Post New Topic  
Edit Profile | Register | Search | FAQ | Forum Home
    next newest topic
» The War Diary   » The Combat and Supporting Arms   » Artillery   » TOWED OR SELF PROPELLED - What does Canada still require?

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: TOWED OR SELF PROPELLED - What does Canada still require?
Gunner
Artillery Forum Moderator
Member # 39

Member Rated:

posted 27 June 2021 17:38      Profile for Gunner   Email Gunner   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
As our M109s age, sooner or later, the army is going to have to ask itself if the army is going to move the artillery toward Towed Artillery or self propelled artillery, or some type of gun system using a LAV III chassis?

Anyone have any thoughts on the utility of any of these options?


Posts: 154 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Jun 2000
McG
Veteran
Member # 150

Member Rated:

posted 23 January 2021 04:58      Profile for McG   Email McG   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I strongly belive that all weapons systems should be self-propeled (with the exception of some high altitude anti-aircraft missles) to maximise the rate of fire and movement. It takes a lot more people to muscle a towed gun into position than in a power operated turret.

I think the ideal option would be for the 105's to be mounted in turrets on the LAV III, and for the M-109s to be replaced. The Americans are developing a new system (the Crusader), and the Germans have just come out with the PzH 2000. A wheeled 155 platform would be more suitable to largely wheeled army of today.


Posts: 159 | From: London | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged
RCA
Veteran
Member # 74

Member Rated:

posted 23 January 2021 13:58      Profile for RCA     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Moving to strictly self-propelled has its merits as long as we understand there we limiting some of or options such as air-mobile ops etc. Also all SPs have a higher profile so cam and concealment options change. And maint increases also.

As for getting rid of the M109? Guns are never obsolete in the fact that they all can throw a round down range which is our function any ways. The only changes actually required are in fire control (both CP and gun end) and range. The 109s have both. The only reason to change them is to move away from tracked vehs.

As to moving to 105 SPs I don't think you are gaining anything unless moving to 155s. The only advantage I see is rate of fire.

However moving to a wheeled 155 SP ( the South Africans have an excellent version - can't remember the model) would fit in nicely with the change of doctrine to a wheeled army (ie LAV IIIs. Coyotes etc.)

Maybe it is time to re-think things and seriously think about this option


------------------
Ubique


Posts: 198 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged
McG
Veteran
Member # 150

Member Rated:

posted 23 January 2021 18:11      Profile for McG   Email McG   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
it is the LIW G6. and if a wheeled 155 can fit into a Herc, then I agree there is no gain in going to a 105 SP.
Posts: 159 | From: London | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are ET  

Post New Topic   Close Topic    Move Topic      next newest topic
Jump To:

Contact Us | CdnArmy.ca | Privacy Statement

2001 CdnArmy.ca. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0 Beta Release 2.0-pre3