More Abrams for ADF?

[HYPERION III]

I guess we are only getting 60 of them so we dont send the wrong message to our neiboughs, we dont want to trigger an arms race do we?

I am glad about the abrams though, they are a mean set of wheels (covered in tracks).

I wish we could get some bradley's also, and apache gunships would be nice.

 

[driftder]

I guess we are only getting 60 of them so we dont send the wrong message to our neiboughs, we dont want to trigger an arms race do we?

I am glad about the abrams though, they are a mean set of wheels (covered in tracks).

I wish we could get some bradley's also, and apache gunships would be nice.

even with 60 units, the neighbours will still try to dictate or limit how your arms which belong to you, should be used. worse they will even tell you where you should get your source from and what model, type you should buy.

since its going to boil down to a ugly squabble, why bother? just get the Abrams and flash them around

since you got it, flaunt it...

 

[cherry]

I dont see what all the fuss is about. We have been operating around 100 Leopards for decades and now suddenly a purchase of only 59 Abrams is a sensitive issue for our poor neighbours. Number one, we are purchasing less tanks than we have traditionally had, and number two, we should have bought 100 Abrams instead of the poultry 59 that we have bought. We have every right to protect our people and we have every right to purchase what ever military equipment it takes to achieve that, and if it starts an arms race then so be it.

59 Abrams tanks and 22 Tiger ARH is probably the bare minimum we need. If it came to the crunch and we were involved in a real serious conflict then I think these two platforms will be the first to be expanded in terms of numbers.

 

[driftder]

I dont see what all the fuss is about. We have been operating around 100 Leopards for decades and now suddenly a purchase of only 59 Abrams is a sensitive issue for our poor neighbours. Number one, we are purchasing less tanks than we have traditionally had, and number two, we should have bought 100 Abrams instead of the poultry 59 that we have bought. We have every right to protect our people and we have every right to purchase what ever military equipment it takes to achieve that, and if it starts an arms race then so be it.

59 Abrams tanks and 22 Tiger ARH is probably the bare minimum we need. If it came to the crunch and we were involved in a real serious conflict then I think these two platforms will be the first to be expanded in terms of numbers.

whoa there, cool down. if you read carefully, what I posted previously is Oz's arms purchases are indeed your own legitimate decision and based on your requirements and needs, so don't get my head on a platter will you? no need to go tearing off as if it's the New Guinea/Solomon isles epic all over again or Long Thanh for that matter.

personal note though is if shove comes to push, with your current C-in-C, its "full steam ahead and damn the engines!"

 

[Cootamundra]

I wish we could get some bradley's also, and apache gunships would be nice.

I don't, we don't need any IFVs or we shouldn't if they complete the M113 upgrades (that are 4 years overdue) and maintain our ASLAVs. Actually what both of these platforms need is some anti armour weapons, Javelins installed on varients would be a good option. But we don't need Bradleys at the moment, nor do we need Apache's, the Aussie Tiger is going to be an excellent recon CAS platform. What we need is another squadron!

 

[pepsi]

Speaking of the Tiger, isn't it a bit strange to only be getting 26 of them (i think its 26 right?)

I thought they were supposed to take over from the kiowa, which afaik we have around 50 of..

 

[driftder]

Speaking of the Tiger, isn't it a bit strange to only be getting 26 of them (i think its 26 right?)

I thought they were supposed to take over from the kiowa, which afaik we have around 50 of..

perhaps its expensive? quite a show stopper and performance wise, better then the Apache. but of course, not battle proven but bundled with the advanced Hellfire, can pack quite a punch for a CAS/AT role.

 

[Cootamundra]

Speaking of the Tiger, isn't it a bit strange to only be getting 26 of them (i think its 26 right?)

I thought they were supposed to take over from the kiowa, which afaik we have around 50 of..

Actually it is only 22, thats one squadron plus training and attrition. I don't think they ever planned on a 1 for 1 replacement, although that would've been great if they did. 1 Tiger is easily worth several Kiowa's but I would love to see another 14 which would give us 3xsquadrons of 12 aircraft each. Anyway 22 will do for now....

 

[SargeAUS]

The 22 Tigers will actually be organised into two 8-aircraft squadrons (161 and 162 Reconnaissance Squadrons), with the rest for training.

Regarding replacing the Kiowas, a Tiger is more capable than any number of Kiowas you care to mention. The most potent sensor on a Kiowa is the pilot's Mk.I eyeball, compared to the array of electronic goodies available on the Tiger. Also, not all of the Kiowas are tasked with reconnaissance duties, they also perform training and liason roles. Currently there are only two Kiowa sqns tasked with reconnaissance, albeit larger than the future Tiger sqns. The Kiowa's training role is being replaced under a seperate project.

Having said that though, I would very much like to see at least a third sqn of Tigers procured, considering the taskings that will be required of them.

- Sarge

 

[Cootamundra]

The 22 Tigers will actually be organised into two 8-aircraft squadrons (161 and 162 Reconnaissance Squadrons), with the rest for training.

Regarding replacing the Kiowas, a Tiger is more capable than any number of Kiowas you care to mention. The most potent sensor on a Kiowa is the pilot's Mk.I eyeball, compared to the array of electronic goodies available on the Tiger. Also, not all of the Kiowas are tasked with reconnaissance duties, they also perform training and liason roles. Currently there are only two Kiowa sqns tasked with reconnaissance, albeit larger than the future Tiger sqns. The Kiowa's training role is being replaced under a seperate project.

