C3 Howitzer Replacement

[Kirkhill]

Marines Activate First Tomahawk Battery - USNI News

The Marine Corps stood up its first-ever Tomahawk cruise missile battery at Camp Pendleton, Calif., last week. Alpha Battery, which falls under the 11th Marine Regiment, is the first of three Long-Range Missile (LMSL) batteries that the service plans to procure starting in FY 2024.The Long-Range...

news.usni.org

The Marine Corps stood up its first-ever Tomahawk cruise missile battery at Camp Pendleton, Calif., last week.

Alpha Battery, which falls under the 11th Marine Regiment, is the first of three Long-Range Missile (LMSL) batteries that the service plans to procure starting in FY 2024.The Long-Range Fires Launcher will use the same ROGUE-Fires carrier of the Navy/Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) and mount a single Mk.41 vertical launch system cell, according to budgetary documents. Each LMSL battery will have 16 launchers, former Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger said in a statement before the Senate Appropriations Committee.

So the Battery will have 16 Ready to Launch Tomahawks mounted on the same vehicles as the NSM batteries.





I was going to ask you lot to forgive me for harping..... but Nah..

So the Norwegians have got a common Command and Control system that works with virtually all NATO standard SAMs, as well as NSMs as well as MRLS missiles and rockets. The Germans and the Swiss have a similar set up for VSHORAD missiles and cannons. The Marines are launching NSMs and Tomahawks from unmanned light trucks.

Doesn't all this suggest, at the very least, that 4 GS Regiment's remit could be drawn a bit broader than just AD and that it could/should also take on the LRPF role that was discussed for it a decade ago?

And I still think that adding a missile/uav battery to each of the Horse () regiments makes sense. Unless every Cavalry and Infantry unit is to get their own MSHORAD troop or platoon.

 

[FJAG]

Doesn't all this suggest, at the very least, that 4 GS Regiment's remit could be drawn a bit broader than just AD and that it could/should also take on the LRPF role that was discussed for it a decade ago?

No. I'm good with 4 AD Regt. But I think its time for a 3 Regt (GS) RCA. I think the AD and GS functions need separate command and control elements at a bn/regt level. Both are needed. So 1, 2, 5 CS, 3 GS, 4 AD (and at least two more ResF regts - 6 CS from Levis and 7 CS from Toronto to make the numbering work out neatly )

And I still think that adding a missile/uav battery to each of the Horse () regiments makes sense. Unless every Cavalry and Infantry unit is to get their own MSHORAD troop or platoon.

This I agree with. I think a CS regt needs one gun battery per manoeuvre bn/regt and a GS battery.

IMHO, the FOO bty needs FOOs, JTACs and mUAVs. The GS battery should be multi launch precision rockets/UCAVs.

With the mUAVs gone to the FOO Bty, I think the STA battery can be reduced to a troop of radars and longer range sUAVs; I'm undecided if it should be part of the FOO bty or the GS bty and am leaning to the latter so that the GS battery forms the STACC and concentrates on counterfire tasks in depth while the FOO bty concentrates on targets in close support of the manoeuvre units.

 

[Kirkhill]

No. I'm good with 4 AD Regt. But I think its time for a 3 Regt (GS) RCA. I think the AD and GS functions need separate command and control elements at a bn/regt level. Both are needed. So 1, 2, 5 CS, 3 GS, 4 AD (and at least two more ResF regts - 6 CS from Levis and 7 CS from Toronto to make the numbering work out neatly )

This I agree with. I think a CS regt needs one gun battery per manoeuvre bn/regt and a GS battery.

IMHO, the FOO bty needs FOOs, JTACs and mUAVs. The GS battery should be multi launch precision rockets/UCAVs.

With the mUAVs gone to the FOO Bty, I think the STA battery can be reduced to a troop of radars and longer range sUAVs; I'm undecided if it should be part of the FOO bty or the GS bty and am leaning to the latter so that the GS battery forms the STACC and concentrates on counterfire tasks in depth while the FOO bty concentrates on targets in close support of the manoeuvre units.

So, if we have three 2+1 Mech Brigades (2 LAV + 1 CAV) then that suggests to me a need for 9 Gun Batteries and 3 GS-LRPF Batteries as well as 3 FOOTAC Batteries.
(I am intentionally keeping the Lt Battalions out of the structure for the reasons mentioned previously).
We are also talking about a new GS-LRPF Regiment with 3 or 4 Batteries, a fully resourced Regular AD Regiment (C-RAM? MSHORAD? VSHORAD? SHORAD? MRAD?) and two Reserve Regiments (Gun or GS or AD)...

