Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[t68]

There was a lot of point to it. It allows the crews to practice action drills, turret drills, fire control orders and engagement drills. It also test fires the weapons and turret systems so when they hit the beach they know everything works. It’s really no different to firing at a static AFV FFTS on land other than the target array is not very good. It’s certainly not for ‘shits and giggles’

Yep agree, it’s not much different from solders siting on the fantail and doing weapons training or even the Navy folk doing the same with ships weapons. The only difference is the environment in which ASLAV did the training was conducted.

It also does wonders for moral to do something slightly different even if for an opportunity for a photo on the media.

Being ex RACT any opportunity to do something different was relished, to tell you the truth the most fun ex in the early 1990’s I did was with water transport.only got to play with them once but really enjoyed it.

 

[oldsig127]

Practice firing with no real point? What do you think the purpose of all training is?

It looks to me like @aussienscale meant that they weren't practicing for a particul role like defending the ship against a swarm of boats or some sort of weird and dangerous drive by beach strafe rather than questioning the broader training value.

oldsig

Edit: apologies, I see this has been covered at length. No more posting at double oh dark for me

 

[ngatimozart]

Yep agree, it’s not much different from solders siting on the fantail and doing weapons training or even the Navy folk doing the same with ships weapons. The only difference is the environment in which ASLAV did the training was conducted.

It also does wonders for moral to do something slightly different even if for an opportunity for a photo on the media.

Being ex RACT any opportunity to do something different was relished, to tell you the truth the most fun ex in the early 1990’s I did was with water transport.only got to play with them once but really enjoyed it.

Terminology please. Fantail is a USN term and not a Commonwealth naval term, so please use the appropriate name which is quarter deck, or in this case the flight deck. Fantail so sounds like the arse of a fan.

 

[t68]

Terminology please. Fantail is a USN term and not a Commonwealth naval term, so please use the appropriate name which is quarter deck, or in this case the flight deck. Fantail so sounds like the arse of a fan.

I’ll defer to you’re infinite wisdom on the matter and all things nautical since I was never a lowly jacktar or anchor wanker

 

[ngatimozart]

I’ll defer to you’re infinite wisdom on the matter and all things nautical since I was never a lowly jacktar or anchor wanker

By jeez you're, lucky that lashings and keel hauling have been struck from the statutes. I don't know some people

 

[Pusser01]

Terminology please. Fantail is a USN term and not a Commonwealth naval term, so please use the appropriate name which is quarter deck, or in this case the flight deck. Fantail so sounds like the arse of a fan.

Bugger, you'd better brief all the ex-RAN FFG sailors then We called the deck aft of the flightdeck with the capstan on it the fantail, carry over from it being a yank design I guess.

 

[ASSAIL]

Bugger, you'd better brief all the ex-RAN FFG sailors then We called the deck aft of the flightdeck with the capstan on it the fantail, carry over from it being a yank design I guess.

Oh dear! The ignorance of the young, Jellicoe would turn in his grave.

 

[koala]

I believe RAN frigates have 127 mm guns not 155 mm.

Sorry my bad

 

[spoz]

Bugger, you'd better brief all the ex-RAN FFG sailors then We called the deck aft of the flightdeck with the capstan on it the fantail, carry over from it being a yank design I guess.

Oh, those Tupperware ships....

should be corrected in the DDGs, though, we made a point of calling it the AX.

 

[aussienscale]

My point is that your statement -



- is just wrong. The purpose was not just to maintain the equipment, it was not practice firing with no real point, it was not for shits and giggles, and it was not for the wow factor.

My point is that I have replied to your previous posts, you take it anyway you like mate, your read it anyway you like, I told you my reply and expanded on it, so if you do not take my explanation and harp on about it I do not care, so get over it !

Cheers

 

[aussienscale]

It looks to me like @aussienscale meant that they weren't practicing for a particul role like defending the ship against a swarm of boats or some sort of weird and dangerous drive by beach strafe rather than questioning the broader training value.

oldsig

Edit: apologies, I see this has been covered at length. No more posting at double oh dark for me

Correct mate, but can't tell some people that !

 

[vonnoobie]

Well we to my knowledge still have the L118/119 guns in storage might be time to break them out and trial them in conjunction with the SPG's when we do get them. As for the 777's if it isn't too costly or difficult throw them into storage with the 198's. Just some random thoughts running through my mind.

 

[OldTex]

Well we to my knowledge still have the L118/119 guns in storage might be time to break them out and trial them in conjunction with the SPG's when we do get them. As for the 777's if it isn't too costly or difficult throw them into storage with the 198's. Just some random thoughts running through my mind.

