Indirect Fires Modernization Project - C3/M777 Replacement

[FJAG]

Is that seriously the GPO with a prismatic compass?

It certainly looks like it.

At that latitude?

Compasses do work that far north (sort of). But you have to be patient.

I wonder if they played with other methods of orientation besides Compass and GPS. I dimly remember being taught to orient using a celestial method. I wonder if they brought the books for that along?

"Prepare to track the sun . . ."

And a very very stable platform. I’m not sure if I’d trust handheld for that.

But what’s a few 100mils between friends right?


Survey Troop Director -Director from known point. .
Wonder if they still actually do that

Did the survey officers course in 73 or 74. Went back to the regiment just in time for the survey troop to shut down. I don't think that they ever came back even to this day.

Yeah originally I had a cheeky comment about how the Recce troop left three months early to get the positions surveyed. But then was more curious if they even did it like that anymore.

Yes, but its changing. With guns able to self orient and locate its going to be a whole different game - especially with the SPs. OTOH, besides preparing the gun position technically for deployment, the recce party secured the area. I'll be interested in seeing how that works in the future.

 

[dapaterson]

Did the survey officers course in 73 or 74. Went back to the regiment just in time for the survey troop to shut down.

Correlation does not necessarily imply causation, but in this case...

 

[FJAG]

Correlation does not necessarily imply causation, but in this case...

It was manpower shortages. At the time 2 RCHA had only one official battery - D Bty. And a second - F Bty - by way of manpower reallocation and borrowed Militia equipment. We basically ran out of people. Besides we knew ever square foot of Petawawa anyway.

It was a really fun two months in Gagetown though.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I found this snippet of info interesting regarding what Norway found when testing the K9 in the winter -

A single K9 was sent to Norway to join the competition. Operated by a sales team, the vehicle went through tests between November 2015 and January 2016. During the January winter test, the K9 was the only vehicle that managed to drive through meter-thick snow field and fire its weapon without any issue. Competing vehicles experienced engine troubles or broken parts.

The K9's engine was able to maintain heat overnight by simply covering the area with tarpaulin, a simple trick learned from operating experience, allowing the engine to ignite without failure the next day at an extremely cold temperature. The hydropneumatic suspension became a huge advantage for mobility, as its mechanism melted snow on mobility parts much quicker. The test result also impacted Finland and Estonia, who were invited to observe performances for their artillery replacement, to acquire the K9

Information like this should have a significant impact on our decisions on what to select......

 

[SeaKingTacco]

No no no. The most important factor in a new SPH is that must go 80 Kph!

 

[GK .Dundas]

No no no. The most important factor in a new SPH is that must go 80 Kph!

And be capable of being manufactured in London.
Priorities people !

 

[FJAG]

No no no. The most important factor in a new SPH is that must go 80 Kph!

You have no idea how mad that requirement in the RFI makes me. It's like DLR2's offices are located in Southern France.

And be capable of being manufactured in London.
Priorities people !

You know. I bet that it could be. There are more than enough factories with facilities for assembly. Cutting steel is also within ur expertise. Barrels . . . it doesn't matter which gun we buy. We don't do those - as it stands.

80 KPH OTOH!

 

[Czech_pivo]

You have no idea how mad that requirement in the RFI makes me. It's like DLR2's offices are located in Southern France.


You know. I bet that it could be. There are more than enough factories with facilities for assembly. Cutting steel is also within ur expertise. Barrels . . . it doesn't matter which gun we buy. We don't do those - as it stands.

80 KPH OTOH!

It should be - need to operate in 1m or more of snow.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I found this snippet of info interesting regarding what Norway found when testing the K9 in the winter -

A single K9 was sent to Norway to join the competition. Operated by a sales team, the vehicle went through tests between November 2015 and January 2016. During the January winter test, the K9 was the only vehicle that managed to drive through meter-thick snow field and fire its weapon without any issue. Competing vehicles experienced engine troubles or broken parts.

The K9's engine was able to maintain heat overnight by simply covering the area with tarpaulin, a simple trick learned from operating experience, allowing the engine to ignite without failure the next day at an extremely cold temperature. The hydropneumatic suspension became a huge advantage for mobility, as its mechanism melted snow on mobility parts much quicker. The test result also impacted Finland and Estonia, who were invited to observe performances for their artillery replacement, to acquire the K9

Information like this should have a significant impact on our decisions on what to select......

Norwegian M109s were pretty good on snow as well, like the Leopard tanks....

 

[FJAG]

Norwegian M109s were pretty good on snow as well, like the Leopard tanks....

So were ours, Mate. So were ours.

 

[FJAG]

This is what we should be striving for. The first Hanwha AS9 Huntsman rolling off the production line in Australia.

 

[suffolkowner]

This is what we should be striving for. The first Hanwha AS9 Huntsman rolling off the production line in Australia.

theyre offering/working on a wheeled version

 

[dapaterson]

This is what we should be striving for. The first Hanwha AS9 Huntsman rolling off the production line in Australia.