Having said that though, I would very much like to see at least a third sqn of Tigers procured, considering the taskings that will be required of them.

- Sarge

Thanks for the clarification Sarge, I recall reading something like this before, but looks like I forgot it. And as I said above 3 sqd's would be much better than 2, especially as the Tiger is turning out to be such a good platform. Cheers mate....

 

[aaaditya]

perhaps its expensive? quite a show stopper and performance wise, better then the Apache. but of course, not battle proven but bundled with the advanced Hellfire, can pack quite a punch for a CAS/AT role.

also a tiger helicopter crashed during the air 88 competition and the crew members calmly walked out of it.that shows the level of crew protetcion that the tiger has,but in terms of firepower i would rate the ah64d longbow higher.

 

[driftder]

also a tiger helicopter crashed during the air 88 competition and the crew members calmly walked out of it.that shows the level of crew protetcion that the tiger has,but in terms of firepower i would rate the ah64d longbow higher.

really? well that's news to me as not having privilege to such info. but was it at low level or high altitude when the crash happens? anyways quite impressive as most don't get unscathed from chopper crashes.

btw the Rooivalk and the AH-1Z Super Cobra (or is it King Cobra?) looks good too, quite cost effective.

anyway back to topic....how did we end up talking abt choppers btw

 

[pepsi]

Would we see any tigers operating off the new LHD's? Or would they just be transport for them with the tanks or something

Surely having a few operating off the LHD's would provide a lot of support for troops on the ground

 

[gf0012-aust]

Back on topic fellas. start a new one if you want to continue on about helos...

 

[Supe]

Spotted on tfc: Pics of the Australian M1A1. click

 

[pepsi]

Cheers Supe, too bad they didn't take more photos

Does anyone know if there is any word yet on if 59 is the final number or what the likelihood of more being purchased is?

 

[Supe]

too bad they didn't take more photos

Or larger pics. (a kingdom for a walkaround of that Abrams) I suspect those pics will end up in Defence Today publication.

 

[shrub]

Cheers Supe, too bad they didn't take more photos

Does anyone know if there is any word yet on if 59 is the final number or what the likelihood of more being purchased is?

yes 59 is the final number cos no1 they dnt need any more than that and no2 it wouldnt be very wise to buy more cos it cost to much seein as 5000 of the abramhs approx 6000 parts are being replaced in the great traditon of australian equipment especially as these extra tanks would just sit there not bein used:rel

 

[blueorchid]

yes 59 is the final number cos no1 they dnt need any more than that and no2 it wouldnt be very wise to buy more cos it cost to much seein as 5000 of the abramhs approx 6000 parts are being replaced in the great traditon of australian equipment especially as these extra tanks would just sit there not bein used:rel

The replacement of parts for the ADF's Abrams is not part of an "great tradition of australian equipment" but part of the USA's Abrams AIM program.
The tanks selected for the ADF requirement were from storage in Germany and have never been issued to a unit, they had low mileage and low gun barrel use
see more about the Abrams tank from this site.
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/abrams.htm

The Abrams Integrated Management (AIM) Overhaul Program​

The Abrams Integrated Management (AIM) Overhaul Program is an innovative teaming of the prime contractor, GDLS, and Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) to refurbish the tank to a like-new condition. The AIM Overhaul is the Army's under-funded program to sustain the nearly 7,000 Abrams Tanks as part of the total recapitalization plan. AIM is funded at 135 tanks per year which translates into a 12-year rebuild cycle for the active component. As the M1A2 fleet ages, the Army must expand AIM to include about 90 M1A2 SEPs per year beginning in 2012. With a 20-year rebuild cycle for the reserve component, the Army must implement a 90 tank per year program beginning in 2006.
Exploiting the unique strengths of both the manufacturer and the Army depot, the tank is completely remanufactured resulting in a nearly new tank. AIM Overhaul increases readiness, reduces operations and support costs, standardizes configuration, and minimally sustains the Abrams industrial base. The first M1A1s are now 15-years old and will approach 50-years old by the time the Army ultimately replaces them. With old equipment, sustainment is only part of the challenge; the Army must also maintain combat overmatch.
M1A1 tanks enter the process at Anniston Army Depot, Alabama, where the entire vehicle is completely disassembled with each component cleaned, inspected and evaluated for rebuilding, refurbishment, or complete replacement. While many of the rebuild components stay at Anniston, other parts are sent to one of several rebuild sites. These sites include General Dynamics' facilities in Scranton, Pennsylvania, Muskegon, Michigan, as well as other Army depots. Turret and hull subsystems are first worked on at Anniston and then shipped to Lima, Ohio, where the tank is reassembled, tested and accepted back into the Army's fleet.

The AIM Overhaul program in its objective state will produce M1A1Ds.
From the above site





​

 

[cherry]

With the updated DCP due out soon, there is also more and more talk of ADF requiring even more Abrams, or even something along the lines of the Bradley IFV. Some people have stated that with the purchase of the Abrams, we now lack something to follow the Abrams in and follow up with a bit of firepower, hence something like the Bradley or some other IFV needs to be required in numbers around 100-150. Forgive my lack of knowledge, but why can't our ASLAV-25s be used for this role? They have great firepower with the 25mm Bushmaster canon and seem to have a reasonable level of armour. And, with an upgrade on the cards very soon for the ASLAV, they may be even more lethal. If they can be used in this role, do we need more of them?