Indirect Fires Modernization Project - C3/M777 Replacement

[FJAG]

Doesn't matter. They take the same fuzes, have the same compatibility class so they can be stored together. What is needed is more infrastructure to store what the army refuses to get rid of. If you keep getting and needing more stuff that needs specialized storage, it gets tiring pretty quickly for those that manage to special storage when told to just make it work.

No doubt.

For all that talk about logistics winning wars it still appears to me that Canada thinks symmetrical units with historic names win wars.

Notwithstanding there is some need for symmetry and if you have historic names why not use them, my take from the direction of the government so far is that it is turning to large L logistics in a number of ways. Even the army is evolving by adding two svc bns and a sustainment bde to 1 Div. There is a huge failure IMHO with the lack of a coherent plan to form any useful logistic entities in 2 Div. The CBG service bns seem to me to be the support company of the CARBs. There is no plan - to this point - for additional maintenance, logistics, or transport battalions to augment 1 Div's sustainment brigade or to provide theatre level support. The medical plan seems marginal at best.

I guess I'll wait for the CDS's big plan.

 

[AmmoTech90]

If the whispers I've heard about new energetic storage and processing infra are true then Canada will be well served.
The expansion to support units is also long overdue.
I will stand by my belief there are tooany ammo techs and what we need are better trained supply techs that can make a career track out of ammo.

 

[Kirkhill]

Doesn't matter. They take the same fuzes, have the same compatibility class so they can be stored together. What is needed is more infrastructure to store what the army refuses to get rid of. If you keep getting and needing more stuff that needs specialized storage, it gets tiring pretty quickly for those that manage to special storage when told to just make it work.

For all that talk about logistics winning wars it still appears to me that Canada thinks symmetrical units with historic names win wars.

How about space for all the rounds the government should have bought and should buy?

What is the approved life expectancy of a 105/155 shell?

How many days of war do we need to have on hand for how many divisions? Are we going to feed allies?

What is the necessary peacetime usage/production rate necessary to maintain fresh inventory?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

If the whispers I've heard about new energetic storage and processing infra are true then Canada will be well served.
The expansion to support units is also long overdue.
I will stand by my belief there are tooany ammo techs and what we need are better trained supply techs that can make a career track out of ammo.

That is a very interesting take.

Would you mind expanding on the last thought?

 

[KevinB]

I wish. We've got a wheels fetish up here. OTOH, if the Koreans make the industrial side of it very tempting then the government might just lean that way. IMHO, if you are a "northern" power and intend to swing your military influence towards "northern" theatre of operation, then get a gun that can go where it needs to everyday. When you decide dispersed, shoot and scoot doctrine then make sure the gun can do that.

I think the K9 for the Mech/Armour Division would be great.

We may have turned the corner on that. Aimpoint 1 is looking at equipping the arty ARes with the new equipment - SPs, HIMARS, VSHORAD, TA - we'll see how it goes. Force 2013 faltered on the STA side.

Color me a skeptic, but even so, I still see a use for the M777 (and maybe a Light 105...)

We've already got LG1s so don't need M119s which are also long in the tooth. There's nothing wrong with the LG1 that good maintenance won't fix (except being lifted by a Griffin - that was just stupid) That might just be a solution too - retire all of the C3s, but keep the LG1 in service for the LIB brigade by adding either an ARes LG1 battery or batteries to the M777 and HIMARS batteries I previously mentioned. I think we have 28 so there are plenty.

Divest the LG1, donate them to Ukraine, if the "Light Artillery" Regiment(s) have M119 and M777, they are compatible with the US Army - which for Light units that have links to 11th ABN for Continental Defense applications it makes sense -- plus you get new M119's, not older clapped out guns.

Switching to the LG1 (or M119) for AVCON would require reregistering all of the targets and a small modification to the guns. These are not big issues in the overall scheme of things.

My guess is that the materiel folks who handle ammo would just as soon get rid of the whole 105mm calibre to free up shelf space and simplify their ammo bunkers - bureaucracy rules where brains fail to work.

