Australian Army Discussions and Updates

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Did they not have a product that met the requirement?

I'm guessing that they already knew that as the Defender line was finishing off due to not meeting EU emissions regs that the contract wasn't worth pursuing for such a small market. Add in consideration for how much effort was needed to meet the 6x6 footprint and a lack of in-house recent relevant exp. (the JRA Landrovers were bastardised Australian developed landrovers - 50% Australian content including things like falcon brake boosters and MC, isuzu diesels etc,...)

The JRA structure had long gone, the Tenix acquisition of JRA didn't retain the old expertise etc etc......

IMO the mechanical and engineering gods were against them and they recognised it internally

as a sidebar, I was seconded to JRA for the Perentie Proj

http://www.unsealed4x4.com.au/issue...KA)&utm_campaign=Unsealed+4X4+034+-+Send+2#71
 

Oberon

Member
I'm guessing that they already knew that as the Defender line was finishing off due to not meeting EU emissions regs that the contract wasn't worth pursuing for such a small market. Add in consideration for how much effort was needed to meet the 6x6 footprint and a lack of in-house recent relevant exp. (the JRA Landrovers were bastardised Australian developed landrovers - 50% Australian content including things like falcon brake boosters and MC, isuzu diesels etc,...)

The JRA structure had long gone, the Tenix acquisition of JRA didn't retain the old expertise etc etc......

IMO the mechanical and engineering gods were against them and they recognised it internally

as a sidebar, I was seconded to JRA for the Perentie Proj

UNSEALED 4X4 ISSUE 034
From memory, the Isuzu engines came from Japan?. Was some issue at the time about whether this violated Japan's prohibition of defence material exports.
 
Last edited:

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
seconded? From Defence or Landrover UK ?
nope, another federal department. I was asked to identify why their teams weren't performing even though all individually capable.

spent 4 weeks at Dry Creek watching, observing, then team leader retraining. I think it was probably the first time a private company paid for a public servant to be on site and assist with program issues
 

Oberon

Member
nope, another federal department. I was asked to identify why their teams weren't performing even though all individually capable.

spent 4 weeks at Dry Creek watching, observing, then team leader retraining. I think it was probably the first time a private company paid for a public servant to be on site and assist with program issues
Was Phil Lawrence or Geoff McPherson Army project director at the time?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Was Phil Lawrence or Geoff McPherson Army project director at the time?
I never dealt with ADF, I dealt with JRA direct.

We also profiled their teams used for the Bushmaster submission and worked on structuring the teams who built the Kuwaiti "police cars" :) It was basically a Unimog based version of the Bushmaster concept
 

Oberon

Member
I never dealt with ADF, I dealt with JRA direct.

We also profiled their teams used for the Bushmaster submission and worked on structuring the teams who built the Kuwaiti "police cars" :) It was basically a Unimog based version of the Bushmaster concept
I'm going back to the late eighties/ early nineties. Jack Heaven was the general manager at Moorebank at the time.
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
A question as to the way forward with the Tiger ARH while it remains in service with the ADF.

I ask this question as a lot has been said about the future of the ARH Tiger;its past, and also options for its replacement. All are important conversations but one that seems to be missing is what to do with the Tiger while it is still in service.

I feel it is an important question and one that gets missed with the emotions of blame and finger pointing attributed to this unsuccessful program.
The defence white paper has called for it's early retirement and we know there are important lessons to be learnt but what of today?

For all it's attributes and limitations the ARH tiger is Army's only in house armed attack helicopter option.
Today ,tomorrow next week,next month,next year and probably some years after, its option A.

So what do we do with the ARH Tiger.
Some speculative options
1 Disband 1st Aviation Regt and sell/dispose of the Tiger ASAP
2 Keep the Tiger and treat it as a training capability only as we transition to a new
system
3 Sell /Dispose of Tiger and transform 1st Aviation Regt to a helicopter transport
Squadron
4 Keep ARH Tiger as is and continue to train and build on the existing capabilities for the platform while we transition to it's eventual replacement.

Any other ideas would be much appreciated but please keep it a mature conversation without history lessons and slagging the current helicopter however much your tempted.

Regards S
 

t68

Well-Known Member
A question as to the way forward with the Tiger ARH while it remains in service with the ADF.

I ask this question as a lot has been said about the future of the ARH Tiger;its past, and also options for its replacement. All are important conversations but one that seems to be missing is what to do with the Tiger while it is still in service.

I feel it is an important question and one that gets missed with the emotions of blame and finger pointing attributed to this unsuccessful program.
The defence white paper has called for it's early retirement and we know there are important lessons to be learnt but what of today?

