C3 Howitzer Replacement

[suffolkowner]

I believe that the 6x6 might do better off road but the 8x8 handles highways at higher speeds (>90 km/h). The Volvo 6x6 is limited to 70 km/h.

Archer artillery system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

ive driven them through 2 feet of mud uphill so the artics can work off road, no idea on the 8x8 straight

From the article it looks like commonality with the fleet of logistics H2 8x8s already in Swedish service. I wouldn't doubt that there are also some stability and robustness improvements and longer range (800kms v 650). OTOH the 8 x 8 is a more complex chassis.

I'm still not an overwhelmed fan of either the Archer or the RCH 155 on Boxer principally because of the low on-board ammo count and the complexity of "bombing up" the turrets. I've recently watched an RCH 155 being resupplied with ammo and it looked worse than Archer. That's something that really needs working on.

I'm also not so fond of all the advertisements as to shoot and scoot. They make it sound like it provides some invulnerability that other systems do not have. IMHO the improvements in STA - including UAVs and OWUAVs - negates much of the shoot and scoot advantage with the old catchphrase of "you move; you die." These guns have very distinct physical signatures and will be high-priority sought after targets. I can't see these guns deploying without a robust dedicated anti-air capability/plan.

Don't get me wrong, they're still better than an M777, - especially the L52 barrel - but they aren't Superman.

seems like with drones there will need to be some sort of integral anti drone system but the alternative is to remain vulnerable to counter battery fire? Perhaps in Ukraine the danger from drones is greater than that of counter battery fire now?

 

[FJAG]

Thoughts on the M327 mortar?

No!!!

Don't just try to cobble together a solution that's cheap and easy. If there's one thing that I want to get across in this forum its that the removal of mortars from infantry battalions and given to the artillery was a colossal, fiscally-driven cock-up that is still screwing things up two decades later.

Artillery has a purpose which is to rapidly mass fires where needed. That can't be done with mortars no matter how people like to quote new improved ranges for 120mm ammunition. If you can't afford a decent gun system then give gunners UAVs and OWUAVs and air defence etc. Give the mortars back to the infantry where they belong.

Just a small overview. The Canadian army has enough RegF and ARes personnel to man two divisions (assuming not everyone is on parental leave, stress leave or whatever other restrictions and the manifest is fully manned). Whether you look at that as one division to deploy and one to provide sustainment and train replacements for deployment doesn't matter. That's the manpower pool you have to play with. How many you actually deploy at any given time is a matter of preference, but right now we equip our artillery on the basis of fielding a full battlegroup (with one 6-gun battery and an STA and AD element that is evolving) and another contingency battlegroup with minimal arty support (which generally means no guns)

In any proper thinking army that looks at the tactical needs of a division you need as a minimum three, better yet four, 18-gun battalions (54 to 72 guns @155mm calibre). Add in at least one STA battalion (lets say a dozen radars (LCMR and MRR mix and a dozen SUAVs); an air defence battalion (18-24 launchers) and a battalion of 18 mixed HIMARS and OWUAV launchers. Add in another 50% again, as a minimum, as the stay-at-home training cadre for the second division and as replacements for combat losses. That type of organization will eat up every existing RegF PY and every ARes authorized position to man.

Right now, all those PYs and authorized ARes have an operational stock of a total of 24 x M777s, some MRRs, LCMRs and SUAVs and a twinkle in their eye that the system will kick out some rocket launchers and an air def bty or two before hell freezes over.

My thought process is to equip the army with what it needs for combat, not what might make a poor training aid. You can't deploy training aids to war. People will die if you do. If you don't want your people to die then you either beg and borrow gear from other folks (who might need it for themselves) or you stay at home.

 

[Maxman1]

My thinking was that towed and rifled mortars would be under the purview of artillery, and smoothbore mortars that can be packed up be infantry. So the Soltam K6/M120 120mm mortar, L16 81mm, M224 or M6 60mm and maybe even a 51mm would all be infantry, and the M327 would be artillery.