Can you get there from here with, I think you said, 2200 Regs and 2200 Res PYs? With 10 gunners per gun?

 

[FJAG]

So, if we have three 2+1 Mech Brigades (2 LAV + 1 CAV) then that suggests to me a need for 9 Gun Batteries and 3 GS-LRPF Batteries as well as 3 FOOTAC Batteries.
(I am intentionally keeping the Lt Battalions out of the structure for the reasons mentioned previously).
We are also talking about a new GS-LRPF Regiment with 3 or 4 Batteries, a fully resourced Regular AD Regiment (C-RAM? MSHORAD? VSHORAD? SHORAD? MRAD?) and two Reserve Regiments (Gun or GS or AD)...

Can you get there from here with, I think you said, 2200 Regs and 2200 Res PYs? With 10 gunners per gun?

In short - yes. Brute math at an average of 550 per regiment times 7 regiments is 3,850 which leaves around 500 for the RCAS and other functions.

I don't use a 2 LAV + 1 Cav construct. With 5 CS regts the hint there is 5 manoeuvre brigades (but that's another whole story [and a different thread])

Incidentally here's an interesting little article on automated guns. The author raises some of the issues that I share. There are weak links in these systems that need fixing.

Automated Howitzers – Pros and Cons » Wavell Room

Automated howitzers - The 'Gunners Dream' - balancing the past and the future when trying to employ these new systems.

wavellroom.com

 

[markppcli]

And I still think that adding a missile/uav battery to each of the Horse () regiments makes sense.

There is one

 

[Kirkhill]

There is one

Can you expand on that?

 

[Kirkhill]

In short - yes. Brute math at an average of 550 per regiment times 7 regiments is 3,850 which leaves around 500 for the RCAS and other functions.

I don't use a 2 LAV + 1 Cav construct. With 5 CS regts the hint there is 5 manoeuvre brigades (but that's another whole story [and a different thread])

Incidentally here's an interesting little article on automated guns. The author raises some of the issues that I share. There are weak links in these systems that need fixing.

What does your RRCA look like when fully kitted out? Hardwarewise.

See my belief is that Canada's defence should be artillery-centric. I want my National Defence to be able to destroy anything that looks as if it might cross our borders and do damage. In my lazy mind that means, from a standing start, being able to launch an effective response and destroy that threat before it does damage. Consequently I value armed aircraft and ships on patrol. I also value Immediate Reaction Units and the Special Forces.

I am ambivalent about the Mech Brigades because I don't see them being able to launch effectively. Artillery focused on supporting those brigades, to my mind doesn't fully exploit the capabilities available to the modern artillery.

It doesn't really bother me what platform launches what ordnance. My bottom line is I want my National Defence to start with comprehensive Situational Awareness to identify threats and then have the ability to defeat any threat, no matter how improbable, at any time. And in my mind that ability is tied to throwing ordnance. Troops on the ground are first and foremost sensors. The Canadian Rangers are 24/7 sensors. A Light Coy is a deployable package of sensors. A Mech Battle Group is an enduring package of sensors.

So how much can be done without actually having to deploy a Mechanized/Motorized/Armoured Division?

I am combining Israel's Iron Dome umbrella with a Mech Brigade as just another autonomous missile to be launched to defeat a threat at a distance.

 

[KevinB]

What does your RRCA look like when fully kitted out? Hardwarewise.

See my belief is that Canada's defence should be artillery-centric. I want my National Defence to be able to destroy anything that looks as if it might cross our borders and do damage. In my lazy mind that means, from a standing start, being able to launch an effective response and destroy that threat before it does damage. Consequently I value armed aircraft and ships on patrol. I also value Immediate Reaction Units and the Special Forces.

I am ambivalent about the Mech Brigades because I don't see them being able to launch effectively. Artillery focused on supporting those brigades, to my mind doesn't fully exploit the capabilities available to the modern artillery.

It doesn't really bother me what platform launches what ordnance. My bottom line is I want my National Defence to start with comprehensive Situational Awareness to identify threats and then have the ability to defeat any threat, no matter how improbable, at any time. And in my mind that ability is tied to throwing ordnance. Troops on the ground are first and foremost sensors. The Canadian Rangers are 24/7 sensors. A Light Coy is a deployable package of sensors. A Mech Battle Group is an enduring package of sensors.

So how much can be done without actually having to deploy a Mechanized/Motorized/Armoured Division?

I am combining Israel's Iron Dome umbrella with a Mech Brigade as just another autonomous missile to be launched to defeat a threat at a distance.

I really wonder what the sky is in your world at times.
What threat do you see that needs Iron Dome?

