Indirect Fires Modernization Project - C3/M777 Replacement

[Colin Parkinson]

I wonder if the warranty for the trailer covers that use?

 

[Kirkhill]

Less recoil if they were launching 70mm rockets instead.
And more of them on the trailer and less need to reload.

Which brings me to this.

BAE Systems expands SRM production capability for tactical missiles

BAE Systems is expanding its solid rocket motor (SRM) propellant production capabilities at Radford Army Ammunition Plant in southwestern Virginia, which operates under...

www.janes.com

BAE Systems is expanding its solid rocket motor (SRM) propellant production capabilities at Radford Army Ammunition Plant in southwestern Virginia, which operates under a government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO) framework.

The plant uses the extrusion method, which was the dominant technology before the development of cast-and-cure systems after the Second World War, Joe Bellotte, research and development manager for BAE Systems Ordnance Systems, told Janes on 13 October at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) exhibition in Washington, DC.

Cast-and-cure technology employs binders such as rubber, which can hold more solids than BAE Systems' extruded double-base propellant, he said, adding that cast SRMs “don't have diametric limitations; they've got more energy”, leaving extruded propellant for small, low-cost, high-volume applications such as 2.75 inch (70 mm) rockets.

.....

Additive process manufacturing of the rocket bodies and SRM fillers equals lots, fast and cheap.

....

And Lockheed is trying to figure out how to reduce the cost of their exquisites (while, no doubt, trying to maintain their profitability).

Lockheed considering modifying existing missiles into lower cost designs - Breaking Defense

“We have really capable systems, like JASSM for example, that [are] already qualified on a whole bunch of airframes and can actually be turned into a modular system that could grow or shrink,” Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control President Tim Cahill told Breaking Defense.

breakingdefense.com

One strategy they are pursuing is modularity.

And modularity is what the 70mm is all about.

Select your motor (various ranges from various suppliers - RTX, BAE, Magellan, Thales)
Select your guidance (or not, you can always go ballistic)
Select your warhead (multiple types from HE to Flechettes to Non-Lethal to Smoke/Gas to Noise and EW)
Select your fuze (again a large variety)
Screw the bits together and load into a simple tube.

Applies to any and all platforms.

And to any and all targets.

 

[Kirkhill]

From the article I posted on the Canada Tanks thread about warfare Ukrainian style

Prioritise the delivery of munitions optimised for striking targets in the middle and deep battle areas.​

Ukraine can produce UAVs to conduct strikes in contested zones and for isolating sectors, but it is struggling to manufacture munitions with a sufficient payload or terminal accuracy to engage all relevant targets in the middle battle and deep battle areas. Ukraine’s international partners should prioritise the provision of precision munitions that can compensate for shortages in Copperhead 155-mm rounds and guided MLRS previously provided by the US. In the case of the deep battle, technology transfer of non-ITAR guidance systems for Ukrainian built cruise missiles is also a priority.

This is the first time that I have seen reference to the Copperhead round. I wasn't aware that it had ever made it into large scale production.

M712 Copperhead - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A laser designated 155mm round with a 6.7 kg HEAT warhead and a 16 km range.

 

[Kirkhill]

Aussie Bushmaster armoured van cut down to an armoured pickup and used to launch NSMs.

So which platform do we want to use?

Mack? Zetros? ACSV? LAV II? Senator? Or perhaps even a Seacan?

The first launch of an NSM missile has been carried out from the new StrikeMaster vehicle developed by Thales and Kongsberg for the Australian Army

Kongsberg and Thales announced the successful live launch of a test munition of the Naval Strike Missile (NSM) from the StrikeMaster launcher vehicle in

www.zona-militar.com

 

[Colin Parkinson]

With a 200km range for the NSM, I am struggling to see the need to have a armoured launcher?

 

[suffolkowner]

I wonder if the warranty for the trailer covers that use?

thats a taillight warranty

 

[Kirkhill]

With a 200km range for the NSM, I am struggling to see the need to have a armoured launcher?

