Thanks Thanks:  81
Likes Likes:  171
Dislikes Dislikes:  1
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 LastLast
Results 301 to 325 of 358
  1. #301
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,614
    Post Thanks / Like

  2. #302
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    They did, however, have no shortage of CAS or cav to support them. Which compensated for lack of arty.

    Overseas, we never have CAS and limited cav, in terms of firepower on the vehicles.

    So an alternative is bring arty for fire suport. But again it is limited by range of the weapon systems we have and more pointedly, by the fact that we are not mobile enough with arty.

    I've said this many times before, our inf and cav are so much more mobile now than years before and capable of operating for extended periods away from a PB. Arty are still effectively using horse drawn guns in comparision.

    We have enough guns for the establishment but imo we need to look more at mounted systems to keep pace with the rest of the fighting formations (especially as medium lift helis are way off)!
    They also served as part of an international coalition with rules of engagement, and many ROE especially those with the un specify limitations on the types of weapons that can be employed limiting many missions to small arms only. People are forgetting that the DF frequently opertate overseas with severe limitations on the types of weapons they deploy, hence 90mm RCl instead of milan in 1980’s Lebanon.

    The defence forces are quite small, and as a result so are the expeditionary forces they can deploy. Canada is a G 7 nation with a population 8 times ours with three times as many soldiers and they found it difficult to maintain a battalion sized battlegroup in Afghanistan, hence why there is so much effort in interational ops and joint operations in western armies it’s the realisation that to have an expeditionary armed forces is expensive and beyond the capabilities of many countries. And the role that joint ops play in DF thinking ovber the past ten years has transformed the force.

    The 105mm capability fits in quite well there, its got plenty of future growth. When the brits and French wanted to break the siege of Sarajevo in 1995 they used 105/120mm mix. the brits and americans boh plan to keep it in service, its air portable, can be towed by armoured vehicles, and adds an asset to joint operations in EUBG with Germany or the Nordics that they don/t have. Put it through a digital upgrade and keep in in service as long as the world powers do.

  3. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  4. #303
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    KMW have done a small re-vamp of their 155mm AGM, could this be the first move to respond to the marketing efforts of BAe Systems with their Archer?
    As shown the AGM is mounted on an Iveco Trakker but it can be fitted to any 8x8 truck. As the rest of the artillery world moves to 155mm how long will 105mm be viable as our only long range asset.

    https://www.kmweg.com/systems-produc...agm-iveco-8x8/

  5. Thanks DeV, Rocinante thanked for this post
  6. #304
    Lieutenant X-RayOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dublin
    Posts
    1,392
    Post Thanks / Like
    I've mentioned this many times before, arty need some form of self propelled gun to keep up with rest of combat and combat support arms if we are to ever have a truly integrated light infantry / combined arms force. I think that would be a major advance that could include increasing effective arty range through larger caliber.

    And before its said......the size of the Glen of Imaal shouldn't limit the various corps developing capability because the noise will wake the neighbors, range is too small ,etc. there are always ways and means around the historical limits.
    Fate whispers to the warrior, "There is a storm coming"

    And the warrior whispers back "I am the storm".

  7. Likes Truck Driver, Flamingo liked this post
  8. #305
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,579
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    I've mentioned this many times before, arty need some form of self propelled gun to keep up with rest of combat and combat support arms if we are to ever have a truly integrated light infantry / combined arms force. I think that would be a major advance that could include increasing effective arty range through larger caliber.

    And before its said......the size of the Glen of Imaal shouldn't limit the various corps developing capability because the noise will wake the neighbors, range is too small ,etc. there are always ways and means around the historical limits.
    Re: your point on SPGs... as someone mentioned elsewhere, take out the vehicle and the gun ceases to be mobile. As against a vehicle towing an artillery piece, hitch to a different vehicle. Pros and cons to both approaches I guess
    "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

  9. Thanks X-RayOne thanked for this post
  10. #306
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    when it comes to range size, nothing stopping any gunner from firing out to sea at a static or towed target. It has been done before,many times......as for taking heavy weapons abroad on a UN gig, I guess the French must have ignored that rule as they brought Leclerc tanks to UNIFIL and potential opponents knew full well that they'd have plenty of firepower floating out to sea just in case anyone got naughty. The Dutch also gave that alleged rule a stiff ignoring and managed to bring TOW missiles with them,which contributed to saving our mens' metaphorical bacon on at least one occasion.

  11. Likes Flamingo liked this post
  12. #307
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    The main advantage that a GOAT system has is the time to shoot and scoot. A modern system will be able to stop, fire a few rounds and be on its way again before the traditional towed system is even ready to fire. And if it is a system such as the BAe Archer or KMW AGM the number of crew required is reduced dramatically due to automation.