Is it a manufacturing or an assembly plant?

 

[GR66]

This is what we should be striving for. The first Hanwha AS9 Huntsman rolling off the production line in Australia.

I don't think that the numbers we're looking at buying really make domestic production viable.

If we want domestic production and maintenance facilities that make economic sense then we either need to significantly up the numbers we're buying (I could get behind that) or we need the facility to produce multiple vehicle types (tanks, IFV's, etc.).

Some might argue that economic viability shouldn't be a question when dealing with key sovereign capabilities but remember there is always an opportunity cost. Invest in a money losing SPG factory producing just dozens of vehicles or invest that money on 155mm shell production, or loitering munitions, or AD missiles?

 

[FJAG]

1 RCHA sends a round down range up North.

Is it a manufacturing or an assembly plant?

I think that it goes well above mere assembly but probably short of the manufacture of all components in Australia. There are a number of Australian and individual partner companies involved and it appears Australian production will figure into the global supply chain for the K9.

 

[FJAG]

I don't think that the numbers we're looking at buying really make domestic production viable.

We're buying more than Australia (who also seem to be keeping their M777s, unlike us).

But I agree. Where is the point where manufacturing from scratch becomes sustainable? I don't think there is such a big issue for Hanwha as to whether the jobs are in Korea or Canada as long as there is a healthy profit for Hanwha. Canadian government assistance in building a plant here would go a long way in bringing more supply chain elements onshore to Canada.

It's interesting actually. Our procurement model over the last 40 to 50 years has been to buy enough equipment for our deployed forces and a small training surplus rather than procuring equipment across the entire force. Even the LAV purchase and upgrade only equipped two of the three brigades (and - without saying it - none of the reserves).

The SP purchase signals an equipping of the whole of a division (albeit the role of the ARes arty reserve seems unresolved especially considering we still need to equip HIMARS and more AD then we planned under GBAD (and will the extra PYs to properly equip a division come?)

 

[Seyek]

I don't think that the numbers we're looking at buying really make domestic production viable.

If we want domestic production and maintenance facilities that make economic sense then we either need to significantly up the numbers we're buying (I could get behind that) or we need the facility to produce multiple vehicle types (tanks, IFV's, etc.).

Some might argue that economic viability shouldn't be a question when dealing with key sovereign capabilities but remember there is always an opportunity cost. Invest in a money losing SPG factory producing just dozens of vehicles or invest that money on 155mm shell production, or loitering munitions, or AD missiles?

I've said this before, as have others, but we really need to re-examine numbers in light of moving to 3.5%, and the DIS. Off the top of my head, 150-200 SPHs for reg and reserve, training vehicles, deployment stock. Add ammunition supply vehicles and command vehicles and we could be anywhere from 300-500 (how many ammo vehicles per gun, 1 or 2? One nearby, one to the rear ready to swap out?). We're also looking at timeline that could align with the K9A3 and the K11A1 control vehicle for optionally manned guns (3 per control vehicle). Allowing gunners to stay away from the firing platform itself in case of counterbattery/drone strike/etc. The K11A1 has a C-UAS enabled RWS and MANPADS missiles for self defence as well.

Add in a tracked family of AFVs, spread it over a couple decades, cascade them down from operations - reg force - stashed away in a stockpile as a war reserve. 25 years, say 2000 x tracked AFVs (based off original LAV-3 numbers plus extras for training and deployment because I'm not building out entire ORBATs like FJAG right now) plus ~500 artillery vehicles and 2500 is a reasonable number. 100 a year sustained production. At that point it's worthwhile to build most or all components, share R&D for future developments, and we can more easily sustain our own fleet locally.

 

[Kirkhill]

I don't think that the numbers we're looking at buying really make domestic production viable.

If we want domestic production and maintenance facilities that make economic sense then we either need to significantly up the numbers we're buying (I could get behind that) or we need the facility to produce multiple vehicle types (tanks, IFV's, etc.).

Some might argue that economic viability shouldn't be a question when dealing with key sovereign capabilities but remember there is always an opportunity cost. Invest in a money losing SPG factory producing just dozens of vehicles or invest that money on 155mm shell production, or loitering munitions, or AD missiles?

Poland

Chunmoo K239s - 288
HIMARS - 500

K9 Thunder - 212
Local Production - > 600

Those kind of numbers?

 

[Czech_pivo]

I don't think that the numbers we're looking at buying really make domestic production viable.

If we want domestic production and maintenance facilities that make economic sense then we either need to significantly up the numbers we're buying (I could get behind that) or we need the facility to produce multiple vehicle types (tanks, IFV's, etc.).

Some might argue that economic viability shouldn't be a question when dealing with key sovereign capabilities but remember there is always an opportunity cost. Invest in a money losing SPG factory producing just dozens of vehicles or invest that money on 155mm shell production, or loitering munitions, or AD missiles?

How many is Australia building?

 

[suffolkowner]

How many is Australia building?

28K9/14K10