A
Aussie Digger
Guest
You can read about the battle here:
http://www.defence.gov.au/DefenceBlog/2008/0225_0302.htm#contact
81mm mortars, 25mm Bushmasters, everything they had was employed in the battle...
http://www.defence.gov.au/DefenceBlog/2008/0225_0302.htm#contact
81mm mortars, 25mm Bushmasters, everything they had was employed in the battle...
Land 17 options whittled down
http://www.australiandefence.com.au...objectID/0695B568-65BF-75E5-C5AC6D6FEA9F604F/
"
Tenix Defence has confirmed that it and Bofors will not be offering the Archer wheeled self-propelled howitzer (SPH) for Land 17, and Rheinmetall has also decided against bidding the Denel G6 for the same requirement (quick note that Rheinmetall has just bought a 51 per cent stake in the South African munitions outfit, subject to relevant approvals).
With both wheeled SPH systems no longer in contention for this requirement, there remains some doubt as to whether Krauss Maffei Wegmann (KMW) will go ahead in offering its much favoured PzH 2000 tracked SPH.
If it doesn’t, there is a possibility that the SPH element of Land 17 may be faced with only one contender, the Samsung Techwin AS-9.
This being the case, it could also face a hostile National Security Committee of Cabinet at second pass, that might demand a major revision of the artillery replacement project, possibly including scrapping expensive self-propelled artillery systems in favour of an all-lightweight towed 155mm howitzer fleet.
There are whispers, wholly unconfirmed, that the L17 PO is bending over backwards to encourage KMW. Was this the purpose of the two-month extension to the tender’s closing date?
These vile whispers even point to recent changes in SPH protection levels as accommodating KMW concerns.
But we don’t listen to such talk…
So, although there is still some uncertainty as to KMW’s intentions, the outcome of last September’s RFT, for the supply of the SPH capability, is currently a run-off between the two tracked heavyweights, the Samsung Techwin AS-9, and the KMW PzH 2000.
The former is teamed with Raytheon Australia and the latter with BAE Systems Australia."
Well there you go, and I thought Archer was a fair chance.
Now have I got this right, Rheinmetall have bought a controlling interest in Denel Munitions. Denel will no longer offer the G-6 for Land 17? Interesting.
This being the same Rheinmetall that is part of the KVM Pzh 2000 offer?
I don't like the future of the G-6
I understand that the land 17 RFT is for between 18 to 36 units(?).
According to recent media reports, defence is supposed to be exempt from the current federal government's razor gang. However I'd be surprised if 36 units were purchased.
rb
http://www.australiandefence.com.au...objectID/0695B568-65BF-75E5-C5AC6D6FEA9F604F/
"
Tenix Defence has confirmed that it and Bofors will not be offering the Archer wheeled self-propelled howitzer (SPH) for Land 17, and Rheinmetall has also decided against bidding the Denel G6 for the same requirement (quick note that Rheinmetall has just bought a 51 per cent stake in the South African munitions outfit, subject to relevant approvals).
With both wheeled SPH systems no longer in contention for this requirement, there remains some doubt as to whether Krauss Maffei Wegmann (KMW) will go ahead in offering its much favoured PzH 2000 tracked SPH.
If it doesn’t, there is a possibility that the SPH element of Land 17 may be faced with only one contender, the Samsung Techwin AS-9.
This being the case, it could also face a hostile National Security Committee of Cabinet at second pass, that might demand a major revision of the artillery replacement project, possibly including scrapping expensive self-propelled artillery systems in favour of an all-lightweight towed 155mm howitzer fleet.
There are whispers, wholly unconfirmed, that the L17 PO is bending over backwards to encourage KMW. Was this the purpose of the two-month extension to the tender’s closing date?
These vile whispers even point to recent changes in SPH protection levels as accommodating KMW concerns.
