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

Time To Dust Off Our M109???

Goober

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The LG1 is for training purposes, it won't see another deployment. We have new 777's coming enough to outfit a bty, hopefully they will be here soon.

As a note, the M777 does use the M776 cannon tube, however, the A6 paladin, does not. The M776 cannon tube is actually, a slightly shaved down version of the A6 paladin's tube. They are basically the same tube, but not exactly.
 

Jammer

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The 777s were invaluable during Medusa, however I'm sure the Gunners were salivating for the 109s when the Dutch showed up on the gun lin with thier Pz-2000s.
 

Gunnerlove

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
105 vs 155

5.56 vs 7.62

Different round for different applications. 105 still has a lighter weight (gun and ammunition), higher rate of fire, reduced manning requirements, and reduced danger radius. Kind of like C7 vs C1, they are different tools with different strengths and weaknesses.
 

time expired

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PETARD
          Thanks for that very informative post,it answered my question.I still wonder about the
requirement for pinpoint accuracy in an indirect fire weapon, when the object of indirect fire is
to cover a beaten zone,either to kill the enemy or to deny him access to an area of the battle
field.I find it even more difficult to understand when in a war situation with no front lines this
accuracy bought with the vulnerability of the gun crews.
          I guess i am just an old cold war warrior that just loved the old M109.
                          Regards
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
Goober said:
The LG1 is for training purposes, it won't see another deployment. We have new 777's coming enough to outfit a bty, hopefully they will be here soon.

As a note, the M777 does use the M776 cannon tube, however, the A6 paladin, does not. The M776 cannon tube is actually, a slightly shaved down version of the A6 paladin's tube. They are basically the same tube, but not exactly.

I didn't say they did, actually the Paladin, officially, has an M284 barrel, but it depends on who you talk to, for example there is also a hybrid M109A5 UK version which has an M185 barrel with a modified forcing cone to allow it to somewhat fire the higher range of charges. I do recall clearly during a recent tour in Watervliet the Paladins' barrel being described as an M777 barrel, and the M777 gun having an M776 barrel.
But this doesn't really matter
As for the accuracy at the expense of the safety of the gun dets, I would agree to a point that a risk is being taken for when the gun groups move by road, but...
One of the assumptions that had to be made in the early summer of 05 for the Afghanistan deployment was that a high degree of operational mobility would be required. What do you do? If you're going to put more weight, somewhat literally, into protection then what you end up with is something more like a tank, sometimes that's what needed, but in this case it could not be done without sacrificing operational mobility. Not only that but it was expected that the Artillery was going to be required to support dismounted Ops, sometimes with mortars, but other times with guns, and still be able to shift locations over very long distances, sometimes requiring Helops. The Canadian M109 was not going to be able to do that very well, and it still won't in that type of theatre, this is for the simple reason it doesn't move very fast, and there isn't anything that's going to carry it there faster to where its needed. We wouldn't be helping any supported arm if we couldn't get there as fast as they do. The main risk is with the HLVW, and it will soon be going, but in the mean while, yes we roll the dice with them for the sake of operational mobility.
There are places where an SP gun is better, IMO Afghanistan is not one of them. That is unless you intend to "hole up" in a very small AO, or you have a capability to dominate a lot of terrain. I don't think we're there yet.
But I say this because, IMO, some of so-called advantages of systems such as PzH 2000 with its multiple round impact and shoot and scoot capability are hindrances in a theatre were you're going to have to rely on an NSE, sometimes many many Kms away.
Ammunition can be at a premium, and most missions do not require that many rounds to be fired anyway, especially if the target location is accurately known. This scoot capability? From what? The best gun position is one where you can see next week's weather coming. For all their bells and whistles, most SP guns are very heavy and scooting anywhere might be a problem if they breakdown and recovery is needed.
Precision is needed to minimize collateral damage and permit very close, danger close, and you don't need that many rounds when they're that close because you have a pretty good idea where the enemy is then, but you do need confidence in the accuracy of the weapon system to achieve that, the M777 has it, the Canadian M109 does not.
So I would say, so far, the assumptions were correct, and that a towed gun does meet, with some risk, the Canadian capability requirements better than a self-propelled gun does for what was and is going on in Afghanistan.
As for more M777's coming to outfit a Bty, you know someone high up in ADMMat do you goober? 
 

geo

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Jammer said:
The 777s were invaluable during Medusa, however I'm sure the Gunners were salivating for the 109s when the Dutch showed up on the gun lin with thier Pz-2000s.

why would they be salivating?
why would our gunners be envious of the dutch guns?
The RCHA were the 1st users of the M777s to fire the guns in anger - methinks the dutch would be the ones that are envious - but that is just speculation on my part.