Hangars won't work easily. Each gun position has multiple targets to shoot. I can't recall the exact number but most of the gun positions have targets in a 360* arc. You'd need a shed with multiple doors and a way to ensure muzzle blast doesn't damage it or the crew's ears or brains. It's a tight valley with slide zones on both sides and sometimes around the corner. You never know which direction you fire in because that is all dependent on the wind and snowfall directions and which sheer layer of the snow is most at risk of releasing. The scientists who work up there and identify which slides to shoot and when are very good at their job. It's as much of an art as a science. The ring positions are simple and useful positions. Besides, who doesn't love firing live in the middle of a blizzard. Makes you feel like you've earned your pay.

So the whole house moves - turntable style - honestly I think bang for the buck buck making permanent installations is a better option - curious is you could mount a Naval gun turret on a fixed bunker - drop 18 on to the current positions - and now the RCN and the RCA can fight it out for who gets to crew them. Take 4 pers to each site for the duration of the avalanche season.
Yes larger front end costs - but that solves the issues for years.

 

[AmmoTech90]

What is the approved life expectancy of a 105/155 shell?

Good storage, 50+ years. I used cast TNT blocks from Op Snowball in 2022, metal clad 50lb TNT charges mfr in 1944 in 2004/5. First thing to go on a projectile would be the metal components from corrosion.

How many days of war do we need to have on hand for how many divisions?

How many days do you want to fight for and with what? How long do you estimate our formations can survive? The government has to decide if we are willing to replace destroyed formations.

How about space for all the rounds the government should have bought and should buy?

That is hopefully what the infrastructure expansion is for.

What is the necessary peacetime usage/production rate necessary to maintain fresh inventory?

A rate slightly more than the training forecast, and this is the important part, the ability to surge to meet 1.5 to 3 times the estimated daily operational use. You need an overage to allow shipping time. Unless we are fighting for Kingston.

 

[KevinB]

Unless we are fighting for Kingston.

Some may argue Kingston should be the CA's first target

 

[FJAG]

I think the K9 for the Mech/Armour Division would be great.

Me too.

Color me a skeptic, but even so, I still see a use for the M777 (and maybe a Light 105...)

Me too, again.

Divest the LG1, donate them to Ukraine, if the "Light Artillery" Regiment(s) have M119 and M777, they are compatible with the US Army - which for Light units that have links to 11th ABN for Continental Defense applications it makes sense -- plus you get new M119's, not older clapped out guns.

The M119 entered service in 1989. We bought our G1s in 1996. The M119A3s upgrades came in around 2013. Our M777s have a different fire control system from the US. We use the Brit/Leonardo LINAPS. the LG1 has no digital but could receive a LINAPS if someone thought it worthwhile (If the guns stay I say digitize those suckers)

So the whole house moves - turntable style - honestly I think bang for the buck buck making permanent installations is a better option

Youve never seen 400 inches of snow in six months - have you?

- curious is you could mount a Naval gun turret on a fixed bunker - drop 18 on to the current positions - and now the RCN and the RCA can fight it out for who gets to crew them. Take 4 pers to each site for the duration of the avalanche season. Yes larger front end costs - but that solves the issues for years.

Maybe you've found a use for the old Bonaventure's Boffins.

 

[AmmoTech90]

Would you mind expanding on the last thought?

Sure.

I was the Ammunition Technical WO for the British CSupps troop in Helmand. I had two LCpl ammo techs (Canadian QL4 equivalent) who had been authorized to perform issue inspections and fraction cans without direct supervision (QL3 everything watched, QL5 work on own). I also had a Sgt & Cpl Supply specialists who did the paperwork. There was a Cpl, 2 or 3 LCpl, and around 10 Ptes Supply Techs who prepared issues. They could break pallets but not fraction boxes or cans. The Cpl was the depot supervisor and had a thorough understanding of compatibility and NEQ and safety requirements. The two LCpls we understudies. All the troops had undergone rigorous ammo specific courses, up to three of them for the Cpl up to two or three months long.

There was also a SSgt, Sgt, Cpl ATs who did ammo investigations, assisted with RIPs, and UXO (not IEDs), and. Nothing to do with supplying ammo, but helped with the returns (RIPs) as the ammo was in a shit state. We all came together for logistical disposal tasks as we could self protect (TBH we always had plenty of other folks volunteering to come out).

