Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[oldsig127]

The press release indicates that this is a 155mm SPG, essentially relaunching the project that was canned in 2012. A total of 30 systems was mentioned, which is a surprisingly high number.

I must say, it is a surprising development. I hadn’t heard anything about it. It is the key missing system in a proper mechanised combined arms team, so it makes sense.

Yes, it surprised me too. With other long range systems being planned I thought it was dead as the proverbial. And may still be, of course. Interestingly some sources (in Geelong) are talking about the K-9 system. My memory is crud, but I didn't think that the project as previously in place had decided on an actual system yet

oldsig

 

[t68]

Majority of article behind paywall

No Cookies | Geelong Advertiser

 

[Traveller]

Australias A$ 450M-600M LAND 17 Artillery Replacement

Reading this old news makes me wonder about the supposed 350 jobs in Geelong. It's an election promise underlined by the lack of a confirmed gun or configuration. Why would we licence build just 30 units when it would be cheaper and quicker to buy from a current producer? Don't get me wrong, this ALP vs Liberal bidding competition on defence spending is political viagra for me. I just see too much wiggle room for post-election excuses not to proceed.

 

[Redlands18]

Yes, it surprised me too. With other long range systems being planned I thought it was dead as the proverbial. And may still be, of course. Interestingly some sources (in Geelong) are talking about the K-9 system. My memory is crud, but I didn't think that the project as previously in place had decided on an actual system yet

oldsig

If I remember correctly we where waiting on the decision between an Australianised version of the K-9 and the PzH-2000 when the whole thing was cancelled in 2012.

 

[aussienscale]

If I remember correctly we where waiting on the decision between an Australianised version of the K-9 and the PzH-2000 when the whole thing was cancelled in 2012.

It actually got a little further that that and the AS-9 Aussie Thunder actually won the tender which was put forward by Raytheon Australia, should be a fair bit of info on the bids earlier in this thread is you have the time to search for it, but also found this posted today and some quotes from Raytheon

Cheers

Self-propelled howitzers back on the cards - Australian Defence Magazine

 

[Redlands18]

It actually got a little further that that and the AS-9 Aussie Thunder actually won the tender which was put forward by Raytheon Australia, should be a fair bit of info on the bids earlier in this thread is you have the time to search for it, but also found this posted today and some quotes from Raytheon

Cheers

Self-propelled howitzers back on the cards - Australian Defence Magazine

I’ll get more excited or not about this come Sunday, won’t mean much if we get a change of Government.

 

[Stampede]

I’ll get more excited or not about this come Sunday, won’t mean much if we get a change of Government.

Taking the politics out of the discussion I would be all for an SPG for Army.
The AS-9 Aussie Thunder was the selected winner 6 years ago and I would suggest is still a good choice today.
I do also like the idea of some defence purchases outside of Europe and the USA.
If this does all go ahead, it will be interesting if it has a influence on the Land 400 phase 3 battle.
With Hanwha Defense Systems offering its new generation of tracked armoured IFV the AS21 Redback, it would be advantageous for them to have a foot in the door with the AS-9.

AS to where to build, well for just 30 units it's probably cheaper to buy directly from O/S.
However 30 SPG packaged with up to 450 AS 21's, well that makes it very interesting.
Back to politics a lot will happen this week,so without trying to crystal ball too far down the track lets just wait and see.
At least defence is on the radar.

Regards S

 

[rossfrb_1]

I’ll get more excited or not about this come Sunday, won’t mean much if we get a change of Government.

Labor "appear" to have matched the government's commitment.
Self-propelled howitzers back on the cards - Australian Defence Magazine
"
The northern part of Geelong forms the seat of Shadow Defence Minister Richard Marles.
In a statement, Minister Marles said that Labor would support the plan if elected on Saturday pending conversations with Army.
"[Labor] will work with Army on the decision to acquire 30 self-propelling howitzers to make sure it gets the capability it needs, when it needs it," Minister Marles said.
"We will seek Army’s advice on this decision to make sure it meets its needs, not a desperate government’s political need.
Once we have determined this capability is the right one for Australia, a Shorten Labor Government will proceed with the decision to build the capability in Geelong."

