Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[ADMk2]

At a guess? At best a continuation of 2024, with increased focus on passive and cUAS systems. Likely direction that Army launchers are to shift to being more common - so that instead of buying a Patriot or Standard, we buy any SAM that will fit in a HiMARs pod. Or similar. That gives CJOPS options - and the threat doesn't know if it's a GMLR, AShM, SAM or hypersonic missile. And, lets not kid ourselves, a common launcher should be simple to build from an industry point of view.

I don't think there will be land based MR GBAD effect in service for a while; certainly not one capable of defending multiple points. I think all the FIC will be in place, and it will be a quick capability to raise, but the missile units will be the last pieces.

Sounds pretty reasonable, though I am unaware of any efforts to convert HIMARS into a common launch system, I doubt it would be difficult to do it.

I recall though that MR GBAD was to be deployed by the RAAF, not Army. Are they under similar constraints as Army when it comes to deploying new capability?

They don't seem to be, when it comes to shiny new aircraft...

 

[Takao]

Sounds pretty reasonable, though I am unaware of any efforts to convert HIMARS into a common launch system, I doubt it would be difficult to do it.

I recall though that MR GBAD was to be deployed by the RAAF, not Army. Are they under similar constraints as Army when it comes to deploying new capability?

They don't seem to be, when it comes to shiny new aircraft...

Ah, poor phrasing. Not necessarily converting the M142 to shoot a SAM, rather a common system that could shoot a SAM or a PrSM or a GLMRS. A common launcher with dedicated pods would be an excellent buy

I know there are discussions about who should 'own' it; I don't really care because the reality is that its a joint asset. Just because it's a Sqn doesn't mean it only defends air bases; likewise, just because it's a Regt doesn't mean it only defends Bdes. I think the workforce question is tricker (and adds to my 'don't really care'); getting that workforce is going to be hard. Technically adept, clever, significant initiative - the ADF of 2025 is more of that than ever, and it's just going to get more as we move through 2035. The days of uneducated people filling most of the force are increasingly long gone - even the RAInf and RACT (the lowest educational requirements) now need the skills to operate and maintain radios, drones, complex platforms as well as synthases multiple different feeds all while having to operate in a environment where they will need to think for themselves. But going back to SAMs, that workforce is competing with AFVs, aircrew, cyber, long range strike, engineers, frigates, submarines - a whole shedload of stuff that will probably have a higher priority

Going to remain tight-lipped on aircraft; I've never been as disillusioned with that attitude as I was in 2025/26.....

 

[Stampede]

Ah, poor phrasing. Not necessarily converting the M142 to shoot a SAM, rather a common system that could shoot a SAM or a PrSM or a GLMRS. A common launcher with dedicated pods would be an excellent buy

I know there are discussions about who should 'own' it; I don't really care because the reality is that its a joint asset. Just because it's a Sqn doesn't mean it only defends air bases; likewise, just because it's a Regt doesn't mean it only defends Bdes. I think the workforce question is tricker (and adds to my 'don't really care'); getting that workforce is going to be hard. Technically adept, clever, significant initiative - the ADF of 2025 is more of that than ever, and it's just going to get more as we move through 2035. The days of uneducated people filling most of the force are increasingly long gone - even the RAInf and RACT (the lowest educational requirements) now need the skills to operate and maintain radios, drones, complex platforms as well as synthases multiple different feeds all while having to operate in a environment where they will need to think for themselves. But going back to SAMs, that workforce is competing with AFVs, aircrew, cyber, long range strike, engineers, frigates, submarines - a whole shedload of stuff that will probably have a higher priority

Going to remain tight-lipped on aircraft; I've never been as disillusioned with that attitude as I was in 2025/26.....

Aircraft??????
Army, Navy or Air Force.
Takao
You have left us hanging.

Cheers S

 

[Bob53]

At a guess? At best a continuation of 2024, with increased focus on passive and cUAS systems. Likely direction that Army launchers are to shift to being more common - so that instead of buying a Patriot or Standard, we buy any SAM that will fit in a HiMARs pod. Or similar. That gives CJOPS options - and the threat doesn't know if it's a GMLR, AShM, SAM or hypersonic missile. And, lets not kid ourselves, a common launcher should be simple to build from an industry point of view.

I don't think there will be land based MR GBAD effect in service for a while; certainly not one capable of defending multiple points. I think all the FIC will be in place, and it will be a quick capability to raise, but the missile units will be the last pieces.

There is HIMARs pod launched SAMs?

 

[ADMk2]

There is HIMARs pod launched SAMs?

No, he was suggesting a common launcher that is agnostic as to what munition is inside it, is an idea we should be looking at.

But, I did find that surface-launched AMRAAM was test fired from a HIMARS, way back in 2009. It was said to be successful, but obviously the concept didn’t progress much further, possibly because air defence wasn’t the priority then, that it has become since…

Lockheed Martin's HIMARS Launcher Successfully Fires Air Defense Missile

A Lockheed Martin High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) launcher successfully fired two Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) during a U.S. Army "common launcher" feasibility...

news.lockheedmartin.com