Don't get your knickers in a knot. Next you'll be giving 6 year olds detention for hugging each other.
Are you serious.......C''K....bet you are an officer.
Soldier is awarded the highest award that is possible, and a "ranga" joke reads, gave it to him because they feel sorry for him, cause he is a stinky red head no friends, so heres a VC.
We all hang crap on rangas, just not on VC winning rangas on a proffesional "ish" forum.
Standard of this forum has gone to shit anyway.
Find me one other person who thinks what was said was anything other than a bit of fun and I might agree with you.
Well in answer to the original point about Rangas the mutation that leads to red hair can also effect the pain response of the brain via endorphin release. While Rangas are more responsive to thermal pain because of lower Vitamin K levels they have been scientifically shown to be less responsive to other sources of pain. In relation other research has shown that Rangas need less painkiller than others for relief. Since pain response could be linked to bravery maybe there is something in this rash of Rangas winning decorations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/magazine/11ideas_section3-22.html?_r=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/magazine/11ideas_section3-22.html?_r=1
For those interested, there is an interesting write up on the EF88 in the latest Army rag. Pages 18-19.
Defence Newspapers | The Soldiers Army
Defence Newspapers | The Soldiers Army
It looks a very nice and modern rifle, but it also looks puny when compared with the rifles of my day, the Lee Enfield .303 and the SLR.
So does anyone know what rounds they went with. I remember a talk on another forum that looked at the HK M416 as an option. I wonder if Thales dropped the weight by using a similar system, ie Titanium parts. It was also discussed that the Grendel 6.5 was probably the best ammo, because it hits the target faster and has adequate knockdown power as the larger NATO round (as discussed on future weapons also).
Last edited by a moderator:
the road runner
Active Member
Seems the last upgraded M113 for Land 106 has rolled off the BAE production line
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoTmgk1w9Pw&feature=g-all-u"]Final M113 vehicle rolls off the line at Bandiana - YouTube[/nomedia]
On another note i just saw on the news a MRH-90 has had issues and had to land on a Farm in QLD. The crew had to sleep a night in the Aircraft ,and a farmer gave them a mattress and some blankets .The Press made out that a lot of issues need to be resolved,including cracked window,cracked floors,engine issues ect.
I understand that it being a new untested platform some issues will need to be resolved ,but have we bought a Dud when purchasing the MRH-90's?
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoTmgk1w9Pw&feature=g-all-u"]Final M113 vehicle rolls off the line at Bandiana - YouTube[/nomedia]
On another note i just saw on the news a MRH-90 has had issues and had to land on a Farm in QLD. The crew had to sleep a night in the Aircraft ,and a farmer gave them a mattress and some blankets .The Press made out that a lot of issues need to be resolved,including cracked window,cracked floors,engine issues ect.
I understand that it being a new untested platform some issues will need to be resolved ,but have we bought a Dud when purchasing the MRH-90's?
Pretty much. We bought the Lego helicopter, rather than the proven battlefield helicopter. If the MRH-90 ever works properly it probably won't be too bad, but if we bought the Blackhawk it would have been in service (and in Afghanistan) 4-5 years ago. The old story of a good helicopter that works being better than the best helicopter that might work.
The fact that the current Blackhawks and maybe Chinook-Ds will still be flying in 2018 shows the problems aren't going to be fixed tomorrow. The fact is we could probably place an order for new Blackhawks now and still have them all in service before the MRH-90s. Bring back the UH-1Hs I say.
I did read somewhere on DMO site that one of the DCP targets is to focus on US sourced equipment through the FMS system.
I only hope that is achieved. It seems that every time a European supplier over promises, it under delivers.
When will we learn and stay away from the snake oil salesmen and simply purchase proven, well researched and developed kit that meets 90% to 100% of the requirement 100% of the time and seamlessly enters service provided the uniforms don't stuff with the fruit levers.
You'd be surprised at how many snr sirs actually take an opposing view on this. Mainly Army. RAN and RAAF have exceptional relationships in place - esp with the USN. and it shows - the USN has batted for us beyond whats necessary quite a few times
Like un-mentionable Brigadiers looking for a career in the local aerospace industry once they leave ADF, by any chance?
and ex star ranks in new careers as politico/strategic commentators......Like un-mentionable Brigadiers looking for a career in the local aerospace industry once they leave ADF, by any chance?
Tee_Centre_10
Member
Not defending the MRH-90, but I seem to remember that the word "dud" was being bandied about the Blackhawk when the Army first got them, what with corrosion caused by basing them next to the sea at Townsville and severe cracking around the ESSS pylons. Army produced new operating procedures and modifications that were appropriate to a new aircraft to mitigate these issues, and the Blackhawk has gone on to serve superbly. There is still time for the MRH-90 to do similarly.
