• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

PPP for M-109 reset.

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,178
Points
1,040
Bae Systems press release.  They say the US will us the M-109 till 2050!  Question....can we re-intro ours or have we moved on?


BAE Systems, U.S. Army Sign Public-Private Partnership for M109 Family of Vehicles
 
 
(Source: BAE Systems; issued Oct. 9, 2007)
 
 
 

The US Army will reset and upgrade its fleet of M109A6 Paladin self-propelled guns, which will then remain in service beyond 2050. (US Army photo)WASHINGTON --- BAE Systems and the U.S. Army have signed a memorandum of understanding that will establish a Public-Private Partnership (P3) to develop and sustain the Army's M109 Family of Vehicles throughout their lifecycle. 

Parties to the memorandum signing include BAE Systems leaders, the U.S. Army Tank Automotive & Armaments Command (TACOM), the Program Executive Office for Ground Combat Systems, the U.S. Army's Project Manager - Heavy Brigade Combat Team (PM-HBCT), and the Anniston Army Depot (ANAD). The memorandum was signed during the Annual Meeting and Exposition for the Association of the U.S. Army in Washington, D.C. 

The establishment of a P3 will capitalize on the strengths and capabilities of each organization to ensure the cost-effective and on-time reset of the current fleet of M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzers and M992A2 Field Artillery Ammunition Supply Vehicles (FAASV), as well as the planned production of the M109A6/M992A2 Paladin Integrated Management (PIM) program unveiled earlier this week. 

"This partnership was established for the benefit of the American soldier," said Col. Paul Lepine, Army PM-HBCT. "The M109 family plays a critical role in the success of the HBCT and we are pleased to partner with BAE Systems and ANAD to ensure these systems continue to provide the performance our Soldiers need to be successful on the battlefield today and into the future." 

The M109 reset activities will be managed by the PM-HBCT, with the goal of creating an integrated, seamless partnership to bring the best value to the soldier, while maintaining necessary skills and competencies in the public and private industrial base. 

Through the P3, ANAD will retain labor and lead the majority of the program, with BAE Systems responsible for materials management. 

"ANAD has proven time and again to be a dedicated workforce focused on meeting the needs of our soldiers through effective combat vehicle reset programs," said Raj Rajagopal, president, Ground Systems, BAE Systems. "We're proud to partner with ANAD and the PM-HBCT to leverage our efficient materials management processes to make M109 FOV reset even more effective, and to work closely as a team to rapidly provide the M109A6-PIM to our soldiers." 

The M109A6-PIM production process will also be led by the PM-HBCT with a direct contract to BAE Systems, who will oversee system design, development and production. ANAD will be integrated into the PIM Integrated Product Development Teams (IPDTs) structure during the design phase and will support the manufacture of the prototype vehicles which will be delivered to the Army for test and evaluation in 2009. Following test and evaluation, ANAD will overhaul the prototype vehicles to ensure the depot has the demonstrated capability to meet their M109A6/M992A2-PIM mission requirements. 

ANAD will be a partner in PIM production, responsible for induction of vehicles, overhaul of critical components such as the main armament, as well as modification & upgrade of the cab structure. The partially assembled cabs, along with overhauled components, will be provided to BAE Systems for integration with the PIM chassis - designed and built around commonality with the Bradley family of vehicles. 


BAE Systems is the premier global defense and aerospace company delivering a full range of products and services for air, land and naval forces, as well as advanced electronics, information technology solutions and customer support services. BAE Systems, with 96,000 employees worldwide, had 2006 sales that exceeded $27 billion on a pro forma basis, assuming BAE Systems had owned Armor Holdings, Inc. for the whole of 2006. (ends) 




 
I know ours are mostly all lined up in Montreal... rotting under tarps until someone decides to do something with em
 
I'm not sure the 109 is a capability that we desperately need also the money needed to re-activate them would be better spent elsewhere in my opinion. 
 
I believe that a few little used surplus PZ-2000's would be a better option ,a la leo II's. IMHO
 
STONEY said:
I believe that a few little used surplus PZ-2000's would be a better option ,a la leo II's. IMHO
Well Christmas isn´t far away. You write them on your wish list and maybe some will under your Christmas tree. ;)
(Okay you need a big tree and there wouldn´t be much left of your fireside, but hey.)

SCNR,
ironduke57
 
STONEY said:
I believe that a few little used surplus PZ-2000's would be a better option ,a la leo II's. IMHO

Holland declared some very new, haven't even been delivered yet PZ 2000s as surplus to their requirements.
They have offered them on the international market to it's allies..... so far no takers.

Question remains, does Canada need them right now?
Between the upgraded 105s and the new M777 155s, are we OK for now?
 
Canada definitely needs something.
The idea that the few M777's we have are enough is absurd.
As for the PzH 2000, well funny that should be mentioned here but it has come up over the last 2 days during the International Artillery Symposium as well, that this Euro beauty might not be so good; like any good looking girl she's high maintenance. Each system has its pro's and cons, but a big clue as to the drawbacks of PzH 2000 ownership should be that there are no takers for the Dutch surplus ones.
The M109's, they're not gone yet (I think there's about 26 in Montreal), W Bty still has their two, and maintenance training battery still has the capability to run courses, this should tell you something as well; that card has not been discarded, yet.
As for the "upgraded" 105s', oiy, I'm too tired right now to get into that one.
but LCMM is scouring surplus markets for parts for the C1 and C3 fleet, and most of the LG1's are still under firing restrictions, which puts even more wear and tear on the C3 fleet that was never meant to be used this much.

hope to be able to fill in more of the blanks later

 
From what I understand, SPA is to be used as part of a large scale armoured advance. I don't see why 'Canada definitely needs something'? Wouldn't those dollars be better spent on more towed-tubes or other capabilities that might be more relevant. Out of my lane, but it just doesn't seem like there is need for SPA.
 
geo said:
Between the upgraded 105s and the new M777 155s, are we OK for now?

