• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Fire Discipline Challenge

GnyHwy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Let's go through all your options.

A. 6400 is not a convention and should never be a convention becuase it could cause grave error.
B. I'm not positive cause I haven't seen one in awhile but the target record book wouldn't contain the observers direction in it nor does IFCCS store it(target records are meant to be kept for use from any OP location and the original observers direction should not influence it).  If the observers location hasn't changed you could potentially use the old direction but, I wouldn't. Leaving,
C. A quick 5 second verify seems the only safe and viable option.
 

GnyHwy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Petard,

You lost me on the Dr. Stranglove quote.  I wiki'd it and I suppose I should watch it some time. 

I don't think anyone is trying to reinvent the wheel but I hope you agree the book is outdated.  As well if possible CIG directives need to be put in and any new procedures or TTP's should possibly be added as also.
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
The point about the Dr Stangelove quote is that in the movie the whole idea of the Soviets new weapon, the doomsday bomb, to prevent war through fear was lost because nobody knew about it until it was too late; they kept a secret too long, and ironically the bomb lives up to its name.
 
I'm not saying its a bad idea to revise those two key documents, I'm just saying the School is being somewhat secretive about it, and instead they need to keep other stakeholders (projects like LCSS, IFCSS, FOO/FAC Modernization) informed about what they intend to do, or they are going to get an unexpected and frustrating result.

They need to do this soon before people like the engineers in LSEC go too far down a path assuming their current references are accurate, only to have the school release a new point of reference requiring the delay of software that itself took a long time to develop. Given time and money constraints the new software might not be as easy to modify as the user would like, consequently resulting in work arounds etc, and possibly yet more confusion.

As for the CIG directives, the intent of those has always been to act as an interim fix until the appropriate publications could be amended, as it is with so many things, that's been easier said than done.

It will be interesting to see what the school is focusing on modifying, in the past I've seen too much effort made by people to change basic things, like fire discipline, when they really didn't understand basic gunnery principles or why things evolved the way they did in the first place, but hopefully this time Fire Discipline itself will be largely left alone and the main effort will be to deal with changes to technical capabilities and organization, and their corresponding responsibilities and tasks.
 

GnyHwy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
You raise some very good points of possible repercussions and it will no doubt be a daunting task. I don't think the intent of the school is to keep this secret, it's just only in the initial stages and has a looooooong way to go.  I should be no secret and maybe I'm out of line but, I've told all available when given the chance.
As well, I don't believe anyone thinks Fire D needs to be changed with the exception of some procedural issues because of new equipment (OPV, IFCCS being 2 big ones). Last year 2 books were drafted that have not been approved yet(calibration and a new instruments book).  No doubt those books will influence this and vice versa.  I am certain there are many good ideas out there from older soldiers and younger ones as well.

This will no doubt be a long and painstaking process where the %100 solution is impossible but I believe if we can even get to %80 it will still be better than where we're at now.  Most likely by the time this is done we'll be ready for another revision. LOL
 

GnyHwy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Here's one that is a bit more complicated.

During a Regt Fire Plan a BC gives his adjustment O's.  Within his adjustment O's he has ordered some Tgts as record for gun data and some as record for coords.

What does that imply for the FOO involved?
What does that imply for the CP? and;
What does that imply for 0?
 

GnyHwy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
How come no one has tried my FD question?  This one is pretty grey, which I thought was the intention.

Your turn Cleared Hot.



 

Harrison

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ArtyNewbie said:
ok here we go.

fire msn comes down like this

FM Bty
CA1234
5 Rds FFE

The tgt was recorded within 2 hours and as such the data from the GPOT was fired.

The OP comes back with a correction A50 5 rds FFE

No direction is given, when calculating the correction do you
A. Apply Dir 6400 by convention, the OP is mounted in the LAV
B. Apply the Dir the TGT was recorded at
C. Send "Verify Direction" to the OP


I would go with C. Send Verify Direction to the OP.
 

vonGarvin

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
19
Points
430
All you gunners slay me.  I mean, really, for every operation, from Waterloo to Medusa, EVERY artillery order can be summed up thus:
MISSION: # Bty will get in range in order to shoot when told
EXECUTION: 
Concept of Operations:
Intent: I intend to get in range of the enemy
Scheme of Manoeuvre:
2 Phases
Phase 1: Get in Range
Phase 2: Shoot when told
Main Effort: Shooting when told
End State: Moved within range, shot when told

The rest is all details that we in the combat arms don't really give a rat's ass about, including we mortarmen!

(FYI: Combat Arms = Armour and Infantry.  Artillery = Combat Support Arm)

:stirpot:
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
maybe its a good thing the Infantry gave up the mortars to gunners then!
:pop:
 

vonGarvin

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
19
Points
430
Petard said:
maybe its a good thing the Infantry gave up the mortars to gunners then!
:pop:
:rofl:

Perhaps!  (though the highest level we shot was "Fire Mission Platoon", though of course the FSCC would have to know how to handle bigger missions, should that need arise.
 

Michael OLeary

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1
Points
410
Petard said:
maybe its a good thing the Infantry gave up the mortars to gunners then!
:pop:

Well, it did decrease the average range of wingers by the Guns.    >:D
 

GnyHwy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
You most certainly can use HE to mark a target, and the more the merrier. 

Although standard mark missions are done with smoke or illumination, a large volume of HE hitting the ground would also be visible from the air.

I say. Why wait 30 min for a plane to drop when you can have the guns in 3.

P.S. For Techno, there at least 2 weeks more training involved past the get in range and shoot when told part of the TP.  ;)
 

vonGarvin

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
19
Points
430
GnyHwy said:
P.S. For Techno, there at least 2 weeks more training involved past the get in range and shoot when told part of the TP.  ;)
Is that where future Artillery Officers learn how to be arrogant? 
(Of course, this only applies to the Horse Artillery!)

;D


 

Old Sweat

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
57
Points
480
Technoviking said:
Is that where future Artillery Officers learn how to be arrogant? 
(Of course, this only applies to the Horse Artillery!)

;D
It's not being arrogant where we are always right.
 

Michael OLeary

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1
Points
410
So, this "place" where Artillery officers are always right, can you point it out to me on this diagram?  >:D



 

Goober

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
GnyHwy said:
You most certainly can use HE to mark a target, and the more the merrier. 

Although standard mark missions are done with smoke or illumination, a large volume of HE hitting the ground would also be visible from the air.

I say. Why wait 30 min for a plane to drop when you can have the guns in 3.

P.S. For Techno, there at least 2 weeks more training involved past the get in range and shoot when told part of the TP.  ;)

Marking with HE is an effective method, but I challenge you to find the book reference.
 
Top