Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[Todjaeger]

Yep, thanks again - not easy it seems.
So the US has spare 39cal AS90's with AFATDS.
The Brits have spare 52cal AS90's without AFATDS.
We are looking at the PzH2000 and the South Korean (acronym forgotten) 52cal's that don't have AFATDS.
Is there a similar system to AFATDS that has been mated to a 52cal weapon, or is AFATDS the only game in town?

AS90 is a British SPH, the US SPH is the M109...

There are other fires planning and control systems out there, however Army uses AFATDS. If a non-AFATDS gun were to be adopted, then Army would need to do one of three things, adapt the gun and develop it to make it AFATDS compatible, add a second fires control and planning system to Army usage, or transition Army off AFATDS onto whatever system worked with the 52-cal gun.

Some like Abe could provide far better information than I, but AFAIK AFATDS is supposed to be one of the most capable and complete, if not the most, in terms of fires control and management. Basically not using for an Army SPH would be a step backwards in capability.

-Cheers

 

[SASWanabe]

AS90 is a British SPH, the US SPH is the M109...

also worth noting that the AS90 is a 32 cal gun. alike the M109. hence Abes comment about buying M109s

 

[Milne Bay]

AS90 is a British SPH, the US SPH is the M109...

There are other fires planning and control systems out there, however Army uses AFATDS. If a non-AFATDS gun were to be adopted, then Army would need to do one of three things, adapt the gun and develop it to make it AFATDS compatible, add a second fires control and planning system to Army usage, or transition Army off AFATDS onto whatever system worked with the 52-cal gun.

Some like Abe could provide far better information than I, but AFAIK AFATDS is supposed to be one of the most capable and complete, if not the most, in terms of fires control and management. Basically not using for an Army SPH would be a step backwards in capability.

-Cheers

So, it seems that there are no 52cal SPH's out there that have been integrated with AFATDS. Yet we want one for LAND 17. Are we waiting for someone else to pay for the integration? The US seems unwilling or uninterested in doing it.
Will we have to pay for it ourselves then? What other alternatives are there?

 

[Waylander]

The PzH uses ADLER II as a fire support tool which is also integrated into other battlefield management networks. It defenitely also is a highly capable system but as was said before it doesn't fit into the Australian networks.

The costs of putting AFATDS onto existing foreign 52cal SPGs is the whole problem of the Australian SPG procurement.

Thinking that it wouldn't cost a premium to integrate it into such a small procurement batch is IMO ridiclious. Neither KMW/Rheinmetall nor Samsung is going to shoulder the integration without Australia paying for it. Why should they. Even with long time support contracts they wouldn't make enough money out of it.

Australia only wants a dozen tubes. Buy some Paladins and call it a day while using the money saved for other important stuff.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Thinking that it wouldn't cost a premium to integrate it into such a small procurement batch is IMO ridiclious. Neither KMW/Rheinmetall nor Samsung is going to shoulder the integration without Australia paying for it. Why should they. Even with long time support contracts they wouldn't make enough money out of it.

Australia only wants a dozen tubes. Buy some Paladins and call it a day while using the money saved for other important stuff.

funny that everyone else has worked out what would have been smarter - pity that it hasn't been so blindingly obvious to others.

its just plain dumb, and the vendor would just be knitting their eyebrows at govt thinking that they were proposing a value solution on that volume

 

[Equinox]

If I remember correctly, I remember reading something about someone (think it was the Germans) having upgraded the M109 with a 52 calibre cannon as a cheaper alternative to the PzH 2000?

Not sure as to the accuracy of what I read, but I thought I would mention it.

 

[SASWanabe]

If I remember correctly, I remember reading something about someone (think it was the Germans) having upgraded the M109 with a 52 calibre cannon as a cheaper alternative to the PzH 2000?

Not sure as to the accuracy of what I read, but I thought I would mention it.

its called the M109 L52. it has the same problem as the PZH2000 and the K-9, it doesnt have AFATDS so they're really all on the same level firepower wise.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The Swiss have a neat upgrade of the M109 with a L47 barrel but the only M109 integrated with AFATDS is the M106A6 Paladin. Since its not just an issue of integrating the gun's FCS with AFATDS but having AFATDS understand the particular L52 system the problem still remains.

But it isn't rocket science to integrate an L52 system with AFATDS and Raytheon/Samsung have been motivated to do the work with their LAND 17 bid. Its just a matter of waiting to the delayed budget timetable comes around and the guns will be brought and delivered. The K9 aka AS9 will be a pretty neat system.