  13. #308
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    when it comes to range size, nothing stopping any gunner from firing out to sea at a static or towed target. It has been done before,many times......as for taking heavy weapons abroad on a UN gig, I guess the French must have ignored that rule as they brought Leclerc tanks to UNIFIL and potential opponents knew full well that they'd have plenty of firepower floating out to sea just in case anyone got naughty. The Dutch also gave that alleged rule a stiff ignoring and managed to bring TOW missiles with them,which contributed to saving our mens' metaphorical bacon on at least one occasion.
    The French also deployed the GCT-155 SPG as well (famously falling off a truck in UN markings), while the Italian have and continue to deploy their Centauro tank destroyers to UNIFIL.

  14. Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  15. #309
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    when it comes to range size, nothing stopping any gunner from firing out to sea at a static or towed target. It has been done before,many times......as for taking heavy weapons abroad on a UN gig, I guess the French must have ignored that rule as they brought Leclerc tanks to UNIFIL and potential opponents knew full well that they'd have plenty of firepower floating out to sea just in case anyone got naughty. The Dutch also gave that alleged rule a stiff ignoring and managed to bring TOW missiles with them,which contributed to saving our mens' metaphorical bacon on at least one occasion.
    The French also deployed the GCT-155 SPG as well (famously falling off a truck in UN markings), while the Italian have and continue to deploy their Centauro tank destroyers to UNIFIL. And if I remember correctly the UN booklet on supply of aircraft also allows for attack helicopters in particular the Mi-24, or are they only for agricultural use?

  16. Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  17. #310
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,614
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    I've mentioned this many times before, arty need some form of self propelled gun to keep up with rest of combat and combat support arms if we are to ever have a truly integrated light infantry / combined arms force. I think that would be a major advance that could include increasing effective arty range through larger caliber.

    And before its said......the size of the Glen of Imaal shouldn't limit the various corps developing capability because the noise will wake the neighbors, range is too small ,etc. there are always ways and means around the historical limits.
    You don’t need SP arty to keep up with light infantry and we have enough APC lift for less than an Inf Bn

  18. #311
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    You don’t need SP arty to keep up with light infantry and we have enough APC lift for less than an Inf Bn
    When was the last active duty deployment as light infantry?
    We do not have enough trucks to transport all our infantry troops, are they all going to march everywhere?

  19. Likes CTU liked this post
  20. #312
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    You don’t need SP arty to keep up with light infantry and we have enough APC lift for less than an Inf Bn
    In a modern military context there are 3 main types of "light infantry",
    (a) Airborne/Airmobile
    (b) Mountain Troops (Chasseurs Alpins, Gebirgsjäger, Alpini)
    (c) Marine/Commando

    All are characterized by being light and highly mobile, that goes also for their artillery. This is why there is interest in the Hawkeye system which mounts a 105mm gun on a HUMVEE.

    I would have no objection if the Army was a true "Light" infantry force like the USMC but then we would need to equip the 7 battalions: 210x PIII's, 441x JLTV's, 42x M777's, 28-42x AH-1Z's, 84x MV-22's, 28x CH-53E's, 42x AV-8B or F-35B's &14 x C-130J's etc.

  21. Thanks CTU thanked for this post
    Likes CTU liked this post
  22. #313
    Lieutenant X-RayOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dublin
    Posts
    1,392
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The main advantage that a GOAT system has is the time to shoot and scoot. A modern system will be able to stop, fire a few rounds and be on its way again before the traditional towed system is even ready to fire. And if it is a system such as the BAe Archer or KMW AGM the number of crew required is reduced dramatically due to automation.
    Dev,

    This is my main reason for the suggestion that SPG is required. Every overseas mission with the exception of UNIFIL and East Timor recently has involved significant amounts of armoured patrolling and some multi day patrols. Arty should be able to accompany these types of patrols and provide over watch for the entire duration of a patrol or mission as well as having the same level of mobility and armour protection. Soft skinned towing trucks don't provide that. Otherwise we are either going without over-watch or limited to fire base range radius for patrolling. Either not reasonable options in my mind.

    I've used the "light infantry" terminology in the loosest meaning. We have always based our doctrine around inf bns. We are only recently beginning to move to integrated, combined arms. However, we are never going to move towards heavy armoured regiments, etc. or any type of formations of the like. If we intend to have highly mobile, manouver formations based around inf bn or components then all the combat formation needs to be mobile and protected to same level and everybody supporting needs to be able to keep up!
    Fate whispers to the warrior, "There is a storm coming"

    And the warrior whispers back "I am the storm".