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

What does your RRCA look like when fully kitted out? Hardwarewise.

See my belief is that Canada's defence should be artillery-centric. I want my National Defence to be able to destroy anything that looks as if it might cross our borders and do damage. In my lazy mind that means, from a standing start, being able to launch an effective response and destroy that threat before it does damage. Consequently I value armed aircraft and ships on patrol. I also value Immediate Reaction Units and the Special Forces.

I am ambivalent about the Mech Brigades because I don't see them being able to launch effectively. Artillery focused on supporting those brigades, to my mind doesn't fully exploit the capabilities available to the modern artillery.

It doesn't really bother me what platform launches what ordnance. My bottom line is I want my National Defence to start with comprehensive Situational Awareness to identify threats and then have the ability to defeat any threat, no matter how improbable, at any time. And in my mind that ability is tied to throwing ordnance. Troops on the ground are first and foremost sensors. The Canadian Rangers are 24/7 sensors. A Light Coy is a deployable package of sensors. A Mech Battle Group is an enduring package of sensors.

So how much can be done without actually having to deploy a Mechanized/Motorized/Armoured Division?

I am combining Israel's Iron Dome umbrella with a Mech Brigade as just another autonomous missile to be launched to defeat a threat at a distance.

So the CAF is yours? You are making some grand pronouncements. On what military or defence policy experience are you basing these sweeping declarations?

It is clear to me that you have a warped lack understanding when you say that National Defence must be able to identify and defeat any threat, no matter how improbable, at any time. Resources are not infinite and if we try to defend against everything we end up defending nothing. Do you have some examples of improbable threats that you demand we be able to defeat at any time?

We do have to be able to react and adapt to emerging threats or ones that we thought less likely in our calculations, but that is part of risk. We are not always going to get it 100% correct. Such is life in an uncertain world.

Everyone is a sensor, but everyone is not merely reduced to that role. The close fight still matters.

 

[Kirkhill]

I really wonder what the sky is in your world at times.
What threat do you see that needs Iron Dome?

I don't see a threat today. Today the sky is clear. Will it be clear tomorrow?
As I said I want the ability to defeat any threat. At very least I want a plan. Just like these ones...

War Plan Red - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Defence Scheme No. 1 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Improbable is not the same as impossible.

 

[Kirkhill]

So the CAF is yours? You are making some grand pronouncements. On what military or defence policy experience are you basing these sweeping declarations?

It is clear to me that you have a warped lack understanding when you say that National Defence must be able to identify and defeat any threat, no matter how improbable, at any time. Resources are not infinite and if we try to defend against everything we end up defending nothing. Do you have some examples of improbable threats that you demand we be able to defeat at any time?

We do have to be able to react and adapt to emerging threats or ones that we thought less likely in our calculations, but that is part of risk. We are not always going to get it 100% correct. Such is life in an uncertain world.

Everyone is a sensor, but everyone is not merely reduced to that role. The close fight still matters.

Sorry T2B but the interest is personal.

It is my wife and kids that you are defending. It is my tax dollars that my government is purloining to that end.

Sensors include tripwires.

Tripwire force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

PS - being aware of all threats is not the same as reacting to all threats. Having the ability to react to all threats is another thing that can and must take into consideration the realities of available resources and the probability of the threat becoming an act.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

There is one

There was one, one of my early WO's was in it

 

[Kirkhill]

It is clear to me that you have a warped lack understanding when you say that National Defence must be able to identify and defeat any threat, no matter how improbable, at any time. Resources are not infinite and if we try to defend against everything we end up defending nothing. Do you have some examples of improbable threats that you demand we be able to defeat at any time?

Concrete examples? You mean other than the threats that the US, NorthCom, Norad and our NATO and Arctic allies are asking for us to cover? Everything from little green men to locally launched drone swarms to cruise missiles launched from Q-Ships?

We do have to be able to react and adapt to emerging threats or ones that we thought less likely in our calculations, but that is part of risk. We are not always going to get it 100% correct. Such is life in an uncertain world.

And nobody is arguing that or demanding that.

Everyone is a sensor, but everyone is not merely reduced to that role. The close fight still matters.

Again, nobody is arguing that. My problem is that we spend an awful lot of time worrying about the structure and requirements of the Mech Brigade which ultimately will only manage an Area of Ops and Interest of 5000 km2 (50x100) and will likely only survive in battle for three days, a week at most.

Ukraine started its war with 24 Reg Brigades and 24 Reserve Brigades and added volunteer brigades, police brigades, assault brigades.....

5000 km2 / 10,000,000 km2 is 0.05% of Canada's land mass or a bit less than the area of Greater Toronto (7,124 km2).