But we don’t listen to such talk…
So, although there is still some uncertainty as to KMW’s intentions, the outcome of last September’s RFT, for the supply of the SPH capability, is currently a run-off between the two tracked heavyweights, the Samsung Techwin AS-9, and the KMW PzH 2000.
The former is teamed with Raytheon Australia and the latter with BAE Systems Australia."
Well there you go, and I thought Archer was a fair chance.
Now have I got this right, Rheinmetall have bought a controlling interest in Denel Munitions. Denel will no longer offer the G-6 for Land 17? Interesting.
This being the same Rheinmetall that is part of the KVM Pzh 2000 offer?
I don't like the future of the G-6
I understand that the land 17 RFT is for between 18 to 36 units(?).
According to recent media reports, defence is supposed to be exempt from the current federal government's razor gang. However I'd be surprised if 36 units were purchased.
rb
the road runner
Active Member
I hope our troops do get self propelled artillery and also towed arty.I think that the more flexible the Army is the more it has to offer.I like the idea of having arty that can be underslung by helicopter and taken to where it is needed on the battlefield.(as the brittish do with there 105mm hammels in the ghan and iraq)I would like to see the M777 howitzers(155mm) purchased for the towed and underslung roles for army.The M777 is in operation with our allies the USA,Canada and England.Makes sense for us to operate as we fight as a coalition force(well in afghan anyhow)
I think the AS-9 will be chosen as our new arty ,as it has a number of components identical to the abrams tanks,thus minimising logistics and training(mechanical training)Its all about cost cutting these days?.The AS-9 holds 48 round of ammo and it is known to be a very fast vehicle and did really well at puckka when they were beieng trialed.
But i really do like the PZH-2000nl,it dose look like a deadley piece of kit>It holds 60 round(12 more than the K-9) and has the awsome dna of the LEO 2 chassis.IT is more armoured than the k-9 too.I heard a rumour(not sure if its true,maybee someone here can add some info on this matter) that the Dutch wanted to swap 12-18 (new as surplus)PZH-2000 for around 300 odd Aussie bushmaster vehicles.If this is true,i hope we do,do a deal ,as it will give Australia 12-18 state of the art SPH,with the bendigo bushmaster plant pumping out another 300 or so bushies.Also the PZH-2000 will be delivered in a timley manner. I Know the Germans do know how to engineer moving machinery,they are very good at this.VERY GOOD!(wish we had the LEO 2,well im dreamin again )
If we were to get say both SPH and M777 arty of 155 mm caliber it will also reduce the burden of logistics as we will be using 155mm shells for both pieces of kit.(not using 105mm shells for leo 1 or 105 mm hammels)
check out this link(dont know if i can post links yet:unknown )
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-17-artillery-replacement-gets-goahead-01928/
The Hardened and network Army will need a SPH that has speed agility and devestating fire power,whatever SPH is chossen for Australia ,i think it has been a long time in comming
MEEP MEEP
I think the AS-9 will be chosen as our new arty ,as it has a number of components identical to the abrams tanks,thus minimising logistics and training(mechanical training)Its all about cost cutting these days?
.The AS-9 holds 48 round of ammo and it is known to be a very fast vehicle and did really well at puckka when they were beieng trialed.But i really do like the PZH-2000nl,it dose look like a deadley piece of kit>It holds 60 round(12 more than the K-9) and has the awsome dna of the LEO 2 chassis.IT is more armoured than the k-9 too.I heard a rumour(not sure if its true,maybee someone here can add some info on this matter) that the Dutch wanted to swap 12-18 (new as surplus)PZH-2000 for around 300 odd Aussie bushmaster vehicles.If this is true,i hope we do,do a deal ,as it will give Australia 12-18 state of the art SPH,with the bendigo bushmaster plant pumping out another 300 or so bushies.Also the PZH-2000 will be delivered in a timley manner. I Know the Germans do know how to engineer moving machinery,they are very good at this.VERY GOOD!(wish we had the LEO 2,well im dreamin again
)If we were to get say both SPH and M777 arty of 155 mm caliber it will also reduce the burden of logistics as we will be using 155mm shells for both pieces of kit.(not using 105mm shells for leo 1 or 105 mm hammels)
check out this link(dont know if i can post links yet:unknown )
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-17-artillery-replacement-gets-goahead-01928/
The Hardened and network Army will need a SPH that has speed agility and devestating fire power,whatever SPH is chossen for Australia ,i think it has been a long time in comming
MEEP MEEP
The K-9 has no common components with the Abrams just like the Panzerhaubitze 2000 has no common components with the Leopard II (Apart from the Swedes using the PzH2000's torsion bars for their Strv122).