Getting the ammunition types for the L118s would be only one of the issues with reactivating the 105 mm guns. It also raises the question of where in the CONOPS would these guns might provide an advantage? They are outranged by 155mm guns and the rounds have about the same effect as 120mm mortar rounds. They may require a larger crew than the 120 mm mortars. There would be a question of whether the L118 can be integrated into AFATDS. The reserve artillery batteries have been made largely ineffective by being converted to 81mm mortars (although it does reduce the training burden for the reserves).Although I would prefer to see the L118 returned before the M198.

 

[oldsig127]

Well we to my knowledge still have the L118/119 guns in storage might be time to break them out and trial them in conjunction with the SPG's when we do get them. As for the 777's if it isn't too costly or difficult throw them into storage with the 198's. Just some random thoughts running through my mind.

To what purpose? The sustainment cost and manpower burden of actually crewing them as well as the new SPG would be enough alone, without the fact that they'd be pretty well tactically useless for all the reasons that @Takao has pointed out with respect to the M777 and with lower range and the fire effect of a 120mm mortar.

oldsig

 

[vonnoobie]

To what purpose? The sustainment cost and manpower burden of actually crewing them as well as the new SPG would be enough alone, without the fact that they'd be pretty well tactically useless for all the reasons that @Takao has pointed out with respect to the M777 and with lower range and the fire effect of a 120mm mortar.

oldsig

My post was in reply to previous posts bringing up if we would be better off if possible to have a mixed fleet of towed and SPG. It was subsequently pointed out that the M777 would still be a logistical strain due to ammunition weight and that it would need a CH-47 to move it by air. Conclusion came to 105 being better towed option if it is needed.

While yes doesn't pack any more punch then a 120mm morter it also has more then twice the range. There can be benefits for having a light towed artillery that can be shifted around far quicker then the SPG. I did however state trialing it out. We have the guns sitting around, wouldn't hurt to give the idea a look at and see how it performs.

 

[Redlands18]

Also lets not underestimate the sheer logistical size of the task facing RAA in the decade ahead, they have no experience in operating SP Armour, no experience in operating Tracked Vehicles, no experience in operating MRLs. They are going to have to lean heavily on the RAAC for expertise in learning how to operate Armoured Vehicles, lean heavily on Allies to learn how to operate MRLs,
A lot of hard work ahead

 

[ADMk2]

Well we to my knowledge still have the L118/119 guns in storage might be time to break them out and trial them in conjunction with the SPG's when we do get them. As for the 777's if it isn't too costly or difficult throw them into storage with the 198's. Just some random thoughts running through my mind.

The L119/8 guns were all disposed of by way of tender in the 2012 - 2015 timeframe. We don’t have them in storage any longer.

Disposal of Ex-Defence 105mm Hamel Guns, and Abbott Conversion Kit L119-F1 to L118-F1 - Australian Tenders

Disposal of Ex-Defence 105mm Hamel Guns, and Abbott Conversion Kit L119-F1 to L118-F1

www.australiantenders.com.au

Similarly with the M198’s.

Closed ATM View - DMOLSD/RFT0065/2015: AusTender

AusTender provides centralised publication of Australian Government business opportunities, annual procurement plans and contracts awarded.

www.tenders.gov.au

 

[ngatimozart]

Just a point to remember that both towed and SPG arty have pros and cons as does 155 mm and 105 mm. This Think Defence article is well worth reading because it covers both aspects.

105mm, 155mm or Something In-between?

A guest post from Obsvr The defining characteristic of field artillery for the last century has been ‘firepower mobility’ of indirect fire. Any target within range can be engaged, providing the eff…

www.thinkdefence.co.uk

 

[vonnoobie]

Just a point to remember that both towed and SPG arty have pros and cons as does 155 mm and 105 mm. This Think Defence article is well worth reading because it covers both aspects.

105mm, 155mm or Something In-between?

A guest post from Obsvr The defining characteristic of field artillery for the last century has been ‘firepower mobility’ of indirect fire. Any target within range can be engaged, providing the eff…

www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Bloody brilliant read, cheers. Thanks for that. Does put it all into perspective. Off hand would there be any commonality in munitions if we acquired a 127mm gun with the RAN. (No I am not advocating that just simple curiosity).

In my mind on paper we would be good with 155mm SPGs and 105mm +/- towed guns but I concede @Redlands18 point about logistics. We may have enough capacity may not time will tell.

 

[oldsig127]

In my mind on paper we would be good with 155mm SPGs and 105mm +/- towed guns but I concede @Redlands18 point about logistics. We may have enough capacity may not time will tell.

You might read @ADMk2 a few posts back. Time has already told. And tolled for that matter. We no longer have the 105mm guns.

oldsig