The M777 is airtransportable throughout Afghanistan.... the PZ2000 isn't.

Apples and oranges... apples and oranges
 

Jammer

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Speaking as one who was there, I can attest to the fact that yes,  the 777 is most definitely air transportable. but with out the where with all to move it that way ourselves it makes the matter moot.
The Pz 2000 on the other hand was able to move rather handily to keep up with our fire support needs.
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
This topic is just about beat to death now

There's no money to replace the M109 right now, the M109 wasn't going to even be considered for Afghanistan as is since it would not be able to achieve the range nor be able to fire precision ammunition required for this type of mission. It might come back, as is, no frills, simply because it doesn't look like anything is going to be able to replace it soon, but it might serve as a training tool, something to keep somewhat similar skill sets alive in case the distant replacement is somewhat similar (ie a Mech type of capability). There are still 24 of them available, and some parts, and some rapidly fading skills to do this.

Early in the planning stages for Op Archer (that soon became Athena, again) it was possible to convince some powers to be that at least the M777 was a viable compromise, that there was risk but it was the best fit considering all the possible demands, and there was only limited funds, certainly not enough to fund a SP gun, nor could one be acquired and implemented in time with all the associated tech training and parts costs, even if people believed at that time that an SP gun was a good idea; many didn't and so the M777 was an easier fit. In addition to all that, it needs to be remembered that there were a lot of other things on the "grocery list" that was needed too.
Incidentally jammer I saw the SS EPA that went to cabinet and the Treasury Board in the late summer of 05, I think I have a pretty good idea what the planners were thinking and why, in any case I will be able to see for myself soon enough, in theatre, what is working and what's not.

In the summer of 05 I don't think anybody envisioned the Afghanistan operation escalating like it has, but what decision makers at the time believed was needed has so far worked out well enough. Doctrine and Tactics had to be drastically modified to deal with what is going on there, and it is certainly straining the machine trying to meet the unexpected demands in manpower (3 independent gun groups and the stand up of unforeseen STA capability being foremost), but so far the mission is getting accomplished.

I still believe it is highly unlikely you will see any Canadian Selfpropelled gun deployed to Afghanistan

 

time expired

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PETARD
          Your absolutely right,we have beaten this subject to death and I agree with everthing you
have said particularly as regards the A-stan situation.My main concern was that given the
understandable preoccupation with our present conflict the ,in my mind, continuing requirement
for a SP replacement for the M109 will be forgotten and we may end up in same situation as we
find ourselves with the CH 47 Chinook helicopter.
                    Time expired OUT
                                Regards
 

Gunnerlove

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The M777 is airtransportable throughout Afghanistan.... the PZ2000 isn't.

Still a non issue as we can't do it, and have not needed to do it for reasons other than recovery (and no lift was available anyway).


We require a mixed arsenal, 81 and 120 mortars, both 105 and 155 in towed and SP. We have been cutting away at capabilities, and many people seem happy with the one new system (M777) because they have developed tunnel vision and can only see what is going on in one little country. We must prepare for the full spectrum of armed conflict as it has already been shown that we can make last minute purchases but they become an exercise in futility as we will not see products delivered and operational for years. 
 

Goober

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Petard said:
...As for more M777's coming to outfit a Bty, you know someone high up in ADMMat do you goober?   

Judging by your tone, it seems I offended you, if I did, it wasn't my intention. I don't know anyone in ADMMat, nor do I have to, to know more 777's are coming.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,751
Points
940
Petard said:
I still believe it is highly unlikely you will see any Canadian Selfpropelled gun deployed to Afghanistan

They said the same thing about the tanks, If the Taliban attempt to overun a gun position, then you might see a change in thinking.
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
8
Points
380
Goober said:
Judging by your tone, it seems I offended you, if I did, it wasn't my intention. I don't know anyone in ADMMat, nor do I have to, to know more 777's are coming.

