New .50 Cal For Kingston Class?

[Stoker]

Now if I ran the CF, I would take a weapon we already use in a few vehicles, and recognise an even greater cost savings in ammo, training and technicians by using it on a ship, especially given the precedent set by our similarly armed allies.

Or we could buy yet another piece of overpriced, overly complicated, un-battle tested european kit, just to thumb our nose at the US.  :

It would be nice to get a bushmaster, however that means we need a NWT onboard to maintain the gun, vice a heavy barrel .50 cal that can be easily taken out of its housing and worked on. Right now its difficult to get BOSN's to carry out PM's on the 40MM, let alone the bushmaster. That is due of course to factors such as weather. The RCHMG is used by a number of navies and in the Italian army under field conditions.

 

[GO!!!]

It would be nice to get a bushmaster, however that means we need a NWT onboard to maintain the gun, vice a heavy barrel .50 cal that can be easily taken out of its housing and worked on. Right now its difficult to get BOSN's to carry out PM's on the 40MM, let alone the bushmaster. That is due of course to factors such as weather.

Strange, because the Bushmaster mounted on LAVIIIs and Coyotes is mostly maintained by the crew of that vehicle. Mounted Infantry units in Afghanistan right now do'nt have a weapons tech anywhere close by most of the time.

The RCHMG is used by a number of navies and in the Italian army under field conditions.

We have a RCHMG mounted on the Nyala right now - and it was originally designed for naval use. Without getting into capabilities, it rivals the bushmaster in many areas.

We also use the bushmaster right now on two different vehicles. I don't recall the last decisive engagement by the Italian armed forces, using any sort of weapons, since WWII. (Although I do remember reading about alot of fighting in Italy  )

The bushmaster and RCM2 are tried, tested and we already own them, and the associated expertise to operate and maintain them.

 

[Journeyman]

The RCHMG is used by ... the Italian army under field conditions.

:rofl:

 

[Stoker]

:rofl:

Pretty funny ;D, although Oto Melara does sell its guns to over 50 navies including Canada.

 

[George Wallace]

It would be nice to get a bushmaster, however that means we need a NWT onboard to maintain the gun, vice a heavy barrel .50 cal that can be easily taken out of its housing and worked on. Right now its difficult to get BOSN's to carry out PM's on the 40MM, let alone the bushmaster. That is due of course to factors such as weather. The RCHMG is used by a number of navies and in the Italian army under field conditions.

Stoker

I'm finding it difficult to comprehend how you would find a "Remote Controlled" HMG easier to maintain than the 40mm.  To me there would be many more complications with anything involving the electronics and mechanisms that operate such a device, than what you'd find in a 40mm gun.  If you feel the HMG is easy to maintain, a Bushmaster would be just as simple, perhaps simpler. 

Your post refers to a "Heavy Barrel .50 Cal."  There is a heck of a lot to maintain on a HMG, than the barrel.  Some of your logic escapes me.

 

[Stoker]

Stoker

I'm finding it difficult to comprehend how you would find a "Remote Controlled" HMG easier to maintain than the 40mm.  To me there would be many more complications with anything involving the electronics and mechanisms that operate such a device, than what you'd find in a 40mm gun.  If you feel the HMG is easy to maintain, a Bushmaster would be just as simple, perhaps simpler. 

Your post refers to a "Heavy Barrel .50 Cal."  There is a heck of a lot to maintain on a HMG, than the barrel.  Some of your logic escapes me.

I don't know why the Bushmaster wasn't considered, it would be nice to have that extra punch. The RGHMG are suppose to replace the .50 cals already on the CPF's . There may be a consideration to put these on the Kingston Class but that is still to be determined. Summerside was only a test platform. There is not that much to maintain on these guns, you have a ups/transformer unit(very small) very little maintenance there, the operators console again a very compact unit, very few PM's, the mount and optical aiming device is a sealed unit that requires little maintenance. The gunmount itself is sealed and requires little maintenance. All the electronics you talk about can easily be taken care of by the NET onboard. The mechanisms on the gun its self are pretty simple, no hydraulics just electric.  The gun does not require pre fire cleanings and daily maintenance like the 40MM, maintaining the 40MM is a unbelievable dirty job, especially outside in the middle of winter on a moving platform like a MCDV. The Bosn's with the exception of cleaning the .50 cal inside after firing do not to have to do a lot of maintenance. If something breaks on the 50 cal they can swap it out with a new one.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I was always led to believe its always good to always do prefiring cleaning on any weapon. Was taught that from BASIC all the way thru my career. This is the first weapon I have ever heard that prefiring cleaning was not required.