This was to support three Battle Groups, six Apaches, and some Chinooks (MRT so minimal ammo needed, just SAA). The artillery was 105 Light Gun battery and GMLRS troop. So six ammo techs and around 15 or 16 supply folks.
In contrast the Canadian ASP has around 15 ammo techs to support one Battle Group.

Focus on the tech part of the job.

I was the first person to dispose of a UK GMRLS, in fact two of them. Lots of fun!

 

[dapaterson]

 

[AmmoTech90]

I did write a memo/service paper suggesting this shortly after I got back.
The senior ATO at the time, understandably, pointed at Supply Tech levels which were in the shitter and said it was a non starter.

 

[Kirkhill]

Good storage, 50+ years. I used cast TNT blocks from Op Snowball in 2022, metal clad 50lb TNT charges mfr in 1944 in 2004/5. First thing to go on a projectile would be the metal components from corrosion.

So 50 years then.


How many days do you want to fight for and with what? How long do you estimate our formations can survive? The government has to decide if we are willing to replace destroyed formations.

That really is the big question, isn't it? What does the government want to do? What is it willing to do? What does it want to prevent future governments from doing? (Yes, I am that cynical).

That is hopefully what the infrastructure expansion is for.

I hope so


A rate slightly more than the training forecast, and this is the important part, the ability to surge to meet 1.5 to 3 times the estimated daily operational use. You need an overage to allow shipping time. Unless we are fighting for Kingston.

Seen.

Ukraine, after 14 years of war, and 4 years of general war, apparently has a field force of 900,000 to 980,000 troops.
30% to 50% of them are engaged on the front line. (300,000 to 500,000)
The front line is 1200 km long
250 to 450 per km

Wiki numbers

M777s in service >130
M114s pledged 70
FH70s 20
TRH1s 14
Bohdahnas-Towed (in local production)

234 Towed 155s

M109s 90
Krabs 53
Caesars 43
Bohdahnas-SP 30 (in local production at a rate of 10 per month)
PzH 2000 28
AS90s 20
Zuzannas 8
Archers 8

280 SP 155s

400 to 500 155mm howitzers
Perhaps an equal number of 152mm howitzers

= 1 to 2 howitzers every 3 km
supporting
750 to 1250 frontline troops every 3 km

Guesstimate of 5000x 155mm rounds per day (10 to 12 rounds per gun per day?)

All numbers are spurious. Just dragged in to get a sense of the scale of the problem.



....

So assume 100 days to get production up to speed in wartime.

5000 rounds per day consumption and production rate
500,000 rounds on hand
50 years shelf life
5% annual turnover = 25,000 rounds per year or 68 rounds per day to maintain inventory freshness

Wartime production 3 shifts per day, 7 days a week = 1092 shifts per year @ 1667 rounds per shift = 1,825,000 rounds per year
Peacetime production 4 shits per month in a single week = 48 shifts per year @ 1667 rounds per shift = 80,000 rounds per year = 16% of inventory

Reducing annual turnover to 5% would require cutting annual production from 48 shifts per year to 16 or so shifts per year.

If the production line's mechanical rate can be reduced to 30% of wartime mechanical rate then you can get back up to 48 shifts a year or one short week of production a month.

The war to peace turndown ratio would then be something like 1,825,000 to 25,000 rounds per year or 73 to 1.
~3 to 1 turndown mechanically
~23 to 1 turndown on labour

Where do you find the wartime labour and can one of the peacetime workers train 23 co-workers to work safely and efficiently in 100 days?

....

That is the real problem with war planning. Getting over that annoying peacetime interval when everybody wants to close you down.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Good storage, 50+ years. I used cast TNT blocks from Op Snowball in 2022, metal clad 50lb TNT charges mfr in 1944 in 2004/5. First thing to go on a projectile would be the metal components from corrosion.


How many days do you want to fight for and with what? How long do you estimate our formations can survive? The government has to decide if we are willing to replace destroyed formations.



That is hopefully what the infrastructure expansion is for.


A rate slightly more than the training forecast, and this is the important part, the ability to surge to meet 1.5 to 3 times the estimated daily operational use. You need an overage to allow shipping time. Unless we are fighting for Kingston.

In 1984 on my demolition course we got to use 1944 Bangalore torpedos and my 1977 recruit course, throw M36 grenades and use the 3.5" RL