IIRC the Dutch indeed offered surplus PzH2000s but Austraöia didn't go for it.
IIRC the Dutch indeed offered surplus PzH2000s but Austraöia didn't go for it.
the road runner
Active Member
Thanx for the info Waylander,my knowladge on defense is not too great but im learning.Anyhow i read in defence today that the K-9 has the same transmission and other components of the M-1.Well thats what i read.
Also read there were wepons of mass destruction in IRAQnfloorl:
Guess you cant read everything you read.
Waylander do you know the reason we did not go for it?
maybee tendering process was already in full swing?
also do you have a link for this deal the dutch were offering to the aussies i would be intrested in reading about it.thanx in advance Waylander
MEEP MEEP
Also read there were wepons of mass destruction in IRAQ
nfloorl: Guess you cant read everything you read.
Waylander do you know the reason we did not go for it?
maybee tendering process was already in full swing?
also do you have a link for this deal the dutch were offering to the aussies i would be intrested in reading about it.thanx in advance Waylander
MEEP MEEP
Roadrunner, i totally agree with your comment about maintaining a Towed ATY unit, that can be air mobile by chopper. Not only do i agree, i believe it is essential to maintain the capability! If we became involved in a conflict closer to home, as a seco, i would want atry cover for my patrol no matter where it was...and although the SP 155,s would have great range, they could be restricted by terrain in our region. Both SP, and towed are needed, but will Rudd cover the expense?
The K-9 does use the same transmission as the M1 Abrams tank, the Allison X1100 unit. Ironically it also uses the same engine as the PzH2000, the MTU 801.
Land 17 is going to acquire both towed and self-propelled 155mm artillery for the Australian Army. Up to 35 towed guns, M777A2, and up to 30 SP guns, K-9 or PzH2000. The offer of surplus Dutch PzH2000s was rejected because it did not provide an adequate indication of life of type costs. However the commercial tender by KMW for the PzH2000s is likely to include surplus Dutch guns not new builds.
Road Runner,
The UK doesn't have the M-777.........The programme, LIMAWS-G, was cancelled due to a lack of funds as a result of Afghanistan, and the retard Brown who is now PM being too stupid to see the necessity. He was, at the time, Chancellor of the Exchequer (Minister of Finance) and the primary person who led to the parlous defence funding situation in the UK today.
Australia needs both towed and SPH versions of the 155mm that is obvious but I personally seriously doubt that we will get both at the same time. SPH first and then some years later possibly M-777.
The UK doesn't have the M-777.........The programme, LIMAWS-G, was cancelled due to a lack of funds as a result of Afghanistan, and the retard Brown who is now PM being too stupid to see the necessity. He was, at the time, Chancellor of the Exchequer (Minister of Finance) and the primary person who led to the parlous defence funding situation in the UK today.
Australia needs both towed and SPH versions of the 155mm that is obvious but I personally seriously doubt that we will get both at the same time. SPH first and then some years later possibly M-777.
the road runner
Active Member
Buglerbilly,
Thanx for the info i read that the uk were buying the M-777,
I guess that there is alot of miss information on the Internet.