 

[Stoker]

I was always led to believe its always good to always do prefiring cleaning on any weapon. Was taught that from BASIC all the way thru my career. This is the first weapon I have ever heard that prefiring cleaning was not required.

Sorry about I was mistaken on that point, the Oto Melera reps were surprised that we did prefire cleanings to the extent that we did them, since the gun was in a sealed housing. Apparently they do them once or twice per week.

 

[fear-acfhuinn luinge]

  The Bosn's with the exception of cleaning the .50 cal inside after firing do not to have to do a lot of maintenance. If something breaks on the 50 cal they can swap it out with a new one.

I'm hoping you are referring only to the firing routines here. Since the implementation of the new force protection measures requiring the weapons to be shipped with ammo at the ready, maintenance has increased significantly. Daily routines along with watch maintenace are now required just to keep the weapons from rusting in place, and we have yet to find that magic cover that allows the weapons to breath while protecting them from the worst of the elements.

As far as swapping out parts, it ain't that easy. Carrying spares is generally frowned upon   ??? , and not all pieces fit all weapons equally.

 

[Stoker]

I'm hoping you are referring only to the firing routines here. Since the implementation of the new force protection measures requiring the weapons to be shipped with ammo at the ready, maintenance has increased significantly. Daily routines along with watch maintenace are now required just to keep the weapons from rusting in place, and we have yet to find that magic cover that allows the weapons to breath while protecting them from the worst of the elements.

As far as swapping out parts, it ain't that easy. Carrying spares is generally frowned upon   ??? , and not all pieces fit all weapons equally.

Of course i'm talking about the RCHMG, the regular .50 cals still require all the daily routines and daily onwatch maintenance. As for the swapping out, i'm talking about the whole .50 cal unit not parts. If they did get rid of the regular .50 cals and only went with the RCHMG, a spare unit could be easily be kept and used as a replacement.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Just from the spec's, it's looks like the biggest advantage in mounting the .50 cal turret vs the 25mm Bushmaster (at least from Oto Melara specifications) is the weight savings at 220kg vs 1200kg....

Add in the probable cost savings both in procurement and training in context of how often the vessel will actually fire those systems and perhaps (and I'm not pretending to be an authority) the .50 cal is sufficient....especially when as others have mentioned perhaps the addition of the optics are the real key capability improvement.


Matthew. 

 

[Kirkhill]

Now if I ran the CF, I would take a weapon we already use in a few vehicles, and recognise an even greater cost savings in ammo, training and technicians by using it on a ship, especially given the precedent set by our similarly armed allies.

Seems reasonable

Or we could buy yet another piece of overpriced, overly complicated, un-battle tested european kit, just to thumb our nose at the US.  :

Before trashing all Eurokit I would note that the following kit currently in Canadian (and US service) actually saw the light of day first in Europe:

Browning HP - FN
C6 - FN MAG
C9 - FN Minimi
81mm mortar - Royal Ordnance
Kingston 40mm - Bofors
CPF 57mm - Bofors
DDH 76mm - Otomelara
M777 - Royal Ordnance
Remote Weapons Stations - Kongsberg

Grizzly/Bison/Coyote/LAVIII/Stryker - Mowag
G-Wagen - Mercedes
HLVW - Steyr
Leopard - Krauss-Maffei
Bv206 - Hagglunds

Mechanical Engineering is not a US strong-suit at this time, in any field of endeavour, with the exception of the aircraft industry. In addition to weapons and ships you can look at automotive design.  Europe and the Japanese produce much more competent mechanical engineers in traditional fields.  The US excels in aerospace and electronics - resulting in surveillance, comms, computing, command and control advantages as well as in missile systems.   The Japanese, of course, are pretty up to speed on the electronics side of things as well.

As fear-acfhuinn luinge notes indirectly the environment at sea is not the same as on land.

Daily routines along with watch maintenace are now required just to keep the weapons from rusting in place, and we have yet to find that magic cover that allows the weapons to breath while protecting them from the worst of the elements.  

As far as swapping out parts, it ain't that easy. Carrying spares is generally frowned upon, and not all pieces fit all weapons equally.

Unless the weapon is protected from salt and condensation it will turn into a block of rust.  Sealing the weapon and controlling the environment by circulating heated/dried air are probably the minimum requirements.  Also an externally driven weapon (like the bushmaster) with its fewer moving parts and less need for fine balancing is probably a better solution in any event. (Bushmaster calibres - 7.62, 12.7, 25, 30, 35, 40)

The weapon and the weapons mount are two different things.  