Verbose political answers always have me worried. There's a lot of wriggle room in them there words.
rb

 

[rossfrb_1]

Oh and here's some history from 2009 for anyone who's interested:
Land Force: Artillery - Land 17: self propelled Vs towed | ADM Feb 2009 - Australian Defence Magazine
rb

 

[Stampede]

In the April Edition of Asia Pacific Defence Reporter there is a list of the top 30 defence Acquisitions for 2019 / 20.
Understandably no SPG project mentioned.

Asia Pacific Defence Reporter : APDR April 2019, Page 1

I wonder if the driver for this project is purely political, or if in fact some quiet words from Army to government have suggested this is actually a priority acquisition.


Thoughts

Regards S

 

[Traveller]

Follow the money. The Liberals have committed funding. Labour has said it will consult...

 

[Stampede]

Follow the money. The Liberals have committed funding. Labour has said it will consult...

I wonder what Army would like?
SPG of something else?

30 x SPG would not be an insignificant purchase in dollars.
Not to mention crews, training and logistics.
Also what happen to the in service M777A2?

Interesting development should it go forward.


Regards S

 

[Traveller]

I wonder what Army would like?
SPG of something else?


Regards S

This the question that sprang to mind when reading the Labour promise re consulting. Given "X" amount of dollars and Labour has won Government, Army could well decide to procure something different and somewhere else. Geelong could lose out but then to paraphrase John Howard, 'it wasn't a core promise'...

...and really, 350 jobs in Geelong to build 30 self-propelled guns? These aren't 350 permanent jobs...

 

[Volkodav]

This the question that sprang to mind when reading the Labour promise re consulting. Given "X" amount of dollars and Labour has won Government, Army could well decide to procure something different and somewhere else. Geelong could lose out but then to paraphrase John Howard, 'it wasn't a core promise'...

...and really, 350 jobs in Geelong to build 30 self-propelled guns? These aren't 350 permanent jobs...

If it's a fully funded addition, great, however if it is at the expense of another capability, or if there are other important wish list items, maybe not so great.

A thought that comes to mind is maybe some of the M-777s could be cascaded to high readiness reserves to free up regular man power.

My concern is with the government likely (though not certain) to change, locking in less critical capabilities now while leaving more critical ones for later could see a repeat of the past were the adf are left with gap fillers while the actual needed capability is cancelled.

 

[aussienscale]

I wonder what Army would like?
SPG of something else?

30 x SPG would not be an insignificant purchase in dollars.
Not to mention crews, training and logistics.
Also what happen to the in service M777A2?

Interesting development should it go forward.


Regards S

Raven22 is a little closer to this than I, so he may be able to expand on his earlier reply, that yes it was a surprise, but it is the missing link in a true mechanised force. If he has the time I will let him expand and explain.

From a political POV, is it opportunistic ? Well yes and no, it is a capability that we need and should have, the original program should never have been cancelled, but it was, and I will not go into the political reasons as to why either for or against.

So is the capability political or opportunistic in nature, well capability and requirement wise, no, we do need this and should already have this.

The timing ? well maybe a little, but also not overly out of context or direction when you look at what has been announced and programs now up and running, some of the announcements on the selections have taken us all off guard.

The location ? Absolutely ! but who cares, that is what elections are all about, as long as we get it at the end of the day, could not give a rats if they are built in Vic or anywhere else, as long as they meet the actual requirements and are made well.

The one thing I would not like to see is this being turned into the Army's version of the valley of death, let's do this smart, and there is no reason we can't have a permanent industry.

Cheers

 

[Traveller]

If it's a fully funded addition, great, however if it is at the expense of another capability, or if there are other important wish list items, maybe not so great.

Unless we increase deficit for the project to be fully funded something else must be de-funded. This is not necessarily defence, it could be money previously allocated to the Murray-Darling water issues.

If Labour wins and and they consult with Army as stated, if Army choose another required capability we still have a win.