True.

But.

The tendency seems to be to create a common T&E system and pod up the munitions so that one launcher can launch everything from 70 and 122 mm rockets to NSMs and beyond to PRSMs.

Maybe some T&Es are mounted in armoured trucks, some on Zetros and some in Seacans.

...

Another thought occurs.

If we are playing hybrid games, wouldn't launchers like that be considered as HVTs for Little Green Men with FPVs?

 

[GR66]

The US trialing an ISV-mounted 81mm mortar system with 72 rounds onboard. Vehicle is transportable inside a CH-47 and can fire then be on the move in 2 minutes.

U.S. Army evaluates new mobile mortar system

The U.S. Army’s 2nd Battalion, 35th Infantry Regiment recently completed a series of tactical evaluations using the Scorpion Light 81mm mobile mortar system during Transformation in Contact (TiC) 2.0 exercises held at Schofield Barracks on the island of Oahu. According

defence-blog.com

With the assumption that unmanned systems will also be in the IDF mix what is the right combo of conventional indirect fires for the Light Battalions? 81mm mortars in the Battalion and 155mm guns (M777 or SPG) in the CS Regiment? Do they need 120mm mortars in the mix as well? Can you substitute 105mm guns (with the benefit of lighter ammunition) if you have a UAV/Loitering Munition/Rocket system that is capable of taking out the longer range targets?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Just rereading "A few guns"

The Chapter on Roto 0, should be required reading for anyone who might need to plan a sudden deployment.

 

[Kirkhill]

More missiles

Lockheed Martin to Expand Missile Production to Meet Global Demand

Lockheed Martin is scaling up production of its combat-proven missile systems and reinforcing its global supply chain amid record demand.

thedefensepost.com

"In 2024, the company delivered more than 23,000 missiles worldwide and expanded PAC-3 production by over 30 percent, with plans for another 20 percent increase in 2025.

To sustain this growth, the company is broadening its supplier base while investing in domestic and allied manufacturing. New initiatives include a solid rocket motor facility in Camden, Arkansas, set to open in 2026, and international co-production programs in Spain, Saudi Arabia, and Poland."

Is our Prime Minister actively engaging on this front?

 

[FJAG]

Jesus wept!

I just read this article . . .

Key considerations for the next big gun | Canadian Army Today

canadianarmytoday.com

. . . and saw that the IOC for the IFM project is "2033 or sooner."

Also the second comment about firing on the move is very apt.

 

[Rifleman62]

Staff may as well shut down this forum until around 2022, or later when it is announced the IOC has been delayed.

What are they thinking at Army HQ's or not?

 

[Rifleman62]

Correcting date typo:

Staff may as well shut down this forum until around 2032, or later when it is announced the IOC has been delayed.

What are they thinking at Army HQ's or not?

 

[dapaterson]

Jesus wept!

I just read this article . . .


. . . and saw that the IOC for the IFM project is "2033 or sooner."

Also the second comment about firing on the move is very apt.

How is IOC defined? Normally it involves trained crews, equipment, materiel and infrastructure, all in initial quantities.

Because the CAF leadership for generations, drawn from operational occupations, has systemically underfunded and ignored the sustainment enterprise, relatively simple things like ammunition storage are on multi year timelines.

As well, the list of Army transformation initiatives directly hitting the Royal Regiment, from relearning AD, to learning rockets, to modernizing C4ISR, to introduction of new platform(s) under IFM all consume bandwidth.

This isn't a minor initiative like, say, rolling out a new computer system for a couple hundred staff that should be a few months of work.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Jesus wept!

I just read this article . . .


. . . and saw that the IOC for the IFM project is "2033 or sooner."

Also the second comment about firing on the move is very apt.

I am not surprised, our army has not taken artillery seriously for a long time.

I want to buy that commenter a beer.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

How is IOC defined? Normally it involves trained crews, equipment, materiel and infrastructure, all in initial quantities.

