C3 Howitzer Replacement

[Colin Parkinson]

Related thought -

Why did the Brits make the Sten in 9mm. Because they figured there would be a lot of German ammunition available when they got to the continent. In the meantime it solved the problem of supplying the Resistance.

9mm Luger was becoming the defacto calibre for Europe (there were several competing 9mm rounds and 7.62/65) The brits started with an disdain for the submachine gun, but were forced quickly to realize it's usefulness, at which point the only option to buy was the US Tommy gun in .45acp. The gun and ammunition was expensive. A couple of MP-18's were acquired and reversed engineered into the Lancaster SMG. It was simpler to adopt 9mm for the gun as you already know the required bolt weight and spring tension than to choose another calibre. Plus 9mm Luger lends itself well to Blowback actions. The Lancaster gun was not that cheap either and so the Sten was born.

 

[daftandbarmy]

9mm Luger was becoming the defacto calibre for Europe (there were several competing 9mm rounds and 7.62/65) The brits started with an disdain for the submachine gun, but were forced quickly to realize it's usefulness, at which point the only option to buy was the US Tommy gun in .45acp. The gun and ammunition was expensive. A couple of MP-18's were acquired and reversed engineered into the Lancaster SMG. It was simpler to adopt 9mm for the gun as you already know the required bolt weight and spring tension than to choose another calibre. Plus 9mm Luger lends itself well to Blowback actions. The Lancaster gun was not that cheap either and so the Sten was born.

You mean the Lanchester? Survived in service until the 70s with the RN, apparently:

Lanchester submachine gun - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Thanks for the correction, yes it did and would love to have one.....

 

[KevinB]

I do understand those. I also understand that our Defense industry has been heavily involved in aspects of our NATO partners with defense R&D. The provisions of providing software, hardware etc is part of a process to build a better force for all. You can say cant, wont, never happen. Those are reasons to not do it.

SSA’s limit IP sharing between international corporations. So one needs to get ITAR approvals before any data transfers go.

My point is simply the size of the CAF means that it is impractical to have domestic production of certain materials due to the scale of the acquisition.

We can, we have and we will are things to make these happen. I guess we are not allowed to buy M777 or their spare barrels because of those. Maybe even the CF18s and part for them due to the above regulations.

You would ideally acquire spares under the original contract. But follow on sales still need approvals. Sure they are an effective rubber stamp for the CAF, but those don’t get rubber stamped for independent corporations to do solo R&D.

I have no doubt Canada could buy some prefabbed Barrels and Breeches for the Paladin platform and build a turret and chassis along with incorporate a FCS that would work well.
We could even go after a AS90 setup, or maybe look at developing a new system as part of the upgrades the US and Britain are looking at currently.

The issue right now is not that we cant, the issue is that to many say we can't so we wont. Those are the SMEs providing advice to the people making the decisions.

Shouldn’t doesn’t mean can’t…

heck if we went that route we would not have a Refueling ship at our call. A few said we cant, and we wont. One man stood against them and made it happen. So it became reality not after being told it wont work and it wont suit our needs. here we are years later drinking fuel and accepting supplies from the MV Astrix.

Or a real Military would have planned for that contingency years ago when the previous class ships where coming to end of life.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Or a real Military and Earnest Government would have planned for that contingency years ago when the previous class ships where coming to end of life.

Planning is for boring people that don't wear fancy socks or are arguing about whether their ranks should be on their sleeve or shoulder.

 

[FJAG]

The specs on the truck are pretty impressive. I have not seen any towing specs for the truck but it has a 20,000lb payload capacity. Can be fitted with armor, mine plow etc. I would assume that truck would rip around a M777 with no issues with the right tires and maybe chains with it gets to muddy. They could even equip it with floater tires for sandy/ really muddy areas.
I use to run medium duty picker trucks towing 10,000plus lbs and never had a problem driving through some pretty crappy conditions.

It's not so much what it can tow or the tires etc. The SMP has a computer linkage with the navigation system on the gun. That could probably be installed if push came to shove. The major issue, IMHO, is the cargo area. Most 155 ammo handling these days comes by way of pallets these days. The cargo deck on the SMP facilitates that and the gun tractor version comes with a pallet handling crane. The Milcots gun tractor does not as its designed for the 105 unpalletized ammo. The other issue, of course, is that the entire RegF bde fleet is the SMP pattern which makes the maintenance of these vehicles standard. If one slipped the Milcots in it would be problematic.

All that said, I don't see any reason why the cargo Milcot fleet couldn't be used for some form of rear area logistics work, such as a sustainment brigade, as long as one could work out the pallet handling issues.

Incidentally the requirements for the SMVS-SMP is here with the gun tractor version at BA-5

 

[dapaterson]

MSVS MilCOTS has cargo variants that can take pallets. It would be adequate as a 2nd / 3rd line transport.

The armoured logistics vehicles from Afghanistan were symptomatic of the CAF at that time. And not representative of a real military deployed in relevant strength with greater than a reinforced battalion to support.

 

[FJAG]

MSVS MilCOTS has cargo variants that can take pallets. It would be adequate as a 2nd / 3rd line transport.

The gun tractor - all 98 of them - does not. On top of that we only ordered 32 of the MILCOTS as pallet handlers. The vast bulk - 895 are pure cargo and pers, another 128 are cargo - cage.

See here.

The armoured logistics vehicles from Afghanistan were symptomatic of the CAF at that time. And not representative of a real military deployed in relevant strength with greater than a reinforced battalion to support.

I agree with that. Like I said above, I'm sure that many of the Milcots would work as 2nd and 3rd line. Not sure if the pallet issue is solvable for the 895 cargo variants or whether this is something for consideration for the next fleet. That said, the SMSV fleet is young yet (by our standards) so they'll be around for a while. You're obviously more up on the 2nd and 3rd line issues than I am - could the MSVS cargo MILCOTs as they are be useable for that or would they need modification (I'm assuming we've gone heavy for pallets beyond just arty ammo."

 

[childs56]

SSA’s limit IP sharing between international corporations. So one needs to get ITAR approvals before any data transfers go.

My point is simply the size of the CAF means that it is impractical to have domestic production of certain materials due to the scale of the acquisition.


You would ideally acquire spares under the original contract. But follow on sales still need approvals. Sure they are an effective rubber stamp for the CAF, but those don’t get rubber stamped for independent corporations to do solo R&D.

Shouldn’t doesn’t mean can’t…


Or a real Military would have planned for that contingency years ago when the previous class ships where coming to end of life.

OK

 

[KevinB]

The gun tractor - all 98 of them - does not. On top of that we only ordered 32 of the MILCOTS as pallet handlers. The vast bulk - 895 are pure cargo and pers, another 128 are cargo - cage.

See here.


I agree with that. Like I said above, I'm sure that many of the Milcots would work as 2nd and 3rd line. Not sure if the pallet issue is solvable for the 895 cargo variants or whether this is something for consideration for the next fleet. That said, the SMSV fleet is young yet (by our standards) so they'll be around for a while. You're obviously more up on the 2nd and 3rd line issues than I am - could the MSVS cargo MILCOTs as they are be useable for that or would they need modification (I'm assuming we've gone heavy for pallets beyond just arty ammo."

Honestly I have to wonder the logic of getting two different heavy trucks. I guess it truly goes to show the CAF doesn’t ever plan for actual wars, for they bought the PRes a domestic use only vehicle, that won’t work well within the Regular Army logistics support.

Yes I get the COTS version is cheaper upfront and to operate for domestic training.

I also understand the SMP version has the older LHS pallet system not the newer PALS like we have down here on the HEMTT.

 

[childs56]

Honestly I have to wonder the logic of getting two different heavy trucks. I guess it truly goes to show the CAF doesn’t ever plan for actual wars, for they bought the PRes a domestic use only vehicle, that won’t work well within the Regular Army logistics support.

Yes I get the COTS version is cheaper upfront and to operate for domestic training.

I also understand the SMP version has the older LHS pallet system not the newer PALS like we have down here on the HEMTT.

The US military runs multiple different trucks for their army.
I did not like that Canada bought a International and a Mack truck to replace what they had.
But both trucks are capable of doing the job they were designed to do.
Those Internationals with some float tires would rock off road.

 

[MH2022]

IMO neither truck is very well set up as a 155 gun tractor the MSVSM at least lets you have most of the detachment and 32 rounds 155 with prop but the SMP requires a whole other troop carry vehicle at all times.

 

[KevinB]

The US military runs multiple different trucks for their army.

Yes, but 1 medium and 1 heavy. Not two different models of the same role. Which you identify also below.

I did not like that Canada bought a International and a Mack truck to replace what they had.
But both trucks are capable of doing the job they were designed to do.
Those Internationals with some float tires would rock off road.

Can the International take add on armor?
Looking at it, that looks like it would be problematic.

 

[Kirkhill]

Yes, but 1 medium and 1 heavy. Not two different models of the same role. Which you identify also below.

Can the International take add on armor?
Looking at it, that looks like it would be problematic.

You sure it is the same medium truck?

The FMTV is derived from the Austrian Steyr 12M18 truck, but substantially modified to meet United States Army requirements, these including a minimum 50 percent U.S. content.[3][4]

There were originally 17 FMTV variants—four variants in the nominal 2.5 U.S. ton payload class, designated Light Medium Tactical Vehicle (LMTV), and 13 variants with a nominal 5 U.S. ton payload rating, called Medium Tactical Vehicle (MTV).[5]

Since the first FMTVs were fielded in January 1996 the family has been expanded and the overall design enhanced considerably. The FMTV was originally manufactured by Stewart & Stevenson (1996–2006), then by Armor Holdings (2006–2007), then by what is now BAE Systems Platforms & Services until 2011. It is currently manufactured by Oshkosh Corporation.[3]

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Perhaps Russian or Filipino style add on armour.....

 

[childs56]

Yes, but 1 medium and 1 heavy. Not two different models of the same role. Which you identify also below.

Can the International take add on armor?
Looking at it, that looks like it would be problematic.

Yes they can be fitted a Armored cab.

 

[childs56]

My point is simply the size of the CAF means that it is impractical to have domestic production of certain materials due to the scale of the acquisition.

It would be interesting to see a RFI bid put out country wide, see what they come up with. A few people might be surprised. Lots of Manufactures out West build multi million dollar one off projects all the time. Do a fine job of it.

 

[daftandbarmy]

It would be interesting to see a RFI bid put out country wide, see what they come up with. A few people might be surprised. Lots of Manufactures out West build multi million dollar one off projects all the time. Do a fine job of it.

There's the Achilles Heel, right there....

 

[childs56]

There's the Achilles Heel, right there....

No reason why out East cant do it either, they should be better set up to do so.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yes they can be fitted a Armored cab.

The Navistar can be armoured?