 

[Equinox]

its called the M109 L52. it has the same problem as the PZH2000 and the K-9, it doesnt have AFATDS so they're really all on the same level firepower wise.

Ah, I understand now; was confusing myself. Everything other than the calibre decided to slip my mind.

 

[ADMk2]

Australia only wants a dozen tubes. Buy some Paladins and call it a day while using the money saved for other important stuff.

Army wanted to in the late 90's but "weren't allowed"... I agree wholeheartedly though. We REALLY should just be buying zero-lifed M109A6's and getting on it with it. If they are good enough for the US Army, they're more than good enough for our purposes.

With the savings from not having to develop the 52Cal / AFADTS combo, we might even be able to buy another battery of M777A2's or upgrade the Mortar replacement project from 81mm to 120mm and increase our Army's overall firepower...

Btw, we are buying 18x SP guns, with 12 allocated to operational batteries (2 at present, but the guns will probably be spread between the 3 Artillery Regiments under Plan Beersheba) and the remainder at the School of Artillery and other training establishments.

 

[Milne Bay]

Army wanted to in the late 90's but "weren't allowed"... I agree wholeheartedly though. We REALLY should just be buying zero-lifed M109A6's and getting on it with it. If they are good enough for the US Army, they're more than good enough for our purposes.

With the savings from not having to develop the 52Cal / AFADTS combo, we might even be able to buy another battery of M777A2's or upgrade the Mortar replacement project from 81mm to 120mm and increase our Army's overall firepower...

Btw, we are buying 18x SP guns, with 12 allocated to operational batteries (2 at present, but the guns will probably be spread between the 3 Artillery Regiments under Plan Beersheba) and the remainder at the School of Artillery and other training establishments.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

With the savings from not having to develop the 52Cal / AFADTS combo, we might even be able to buy another battery of M777A2's or upgrade the Mortar replacement project from 81mm to 120mm and increase our Army's overall firepower....

The price difference between 18 AS-9s and 18 M109A6s would be a bit more extreme than that.

 

[Waylander]

What could one expect to be the price for Australia if it asked for 18 zeroed Paladins? (I expect the needed localization modifications would be neglectible)

 

[donuteater]

Just a question to anyone in the army, why the hell do the loadmasters just look out the little window on a blackhawk, make them useful and give them a gun. Thats how helicopters get shot down, no protection against hostiles with RPG's. At least let the troops in the helicopter shoot at the enemy which at this point in time they they cant. I don't understand, are we poor. Its only a FN MAG 58, the army has hundreds of them. Why dont we use the old M60s from the Hueys.

 

[Volkodav]

Just a question to anyone in the army, why the hell do the loadmasters just look out the little window on a blackhawk, make them useful and give them a gun. Thats how helicopters get shot down, no protection against hostiles with RPG's. At least let the troops in the helicopter shoot at the enemy which at this point in time they they cant. I don't understand, are we poor. Its only a FN MAG 58, the army has hundreds of them. Why dont we use the old M60s from the Hueys.

Are you serious the Blackhawks have had Mag 58s for the load masters for years and first deployed with them on a peace keeping mission in Cambodia back in the 90s, although I doubt they would ship them while flying flood relief missions on the Australian mainland.

Is there an insurgency in southern QLD at the moment, I know the government is unpopular but do you really think people will be firing RPGs at the Blackhawks that have come to rescue them from their roof tops?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...amphibious_assault_ship_USS_Boxer_(LHD_4).jpg

Have a look at the link and you will see a MAG 58 with a blank firing barrel fitted at the loadmasters station.

30 second on google is all it took to find the image, again check your facts.

 

[the road runner]

Just a question to anyone in the army, why the hell do the loadmasters just look out the little window on a blackhawk, make them useful and give them a gun.

They are in the Army,they have Guns.

Thats how helicopters get shot down, no protection against hostiles with RPG's. At least let the troops in the helicopter shoot at the enemy which at this point in time they they cant. I don't understand, are we poor. Its only a FN MAG 58, the army has hundreds of them. Why dont we use the old M60s from the Hueys.

RPG is a bit different from a Shoulder launched missile such as RBS-70 or stinger MANPADS.