  23. Likes CTU, EUFighter, Truck Driver liked this post
  24. #314
    Lt General ODIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,050
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    I would have no objection if the Army was a true "Light" infantry force like the USMC but then we would need to equip the 7 battalions: 210x PIII's, 441x JLTV's, 42x M777's, 28-42x AH-1Z's, 84x MV-22's, 28x CH-53E's, 42x AV-8B or F-35B's &14 x C-130J's etc.

    Dear Santa, I have a been a very good boy this year....
    What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

  25. Likes CTU, Flamingo liked this post
  26. #315
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,614
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    Dev,

    This is my main reason for the suggestion that SPG is required. Every overseas mission with the exception of UNIFIL and East Timor recently has involved significant amounts of armoured patrolling and some multi day patrols. Arty should be able to accompany these types of patrols and provide over watch for the entire duration of a patrol or mission as well as having the same level of mobility and armour protection. Soft skinned towing trucks don't provide that. Otherwise we are either going without over-watch or limited to fire base range radius for patrolling. Either not reasonable options in my mind.

    I've used the "light infantry" terminology in the loosest meaning. We have always based our doctrine around inf bns. We are only recently beginning to move to integrated, combined arms. However, we are never going to move towards heavy armoured regiments, etc. or any type of formations of the like. If we intend to have highly mobile, manouver formations based around inf bn or components then all the combat formation needs to be mobile and protected to same level and everybody supporting needs to be able to keep up!
    Not disagreeing with you but “light infantry” is boot mobile and “mechanised infantry” is APC borne. We don’t have enough APCs (even if they were all at home) for 1 full mechanised Inf Bn

    We do have doctrine for both.

    If we have spare money it has to be spend on more APCs.

    What would I do with Arty?
    Upgrade the 105s to the U.K. equivalent standard and 120mm to reduce the into action and out of action time

    They could be towed by an armoured vehicle.

  27. #316
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Not disagreeing with you but “light infantry” is boot mobile and “mechanised infantry” is APC borne. We don’t have enough APCs (even if they were all at home) for 1 full mechanised Inf Bn

    We do have doctrine for both.

    If we have spare money it has to be spend on more APCs.

    What would I do with Arty?
    Upgrade the 105s to the U.K. equivalent standard and 120mm to reduce the into action and out of action time

    They could be towed by an armoured vehicle.
    Boot mobile went out 75 years ago, even the BEF was fully motorised, no modern force is boot mobile. We need to get away from number of boots, if we only want to spend 0.3% on defence then better to reduce numbers and give them the equipment & remuneration that they need.

    Light infantry today is helicopter mobile (including their vehicles)
    Heavy infantry is mechanised mobile.
    Last edited by EUFighter; 26th October 2020 at 18:08.

  28. #317
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    639
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Not disagreeing with you but “light infantry” is boot mobile and “mechanised infantry” is APC borne. We don’t have enough APCs (even if they were all at home) for 1 full mechanised Inf Bn
    My understanding is that

    "light" is boot borne
    "motorised" is APC borne
    "mechanised" is IFV borne

    And for arty I would say AMOS or NEMO on 8 wheeler. Has direct fire ability.
    Last edited by Graylion; 26th October 2020 at 19:02.

  29. Likes DeV liked this post
  30. #318
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,614
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    My understanding is that

    "light" is boot borne
    "motorised" is APC borne
    "mechanised" is IFV borne

    And for arty I would say AMOS or NEMO on 8 wheeler. Has direct fire ability.
    Mech in Ireland is APC
    Armd is IFV

  31. #319
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,614
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Boot mobile went out 75 years ago, even the BEF was fully motorised, no modern force is boot mobile. We need to get away from number of boots, if we only want to spend 0.3% on defence then better to reduce numbers and give them the equipment & remuneration that they need.

    Light infantry today is helicopter mobile (including their vehicles)
    Heavy infantry is mechanised mobile.
    We don’t even have sufficient truck lift

  32. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  33. #320
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,887
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm attached to a British Army Light Infantry Battalion at present.

    Light Infantry rarely train with helicopters...thats not their role.

    They are transported to short of the FUP by lorry.

    They then move to the FUP and on to the start line on foot prior to the assault.

    Air Assault Infantry are transported by helicopters; at present in the British Army 1RGR are fulfilling that role with 16 Air Assault Bde, with 2&3 PARA training for it also.

    A whole different skillset.

    Light Protected Mobility Infantry Bns are equipped with Foxhound.

    Heavy Protected Mobility Infantry Bns with Mastiff.

    Armoured Infantry Bns with Warrior.

