Australian Army Discussions and Updates

V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
ADMk2 said:
Meanwhile, HIMARS has arrived…

More at:


View attachment 52524
View attachment 52525
Click to expand...
It will be interesting to see how the actual vehicle goes in service considering the issues that the BAE trucks had during their LAND 121 acquisition, way back when.

Does anyone remember the details?

I recall the BAE / Stuart Stevenson truck was the preferred option until it underwent service trials, where it encountered unexpected issues.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Volkodav said:
It will be interesting to see how the actual vehicle goes in service considering the issues that the BAE trucks had during their LAND 121 acquisition, way back when.

Does anyone remember the details?

I recall the BAE / Stuart Stevenson truck was the preferred option until it underwent service trials, where it encountered unexpected issues.
Click to expand...
Going to be a minuscule fleet compared to LAND 121. Can’t be too much of an issue, more than 114,000 of them have been sold around the world. Parts certainly on’t be a factor!

:D
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
ADMk2 said:
Going to be a minuscule fleet compared to LAND 121. Can’t be too much of an issue, more than 114,000 of them have been sold around the world. Parts certainly on’t be a factor!

:D
Click to expand...
I think that was the assumption with the initial modified of the shelf. The thinking was the US uses it, it will be fine, then they fitted them with the specified armour kits and handed them over to soldiers.

Shortly after contract negotiations ended and a full traditional selection process with full T&E was initiated.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Volkodav said:
I think that was the assumption with the initial modified of the shelf. The thinking was the US uses it, it will be fine, then they fitted them with the specified armour kits and handed them over to soldiers.

Shortly after contract negotiations ended and a full traditional selection process with full T&E was initiated.
Click to expand...
There is a whole ANAO report detailing the LAND 121 debacle, including the FMTV assessment and why we didn’t go for it.

Perfect reading material for an insomniac…

:D
 
Lolcake

Lolcake

Active Member
Fibre optical drones are having great success in ukraine. Unjammable and flying into enemy trenches with pinpoint accuracy, wrecking havoc.

I am unsure why we are not moving on having an army of these things now. Despite excessive netting and protection they manage to find their way in and disable vehicles or hit dismounting troops, a huge force multiplier. I would hope we move on this fast
 
S

SammyC

Well-Known Member
Lolcake said:
Fibre optical drones are having great success in ukraine. Unjammable and flying into enemy trenches with pinpoint accuracy, wrecking havoc.

I am unsure why we are not moving on having an army of these things now. Despite excessive netting and protection they manage to find their way in and disable vehicles or hit dismounting troops, a huge force multiplier. I would hope we move on this fast
Click to expand...
They are limited range though. From my understanding they can only operate within a 10-20km radius. So you do need to get within artillery firing.

I'm also unsure how beneficial they would be in a littoral environment, which is where we are preparing to operate.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
SammyC said:
They are limited range though. From my understanding they can only operate within a 10-20km radius. So you do need to get within artillery firing.

I'm also unsure how beneficial they would be in a littoral environment, which is where we are preparing to operate.
Click to expand...
Is the drone thing a passing chapter or a revolution in military affairs.
What we do know is that tens of thousands are employed currently in this ugly European war with devastating effect in the same environment that tens of thousand’s of artillery rounds are expended.
A very hostile battlefield.
Or is it that a battlefield has always been a risky place over the centuries

Do vehicles still have a place?

I would think so , but planning todays and tomorrows Army is now a very complicated calculus.

Trust the ADF makes good choices

Regards S
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
SammyC said:
They are limited range though. From my understanding they can only operate within a 10-20km radius. So you do need to get within artillery firing.

I'm also unsure how beneficial they would be in a littoral environment, which is where we are preparing to operate.
Click to expand...

They work pretty well over open plains in clear weather conditions too, I’ve noticed.

Send a few up to the Land Warfare Centre at Tully in the wet season and lets test them in a jungle environment before we get too carried away, would be my suggestion…
 
S

seaspear

Well-Known Member
Im sure I am not the only one who would consider how the A.D.F would operate in an environment such as the Ukraine battlefield with various drone warfare strategies these make the Afghanistan ied. threat pale by consideration ,I have read of examples of Trophy being able to defeat such but only select platforms will host such ,should a consideration be given for more important platforms to be included
Its not to suggest the A.D.F is not aware of these threats but that current answers are not developed yet
www.australiandefence.com.au

Defence outlines C-UAS plans - Australian Defence Magazine

Almost three years into the Ukraine war, where drones have proliferated, the Australian Defence Force is seeking a counter-drone system that will deliver a minimum capability by the end of 2030 | Max ...
www.australiandefence.com.au www.australiandefence.com.au
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Sandson41 said:
Counter drone tech is at least being rolled out.