They may have been upgraded but, from what I have been told, shortly there after the company that made the spare parts closed down, we had one in Red Deer that we where told was something like #24 in line for the last recoil system replacement in the CF, although apparently we are building some on our own now as last time I was back in Red Deer we only had n gun and I was told the other was off being fixed with a "home made" (CF home made not local decision) replacement. And I don't think they are going to make many spares or do it again.
 
As it was explained to me using as many small words as possible. The Dutch manufacturer
(RDM?or KDM?)produced a  better mousetrap  by expanding the chamber to allow for a" hotter load" as it were. As well a longer barrel both in expection of a gain in both range and the useful life of the fieldpiece.
However there is a drawback to this it sort of like firing a 44 magnum in a revolver chambered for 44 special...you can do it but I really wouldn't expect the weapon to have a really long life .In fact you'll be lucky if only your warranty blows up in your face
 
Petard,

There are more than 26 lined up in Montreal...

Could they be stripped down & rebuilt?  Guess so, but it would be a tremendous job and I don't think that 202 Wkshops has the current capacity to handle it.  They are busy bees servicing all the rolling stock coming out of KAF for 3rd line work.

Could they be contracted out for the work?  Guess so, but who has the facilities this side of the border & if someone starts up a production line to do it, I can see people @ the Wkshps bailing the CF to go there.... so we're no further ahead, from where I sit.
 
geo said:
Petard,

There are more than 26 lined up in Montreal...

Could they be stripped down & rebuilt?  Guess so, but it would be a tremendous job and I don't think that 202 Wkshops has the current capacity to handle it.  They are busy bees servicing all the rolling stock coming out of KAF for 3rd line work.

Could they be contracted out for the work?  Guess so, but who has the facilities this side of the border & if someone starts up a production line to do it, I can see people @ the Wkshps bailing the CF to go there.... so we're no further ahead, from where I sit.

Well Rheinmetall has already an facility in Canada and has an upgrade pack for the M109 in there portfolio.
- http://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/index.php?fid=4223&lang=3&pdb=1

Regards,
ironduke57
(Not a salesman of Rheinmetall, HDW or KMW ;) )
 
Is it physically possible? Yes.
Is it a good idea from a fiscal and capability stand point? It is probably not.
 
geo said:
Petard,

There are more than 26 lined up in Montreal...

Could they be stripped down & rebuilt?  Guess so, but it would be a tremendous job and I don't think that 202 Wkshops has the current capacity to handle it.  They are busy bees servicing all the rolling stock coming out of KAF for 3rd line work.

Could they be contracted out for the work?  Guess so, but who has the facilities this side of the border & if someone starts up a production line to do it, I can see people @ the Wkshps bailing the CF to go there.... so we're no further ahead, from where I sit.

Why do we have to do the work in Canada?  Just tag on the US order with BAE and be done with it.  i understand the politics but I just wish we could move past that. 
 
Spencer,

As Bane pointed out, is it a good fiscal decision to strip & rebuild 40 year old SPs?
 
I would say not.  I think we should get a new SP or something to replace it like NLOS etc.  But the article states the US will be using the system till 2050!  I do not think there are any "new" builds.  But I think the rebuild ones are so "rebuilt" as to be new.

One little point, I have read here that sometimes it is easier to rebuild systems at same or higher price than to replace them with new.  Something about the maintance budget vs Crown capital.   
 
I would say if you are able to upgrade them locally it would be probably the cheaper way. If not, well then it is mainly a question of negotiations what would be cheaper. Rebuilding the old M109 or buying "used" PzH2000(just as an example).

Regards,
ironduke57
 
Hey All,

When I was out with E Battery, the Dutch came out with a pair of PZH2000's. They were the all singing, all dancing arty system, 100% atuomated.
However, when 1 system goes down(which it did on one of the Dutch guns) the whole gun is out of action. This one gun sat for a week and a couple of days, waiting for parts.
Not good.

As for the whole C3 thing...there isn't any parts, no support for it. It was built to fire a round(RAP or somthing like that) that we'll never see. Isn't it time to replace it? So what if its just a training gun? Why are the Reg F using Reserve C3 guns? Plus useless LG1's?

Even with the whole trend of the 777, even the US is keeping and getting more of the 105 Light Gun.
 
Its interesting to see the US are keeping some paladins around until 2050. Next year (2008) they start producing NLOS C at a low rate of 8 per year or something like that.

But then I could see other systems sticking around like the Bradley technology demonstrator model by BAE (Hybrid engine, remote weapon station replaces turret and carries 3 + 9, yes I TYPED 3 + 9).

So maybe we are at a point were some of the technology is going to be hanging around for 25-40 years yet.
 
Back
Top