Mortars: 51 mm, 60 mm, 81 mm, 120 mm & more

[Yard Ape]

This could be one of the MOSID sub-occupations that are planned, but it could be unique to the reserves.

 

[slickguy1]

The problem is that most reserve units will not have the time to train on & become proficient with both weapon systems.   Split MOCs would allow reserve artillery to focus on one weapon.

Not at all true: 56 Field has use of both the C3 how and the C3 mortar (81mm Mortar) and ran about 70-80% of the reg't through three conversion courses done in under six months. The conversion course can be done in about 3 days not including a day or two of live fire.  Gunners in 56 are not having retention problems with the C3 how or the 81mm mortar - it's just like having to use the C7, C6, C9, etc etc or the conversion course to the M109 or C1.Drills for the 81mm mortar are not difficult and are fairly similar to respective drills on the C1, C2 or C3 howitzer.Gunners on SG04 not qualified on the 81mm were put through a course on the first Friday,Saturday and Sunday w/ firing live by Sunday night.

56 proved that a simple conversion course can result in accurate tgt rounds wrt time on target as well. There is no need of a conversion for recce, arty techs or foos because most of their respective drills and theories are still the same or have a minor altercation.


In addition, why wouldn't soldiers sign up for a mortar platoon? Have you seen a mortar fire or heard the hollow sound of the base plate slamming into the ground? Hundreds of USMC and US Army personal have signed up to be just Mortarmen in their respective service and I know if I decided to join either service I would have no regrets doing so because the mortar is just as effective with it's high rof, simplicity and ease of transportation. Heck, by setting the bipod on the ground a single personal camcover can hide the mortar anywhere and most of it's eis.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

56 Fd has already re-roled, and 11 Fd is about to.  The decision was made not to have a separate MOC - in fact all career courses are still done on the gun vice the tube.  We will see how it works out...

 

[The Bat]

I think they should learn the Gun first and then when they get the there unit they can convert over to the Tube... yes the money is a big issue.. but a sight is a sight.. and more flexablity for the troops once they understand Gunnery...

 

[FOO TECH G11]

So true Rocky 31

The artilleryman should first be trained on the C3 then move to the mortar if the unit is so equipped. In 2 RCHA right now, all the gunners are quallified C3 and depending on the battery (Delta - mortar, Fox - LG1 and Echo - ????? for now) can be quallified other systems. I am quallified C1/C3, LG1, M109 and 81 Mortar as well as other non-Canadian guns (M118/118. M119/L119, M109 Pallidon, AS-90) and I could go to any of the other batteries and do a layers test on any system today.

 

[Mountie]

What do you guys think of eliminating the mortar platoons in the infantry battalions (or not reinstating them for those that have already been eliminated) and reorganizing the RCHA regiment to include three small close support batteries each with 6 LAV-III 120mm Armoured Mortar Systems and a general support battery with 6 LAV-III Denel 105mm SPHs.

 

 

[Kirkhill]

More ammunition for fans of the 120mm mortar.

A new Precision Guided round.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.4308111.1089903978.QPadasOa9dUAAESlMZk&modele=jdc_34
http://www.defense-update.com/products/x/xm395.htm

Laser guided.

 

[Art Johnson]

I have not been following this thread too closely but as an "Old Mortar Man" It seems to me that the control has been moved further and further from the scene of the action. In my opinion I think a battalion commander needs to be in control of his own mortar unit. It is bad enough trying to call up the Arty for a stonk when they are involved in a Mike shoot, give the Mortar back to the infantry.

 

[readyfourzero]

I'm a British Infantry Mortarman (mainly on the STA side of things) and only recently found out you guys had taken on the Mortars from the Infantry, it's been something I found a bit startling!  How do you solve the problem of guaranteed indirect support? do you attach Btys to Bns when operational and do you have separate STA teams or is this all handled by the FOO?

On another note we were toying with a 120mm AMS but the Mortar people at the Infantry Training Centre Warminster were against the idea due to lower rates of fire, less and heavier ammunition to carry (definately not a good idea for Light Role Infantry anyway) and also the distance from Last Safe Moment to the forward edge of the enemy position would increase from 250-300 to somewhere in the region of 4-500 metres, which is alot of ground to cover underfire without any indirect support.  I think it would be something that would be adopted by Armoured Bdes if it was taken on but I think everyone else would retain the 81.