For all it's attributes and limitations the ARH tiger is Army's only in house armed attack helicopter option.
Today ,tomorrow next week,next month,next year and probably some years after, its option A.

So what do we do with the ARH Tiger.
Some speculative options
1 Disband 1st Aviation Regt and sell/dispose of the Tiger ASAP
2 Keep the Tiger and treat it as a training capability only as we transition to a new
system
3 Sell /Dispose of Tiger and transform 1st Aviation Regt to a helicopter transport
Squadron
4 Keep ARH Tiger as is and continue to train and build on the existing capabilities for the platform while we transition to it's eventual replacement.

Any other ideas would be much appreciated but please keep it a mature conversation without history lessons and slagging the current helicopter however much your tempted.

Regards S

Option 4 funds havnt been released yet for the replacement, but the funds are in place for training. Better to keep collective training until a firm decision has been made.
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
A question as to the way forward with the Tiger ARH while it remains in service with the ADF.

I ask this question as a lot has been said about the future of the ARH Tiger;its past, and also options for its replacement. All are important conversations but one that seems to be missing is what to do with the Tiger while it is still in service.

I feel it is an important question and one that gets missed with the emotions of blame and finger pointing attributed to this unsuccessful program.
The defence white paper has called for it's early retirement and we know there are important lessons to be learnt but what of today?

For all it's attributes and limitations the ARH tiger is Army's only in house armed attack helicopter option.
Today ,tomorrow next week,next month,next year and probably some years after, its option A.

So what do we do with the ARH Tiger.
Some speculative options
1 Disband 1st Aviation Regt and sell/dispose of the Tiger ASAP
2 Keep the Tiger and treat it as a training capability only as we transition to a new
system
3 Sell /Dispose of Tiger and transform 1st Aviation Regt to a helicopter transport
Squadron
4 Keep ARH Tiger as is and continue to train and build on the existing capabilities for the platform while we transition to it's eventual replacement.

Any other ideas would be much appreciated but please keep it a mature conversation without history lessons and slagging the current helicopter however much your tempted.

Regards S
The discussion is moot to a degree because it is option 4. Tiger will be operated until it's replacement is chosen and phased out over time. Minor upgrades to it will improve capability until it is due to be replaced and I'm happy that is all the planned additional expenditure will result in.
 

the road runner

Active Member
Was on the M4 highway today and what did i see hooning down the road..??
Two Extenda MK2 spec ops vehicles pushing 80 km an hour ...the drivers had black motor bike helmets on .. Thought that was weird ..

Have these just been delivered to 2nd Commando ? Or have they been in service for a while.. I know they were on order..
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Was on the M4 highway today and what did i see hooning down the road..??
Two Extenda MK2 spec ops vehicles pushing 80 km an hour ...the drivers had black motor bike helmets on .. Thought that was weird ..

Have these just been delivered to 2nd Commando ? Or have they been in service for a while.. I know they were on order..
some were delivered yonks ago. east and west

if they were wearing full face you've kind of answered your own question :)
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
The discussion is moot to a degree because it is option 4. Tiger will be operated until it's replacement is chosen and phased out over time. Minor upgrades to it will improve capability until it is due to be replaced and I'm happy that is all the planned additional expenditure will result in.
Thanks T68 and ADMK2.
No one wants to throw good money after bad but are in favour of 4 myself at this stage.I do wonder if even for today if there is a place for any type of future Armed reconnaissance helicopter at all. Manned rotary flying close to the battlefront with todays technology and weapons systems may need to be handed to unmanned platforms.
Just a thought

Regards S
 

Navor86

Member
Just a quick question. Has the existence of a 4th SASR Squadron officially been acknowledged by now? Or is it still considered to be rumour?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Just a quick question. Has the existence of a 4th SASR Squadron officially been acknowledged by now? Or is it still considered to be rumour?
why is it a rumour? their rotation model is based on 4 - I spent about 4 years (recently) dealing with them on specific projects
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
Just a quick question. Has the existence of a 4th SASR Squadron officially been acknowledged by now? Or is it still considered to be rumour?
Technically it hasn't been acknowledged from what I recall, But it is a unit that every one knows exists.
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
the 4th's existence isn't exactly privileged information - its what the 4 do in detail that is
ah, Cheers.

If I remember correctly an article I read years ago postulated that the 4th was primarily for African operations? But who knows. Could be a unit for a particular region or a unit with highly specialized set of skills used globally.
 
Top