Because the CAF leadership for generations, drawn from operational occupations, has systemically underfunded and ignored the sustainment enterprise, relatively simple things like ammunition storage are on multi year timelines.

As well, the list of Army transformation initiatives directly hitting the Royal Regiment, from relearning AD, to learning rockets, to modernizing C4ISR, to introduction of new platform(s) under IFM all consume bandwidth.

This isn't a minor initiative like, say, rolling out a new computer system for a couple hundred staff that should be a few months of work.

Ah yes, ammo depots.

Where the Ottawa “solution” was pole barns and tarps for ammo storage, because bunkers are “too expensive”….

Or, just divesting stored ammo because it is obviously dead stock and that costs money. We can just in time buy it when we need it right?(based loosely on a actual conversation with an ADM (MAT) honcho….)

 

[FJAG]

As well, the list of Army transformation initiatives directly hitting the Royal Regiment, from relearning AD, to learning rockets, to modernizing C4ISR, to introduction of new platform(s) under IFM all consume bandwidth.

This isn't a minor initiative like, say, rolling out a new computer system for a couple hundred staff that should be a few months of work.

IFM is a discrete project targeting the SPs and mortars. The other items that you mention are separate projects. They can (and likely will) all be introduced piecemeal.

As far as components for the IFM - crews are dead simple to train - we're literally talking weeks to months, not years. We already have most of the doctrine since the 1980s but with much better technology available now.

Training the techs to service it is more complex but manageable - I'd estimate a years to have the pipeline up and running. Infrastructure - IMHO it's mostly in place.

The compounds/gun sheds were serviceable for M109s and, for the most part, all this gear is usually stored outside anyway. If they actually think that some of these systems will be manned by reservists then there is definitely some infrastructure work needed there, however, that affects FOC not IOC.

Tech servicing again needs addressing.

Equipment manufacture and delivery - there's the rub. There's a lot of competition for new guns, but not eight years.

Ammo - We have storage space for 155mm but I doubt if it's sufficient for the new war scales basic stocks and natures required. Same with manufacturing. But that's a progressive process that affects FOC and not IOC.

There are a number of fundamental principles that I learned as a young gunner. One of those was that everything needed to be done with a "sense of urgency" as the supported arms needed our support right now not at some time in the distant future. Within DND that sense or urgency has been lacking for a long time now.

 

[dapaterson]

I am glad that IFM is the only project in all of Defence, and that there are no interdependencies, and nothing complex about it, and no need for priorities and triage, and that all the support people are such lazy fucks and that they are the source of all problems.

 

[FJAG]

I am glad that IFM is the only project in all of Defence, and that there are no interdependencies, and nothing complex about it, and no need for priorities and triage,

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying IFM is a discrete project that can proceed without all those interdependencies. They can hook in as they come on line. I'm saying that IOC could and should happen much earlier. Priorities and triage aren't part of the project's internal parameters, they are outside imposed factors that are mostly unknown until imposed from the outside. Since the project remains unfunded, they remain unknown. But if a CCA high priority project is already at an IOC eight years out then God help the CA.

and that all the support people are such lazy fucks and that they are the source of all problems.

Where did you get that idea from? What I was saying is that it will take longer to train veh and weapon techs to do their job and to get the maintenance system running than it will take to convert a gun detachment from an M777 to an Archer. How long does it take to train a veh tech or wpns tech to do the job on a new SP? I'm guessing a year to get the training and support pipeline up. That's not a problem in my eyes at all. That's a statement of fact and not meant in any way to disparage the support trades.

 

[dapaterson]

Your assertion that there's a lack of urgency. Those delivering on those projects are support occupations and civilians.

Their capacity has been ignored and reduced continually to protect Potemkin paper units. Traditionally, "a sense of urgency" is used as an excuse for "I wasted my time and yours, and now expect you to pull off miracles to make up for my lack of planning and preparation."