Whoops,sorry! Guess that's what happens when you don't see the whole story!
While SPH would be nice to acquire it would mean forgoing the planned MLRS mentioned in the DWP. It would be one or the other and frankly MLRS is better then SPH.
To my knowledge they are of similar price ranges and no there isn't room for both. Only have so many personnel, Lot of other projects we have going, planned or intended and with manning cap's just can't do it.
FoxtrotRomeo999
Active Member
I will leave it to the experts about capabilities we need and capabilities we can afford. In my ignorant opinion, not having SPH puts us at a disadvantage in higher intensity conflicts, where 'fixed' artillery are easy targets.
If manning caps are the issue, could we not push some capabilities to the Army Reserve? The Reserve is gradually getting squeezed out of capabilities they used to have - for example, armour, artillery (mortars only now) and AFVs (mostly light vehicles now).
If manning capacity is the only reason not to acquire something, it is pretty weak. I am sure $12ml would cover 150 or so troops, which I am sure the Army would appreciate. The government has recently gifted $30m to Foxtel, so they can afford $12m or $15m to the Army for more personnel.
Er, $12 - $15 million is going to be nowhere near enough to pay for 150 soldiers. Just the base wages alone would cost more than $10 million. Every single year. By the time you add in medical, housing, travel, superannuation, removals, courses, uniforms, training etc, it would be at least triple that. Every year. Soldiers are expensive.
If it was that easy to add extra soldiers, the army wouldn't be shrinking the combat brigades to free up manning for new capabilities. At the end of the day, it is a zero sum game - if you won't something new, you have to be prepared to give something up to get it.
Don't even need to actually equip the reserves, just shove some of the M777s into storage to be issued to the reserves if they're called up (or if not, guess they can be dug out later to extend the service life of the weapon), and whack the regulars freed up with either an MLRS or SPG system...
Having said that, lack of manning isn't the reason for no SPHs. In fact, SPHs have smaller gun lines than towed guns. The reason we aren't getting SPHs is that no one is fighting for the capability. Once the original fight for SPHs was lost, the powers that be invested their efforts into other things, such as the HIMARS, new GBAD etc. At some point, likely once the new capabilities have come into service, someone will get around to fighting for the capability again, and they'll probably be successful. It won't cost that much, it just will take someone willing to invest the political capital into making it happen.
There are that many new capabilities coming into service at the moment that the Army basically can't keep up. There is only so many people in CASG, so many people to run introduction to service. A lot of delay and reprogramming you see with projects isn't so much a lack of money, but simply a lack of people physically able run the programs and bring things into service. No one wants to artificially speed up the process, lest they be the one that stuffs it up and ends up buying a lemon.
There are that many new capabilities coming into service at the moment that the Army basically can't keep up. There is only so many people in CASG, so many people to run introduction to service. A lot of delay and reprogramming you see with projects isn't so much a lack of money, but simply a lack of people physically able run the programs and bring things into service. No one wants to artificially speed up the process, lest they be the one that stuffs it up and ends up buying a lemon.
HIMARS battery/regiment manning
Hi all.
Does anyone know what the manning level of a HIMARS battery or regiment is?
Been hunting around for the numbers but haven't been able to find it.
Suspect quite low but would like to confirm - all comment/links/info greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Massive
Hi all.
Does anyone know what the manning level of a HIMARS battery or regiment is?
Been hunting around for the numbers but haven't been able to find it.
Suspect quite low but would like to confirm - all comment/links/info greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Massive
It is also worth thinking about how one wants to implement one's forces into a coalition situation.
With hardly any C3 capabilities above bn battlegroup level one is alway dependent on other nations for C3 capabilities when it comes to integrating the forces into a brigade level task force. One would be left out when it comes to rotating the command assets of said task force.
Not a desirable situation to be in.
Thanks Raven.
Was working on an assumption of 40-50 per battery of 6 launchers so that sounds about right.
Not sure how big the support battery would be or the regimental HQ but this seems to indicate something around regimental size - 18 launchers I imagine.
Thanks again,
Massive
When moving into a new field you dont do everything all at once, You take a multitude of baby steps slowly learning what you need to.
Perhaps we could have purchased a few AAV's from the get go (With out going into issues such as specialized manning, training, new logistics pipe line, new build or reconditioned etc) but it then becomes an issue of how many? How they are used? If they are needed for our future force at all?
Takes time to answer those questions and they can only be answered through trial and error. Learning both what we can and cant do with out ships and forces manning them.
Buying them now and you risk throwing good money after bad, Which can also then affect future replacements as a negative stigma ends up surrounding such an asset.
We have already leaped ahead in what we can do especially when comparing the Kanimbla's to the Canberra's, Let's continue on a nice stroll, perhaps a job rather then going for a full out sprint and risking falling face first into the dirt.
My 2 cents.
And who would introduce them? Are we not neck deep into LAND 400 at the moment? With all public reports stating that Phase 2 CRV is to be chosen towards the end of this year, phase 3 about to get underway and the process to acquire maneuver support vehicles and perhaps upgraded and/or additional M1 Abrams in train, all the while redistributing it's current armour assets into the new ACR's and within the Beersheba infantry battalions, it seems as if Army just about has it's hands' full just getting the current, planned new armour into service...
Maybe once LAND 400 is well in hand and the Beersheba Brigades are bedded down and we have more experience in amphibious operations, perhaps such an idea will be reviewed...