C3 Howitzer Replacement

[Kirkhill]

That's my take on it. It needs a lot more analysis of both the way that the Ukrainians use their varying gun systems and the way that Russians identify and prioritize their counter battery work. Saying tracked vehicles leave ... well tracks ... while Caesars are wheeled and don't is simplistic in the extreme. If Caesars and other guns move solely on highways then their AMAs are greatly reduced and a plan of flying reconnaissance along highways would quickly spot most of them even when not firing.

I do agree that I've seen far to many pictures of gun positions with salvage around them bearing witness to prolonged periods of firing. Conversely, a battery on the road also quickly draws attention to aerial surveillance. One big issue about staying in place v moving is what type of ammunition support vehicles, and how many, are organic to the battery. That's a major factor.

If I were to guess, and I do that all too often, then my money would be the importance of 155mm guns as the most viable targets and the ones that you would expend a Lancet on. 105mm simply aren't the same threat in the deep muck that is Ukrainian soil and their trench systems. They don't get paid the same level of attention.

Just as an aside, Oryx reports 5 Caesars as hit with three destroyed and two damaged. The statistic that I find interesting is that 37 M777s have been destroyed and another 34 damaged which reinforces the vulnerability of unarmoured guns to near misses. I haven't run a detailed calculation - I'll leave that to you - but my impression is that there is a higher ratio of destroyed SPs to damaged ones. To me that's indicative of near misses doing little damage to SPs but a direct hit - like with a Lancet - is catastrophic. An interesting statistic that one doesn't get from Oryx, is the rate of personnel casualties amongst armoured v unarmoured guns.

Just a reminder - I have nothing against wheeled guns - my problem is with unarmoured guns which is what the Caesar is.

Re the Caesar stats on Oryx.

The Forbes article cited is from May so the loss over the summer has been an additional 3 guns.

WRT Armour...

Would you consider Archer as an armoured gun? The cab is armoured and the crew doesn't have to dismount.

 

[FJAG]

Re the Caesar stats on Oryx.

The Forbes article cited is from May so the loss over the summer has been an additional 3 guns.

WRT Armour...

Would you consider Archer as an armoured gun? The cab is armoured and the crew doesn't have to dismount.

I would indeed. And I like Archer in general. Its the limited on-board ammunition supply and reload cycle that I don't like. There's also ammo inflexibility in that small load. I.e. if you suddenly need to fire a smoke screen but you only have 21 rounds in the magazine (and most of those are probably HE, how do you effectively do that? With the M109 set you have some 40+ rounds on board - that's been creeping down too - plus you had another 100 + in the M548 limber vehicle (or better yet, 93 under armour in the M992). Its the same with the K9 (48 rounds) and its K10 (100 + rounds) limber vehicle.

Most countries cheap out on the limber vehicle which, IMHO, comes from peacetime cost constraints as well as limited ammo handling during exercises. The M548 was a prime example. It came out over a decade after the M109 went into service, but we stayed with the unarmoured M548. While the M548 could keep up with the M109 cross country, it makes a marginally suitable vehicle once you start receiving counterfire. Again, IMHO, a good artillery system can be either wheeled or tracked but needs armour to protect the tender parts and a viable ammo limber/sustainment capability while under fire.

 

[quadrapiper]

is it controlled for usage and risk/exposure?

M109s and KRABs getting used in higher-threat settings, sort of thing?

 

[WestIsle]

Future Artillery 2023: Dstl develops Lightweight Fires Platform to replace 105 mm Light Gun

The UK's Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) is working on a Lightweight Fires Platform technology demonstrator programme to replace the 105 mm Light Gun,...

www.janes.com

Janes on a potential replacement for 105mm in service. Ironically upping it to 127mm.

 

[FJAG]

Future Artillery 2023: Dstl develops Lightweight Fires Platform to replace 105 mm Light Gun

The UK's Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) is working on a Lightweight Fires Platform technology demonstrator programme to replace the 105 mm Light Gun,...

www.janes.com

Janes on a potential replacement for 105mm in service. Ironically upping it to 127mm.