Google is your friend

 

[aussienscale]

Just a question to anyone in the army, why the hell do the loadmasters just look out the little window on a blackhawk, make them useful and give them a gun. Thats how helicopters get shot down, no protection against hostiles with RPG's. At least let the troops in the helicopter shoot at the enemy which at this point in time they they cant. I don't understand, are we poor. Its only a FN MAG 58, the army has hundreds of them. Why dont we use the old M60s from the Hueys.

Donut, I think you just need to take a little more time in your questions and structure yourself a bit better when posting, for example to start your question with "why the hell" is not going to get people interested in what you are trying to say
You have to realise that many of the posters on here are verified professionals of the defence community, and are either current serving, ex serving, defence civilians, or a combination of both.

Numerous people have replied to your posts, pointing out facts to you and you seem to go to a different thread and shoot off on a different tangent, just slow down, read all the post's and research not only old threads on here but as Volk has pointed out, basic google searches can be your friend, also a search on this site will give you a wealth of information ! For example, you seem pretty passionate about the RAN getting a carrier, read this thread, although 61 pages, it will answer every question you have

Cheers

 

[ADMk2]

Just a question to anyone in the army, why the hell do the loadmasters just look out the little window on a blackhawk, make them useful and give them a gun. Thats how helicopters get shot down, no protection against hostiles with RPG's. At least let the troops in the helicopter shoot at the enemy which at this point in time they they cant. I don't understand, are we poor. Its only a FN MAG 58, the army has hundreds of them. Why dont we use the old M60s from the Hueys.

Absolutely spot on. Australian Blackhawks never carry FN MAG machine guns do they?

http://www.defence.gov.au/opEx/glob...lery/2009/0212a/20090206adf8262658_248_lo.jpg

 

[ASSAIL]

Donut, I think you just need to take a little more time in your questions and structure yourself a bit better when posting, for example to start your question with "why the hell" is not going to get people interested in what you are trying to say
You have to realise that many of the posters on here are verified professionals of the defence community, and are either current serving, ex serving, defence civilians, or a combination of both.

Numerous people have replied to your posts, pointing out facts to you and you seem to go to a different thread and shoot off on a different tangent, just slow down, read all the post's and research not only old threads on here but as Volk has pointed out, basic google searches can be your friend, also a search on this site will give you a wealth of information ! For example, you seem pretty passionate about the RAN getting a carrier, read this thread, although 61 pages, it will answer every question you have

Cheers

Aussie, Thanks for the way you have mentored Donut. I enjoy this forum immensely but I have been somewhat disturbed by the way some of the more experienced posters belittle and personally abuse those whose inexperience or "foot in mouth" replies cause them to appear just plain dumb.
There are some very experienced defence aficiondos, ex-servicemen, bureaucrats etc who are heard here but there are also students, young servicemen and women and casual inquirers as well.
The arrogance of experience or occupation should be tempered by a willingness to educate. We don't need to drive people away.
Once again thanks for that reply.

 

[Todjaeger]

Aussie, Thanks for the way you have mentored Donut. I enjoy this forum immensely but I have been somewhat disturbed by the way some of the more experienced posters belittle and personally abuse those whose inexperience or "foot in mouth" replies cause them to appear just plain dumb.
There are some very experienced defence aficiondos, ex-servicemen, bureaucrats etc who are heard here but there are also students, young servicemen and women and casual inquirers as well.
The arrogance of experience or occupation should be tempered by a willingness to educate. We don't need to drive people away.
Once again thanks for that reply.

Assail, the issue I have had, and I am certain others have had as well, are the amount of posts which have either already been discussed in detail on DT previously, and/or the number of assertions which a quick search with google would indicate are incorrect.

A few posts like that could certainly be explained by someone being interested in defence matters but naive or a novice. Generally members are willing to educate people in such categories though admittedly patience gets short when schools are on holiday and a bunch of kids join to bang on about what they think is cool and refuse to listen when get corrected factually and then the kids persist in posting after they are advised their facts or assumptions are wrong.

Unfortunately, if (when) someone starts posting and their basic facts or premise is wrong, they get advise that it is wrong and what about it is wrong, and they are further advised to double check their facts prior to continue and they then either persist based off their incorrect information, or start advocating for something else entirely but again with wrong information which could easily be double checked... Such a pattern of behavior suggests that the poster is not interesting in actually debating or discussing defence matters and is instead just posting to be a pot-stirrer.

In the case of the Army Black Hawks, they are equipped with MAG-58's and their (the Black Hawk's) most large scale operational deployment that I am aware of, was for disaster response within Australia in which case suppressive fires would be a just a bit inappropriate.

-Cheers