They are considering the PMV a marginal capability against direct fire, not IEDs. Since the PMV is not a combat vehicle, it is largely irrelevant.Not sure if this has been posted here yet, but gives an insight on where Army sits at the moment. I havnt read it all yet hopefully I'll get a chance over the weekend sometime.
Intersting to see that going forward that Bushmaster is being labeled a marginal capabilty, wonder what they see considering if you put a big enough IED in the ground a Namer AFV will still suffer,
https://www.aspi.org.au/publication...y/SI100_ADF_capability_snapshot_2015_Army.pdf
I wouldn't put too much stock in that ASPI report. It's an incredibly superficial treatment of the subject, with lots of factual errors spread through out (despite having been put out for comment to Army before release, which at least caught most of the more glaring errors). It provides no real insight whatsoever as to where the capability gaps lie, why they exist and what could be done to fix them. A keen 12 year old who reads internet sites like this could do a better job.