I'm sceptical of anything that replaces a 2,000 kg light gun with a 3,000 kg gun and still calls it "light." The M777 comes in at 4,200 kg.

Then it becomes electric and autonomous and is limited to a 14-round magazine.

I've lost the plot on what "artillery" problem they are trying to solve with this thing but anything that reduces flexibility (read easy deployment by helicopter) and mass/weight of fire, is not solving the light gun issue.

I don't want to turn the clock back, but the 105mm L5 at 1,290 kg and capable of breaking into 12 parts for man/mule packing was about as good as you could get in the "light" category. Same for 120mm mortars - still useable. Yup. range was/is an issue. In Italy, 1st Mountain Artillery Regiment has gone from the L5 to having the regiment being a mix of FH 70 (155mm) and 120mm mortars. IMHO, the golf bag principle (which we used in Afghanistan with M777 and 81mm mortars) is a better solution to solving the "light gun" problem than trying to develop a new "not-so-light" gun. In fact I prefer the 81mm mortar to the 120mm for the "light" role as you can manpack it and a healthy supply of tripack ammo just about anywhere - something not done as easily with the 120mm.

 

[suffolkowner]

I'm sceptical of anything that replaces a 2,000 kg light gun with a 3,000 kg gun and still calls it "light." The M777 comes in at 4,200 kg.

Then it becomes electric and autonomous and is limited to a 14-round magazine.

I've lost the plot on what "artillery" problem they are trying to solve with this thing but anything that reduces flexibility (read easy deployment by helicopter) and mass/weight of fire, is not solving the light gun issue.

I don't want to turn the clock back, but the 105mm L5 at 1,290 kg and capable of breaking into 12 parts for man/mule packing was about as good as you could get in the "light" category. Same for 120mm mortars - still useable. Yup. range was/is an issue. In Italy, 1st Mountain Artillery Regiment has gone from the L5 to having the regiment being a mix of FH 70 (155mm) and 120mm mortars. IMHO, the golf bag principle (which we used in Afghanistan with M777 and 81mm mortars) is a better solution to solving the "light gun" problem than trying to develop a new "not-so-light" gun. In fact I prefer the 81mm mortar to the 120mm for the "light" role as you can manpack it and a healthy supply of tripack ammo just about anywhere - something not done as easily with the 120mm.

interesting as Ive always wondered about the adaptability of the 127. Its already in use with autoloader.

light 81 mm mortar packable
medium 120 mm mortar mounted or turreted
heavy 155 mm tracked and/or wheeled
MLRS

 

[Kirkhill]

NOT a C3 replacement.....

But certainly an adjunct.

PAS 2023 - UVision introduces new manportable loitering munitions following the market trend - EDR Magazine

The leading company in loitering munitions, UVision is scaling its products towards manportable as well as towards high-end systems.

www.edrmagazine.eu

U-Vision has supplied the USMC with the Hero-120 as a battalion level asset launched from LAVs and LRUSVs.
They also have heavier and lighter systems but the market seems to be calling for additional sweet spots.

Following the requests of some customers, who required an intermediate system between the 3.5 kg HERO-30 and the HERO-120, UVision developed the HERO-90, which was unveiled at the Paris Air Show. The weight is halved, 9 kg at launch compared to the 18 kg of the HERO-120, while range and endurance performances are slightly reduced, respectively over 40 km compared to 60 km and 45 minutes compared to one hour. What is scaled down is the warhead, which is now of over 1.5 kg compared to the 4.5 kg of the HERO-120, however this is well sufficient to neutralise main battle tanks especially hitting them in top-attack mode.

the HERO-90 is in advanced stage of development. The new manportable HERO, which can be made ready for launch in less than two minutes, will allow infantry to carry a higher number of munitions for a given weight, its weight with canister being 12 kg.