Also Jezza you think a wheeled SPH whill have better mobility?
well i think it would be very mobile on a paved road or dusty dirt roads ,but i think the mobility of a wheeled SPH would find it dificult to operate in muddy/tropical environments.
As old faithful has pointed out it would be difficult for even a tracked SPH to operate in our imediate terain.Now in Afghanistan the Tracked SPH of the dutch have suported the diggers on a number of fire missions.Very nice piece of kit!:nutkick
AGRA thanx for the info,35 towed guns ? I hope so i thought we were getting 18 odd tow guns.ALSO 30 SPH WOW times are looking good for the ARMY
1 more question dose australia make its own 155mm ammo for there arty?
Or we buy 155mm shells off german? american? who supplies the ADF?
MEEP MEEP
Thanx for the info i read that the uk were buying the M-777,
I guess that there is alot of miss information on the Internet.
Also Jezza you think a wheeled SPH whill have better mobility?
well i think it would be very mobile on a paved road or dusty dirt roads ,but i think the mobility of a wheeled SPH would find it dificult to operate in muddy/tropical environments.
As old faithful has pointed out it would be difficult for even a tracked SPH to operate in our imediate terain.Now in Afghanistan the Tracked SPH of the dutch have suported the diggers on a number of fire missions.Very nice piece of kit!:nutkick
AGRA thanx for the info,35 towed guns ? I hope so i thought we were getting 18 odd tow guns.ALSO 30 SPH WOW times are looking good for the ARMY
1 more question dose australia make its own 155mm ammo for there arty?
Or we buy 155mm shells off german? american? who supplies the ADF?
MEEP MEEP
Australia has no domestic 155mm ammunition capability. We currently buy our 155 from South Korea, a deal that also involves them buying explosive filler from us. In order to manufacture 155 in Australia we would need to buy new tooling as the current system in operation at the Benalla ammunition plant can only forge 105 and 127 shells (155 is too big for it). The Benalla ammunition plant is managed under the Strategic Agreement Munitions Supply (SAMS) between the Commonwealth and Thales Australia (ADI).
Jezza
Member
Australia should strive to be more self sufficient with defence.
Should build own rounds etc
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I suspect with the withdrawal of the L-118 and M2A2 105mm artillery pieces from the Army in-line with the Land 17 artillery replacement project and the subsequent lack of need for 105mm artillery rounds that entails, that Benalla may indeed re-tool and start producing 155mm munitions...
The vast majority of our ammunition natures are manufactured within Australia. With the new enthusiasm and funding for our munitions manufacture, I suspect new natures, such as 120mm Abrams ammunition, 30mm Tiger ammo etc, will eventually be manufactured in Australia...
If memory serves, they where offered Bofors 155mm truck-towed and refused Ceaser.
They also turned down Dutch PZH2000 - offered at quite a rate. If the South Koreans can offer offest, perhaps K-9 then?? But surely we are only taliking about 30-to-50 units tops? Not really a long-term tech offset...
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I think the PZH-2000 is the definite favourite between the 2 platforms that seem to have "short listed".
The original deal for the PZH-2000 was initially rejected, but it was nothing to do with the capability itself, but rather the support costs for the platform were lacking in detail. Considering how we got hosed by EADS on the Tiger when they lied about the support costs for the Tiger (making it seem like a bargain compared to Apache) I don't think this is too unreasonable.
However I believe the PZH-2000 will probably be ordered, unless the Government keeps listening to civiians and not Defence Professionals. If that happens we probably won't get SPG's at all because they might be "big" or "giant" or "not suited to Defence of Australia" operations or some other rubbish.
The tender details requested costings on a number of packages with the smallest being 18x guns (2 operational batteries worth) and the largest being 36x guns (4-5x batteries worth).
you are correct Izzy, it is not the biggest military project in the world, but the project as a whole is still worth $600m... Hence the interest and spotlight on it...
Thanks A.D, it is a darn good artillery piece and is most likely the best SPH that is currently fielded.