 

[GO!!!]

Kirkhill,

While I am willing to concede that the Europeans have developed some fine equipment, and continue to do so, I think we shoot ourselves in the foot sometimes in reference to acquisitions.

Lest we forget the ERYX?

The prevailing attitude seems to be "buy Euro first, if nothing exists, then buy American". The Cormorant is a perfect example of this, whereas superior, and well tested and refined helos exist from numerous sources in the states, we bought European. Airbus is still trying to sell us the as yet unbuilt A400M, despite the fact that Boeing makes aircraft we need, right now.

I believe the LUVW will cost us millions in the near future, once the overly complex electrical and sensor systems in that vehicle deteriorate with age. The G is needlessly complex, and extraordinarily difficult to work on, and turnaround times on warranty work are very long.

As for the AVGP family, a bit of sanity there, we bought the US versions, probably because Mowag was uninterested in building a plant in Windsor.

The BV was kind of sole supplier deal, the Bombardier products were crude and inefficient, and there were no alternatives manufactured in the states.

Cheaper alternatives to the HLVW were and are available from a variety of sources - all with equivalent performances.

IMHO, performance, price and ease of maintenance always take a backseat to political considerations, and this RCHMG appears to be no different.

 

[Kirkhill]

GO!!!

I will comfortably concede the Eryx (a missile) and the Cormorant (an aircraft) to you. Although I think the pilots round about here have a mixed bag of opinions on the Cormorant.

And I will also concede the LSVW (I wouldn't buy a Fiat either  - a Ferrari maybe)

I can quibble with some of your other comments but at bottom I can't agree more with these:

I think we shoot ourselves in the foot sometimes in reference to acquisitions

IMHO, performance, price and ease of maintenance always take a backseat to political considerations,

although "always" may be a bit much.

I don't think I am willing to agree that the RCHMG is no different yet.

Cheers, Chris.

 

[fear-acfhuinn luinge]

As for the swapping out, I'm talking about the whole .50 cal unit not parts. If they did get rid of the regular .50 cals and only went with the RCHMG, a spare unit could be easily be kept and used as a replacement.
[/quote]

Well that'd be a treat, but I'll believe it when I see it. If they can't be bothered to give us a spare .50 now, or spare 40mm parts, then I'm not sure about a bunch of spares for the new system (at least not kept by the ship at sea)

 

[Colin Parkinson]

To be fair to the Navy guys. the Salt water environment attacks everything on a chemical, electrical, biological level, the salt laden moisture is incredible nasty on everything.

 

[Cayuga]

http://www.otomelara.it/products/schedule.asp?id=prod_naval_small_12_ge
That is the link for the Oto Melera page.

I was in the Summerside for the trials. It was an impressive looking piece of kit, especially when observing the tracking and the stabilization in operation. It was referred to colloquially as the 'Mosquito". We went through a decent storm coming back from Newfoundland, so it also enabled that aspect of the system to be tested. The best part of the trials were the live fire trials. It is a beautiful thing seeing AP tracer rounds fired at sea, especially on a grey Atlantic day. They shoot up like fireworks when the ricochet off the wave tops. It was a nice bonus experience to get on a MARS IV trip.

 

[Navy_Blue]

Sorry to highjack this but on the topic of .50cals and rust.  Just had a brain wave.  As an ET we commonly get parts (motor's controllers ect) which come with large baggies full of moisture absorbing material.  Kind of like the little bags that come in IMP's and shoe boxes that say "do not eat" just bigger.  It was mentioned that we have yet to find a cover that would prevent the gun from rusting.  If someone was a little inventive and could acquire some of this material place it in the covers and tie the bottoms tight it might reduce the rust on the guns considerably.  It might need to be changed out weekly but the guns would be better off.  A friend of mine puts them in his tool box at home (salt air in Nova Scotia) his tools all look great.  A possible source would be Desiccant the stuff we use in our high pressure air dryers on the CPF's.  dump some in a burlap sand bag and stick it on top of the gun before the cover goes on.  Again just a thought. 

Pass the idea on to any of the bos'n and NWT's that have to deal with rust and crap on a regular basis 

Let me know if it works out.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Actually just a small vent blowing warm air from the ship into the tarp would make all the differance, of course it would need a shut off valve.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Actually just a small vent blowing warm air from the ship into the tarp would make all the differance, of course it would need a shut off valve.

it would also increase how a ship appears in the IR spectrum....