Bushmaster gains counter-UAS tech after successful testing - Defence Connect
Company site:
DedroneOnTheMove (DedroneOTM): Vehicle Mounted Counter-Drone Protection

But it looks like a jammer, so maybe not effective against fibre optical drones...
Click to expand...
That’s a company funded demonstrator. Not kit being rolled out for our forces…

There are a million solutions out there. We just haven’t bought anything…

Camnets and small arms is our response so far…

:rolleyes:
 
Takao

Takao

The Bunker Group
Lolcake said:
Fibre optical drones are having great success in ukraine. Unjammable and flying into enemy trenches with pinpoint accuracy, wrecking havoc.

I am unsure why we are not moving on having an army of these things now. Despite excessive netting and protection they manage to find their way in and disable vehicles or hit dismounting troops, a huge force multiplier. I would hope we move on this fast
Click to expand...
Why would we?

Look at the shelf life of these Ukrainian examples? Drones from two years ago are obsolete, replaced by better/faster/more resilient models. Gosh - just compare a DJI Mavic now to 2022. The life cycle of a drone is small that fleets (unless they are being chewed up through war) quickly go out of date. And remember, assume $3k per drone and a fleet of 10 000 (which is much lower than what Ukraine or Russia are running) and that's $30 m. Bumping up numbers of either could push that to over $1 b for a wartime fleet. Rotating every 2 - 3 years is going to chew up money quickly, especially as noting they don't replace any of our capabilities, just enhance, so we have to keep the rest of the ADF going.

Better to have just enough to train up users, commanders and counter-users to keep them familiar enough as tech changes, and then a mobilisation plan that can pump out what we want/need when we have to.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Takao said:
Why would we?

Look at the shelf life of these Ukrainian examples? Drones from two years ago are obsolete, replaced by better/faster/more resilient models. Gosh - just compare a DJI Mavic now to 2022. The life cycle of a drone is small that fleets (unless they are being chewed up through war) quickly go out of date. And remember, assume $3k per drone and a fleet of 10 000 (which is much lower than what Ukraine or Russia are running) and that's $30 m. Bumping up numbers of either could push that to over $1 b for a wartime fleet. Rotating every 2 - 3 years is going to chew up money quickly, especially as noting they don't replace any of our capabilities, just enhance, so we have to keep the rest of the ADF going.

Better to have just enough to train up users, commanders and counter-users to keep them familiar enough as tech changes, and then a mobilisation plan that can pump out what we want/need when we have to.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a perfect job for 1 Armoured Regiment… Feed them a constant supply of new models for a very low dollar amount and keep Army in the loop as to new capabilities…

Of course Bruce Cameron will disagree, but it’s rather difficult to please everyone…
 
Lolcake

Lolcake

Active Member
Takao said:
Why would we?

Look at the shelf life of these Ukrainian examples? Drones from two years ago are obsolete, replaced by better/faster/more resilient models. Gosh - just compare a DJI Mavic now to 2022. The life cycle of a drone is small that fleets (unless they are being chewed up through war) quickly go out of date. And remember, assume $3k per drone and a fleet of 10 000 (which is much lower than what Ukraine or Russia are running) and that's $30 m. Bumping up numbers of either could push that to over $1 b for a wartime fleet. Rotating every 2 - 3 years is going to chew up money quickly, especially as noting they don't replace any of our capabilities, just enhance, so we have to keep the rest of the ADF going.

Better to have just enough to train up users, commanders and counter-users to keep them familiar enough as tech changes, and then a mobilisation plan that can pump out what we want/need when we have to.
Click to expand...
No doubt this qould be the way forward..Just so long as we have production facilities ready to roll and we are not left flat footed. Damn scary how these things are taking out the most modern vehicles with ease.

Moreover the modern warfighter all need to be able to operate these things should we step into a hostile environment. It should become an integral part of training.
 
S

seaspear

Well-Known Member
There's enough example of Russian tanks with counter drone technology being hit by drones because the jamming system did not work if Thales is confident fit them to some of those over in Ukraine
 
M

Massive

Well-Known Member
Takao said:
Why would we?

Look at the shelf life of these Ukrainian examples?
Click to expand...
It was for this very reason that I feel comfortable with the Sheibel Camcopter 100 cancellation - a high-cost option that was likely to become rapidly obsolete given the pace of innovation re drones.

There were other reasons I understand, though in my view the pace of innovation is a very important one.

Regards,

Massive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top