Going up in scale

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine highlighted the need for affordable stand-off precision systems, capable to replace in many cases air-launched missiles which are more expensive and put at risk pilots’ lives. UVision catalogue includes the HERO-1250 and HERO-900,

According to available information the HERO-1250 has a range of over 200 km, and can fly for up to 10 hours carrying a 50 kg warhead over a weight of 155 kg- Powered by a diesel/hybrid engine, it carries three electro-optic gimbals that allow it to gather information during the mission, electronic warfare systems being also installable. Lighter, 110 kg at launch with a 30 kg warhead, the HERO-900 has a range in excess of 150 km and a 6 hours flight time, has a similar power pack and carries only one E/O gimbal. Both are launched by a ramp. .

Note - the HERO-120 is compatible with the Griffon.... lots of launch points while keeping the Griffon well out of line of sight.

UVision USA and Axxeum announces a proven ability to launch its Hero 120 Loitering Munition System from an airborne helicopter - EDR Magazine

June 12, 2023 – UVision USA, the US subsidiary of UVision Air, a global leader in aerial loitering systems, in

www.edrmagazine.eu

... in May 2023 at Yuma Proving Ground in Yuma, Arizona.

The trial showcased the system’s ability to complete a sensor-to-shooter cycle by launching the Hero 120 from a Bell 412EP helicopter to strike a ground target. The Hero 120 demonstrated safe separation, successfully launching from the helicopter while it was airborne. Several parameters were tested and proven successful during the trial, including launching from a safe altitude without endangering the helicopter, transferring tactical control between the on-board operator and the ground operator six times, pursuing the munition to a forward location, controlling the system within a 30-kilometer range from the helicopter, and effectively attacking a ground target over a 50-kilometer flight.

That ability to transfer control 6 times seems to me to be important.

If it can be done with the HERO-120, how many other weapons systems can it be done with?

 

[GR66]

I wonder if you could develop a simple portee system to mount an L5 to a Humvee sized vehicle and/or a BVs10 to give Light Brigades a shoot-and-scoot capability when desired?

 

[Kirkhill]

I'm sceptical of anything that replaces a 2,000 kg light gun with a 3,000 kg gun and still calls it "light." The M777 comes in at 4,200 kg.

Then it becomes electric and autonomous and is limited to a 14-round magazine.

I've lost the plot on what "artillery" problem they are trying to solve with this thing but anything that reduces flexibility (read easy deployment by helicopter) and mass/weight of fire, is not solving the light gun issue.

I don't want to turn the clock back, but the 105mm L5 at 1,290 kg and capable of breaking into 12 parts for man/mule packing was about as good as you could get in the "light" category. Same for 120mm mortars - still useable. Yup. range was/is an issue. In Italy, 1st Mountain Artillery Regiment has gone from the L5 to having the regiment being a mix of FH 70 (155mm) and 120mm mortars. IMHO, the golf bag principle (which we used in Afghanistan with M777 and 81mm mortars) is a better solution to solving the "light gun" problem than trying to develop a new "not-so-light" gun. In fact I prefer the 81mm mortar to the 120mm for the "light" role as you can manpack it and a healthy supply of tripack ammo just about anywhere - something not done as easily with the 120mm.

Is range the issue that it was? Particularly for the 120mm mortar?

I'm thinking that with the continuous improvement of self-powered precision guided munitions that the range of options available to a mortar operator are increasing markedly.

This is a naval multi-barreled mortar. It launches everything from Chaff and Smoke to Javelins and HE as well as LAMs.

I am not proposing the multi-barrelled launcher. I am suggesting that the basic 120mm tube could launch many more types of munitions than what is available currently.

The 120 does, HE-Smk-Ill but it also does STRIX PGMs and could do LAMs.

 

[Kirkhill]

interesting as Ive always wondered about the adaptability of the 127. Its already in use with autoloader.

light 81 mm mortar packable
medium 120 mm mortar mounted or turreted
heavy 155 mm tracked and/or wheeled
MLRS

The Europeans have been using the 81 as a company level asset for a long time.

 

[Kirkhill]

I wonder if you could develop a simple portee system to mount an L5 to a Humvee sized vehicle and/or a BVs10 to give Light Brigades a shoot-and-scoot capability when desired?