Our Mech Brigades will not defend Canada or even part of Canada. That doesn't mean I don't think we should have them. Of course we should have them.

But to be blunt I am more inclined to rely on the Air Force, the Navy, the Mounties, the Rangers and the various technical services and specials to actually defend Canada. The Army has its place but I am not convinced of the validity of an infantry-centric Department of National Defence.

....

And as to my voice, I am just one voice in 40,000,000 with an interest in National Defence - whether all 40,000,000 of them know it or not.
I choose to raise my voice.

As of June 16, 2023, there are now 40 million Canadians

Canada's population reaches 40 million

As of June 16, 2023, there are now 40 million Canadians! This is a historic milestone for Canada and certainly cause for celebration. It is also a great opportunity to look back on the country's growth over the years, and to reflect on the future.......

www.statcan.gc.ca

 

[Kirkhill]

There was one, one of my early WO's was in it

There was one. Indeed.

 

[Old Sweat]

Very early in our nuclear age, based on the licence plates and the dress of the troops in bush dress and US pattern helmets. The latter dates the shot to no earlier than mid-1960 when we switched helmets, while combat was not issued until circa-1964.

 

[Kirkhill]

Some commonalities...

 

[KevinB]

I still believe a credible expeditionary force is much better in terms of bang for one’s buck than putting an Iron Dome type setup over Canada.

1) Israel has both a small land mass and a very credible threat currently they can justify that sort of provisioning.

2) Canada has an enormous land mass, that doesn’t deal with incoming rockets, mortars, and missiles.

NORAD watches the skies and Continental BMD is a goal. However the Missiles for BMD aren’t the ones you are talking about - your talking about Short and Medium Range Missiles, those do better on a CSC or F-35 or LAV than a fixed site somewhere in Canada.

Frankly yes a PreDeployed CMBG does a lot more good for Canadian Defense and the people of Canada that a few hundred Medium Range SAM’s would do.
The whole goal of Expeditionary Forces is to ensure the war doesn’t come home.

 

[Kirkhill]

I still believe a credible expeditionary force is much better in terms of bang for one’s buck than putting an Iron Dome type setup over Canada.

1) Israel has both a small land mass and a very credible threat currently they can justify that sort of provisioning.

2) Canada has an enormous land mass, that doesn’t deal with incoming rockets, mortars, and missiles.

NORAD watches the skies and Continental BMD is a goal. However the Missiles for BMD aren’t the ones you are talking about - your talking about Short and Medium Range Missiles, those do better on a CSC or F-35 or LAV than a fixed site somewhere in Canada.

Frankly yes a PreDeployed CMBG does a lot more good for Canadian Defense and the people of Canada that a few hundred Medium Range SAM’s would do.
The whole goal of Expeditionary Forces is to ensure the war doesn’t come home.

NORAD does supply a dome.
Canada doesn't need an Iron Dome everywhere.
As @Tango2Bravo pointed out trying to defend everything results in defending nothing.

On the other hand the skeleton of three Iron Domes over the Greater Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver Areas, (7,000 + 4,000 + 2,000 = 13,000 km2 vs Israel's 22,000 km2) should not be an impractical task. We don't need as many launchers as the Israelis, at this time, nor as many missiles as the Israelis, at this time. But the sensors and Fire Direction Centres could be in place with a couple of Troops in each area to deal with the improbable, in my books, feels like a reasonable investment.

After all, you lot not only have ICBM interceptors and SM6s you also have Patriots and Avengers, many of which are manned by your Reserves. Just in case. I am merely suggesting the same capabilities for Canada. As a priority. And the stuff we don't use. The FDCs and Radars and EOs and missiles in storage - that can always be made available to friends in need, with or without Canadian soldiers attached. Just like we can make a Mech Brigade available to a friend in need if we don't need it at home.

The goal of the Expeditionary Force is to ensure the war doesn't come home. But sometimes strategies fail. Sometimes the forwards can't keep the ball in the other guy's end. And then it falls to the defence and the goal keeper and the midfield has to come home.

 

[Kirkhill]

You know Kevin, sometimes I feel that you are so focused on finding auxiliaries for Uncle Sam's expeditions that you forget that Canada has needs of its own. Just like the US has needs of its own and which it attends to with the Coast Guard, the National Guard and the Air National Guard.

 

[markppcli]

There was one, one of my early WO's was in it

Every STA Bty has UAS, and we have UAS in 4 GS. I think @Kirkhill had originally typed UAS Bty and then added missile? Or maybe I just hadn’t had my coffe. Regardless STA Bty’s operate UAS as does 4 GS.