There were articles on the purchase in the MSM a few weeks back
 

rampage800

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I've heard as well that there are more 777s coming, #'s still floating around but at one point I do think they were talking having upwards to 40 or so as an endstate. As for the Taliban over running a gun posn, well they aren't totally defenceless out there and still have the ability to mount the same wpns as they would on the 109s, half the battle is choosing the AMA into which they deploy and use their various wpn stand-off rges to their advantage. I don't think there is anyone out there in their right mind who would say that a 109 (ours) is more mechanically reliable then a HL, can you imagine a 109 breaking down on a road move,(which would happen) talk about a tempting tgt. :-\
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,751
Points
940
As I said, “Attempt” I suspect they will try to infiltrate as close as possible and then try to overwhelm a position if possible, if such an event where to happen and it was a close battle, you can bet they would be considering SP’s. a freshly rebuilt 109 would be reliable, a new SPG would be better, although even if they decided today to bring them over you would be looking at 3-6 months to get them back to running. It was good that the Armoured guys had been able to up armour some Leo’s and keep them operating, allowing them to respond quickly for the request for armour, perhaps a lesson the Artillery could take to heart
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
I've heard these rumours about more M777 but so far the only ones for sure that will be around for the next while are the original 12 that was planned. Those 12 were bought under a Foregin Military Sales agreement, we didn't procure this system like in the past with any long term commitment, it was very last minute and there are drawbacks to this. BTW those guns were meant for the USMC, selling them to us meant delaying delivery to those US units. Even in this case we were not guaranteed of getting what we asked for just because we asked, and had the expenditure approved by the G o C. But the original 6 were also Low Rate Initial Production guns, the US would most likely be getting a benefit in us finding any "bugs" in the system using them in an operational theatre, but more to the point they were going to be used as part of Operation Archer, and so we got the initial 6, and now to assist in dealing with the extension of the mission, an additional 6. But the distribution does not mean a Bty in Canada is getting fully equipped while 6 are in the deployed Bty.
As for more, there are some people working on it, and it sure ain't a sure thing. The US are now at full rate production and are in the middle of trying to reequip their forces. They have priorities and theirs understandably come first. Within that is the problem of sustaining their forces: parts, techs training, managed use; all of which decreases availability of anything just yet. Besides that purchasing more creeps into something beyond a UOR and into a strategic project, something that begins to affect others' "slice of the pie"
Anyway, IMO, its a ways off before more might show up, and that's only maybe.

A for comparing the M109s to the Leopard deployment, I don't quite get the connection. If someone is trying to suggest the M109 offers more protection, like the Leopard, how? the Leo has been upgraded a great deal to gain the protection level needed. The M109 definitely is not well armoured and its powerplant and drive train sure won't handle hanging more on it to try and achieve more protection. 
 

geo

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
0
Points
0
+1 petard

adding additonal armour to the M109 would make it a dandy pillbox though
a new maginot line at KAF ;)
 

rampage800

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Petard

I'm not too sure that the procurement of more 777s are rumour, as a matter of fact it was from a CLS O-Gp that was released about 2 months ago (I don't have the link) As for more coming in the near future, well word is that it could be sooner than later (not all of them) but perhaps your more privy to some of that info.
Colin P, I don't know if the arty guys have to take anything to heart, the 777s did come pretty quick and they're doing pretty solid work over there, not to mention 777s were in theatre long before the Leos (I'm not bashing armoured guys, I know they had/have) the Coyotes there. From what I've seen the arty have been pretty proactive vice reactive so I'm not buying that they have anything to take to heart.
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
The point I was trying to make is that a number of people are making the assumption that it is a done deal, and I know it is not so.
DLR is definitely working on "something", but it is still going to take time, some negotiating, and even then it still going to be "wait out" for a while yet.
I don't deny we need more, and some are going to ask, but I don't think we should take it as a given, and some have made it sound like they're already on the way.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,751
Points
940
Petard said:
A for comparing the M109s to the Leopard deployment, I don't quite get the connection. If someone is trying to suggest the M109 offers more protection, like the Leopard, how? the Leo has been upgraded a great deal to gain the protection level needed. The M109 definitely is not well armoured and its powerplant and drive train sure won't handle hanging more on it to try and achieve more protection. 

What I am suggesting is that the Armoured Corp pushed to keep their armour and kept a small portion upgraded despite a lot of pressure to get rid of it. Because they did so they were able to respond to the call for tanks in theatre. If the theatre Commander asked for SPG’s now, the Artillery is not in a position to respond. I think they should have done as the armour did, put most into reserve and upgraded a number of them, while looking for a replacement. I understand that the people in charge had a lot of difficult choices to make with the limited budgets, but I think they made a mistake getting rid of the M109’s without a SPG replacement.
 
Top