    The US Army use a similar construct; their light infantry are transported forward in 'B' Vehicles also, not helicopters.

    They run a specialist Air Assault School at Fort Campbell, Kentucky...for their Air Assault Infantry...and award a badge for it.

    1 RIRISH sent a Company over to do the course about 10 years ago, when they were in the 16X Air Assault role.

    They broke all the schools records, but the Commandant wouldn't allow their record to stand as they were from a foreign army.

    I'm reliably told they would have done even better on the initial beat-up phase, but they'd been partying the night before...

    Light Infantry soldiering and Air Assault (or heliborne) soldiering are very different.
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  34. Thanks DeV, Flamingo, sofa thanked for this post
    Likes Flamingo liked this post
  35. #321
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    We don’t even have sufficient truck lift
    I know, perhaps the plan is to use Taxis to transport troops in an Emergency!! And we must not forget we even have trouble issuing more than one pair of boots.

  36. Likes Flamingo liked this post
  37. #322
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    713
    Post Thanks / Like

  38. #323
    My tank is bigger... California Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,941
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have to say, I'm at something of a loss to wonder what purpose the 105 has in the DF. Today the only reason for a gun of that calibre tends to be for air mobility, hanging it under a small helicopter or chucking out of an airplane. It's worth noting that the Aussies replaced their 105mm light guns with the M777 155mm howitzer, a 4-ton gun vs the 105mm 2-ton. (The previous towed 155mm was a 7-ton gun). The M777 can be carried by most of the Australian army's helicopters, so it's reasonable for them. The Americans have shown what is possible to upgrade the 105 to with modern fire control and navigation, if you really do feel like keeping the gun (and dropping it with a parachute)

    But realistically, where is the Irish Army going to be airlifting towed artillery with its AW139s on operations? If they're driving around Chad or somewhere and they want to have a bit of fire support emplaced before going into a town or valley, the 120mm mortars ought to be plenty handy enough. If they're in Lebanon, with a much smaller operating range, the towed 155s on a firebase would be fine (Worked for us in Afghanistan). If they want to take the artillery on long range operation anyway, then they're towing it and the weight is irrelevant. And if it's a matter of WW3 and conventional combat, then the ability to displace rapidly to avoid counter-battery becomes critical, making towed units very vulnerable.

    However. If the purpose of the Artillery Corps in the DF today is simply training in processes/procedures with no expectation of combat use, then the current 105s are fine and don't need replacing until the barrel falls off.
    Driver, tracks, troops.... Drive and adjust!!

  39. Thanks na grohmiti, Auldsod, DeV, Flamingo, Truck Driver, EUFighter, sofa thanked for this post
    Likes Flamingo, hptmurphy, Rocinante, Sluggie liked this post
  40. #324
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,748
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by X-RayOne View Post
    Dev,

    This is my main reason for the suggestion that SPG is required. Every overseas mission with the exception of UNIFIL and East Timor recently has involved significant amounts of armoured patrolling and some multi day patrols. Arty should be able to accompany these types of patrols and provide over watch for the entire duration of a patrol or mission as well as having the same level of mobility and armour protection. Soft skinned towing trucks don't provide that. Otherwise we are either going without over-watch or limited to fire base range radius for patrolling. Either not reasonable options in my mind.
    Mortars are organic to a mechanised infantry company's structure, the only guaranteed indirect fire resource.
    Due to the small number of Mowags, a mech inf coy is going to the largest size armoured formation that would be on a patrol, but more likely platoons or in pairs.
    If needs must, a 120mm, 81mm or 60mm mortar detachment, with ammo can be transported in a Mowag, dismounting to go into action.
    A dedicated armoured SPG/mortar carrier would become a garage queen unless it can be stripped out and used as an APC when not needed for carrying mortars.

  41. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes na grohmiti, DeV, Truck Driver liked this post
  42. #325
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    144
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhodes View Post
    Mortars are organic to a mechanised infantry company's structure, the only guaranteed indirect fire resource.
    Due to the small number of Mowags, a mech inf coy is going to the largest size armoured formation that would be on a patrol, but more likely platoons or in pairs.
    If needs must, a 120mm, 81mm or 60mm mortar detachment, with ammo can be transported in a Mowag, dismounting to go into action.
    A dedicated armoured SPG/mortar carrier would become a garage queen unless it can be stripped out and used as an APC when not needed for carrying mortars.
    Just putting these out there....although as a Vamtac fan I wouldn't mind us getting it in half a dozen variants...





    Last edited by Rocinante; 27th October 2020 at 23:55.

  43. Thanks Flamingo thanked for this post
    Likes madmark, Tempest, Truck Driver liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •