Australian Army Discussions and Updates

Bob53

Well-Known Member
I know this was touched on a week or so ago but attached is from latest DTR. For a force that is light on for bodies the autonomous Himars launcher seems like a sensible multiplier if AU proceeds with this type platform. I think the focus is on littoral defence and area denial under land 8113 long range fires, but it also gives army a strategic mainland defence capability that has previously been limited to RAAF and RAN. My guess is that a manned system could eventually have 2-3 Autonomous” wingmen”. When managed by a networked and AI powered battle management network it will bring an unheralded capability to The Australian Army. F879E390-D51E-4E14-A3F3-D865620E7986.jpeg
 

t68

Well-Known Member
Sorry just noticed another 48 on order. Still with 700+ armoured vehicles still seems light on.

I am a little bit surprised that they didn't expand with a mixed fleet of 4x4, 8x8 plus a few the 10x10 as I imagine those Abrams MBT would drain dry that 18kl PDQ

Military trucks. Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles expands production (topwar.ru)

But I was talking to a couple of drivers recently about the new trucks whilst great off road they are a PITA on road and the bureaucratic burden with permits just to drive them on the roads, was quite shocked at the crap they have to go through with permits and complying with NHVR work diary someone must think they are run of the mill highway runners. actually puts people off going RACT so they tell me.
 

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
Serious question. Who exactly is going to conduct all the operator maintenance on these unmanned vehicle, and all their complex autonomous operating systems?
 

OldTex

Well-Known Member
Serious question. Who exactly is going to conduct all the operator maintenance on these unmanned vehicle, and all their complex autonomous operating systems?
Definitely agree with that question, and would include the refuelling of the vehicle and the APU/generator (without which the AI is a dumb lump of silicon). I would also add "Who will do the reloading of these vehicles after expending their munitions?"
 

Bob53

Well-Known Member
Definitely agree with that question, and would include the refuelling of the vehicle and the APU/generator (without which the AI is a dumb lump of silicon). I would also add "Who will do the reloading of these vehicles after expending their munitions?"
I think the intended use is to launch a strike and return to back to base but it’s a good question. I think the USMC ops plan is to fly/drive into area and then quickly exit. My limited understanding is that any MLRS type system isn’t sitting in one spot and pumping out load after load…meaning a team of loaders and logistics vehicles don’t necessarily travel to fire zone with the launchers. Given the size of the projectiles the launchers fire and return for reloading with specialised equipment.

And seriously @OldTex don’t under estimate what AI will bring to any domain it operates in. It will be so powerful with learning capabilities that it’s is almost impossible to grasp for the average punter including myself. In the private domain automation is a ripple that will trim into a tidal wave in the coming years. The learning in that space is so rapid I suspect it’s going to very short order that where a pilot is in the plane for very basic reasons. All complex decision making and planning will be done. If it gets to something like dog fighting with a human vs AI the human will most likely be dead in very short order.
 

Bob53

Well-Known Member
According to the article you linked it will be 35 by Jan 2023. Did you not read the last paragraph?
Yes and noted I think our posts crossed but still seems light on for 700 odd armoured vehicles. I know they won’t all be in one spot at one time so assume the numbers cover expected operations.
 

Raven22

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
There are only a small number of dedicated fuel trucks because most fuel delivery will be done by fuel modules on the back of normal trucks. I can’t remember how many fuel modules were purchased, but it was in the hundreds
 

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
Posted this in the RAN thread, but relevant here too.
Since the Independent Landing Craft and LARC-V replacement were brought up here are links to Navantia Australia's fact sheets on prospective offerings.
Three "Kodal-class" ILC variants, one 25m (can fit in RAN LHD welldeck) & two 35m, and the "Platypus" LARC-V replacement
I've repeatedly filled out their annoying information blocks to open the PDFs so you won't have to (plus I wanted to download them too...)

Kodal-class Independent Landing Craft:
Kodal 75S, 25m with bow ramp: https://navantia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/KODAL75S.pdf
Kodal 90DT, 35m drive through: https://navantia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/KODAL90DT.pdf
Kodal 90S 35m with bow ramp: https://navantia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/KODAL90S.pdf


Platypus Amphibious Vehicle: https://navantia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/PLATYPUS.pdf
(not a lot of specific information)
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Posted this in the RAN thread, but relevant here too.
Well its a Army project so belongs here even more so then the RAN Thread.
Yes Navantia looks to be in a quite strong position for both of these. Already has a close working relationship with the ADF through the LHDs, Hobarts, AORs and LCM-1Es.
Has teamed up with Rheinmettal for the LARC-V replacement who will bring a production site with them that is currently building the Boxer ARV and possibly the Lynx KF-41 in the future.
Looking at the 3 LCM versions i think its more likely the 2 larger Craft are more likely to be looked at, the Army is looking at something that will be able to carry up to 40% more, has better Speed and Sea Keeping over the LCM-8,
Mind you the claim that the Kodal 90S can carry 405 people may be a misprint
 
Last edited:

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
Well its a Army project so belongs here even more so then the RAN Thread.
Yes Navantia looks to be in a quite strong position for both of these. Already has a close working relationship with the ADF through the LHDs, Hobarts, AORs and LCM-1Es.
Has teamed up with Rheinmettal for the LARC-V replacement who will bring a production site with them that is currently building the Boxer ARV and possibly the Lynx KF-41 in the future.
Looking at the 3 LCM versions i think its more likely the 2 larger Craft are more likely to be looked at, the Army is looking at something that will be able to carry up to 40% more, has better Speed and Sea Keeping over the LCM-8,
Mind you the claim that the Kodal 90S can carry 405 people may be a misprint
I would assume the 25m 75S is more targeted as a replacement for the LCM-1E/LLC, so as to accommodate the increased weight of the upgrade to the M1A2B SEPv3/M1A2C
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
I would assume the 25m 75S is more targeted as a replacement for the LCM-1E/LLC, so as to accommodate the increased weight of the upgrade to the M1A2B SEPv3/M1A2C
There is no requirement for a LCM-1E replacement at this time, this is about replacing the LCM-8 which are over 40 years old.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
It appears the Australian Army has taken delivery of 2 new* Chinooks with 2 more to come.
*Article doesn’t say whether they are Brand New or ex US Army, but going on the wording of the recent DCSA release they are coming out of US Army stocks, i certainly wouldn’t trust the ABC to know the difference.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
It appears the Australian Army has taken delivery of 2 new* Chinooks with 2 more to come.
*Article doesn’t say whether they are Brand New or ex US Army, but going on the wording of the recent DCSA release they are coming out of US Army stocks, i certainly wouldn’t trust the ABC to know the difference.
In the article WRT the MRH-90 "The fleet was also suspended in 2019 when problems with a tail rotor on one airframe was discovered." I'd be somewhat concerned if said tail rotor wasn't there. Journos eh :p
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
It appears the Australian Army has taken delivery of 2 new* Chinooks with 2 more to come.
*Article doesn’t say whether they are Brand New or ex US Army, but going on the wording of the recent DCSA release they are coming out of US Army stocks, i certainly wouldn’t trust the ABC to know the difference.
According DSCA Australia – CH-47F Chinook Helicopters | Defense Security Cooperation Agency they came from us army stocks. WIth spares, support and unique modifications will come in at $259m USD or less. At that price they won't be brand new (for reference when we got our first 7 F's the price was $560m USD) but will have plenty of life in them.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
ADBR are reporting that they are coming from US Army slots and the 2nd two will be delivered in 2022. Boeing have put there 2 cents in so i think they are brand new.
ADM Magazine is reporting the cost at $595m, that price is way above what the DSCA announced and does sound like Brand new Aircraft.
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
ADBR are reporting that they are coming from US Army slots and the 2nd two will be delivered in 2022. Boeing have put there 2 cents in so i think they are brand new.
ADM Magazine is reporting the cost at $595m, that price is way above what the DSCA announced and does sound like Brand new Aircraft.
What we budget and what the DSCA budgets are two entirely different thinks. Our budget can include a multitude of different things from infrastructure to operation & maintenance while the DSCA listed figure is for the most part just hardware.

All other FMS regarding the CH-47F are in the range of $80-$125m USD per a bird with standard spares and support for new builds, at $65m or less ours are definitely second hand, the US likes us but they won't be giving us brand new birds below cost not to mention everything states they are coming from US stocks, not US order slots but US stocks.
 
Top