A U.S. Naval Special Warfare Operator fires a Switchblade 300 system. Photo: Spc. Chelsea D. Meiller
by Allan Joyner
With the M777 Light-Weight Towed Howitzer at the end of its known limits for range and mobility in the contemporary operating environment, and projects for newer artillery with greater range still several years away from delivery, the Army is turning to a weapon system prominent in the conflict in Ukraine to address a looming gap in the strength of the Canadian-led multinational brigade in Latvia: loitering munitions.
Although the Directorate of Land Requirements (DLR) is advancing two projects, Long-Range Precision Strike-Land (LRPS-L) and Indirect Fires Modernization (IFM), that will eventually transform artillery, in the interim “it is recognized that we need to be able to engage, with precision, both static and moving targets beyond the range of conventional artillery,” said Lieutenant-Colonel Cory Durant in an interview with Canadian Army Today last year.
Canada does have longer range munitions for the 155mm howitzer, but they are not available at scale. A loitering munition offers a solution adopted by allies seeking to address a similar gap, he noted, combining the range and precision of a guided missile with the manoeuverability of an uncrewed aerial system (UAS).
“It provides a middle ground between the responsiveness of artillery and mortar systems, with the precision and of longer-range missile or rocket systems,” said Durant, an artillery officer who served as a forward observer in Afghanistan with the 5e Régiment d’artillerie légère du Canada, and later as a battery commander in the 2nd Regiment, Royal Canadian Horse Artillery.
Until last summer, he served as the project director for loitering munitions, which are being acquired under an urgent operational requirement (UOR) for the brigade in Latvia.
As the name indicates, loitering munitions will give the land force there the ability to loiter over a target area for an extended period, as well as strike targets “without the need to tap into Air Force resources or air-based resources,” he noted. “This very much incorporates the command-and-control aspects of an UAS, with the flight characteristics of a missile.”
Since the first iteration of the weapon system is intended solely for Latvia, Durant was cautious about revealing too much detail about the capability. But a core aim is to place it directly into the brigade’s manoeuvre forces rather than as a system for a standalone unit or as an asset positioned with a higher echelon such as a division.
“One of our requirements is to incorporate it into our existing mini-UAS (MUAS) detachments, and effectively arm those detachments, who, as of right now, are operating surveillance and reconnaissance UAS that have similar command and control and training characteristics,” he explained.
The hand-launched Raven B RQ-11, designated the CU173, is an ISR asset employed by armoured reconnaissance squadrons and surveillance and target acquisition batteries. The mini fixed-wing UAS, built by AeroVironment, was acquired in 2014 under a contract with MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates (MDA).
Like the Raven, the loitering munition must be controlled by an operator throughout a mission, Durant emphasized. Launch, flight, target selection, execution or mission abort would all be managed by a human-in-the-loop.
“There’s no autonomy as it relates to target acquisition,” he explained. “The human operator looks on the screen where the optics are looking, visually identifies the target, places the cursor on that target, and directs the munition to attack. None of that’s automated.”
UVisionUSA autonomous multi-launch system.
The system range and resolution of its electro-optical/infrared camera are among a few closely held operational security details, Durant noted, but the intent is to have a munition able to detect and identify targets day or night.
“Its main focus in terms of lethality is the neutralization of high payoff targets—air defence systems, command-and-control platforms, electronic warfare platforms, artillery sensor systems, higher level combat support systems like anti-tank guided missiles and mortars,” he said.
The capability becomes increasingly vital in a theatre where adversaries are leveraging advanced systems to protect their assets.
“Based on the quantities we’ll have – [also an op sec detail] – we’re looking for a system that is tailored to neutralizing the more important high payoff targets, rather than the common fighting vehicle or tank,” he explained.
With allies adding similar capabilities to their manoeuvre formations, the Army has been able to lean on some of the research completed by others to identify possible solutions. A request for information to industry earlier this year received responses from three major original equipment manufacturers, a decent return given no ally has a deployed, dedicated loitering munition unit with years of operational experience.
“This is all new across our allies and being developed as we speak,” Durant noted. “We had three substantive returns from industry that have allowed us to build our concepts.”
The project is in the process of shifting from the definition to implementation phase of the procurement process, and DLR intends to have a system at full operational capability by 2028.
“That said, major elements of the system will be delivered over the next two years” to provide the brigade with an initial operational capability sooner, he added.
Training will begin in Canada with an initial cadre from the MUAS unit about to deploy. The Army isn’t revealing which of its three mechanized brigades will launch the system, but it would aim to complete two serials of training before deployment, provided by the manufacturer or a designated partner, while the schoolhouse in Gagetown hones its expertise.
“We’re looking to incorporate a virtual training environment for the command-and-control system and an inert training mission to allow a full hands-on experience for the operator, excluding impact. There’s no explosive material in the inert system,” said Durant. “It provides a higher fidelity training experience for the operator, and most of those inert munitions can be recovered and sent back for refurbishment for a lower cost replacement.”
Members of the 2nd Regiment, Royal Canadian Horse Artillery, with the M777 Howitzer during pre-deployment training in September 2024. Photo: Cpl Nicholas Brunshaw
Though the loitering munitions are intended exclusively for the MUAS detachments, “based on their familiarity with much of the technology and the operating concepts,” they will serve as a proof-of-concept for the wider Army, Durant suggested. Together with LRPS-L and IFM, the weapon system is seen as one of three pillars for near-future fire support.
“In the short term, we’ve tailored it to the user community that is being deployed already [in Latvia], and has all the skillsets that allow them to easily integrate the system,” said Durant. “Longer-term, there’s a plan to begin a broad Army-wide loitering mission capability. That’s in pre-identification.”
In the future, the systems would be dispersed among infantry company weapons detachments and armoured reconnaissance as they continue to develop their cavalry concept. “These are logical weapons that bring a lot of range and effect in a relatively small space, and therefore it’s good for cavalry operating in front of our forces,” he observed.
Loitering munitions overcome some of the challenges and limitations of the M777 howitzer, including range and mobility, but they are not a temporary solution until newer systems are delivered, emphasized Durant, who has led previous intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance projects for the Army.
“Loitering munitions are becoming their own weapon system, in general terms,” he said. “We’ve seen significant use of them in Ukraine, somewhat by the Ukrainians, but more by the Russians – the Lancet-3 is having a significant effect against high value targets, engaging guns, engaging other systems that operate as individual platforms.
“This weapon system as an emerging technology and type of capability, it’s not a flash in the pan. The UOR addresses an immediate need for Latvia, but it’s also the start state of how we envision the future. This will be a great testbed to trial this, to give troops the equipment that will solve a problem and give them an edge against an adversary that is significantly supported by high payoff targets like electronic warfare, air defence and direct fires. I believe that we’ll be bringing a novel and very powerful capability to our forces.”
