K
KenRob
Guest
Dang! Being on the business end of that puppy would ruin your whole day!!!
btw... my first post here. Hi all!
btw... my first post here. Hi all!
Canadian Artillery-5 Years[and counting] of Artillery Thoughts
- Thread starter Gunner
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 6,542
- Points
- 1,360
I just thought I would ask a question. The other combat arms seem to have a lot more discussion on their parts of this site. Is this because they have more too bitch about or are we too appathetic? Or maybe all is well in the Gunner world.[as it should be] Maybe some of you presently serving members could shed some light on this for me. So here is the question,what is wrong[if anything] with the state of gunnery today as you see it? :crybaby: CHEERS
- Reaction score
- 6,542
- Points
- 1,360
Further to above, feel free to include what is really right with the Gunner world also. 
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 230
I guess gunners are a natuaraly "quiet" type who follow the adage of fools rushing in where angels fear to tread.
We rather sit back and "observe" and intervene when the time is right.
Though, I must admit, not all is well in the Gunner world, with the potentail future loss of the M109, the gaining of the mortars, being so long that the others arms have seen the fall of shot, they have forgotten our importance to the all arms battle, lack of ammunition, future regt organization, dumbing down of arty trg are just to name a few.
We rather sit back and "observe" and intervene when the time is right.
Though, I must admit, not all is well in the Gunner world, with the potentail future loss of the M109, the gaining of the mortars, being so long that the others arms have seen the fall of shot, they have forgotten our importance to the all arms battle, lack of ammunition, future regt organization, dumbing down of arty trg are just to name a few.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I‘ll have to argree with RCA about the future of the M-109. The redepolyment of mortors for the arty is good, but the actual use of them is right out to lunch. What i mean by that is, that being in a light bty we sometimes are stuck with both systems (LG1 and mortor) inside an already packed grizzly and we end up never usin one of them. And again to agree with RCA the trg that recruits are getting is just plain wrong. 1 guy came in off his MQ course and only fired 1 round, while others on his course got the badge but never fired......
Gunner
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 430
Gents,
I think the artillery world is suffering from a lack of direction of where we want to go. I also believe (as I have mentioned before) that the Regular and Reserve components of the artillery are moving further apart and weakening us further still.
Over the next ten years we will see a reduction of the armour and particularly the artillery into supporting roles for the infantry. The armour is losing its ability to conduct offensive operations and attempting to find a niche for it self in surveillance (Coyote) and direct fire support (MGS - Stryker). The armour will also take control of TOW as a direct fire resource and also ADATS which is giving up its LLAD role for primary role of direct fire and ISTAR. Both assets will soon be under control of the armoured (reorganization of the LdSH(RC)).
The artillery seems to lack direction as to where we want to go. Mortars are not the primary role of the artillery rather it is simply a secondary role to be created as required. Certainly the M109 are on the chopping block however, I believe there is a plan to replace them with a LAV III variant mounting a 155 mm gun for indirect fire. I do not believe they will be replaced on a one for one basis.
There are other plans for an increase in locating capability and perhaps missle technology to provide a improved range capability. Not sure where this stands...
I always saw artillery playing a key role in ISTAR (eyes and ears on the battlefield) however, it seems we have been superceded by the other arms and we are rapidly moving into obscurity.
We need a vision in an political and military environment that does not require massive amounts of firepower. The answer becomes what should our role be for regular and reserve?
I hope we can develop some discussion .. maybe an article for the ADTB.
I think the artillery world is suffering from a lack of direction of where we want to go. I also believe (as I have mentioned before) that the Regular and Reserve components of the artillery are moving further apart and weakening us further still.
Over the next ten years we will see a reduction of the armour and particularly the artillery into supporting roles for the infantry. The armour is losing its ability to conduct offensive operations and attempting to find a niche for it self in surveillance (Coyote) and direct fire support (MGS - Stryker). The armour will also take control of TOW as a direct fire resource and also ADATS which is giving up its LLAD role for primary role of direct fire and ISTAR. Both assets will soon be under control of the armoured (reorganization of the LdSH(RC)).
The artillery seems to lack direction as to where we want to go. Mortars are not the primary role of the artillery rather it is simply a secondary role to be created as required. Certainly the M109 are on the chopping block however, I believe there is a plan to replace them with a LAV III variant mounting a 155 mm gun for indirect fire. I do not believe they will be replaced on a one for one basis.
There are other plans for an increase in locating capability and perhaps missle technology to provide a improved range capability. Not sure where this stands...
I always saw artillery playing a key role in ISTAR (eyes and ears on the battlefield) however, it seems we have been superceded by the other arms and we are rapidly moving into obscurity.
We need a vision in an political and military environment that does not require massive amounts of firepower. The answer becomes what should our role be for regular and reserve?
I hope we can develop some discussion .. maybe an article for the ADTB.
- Reaction score
- 6,542
- Points
- 1,360
Gunner,
As you know I‘ve been out for some time and,truth be known, havent followed things that much. The one thing you said that struck home was the intel. part of the Artillery. As you stated massive amounts of firepower are not being used right now in our role as primarily peacekeepers, etc. However maybe we could take a larger part of the intel. gathering scheme that would allow us to practice the system we have set up and still keep the skills just in case our firepower is required in some future Ops.
Put some thoughts up here and maybe some of the men/officers who would‘nt speak up via normal channels might be willing to put something here. Can‘t hurt and ..com‘on you know it‘s coming, what‘s a ADTB?
As you know I‘ve been out for some time and,truth be known, havent followed things that much. The one thing you said that struck home was the intel. part of the Artillery. As you stated massive amounts of firepower are not being used right now in our role as primarily peacekeepers, etc. However maybe we could take a larger part of the intel. gathering scheme that would allow us to practice the system we have set up and still keep the skills just in case our firepower is required in some future Ops.
Put some thoughts up here and maybe some of the men/officers who would‘nt speak up via normal channels might be willing to put something here. Can‘t hurt and ..com‘on you know it‘s coming, what‘s a ADTB?
- Reaction score
- 18
- Points
- 530
Further to that, we were always told that Arty Comms was the quickest and most efficient - perhaps from the net structures, and influence of fire discipline? Anyway, assuming that‘s not chest pounding or old wive‘s tale - I would think the same principles would apply to Intel..
What about MLRS? Has that ever been considered, or does it not fit into our structure?
What about MLRS? Has that ever been considered, or does it not fit into our structure?
- Reaction score
- 6,542
- Points
- 1,360
I hate you guys with all the initials. :crybaby:
- Reaction score
- 6,542
- Points
- 1,360
...now see" big bunch of tubes", I can understand.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 230
ADTB = Army Doctrine and Tactics Bulletin
How about setting up OP Bty/Regt for Intel and Target Acquisition (TA). However we should never lose our role as Fire Support Coordinators. Lose that, might's as well grab our rifles and become grunts.
We cannot afford to lose the skill sets we have now just because they are not the flavour of the month. Time and time again it has been proven that Artillery are the only ones that can give 24/7 all weather fire support. It is up to us as a Regiment to keep reminding everyone that will listen and those that don‘t, not to forget this fact.
How about setting up OP Bty/Regt for Intel and Target Acquisition (TA). However we should never lose our role as Fire Support Coordinators. Lose that, might's as well grab our rifles and become grunts.
We cannot afford to lose the skill sets we have now just because they are not the flavour of the month. Time and time again it has been proven that Artillery are the only ones that can give 24/7 all weather fire support. It is up to us as a Regiment to keep reminding everyone that will listen and those that don‘t, not to forget this fact.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 230
This was lost due to the blackout so I‘ll throw it out again.
Just a small thing, but artillery have detachments, not crews.
As to the OP Bty/Regts, I would foresee their job as the same as now but also increased ability for TA for all natures of ordnance from mortars to fast air, and the gathering of battlefield intelligence. I haven‘t quite thought the whole thing through as yet, so if someone else wants to jump in and expand the idea, feel free.
Dumb rounds will always have a place in the Arty as they are a fire and forget system that is capable of functioning in all natures and all times. Indirect fire support must remain one of our primary missions and a key role. What other roles should we adopt/adapt to? As mentioned earlier, the Arty comms net is one of the fastest within a BG Group. We should capitalize on that, and OP Bty can be tied into that. MLRS are not the way to go. Too expensive, and in a lot of cases like hitting a mosquito with a sledgehammer. As well the ammo expense alone will put us in the same boat as the AD guys who only fire a handful of live msl a yr.
As far as I know our mission hasn‘t changed from "the role of the field artillery is to assist in the defeat of the enemy with indirect fire as part of the all arms battle". Call me old fashioned, but the theory of Indirect Fire is a science, and something we cannot lose. However this doesn‘t mean we can‘t be assigned other roles and missions such as - you fill in the blank. I know there are a lot of Gunners out there, so what should our
other mission and roles be within the new army. (we already have some of these)
UAVs being an extension of OPs (battlefield intel and TA)
Counter Battery/Mortar (by all means) becoming increasingly important
Fire Support Control at all levels from Combat team to Corp and to include everything from Battleships to mortars
Weapons effects experts
Integral in all combat command comms nets
Operating alt CPs at all levels
Just a small thing, but artillery have detachments, not crews.
As to the OP Bty/Regts, I would foresee their job as the same as now but also increased ability for TA for all natures of ordnance from mortars to fast air, and the gathering of battlefield intelligence. I haven‘t quite thought the whole thing through as yet, so if someone else wants to jump in and expand the idea, feel free.
Dumb rounds will always have a place in the Arty as they are a fire and forget system that is capable of functioning in all natures and all times. Indirect fire support must remain one of our primary missions and a key role. What other roles should we adopt/adapt to? As mentioned earlier, the Arty comms net is one of the fastest within a BG Group. We should capitalize on that, and OP Bty can be tied into that. MLRS are not the way to go. Too expensive, and in a lot of cases like hitting a mosquito with a sledgehammer. As well the ammo expense alone will put us in the same boat as the AD guys who only fire a handful of live msl a yr.
As far as I know our mission hasn‘t changed from "the role of the field artillery is to assist in the defeat of the enemy with indirect fire as part of the all arms battle". Call me old fashioned, but the theory of Indirect Fire is a science, and something we cannot lose. However this doesn‘t mean we can‘t be assigned other roles and missions such as - you fill in the blank. I know there are a lot of Gunners out there, so what should our
other mission and roles be within the new army. (we already have some of these)
UAVs being an extension of OPs (battlefield intel and TA)
Counter Battery/Mortar (by all means) becoming increasingly important
Fire Support Control at all levels from Combat team to Corp and to include everything from Battleships to mortars
Weapons effects experts
Integral in all combat command comms nets
Operating alt CPs at all levels
- Reaction score
- 8,324
- Points
- 1,160
http://www.ets-news.com/fire_power.htm
I came across this quote while surfing and hit this article on the Future of British Firepower.
To my way of thinking if you apply the math, 5 times the area and ten times the effect for half the manpower that equates to a single gun det doing the work of a full regiment. Logistically it would mean that one man would do the job of the five hundred it would take to supply as divisional arty group. Or put another way a troop is expected to influence the battle to the same extent as a 3 regiment group with a dedicated logistics battalion would.
What do the gunners here think? Dreaming in technicolour?
On the other hand even if they get to the point that a battery replaces two regiments what are the implications for the RCA?
It doesn‘t sound as if they are going to need as many gunners per tonne of earth moved.
How much earth do we need moved?
Cheers, Kirkhill
- Reaction score
- 6,542
- Points
- 1,360
So maybe we cut our losses and go down to one Regt. and train independently. Sort of become free agents and send personal to whatever unit requires our services at the time?
Feedback?
Feedback?
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,141
- Points
- 1,010
Not to pick but the US call it HEP (High Explosive Plastic) and Canada/UK call it HESH (High Explosive Squash Head)...both the same thing.
Happy Birthday
Happy Birthday
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,992
- Points
- 1,160
Thanks
I have always seen the two mentioned and wonder how much was different. The British still believe in HESH quite a bit, and it would certainly do well in an Urban environment.
I noticed in the gallery, that the gunner in the AT drills were using practise HESH rounds. Man we never got to see any of the other cool rounds, just HE, with VT, mechanical time and smoke. Would have been fun to fire some live HESH.
I have always seen the two mentioned and wonder how much was different. The British still believe in HESH quite a bit, and it would certainly do well in an Urban environment.
I noticed in the gallery, that the gunner in the AT drills were using practise HESH rounds. Man we never got to see any of the other cool rounds, just HE, with VT, mechanical time and smoke. Would have been fun to fire some live HESH.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 230
We just fired some recently. It nice having the tracer as opposed to following a fast moving back dot. Unfortunately we only fired at wood targets, so can not attest to the effects.
My anti-tank drill for the C1 Battery would have been fire WP at the bastards and get the puck out.
My anti-tank drill for the C1 Battery would have been fire WP at the bastards and get the puck out.
Similar threads