I always thought an interesting "what if" would have been if Army had considered the MH-60S for Air 9000Ph2/4. The aircraft is already fully marinised and suited for extended operations at sea, can be armed with Hellfire and Air 9000 Phases 2, 4 and 6 could have had a very high level of commonality with Phase 8 (MH-60R).
From memory it all started with a requirement for an additional troop lift capability of about a dozen airframes rather than a Blackhawk replacement. The contenders included new Blackhawks, the NH-90 and the EH 101. As the Army was really looking for a Blackhawk replacement the EH 101 was rejected as being too big leading to the selection of the NH90 as it was seen as a better fit (on paper) to the requirement for additional troop lift.
With the subsequent accelleration of the Seaking replacement following the Nias Island crash the NH90 was in the box seat for even more orders.
In hind sight I wonder if we would have been better off choosing the EH101 for the additional troop lift and seaking replacement requirements and go for UH-60M, MH-60R & S to replace the legacy Blackhawks and Seahawks as well as instead of the Seasprites.
Now if only we had ordered Apachies instead of Tigers.
The big, very big, advantage of the NH-90 is it seats ~18 troops, compared to the ~10-12 troops of the Blackhawk. If it wasn't for that it wouldn't have been chosen. OF course, the Blackhawk has the advantage in that it actually works.
Why introduce a new airframe in the EH101? The Blackhawk and Chinook is good enough for the Yanks, why not good enough for us?
The whole idea was to rationalise ADF helo types down from 8 or 9 small fleets to a more efficient 4 or 5 larger fleets being:
Utility (UH-1H, Blackhawk and Sea King), maritime helo (Sea Sprog and Seahawk), training helo (Squirrel and Kiowa), ARH (UH-1H Bushranger and Kiowa) and heavy-lift helo (CH-47D).
Once the NH-90 won the additional troop lift helo competition (to replace UH-1H) it became the obvious favourite to fulfill the utility and maritime helo requirements and thus facilitate ADF's desire to truly rationalise it's fleet.
The problem being it is a very developmental program and is unlikely to be available to replace ADF's helo's in the timeframe we need. The maritime helo is even worse than the utility version in terms of it's maturity, so it would have taken an extremely brave decision for someone to choose it, given the need to fill the role the Sea Sprogs were meant to undertake.
Given RAN's needs, a developmental helo was never going to meet them in a likely timeframe.
A fleet of F model Chooks, UH-60M's, MH-60R and AH-64D would have met our requirements very nicely and most of it would be at FOC now...
The Additional Trooplift Helicopter (ATH) program was conceived in 2001 as a sea going batch of Black Hawks. Then in 2003 the ADF Helicopter Strategic Master Plan had turned into AIR 9000 and ATH bids (now Phase 2 of AIR 9000) were required to provide options for full replacement of the Black Hawk fleet (6 to 48 aircraft) rather than just 12 new aircraft and upgrade of the Black Hawks (Phase 4).
Both AgustaWestland and Sikorsky made offers but for mixed fleets of A109/EH101 and S-70/S-92 respectively. Which pretty much ruined their chances and the single fleet NH90 with an underway local assembly program (Tiger ARH) was able to cruise over the line. Eurocopter also offered full blade folding and the Government thought it important enough to mention in the selection press release even though the option was never taken up by the DoD!
The smaller trooplift capability of the Black Hawk still meet the ATH/ADAS requirement. Which was only a single infantry company group being simultaneously lifted by the helicopters from two LHDs. And the NH90 offered only had seats for 18 soldiers which is just 1.5 times the Black Hawk in seats (not 2x of the NH 90 TTH).
From the 2001 DCP:
Both AgustaWestland and Sikorsky made offers but for mixed fleets of A109/EH101 and S-70/S-92 respectively. Which pretty much ruined their chances and the single fleet NH90 with an underway local assembly program (Tiger ARH) was able to cruise over the line. Eurocopter also offered full blade folding and the Government thought it important enough to mention in the selection press release even though the option was never taken up by the DoD!
The smaller trooplift capability of the Black Hawk still meet the ATH/ADAS requirement. Which was only a single infantry company group being simultaneously lifted by the helicopters from two LHDs. And the NH90 offered only had seats for 18 soldiers which is just 1.5 times the Black Hawk in seats (not 2x of the NH 90 TTH).
From the 2001 DCP:
ATH Decision:
The MRH90 is a classic case of a paper airplane looking much better than a real thing. If both Sikorsky and the DoD had understood this then the Army and Navy would have 54 MH-60S on order and in service right now...
Is it just me,or is history and hind sight starting to demonstrate that, with the exception of FMS sourced projects, that the Howard government was particularly bad at defence procurement and project management? Some of the decissions seem just loopy.