Was that rhetorical

 

[GR66]

Was that rhetorical

I'm aware of the Hawkeye. What I'm envisioning is a standard 105mm gun that can be mounted and dismounted from a vehicle. Same gun can be airlifted by helicopter, towed by a light vehicle and mounted portee-style on a medium vehicle to be self-propelled. The 105mm on the Hawkeye is permanently mounted on the Humvee

 

[Kirkhill]

Add this to the Humvee

Rheinmetall

The Rheinmetall PATH autonomy kit (A-kit) is a proprietary robotic control software suite which integrates autonomous capabilities into existing vehicle fleets.

www.rheinmetall.com

 

[Kirkhill]

I'm aware of the Hawkeye. What I'm envisioning is a standard 105mm gun that can be mounted and dismounted from a vehicle. Same gun can be airlifted by helicopter, towed by a light vehicle and mounted portee-style on a medium vehicle to be self-propelled. The 105mm on the Hawkeye is permanently mounted on the Humvee

Gotcha...

a 105 version of this?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Gotcha...

a 105 version of this?

C130 portable?

Paratroopers approve!

 

[FJAG]

NOT a C3 replacement.....

But certainly an adjunct.

I'm all for loitering munitions. I don't know if the Hero 120 is big enough to guarantee a tank kill each and every time but I'd like something like that and would clearly put it into an anti-armour battery as part of a close support regiment. I think that there is a distinction to be made with weapon systems designed for precision kill and ones still capable of mass effects and a variety of munitions - hence the need for both guns and missiles/loitering munitions. I tend to favour both these with the artillery as it simplifies coordination and being able to concentrate weapons across a brigade front which you can't do if you decentralize to battalions or companies. The battalions have their own weapon systems to deal with things within their own areas of responsibility.

I wonder if you could develop a simple portee system to mount an L5 to a Humvee sized vehicle and/or a BVs10 to give Light Brigades a shoot-and-scoot capability when desired?

Portee systems are easy - we had portee kits for L5s in both 2 1/2 (in the wheeled (combat groups) and M548 (for the AMF(L) battle group. The Airborne battery also towed theirs with 3/4 ton trucks. The 3/4 could handle an L5 as it was just a tad above the weight rating for the vehicle. A HMMVW could easily tow or carry one.

There is obviously a difference between a portee and a gun-on-a-truck. My guess is that a HMMVW couldn't handle the shock of firing very well. I conclude that only from the fact that you need something like a soft recoil gun for the Hawkeye. Most 105mm that I've seen for firing off a truck call for something like a 5 ton - see for example the Korean conversion of an M101 on a heavily modified 5 ton. The Koreans found this a highly efficient and cost effective conversion and they recycled about 800+ M101s into these K105A1s. It comes with a a digital fire control system.

Note that even on a 5 ton they still need stabilizers. It supposedly holds some 60 rounds on board and has very light small arms and splinter protection.

Interestingly their primary purpose was to replace the older 4.2 inch mortars in infantry divisions.

 

[ringo]

Current state of 155mm and 105mm ammo shortage, makes naval stocks of 114mm and 127mm attractive if tubes can be fitted to existing gun carriages so much the better.
Flies in the face of standardization but perhaps is a good use of available naval ammo stocks and production lines.
Marines eqiupped with 114mm or 127mm perhaps makes the most sense, perhaps not for Canada.
M777 lite 127mm tube.
M777 super lite 114mm tube.
Fire away.

 

[dapaterson]

Current state of 155mm and 105mm ammo shortage, makes naval stocks of 114mm and 127mm attractive if tubes can be fitted to existing gun carriages so much the better.
Flies in the face of standardization but perhaps is a good use of available naval ammo stocks and production lines.
Marines eqiupped with 114mm or 127mm perhaps makes the most sense, perhaps not for Canada.
M777 lite 127mm tube.
M777 super lite 114mm tube.
Fire away.

Orphan fleets are in nobody's best interest.

 

[Kirkhill]

Orphan fleets are in nobody's best interest.

Unless you're Ukrainian and want to keep on killing Russians.

 

[markppcli]

Unless you're Ukrainian and want to keep on killing Russians.

Last I checked they were using NATO stand ammo.