper]

I think it would be a good idea for all to read the latest Canadian Army Journal...

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/main.asp?view=more&issueID=33

...and read the article "Cavalry charging Panzers". It will give you a good idea on what seems to be important to the Officer Corp these days.

Sheesh.

 

[RCD]

it will be a sorry day when Canadians come home in bodybags or held hostage.
because the forces didn't have the proper equipment our politicans did not want to invest in getting.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Right again George.

Unfortunately another thing that seems to be happening (to the military and otherwise) is that the military is no longer looked upon as a "career" where you are a soldier first. It is being looked at and run as a business where you must meet budgets, and stay out of the red. Officers (and technical NCO's) are in it as a career builder so that they can go onto a higher paying civvie job with as little fuss and muss as possible. The idea of joining to one day (maybe) get into combat are to be avoided at all costs. Why would you want to fight when you can get your education paid for and all the management training you need to come out in a few years to a 6 figure job without the huge educational debt? Sounds good to me. And world travel to boot.

I've talked to many "officers" who are doing their time until they achieved their educational goals and then it would be off to civvie land and a cushy job waiting for them. Its similar for the techs. Do their time and get trained for their ticket, then quit to a nice union paying trade.

The only ones screwed are the dumb asses (like me) that went combat trades. Its they who keep the word soldier alive in the military.

Some exceptions of course. ;D

And where do you, a former (?) PRes crewman, get this gem of information?  If you're going to bash officers, at least have your facts (with references or examples) in order before you launch.  For instance, you quoted a CAJ article by an officer that I KNOW isn't in this game to feather his own nest.  The fact that the subject isn't to your taste doesn't mean much, nor does your claim to have spoken to "many" officers.

The last time I checked, combat arms officers were in the combat trades too and you've engaged in a gross generalization based on nothing.  I've done my turret time...

If you suspect you've offended me - you have and your smiley face doesn't do much to cheer me up.

TR, out.

 

[Gunner]

and read the article "Cavalry charging Panzers". It will give you a good idea on what seems to be important to the Officer Corp these days.

Umm, Leadership in the Army?  Aren't officers supposed to consider it important?  Maybe I'm missing your point?

Leadership is not a panacea for the wide variety of challenges that exist within LFC.  It is, however, one of the most important tools that commanders at any level can use to ease the difficulities faced by their troops.  It is one of the central characteristics of being a member of the military.  Canadians expect their soldiers and their commanders to display ethical leadership in the conduct of all activities that they undertake.  An army that does not exercise leadership is little more than an armed mob...

Zipper, what is your problem with Maj Strickland's article, or did you even read it?

 

[Zipper]

The general idea behind his article was fine. It is the fact that he seems to be concentrating more on trying to bring "modern" business type "soft" leadership styles into the military then trying to figure out the systemic problems that already exist is not. The military is NOT a business, nor should it be thought of as one, or lead as one. Ethics and leadership styles are fine when dealing with various levels of government and other civillian bodies, but the last thing that should be on your mind on a battle field is not how to not upset your men.

Maybe in my opinion he seems to be approaching the whole issue from a very typical businuess human resource style. Which is fine in garrison. But that is one of the problems with our military today. We THINK to much like garrison soldiers instead of field soldiers.

In other words, I have very little confidence that he could actually ask the men under his command to go out and die for him today and expect them to do it.

 

[54/102 CEF]

My view

After WW2 the Army went from being a national organisation to a NATO focussed organisation with the regular component unfortunately divorced from the reserves - the regulars were going to help the Russians Die quick with them.

Since 1972 at least (in my case) there was no plan for follow on eqpt or forces

Today - the combat elements of the regulars - too small and too underfunded by a very well off country are left on a limb on which they can`t back up - directed by politicians at external affairs with no stake in a potential outcome.

While we wasted (from a strategic perspective) 60 years, our friends to the south created the machine that amazingly spins ofg power projection - eqpt and capabilities - with their own internal hatchet fights no doubt - but what a machine!

Whats the link?

The US won and held an empire since 1945 and we continued our shrink back from ex-patriate Brit status that we started on in Nov 12, 1918. Look back to 1968 when we ran away from a front line duty position in Northern Germany and did the same by taking an Air Wing out of France. Must have been the same for the Navy. Transformation is a code word for a down hill trend line.

I think the big failure of the CF is not explaining very clearly to the soldiers that the real need for them is short term - and thus we should have hundreds of thousands or at least thousands of recently released combat trained soldiers to back up our policy of limited use of the military (mind you it must seem like 110% use for those who get tagged to go to Kamloops East - Kabul and environs)

So keep the capabiltiy going as best you can troops! Some of us out there admire what you do!!!! 

 

[TCBF]

Notwithstanding the fact that we appear to have gone from the Tiny Perfect Army of the fifties/sixties to the Uniformed Branch of the Department of National Defence, I still meet young soldiers who - although they may not be able to articulate it well - still know what an Army is for, and the roll soldiers play in it.  And that is even after twelve years of ComSymp propaganda in school.  "The truth will out."

Tom

 

[Zipper]

Well then Tom, could you please let them know to let their superiors know what it is for.

That NOT being a free education/training/ticket punching/political ladder climbing vehicle for the purposes of making a bigger buck as soon as ones time is served.

Of course their will always be those that do that. I just wish it wasn't the main stay.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

That NOT being a free education/training/ticket punching/political ladder climbing vehicle for the purposes of making a bigger buck as soon as ones time is served.

Of course their will always be those that do that. I just wish it wasn't the main stay.

I have to be honest - I have not run into many who are using the military in the manner that you have suggested above.  Perhaps you have just had a run of bad luck with the leaders that you have been exposed to.

As to Maj Strickland's article - it was a well written and extremely well researched ACADEMIC article.  Surley there is room in the military for a little academia?