But as previously posted, follow the money. The Liberals are committed to the SPG's and Labour is committed to consulting. If Labour forms Government with the Greens, I predict a loooonnnnngggg consultative process.

But then after Labour removed the F-111 nuclear triggers in the 80's I've never been impressed by their commitment to defence.
https://www.raafa.org.au/sites/default/files/F-111 Pt2 summer2010.pdf for anyone not knowing about the nuclear capability removal.

 

[Stampede]

Raven22 is a little closer to this than I, so he may be able to expand on his earlier reply, that yes it was a surprise, but it is the missing link in a true mechanised force. If he has the time I will let him expand and explain.

From a political POV, is it opportunistic ? Well yes and no, it is a capability that we need and should have, the original program should never have been cancelled, but it was, and I will not go into the political reasons as to why either for or against.

So is the capability political or opportunistic in nature, well capability and requirement wise, no, we do need this and should already have this.

The timing ? well maybe a little, but also not overly out of context or direction when you look at what has been announced and programs now up and running, some of the announcements on the selections have taken us all off guard.

The location ? Absolutely ! but who cares, that is what elections are all about, as long as we get it at the end of the day, could not give a rats if they are built in Vic or anywhere else, as long as they meet the actual requirements and are made well.

The one thing I would not like to see is this being turned into the Army's version of the valley of death, let's do this smart, and there is no reason we can't have a permanent industry.

Cheers

Thanks for the reply
Agree with the sentiment.

We are currently replacing the majority of Armys vehicles with many different flavours and types. Soft skinned / Armoured / with wheels and tracks.
All of which are very big projects.
Back up ten years with some Permanent Industry vision to the future and of these various projects could have all been built locally.
Luckily many still will be, but not all.
Suggest both sides of government may want to look at this situation.
Courage and foresight was found in investing in our ship building sector for the long term.
So suggest maybe some bi partisan governmental effort in military vehicle manufacturing for the long term may bring benefits much greater than just the vehicles themselves.

By the way what did the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation make............................................................That's correct - buses ?

Its amazing what you can do with sovereign skills.


Regards S

 

[John Newman]

If it's a fully funded addition, great, however if it is at the expense of another capability, or if there are other important wish list items, maybe not so great.

A thought that comes to mind is maybe some of the M-777s could be cascaded to high readiness reserves to free up regular man power.

My concern is with the government likely (though not certain) to change, locking in less critical capabilities now while leaving more critical ones for later could see a repeat of the past were the adf are left with gap fillers while the actual needed capability is cancelled.

I find it very hard to believe that the possibility of 30 155mm SP Guns being acquired for Army is going to turn the Defence Budget on it's head, which is now close to $40b per year and steadily increasing, what are we talking about? $1b or so over the life of the project?

I'm far more concerned and worried by all the other election promises (by both sides), that currently amount to around $50b+ each, if anything is going to hurt the Defence Budget, it's finding dollars for all the 'other' promises.

Thirty SP Guns? Beer money in the big scheme of things.

 

[John Newman]

But as previously posted, follow the money. The Liberals are committed to the SPG's and Labour is committed to consulting. If Labour forms Government with the Greens, I predict a loooonnnnngggg consultative process.

I think it's pretty clear that enough voters have moved from the Right to the Left for the ALP to win the Election, but my real fear is, if it's close, that the ALP ends up having to rely on the Greens to form minority Government (eg, Gillard Government). If there is too much far Left influence, it won't be good for the Defence Budget.

As much as it pains me to say this (only once in my life and I do so with a very heavy heart), if the ALP wins, I hope they don't have to rely on the Greens!!

 

[ngatimozart]

Thanks for the reply
Agree with the sentiment.

......

By the way what did the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation make............................................................That's correct - buses ?

Its amazing what you can do with sovereign skills.


Regards S

Found this at the State Museum in Melbourne when I was visiting there 10 years ago.




The information of the board which I also photographed at the time and is above, states that it was a vanette. Quite an interesting artefact and was displayed by the main entrance.