We had some German soldiers visit one of our live firing sessions on Salisbury plain who were taking great interest in the 81 for their light troops, Gebirgsjaeger and Fallshirmjaeger, something lighter that they could carry without vehicles - well for those who have to it's not exactly light is it?  I feel sorry for the Rifle Companies who end up carrying our ammo, boy they bitch about it!

 

[CommonSenseNCO]

WRT 81 mm Mortar, the reserves should have a C3 QL3 followed by a 81mm conversion to increase the available manpower.

As for the artillery having the 81mm mortar systems they are attached to the infantry and used as their lackeys as well as mortarmen.

If any infanteer could arrange  it I could arranget to have the mortars, including all spares and related stores transferred back to them tommorrow. Please, oh please ask for them back

 

[The Bat]

well guys, i don't think the Artillery will be giving up the tubs any time soon, if you guys read what Rick had to say in his letter the other day you would under stand much better, the Army is in a transion period like always and there is no money so you can see why trades are slowly losing there equipment, look at the Tanks there will be all gone soon we will only have 8 in CMTC and as well as the sky guard, so if you look back to WW2 you will see again that we will be on the road hitch hiking and hoping that the US will give us a ride and hopfully give us Air and Armoured support as well, All's we will have is a small Navy and some Ground Force that will be able to attend anything, i think all trades and Arms are grasping at the pecking order and fighting for equipment who will win ???? who knows  but i now the troops will Lose!!!!

 

[Infanteer]

Ok, simple question here.  Do smoothbore and rifled mortars of the same caliber (81/120mm) require different types of ammunition or can the same round be utilized in either tube?

 

[Michael OLeary]

Rifled mortars (such as the 120 mm RT-61 Thomson Brandt (if I recall the designation correctly)) have purpose built ammunition for maximum capability, i.e., their obturation rings engage the rifling. Smooth bore ammunition can be fired in rifled bores with some decrease in capability (range) due to the less effective seal.  Rifled rounds may not effectively work in smooth barreled tubes.  It really all depends on the design charactiristics of the particular tubes and ammo.

As an example the RT-61, which was much vaunted as the "Corps 86 heavy mortar" claimed a range of 13 Km - that was with rifled, rocket-assisted ammunition. The end result was a terminal payload about equal to an 81 mm round. The same mortar firing smooth-bored ammo ranges to 7-8000 m, about the the same as a smooth bored mortar firing the same rounds.

IIRC, the same company (TB) was also marketing a long-range 81 mm mortar (smooth-bored) in the 7500 meter range band at the time as well.

 

[Gunner109]

Just got back from my TSMs crse. The attitude of the School seems to be that we (arty) want to move away from mortars all together.  This I think will be a good thing except maybe keeping a Bty that has the ability to employ it like the Para bty did.  Maybe the SOG will have that.  Who knows.  But in the end I think that the battalions should get them back but it maybe a PY issue.

 

[Michael OLeary]

So offer the PYs to the infantry.  ;D

 

[Gunner]

No PYs were involved....Mortars are supposed to be an off the shelf capability.

 

[vonGarvin]

No PYs were involved....Mortars are supposed to be an off the shelf capability.

Pretty pathetic, when you think about it.  It's hard to take an 81 off the shelf and try to parallel by sight unit!

 

[Michael OLeary]

No PYs were involved....Mortars are supposed to be an off the shelf capability.

No, not directly in transferring the capability out, but since all those soldiers have been employed elsewhere it would take PYs to bring it back on top of everything the battalions are currently doing. I'm sure the Artillery wouldn't mind giving up 500 PYs to let the infantry stand up nine mortar platoons and the School's mortar cell once more. 

 

[Gunner]

Let the infantry fill up their current PY billet, then look for additional PYs! 

I like mortars, its a simple and flexible piece of equipment, however you would have to provide me with a persuasive argument to resurrect them as a standing capability. 

 

[Infanteer]

I like mortars, its a simple and flexible piece of equipment, however you would have to provide me with a persuasive argument to resurrect them as a standing capability.

Fallujah, Najaf, Ramadi, a host of funny-named vallys and ridges in Afghanistan....I'd hate to see an Infantry unit scrambling for intimate indirect support while the Artillery is too busy playing with UAV's and 4 155mm howitzers to take a simple mortar off of the shelf.